Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

oh really? shit.. I've been driving on the streets with them to the track LOL...

been pulled over once and a copper said they look bald.. so I showed him the tread indicator and he was happy they were above the indicators and off I went

DOT? We're not in America. These are DOT too:

ho_a7_ci2_l.jpg

NT01 have no load index rating on the sidewalls. They're not road legal in Australia. They're not CAMS approved either. They're not good for much at all really.

Edited by hrd-hr30

Are the nankangs road legal?

I reckon 265 vs 265 Nitto v nankang that they would be very similar speed, but also willing to bet the Nitto would be more consistent over the lifespan of the tyre and the nankang will fall off.

Yet you hold such a grudge.

Anyway I'm over it. Back to real data and no more speculations.

lol Silly me! I thought I had real data having used both tyres on the same car. I defer to your "I reckon" and "I bet" guesswork based on never even having seen one of these tyres...

Edited by hrd-hr30
  • Like 1

no, but your post did - you asked me a question (yes the Nankangs are road legal btw), then told me I hold "such a grudge".

NT01 are consistent, that's true. But you can't lose what you never had :P

AR01 could drop off at least a second over their life and still be as good as brand new NT01s. The soft compound Hankook Z221s when they had totally given up the ghost and were sliding around all over the place were still faster than the NT01s, but it was time to chuck them out as absolute garbage.
What the Nankangs do over heat cycles remains to be seen. I've had tyres that heat cycle really well and ones that deteriorate very quickly after a handful of track days, but I certainly can't tell which would do what from just driving on them once, let alone just from their brand name.

FWIW, Nankang has technology licencing and technical support agreements with Yokohama... That's from Yokohama's website, not Nankang's - they don't mention it at all. Who knows how much of their technology is involved with the AR1, but it was one of the factors that encouraged me to take the gamble on these $209 semis! lol I wouldn't be so quick to write them off before trying them.

I'm keen, but they need a new name LOL

call them Yokakangs.. I will buy

Nankangs, no...

I nearly killed myself 10+ years ago on Nankangs NS-2.. now that I am older, wiser and have some form of cash flow I refuse to buy Nankangs.

Nt01 is only a intro semi which back before the rsrr was released they could be had for the same price.

This argument is silly.

I agree, because Nitto has beautiful women promoting the brand so it must be good.

post-22311-0-42861300-1466143821_thumb.png

  • Like 1

lol this thread heated up ;) I've used NT01's which are a real semi slick and not bad but not up there with the best for racing in 2016. One thing with Harry's reports is that they are roughly comparative with the other tyres he has used so to dismiss them outright is just plain dumb. Then again he won't say what cold pressures are used so...........

lol this thread heated up ;) I've used NT01's which are a real semi slick and not bad but not up there with the best for racing in 2016. One thing with Harry's reports is that they are roughly comparative with the other tyres he has used so to dismiss them outright is just plain dumb. Then again he won't say what cold pressures are used so...........

Agree that testing with the same car and driver is the best evidence. Not sure why you think his cold pressure is a big deal, just play with it and see what works. Will be different on different cars anyway.

1. They're the slowest semi money can buy.

2. They're not road legal so you can't even legally drive to the track on them which is a PITA.

3. They're not CAMS approved for production car classes.

You're better of doing very similar times on street tyres, or buying literally any other semi (other than R888 :P)

What's wrong with the R888 (besides being the same compound as NT01)?

The replacement tyre R888R is street legal, it'll be interesting to see if the upcoming NT01 replacement will be too, and whether they'll again share the same compound.

Also the NT01 vs. RS-RR comparison seems a little odd, they're a different category tyre aren't they (100 treadwear semi vs. 140 treadwear street semi)?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...