Anyone tried out the Michelin PS5's?

[Lucas_R]

Because as much as you think it's trolling, there's a genuine question somewhere in it - an opportunity for real information to be gleaned. You may not like the way it's framed, but there's a genuine answer that can come out of it.

There was NO genuine question in your post. It was just a troll, nothing more, nothing less.

You've got a PM from me from a while back, maybe read it?

My post was a troll - in response to his troll.

I saw your PM, and I can only hope amunra got one as well about his behavior because he is the instigator.

It was all genuine.. i actually wanted to know what makes someone lean to falken .. at that price range i would never consider it myself and am not too familiar with the brand but im open to hearing how someone else chooses or thinks..

What a load of bs. How ridiculous to suggest a tyre shop has nothing other than Falken to offer. Your post was nothing more than a troll and you know it. I love how you act all sweet and innocent when you know the moderator is watching you.

[petemac110]

more importantly to my question. whyd u go with falken? is that all the store had

No, they had several options (although sadly not the Pilot4S which were my preference - there were stock shortages across Australia at the time).

The Falkens generally test very well and are great tyres. Two of us have explained how to read the statistics in our posts above - you are misunderstanding the results. The pecking order says very little - dig deeper. If you are seriously suggesting that the Hifly and the Falkens are close in terms of measured performance... you are wrong

They were also $220/corner (as I managed to convince a mainstream retailer to match Tempe Tyres prices) in 235/40R19 which is a screaming bargain in my books.

[amunra]

Falling "in between" in outright ranking doesn't really tell the full story - you need to drill down further into the scoring, and also how the tyres perform in different tests.

The "overall points" column is telling - the FK510 came 5th with 22 points, whilst the Hifly was 7th with 42 points... a sizeable gap in performance. The Hifly is also part of a cluster of the five worst tyres, only separated by 3 points. Conversely, the FK510 is part of a cluster of 3rd to 5th which are also separated by 3 points and towards the top of the list.

The gap between these two clusters is more telling than the numerical order of the results.

This is reflected in the text in the MOTOR's review which is pretty unambiguous about trading performance for price as you head down the list:

"It was a two-horse race between Continental and Dunlop until the wet tests exposed a chink in the latter’s armour, but there’s been plenty else happening down the order. The Kumho, Pirelli, and Falken’s collective scores were closer bunched; however, they specialised at different things.

The Falken loved the wet stuff, going as far to give our Continental a scare on the lateral G. The Kumho also worked well in puddles, but its braking performance was truly impressive.
If you want consistency, though, then pick the Pirelli P Zero. Luffy said early on, “it does everything you want it to,” and while it didn’t top any discipline, its four fourths highlight that.

Goodyear’s Eagle F1 started strong in the slalom, but seems to have developed hydrophobia compared to predecessors. The old Eagle F1 Asymmetric 2 once dominated the wet weather tests.

Even so, the gap between the Goodyear and the HiFly is the order’s largest, suggesting from here on you’re trading performance for price. The only highlight in the bottom five was the Achilles’ motorkhana run, where it placed ahead of the Goodyear and Falken.

On equal placing to the Achilles is the Nitto. It didn’t excel anywhere. Like the Laufenn it’s claimed to prioritise comfort and noise levels over outright performance, but that’s a bit like bringing a pea-shooter to a gun-fight.

Joining it in last place is the Nexen N’Fera SU1. It didn’t flounder in the wet, but its dry results shows it’s no performance king. That title goes to the Continental SportContact 6."


I'm always cautious of comparing tyre results from different tests - too many variables are at play, particularly when different sizes/profiles and different cars are being used. Any comparisons between the 2018 and 2021 tests are vague at best. There's also a large number of overseas tests by various magazines which are useful references - MOTOR is useful but far less detailed than many of those.

well going from the most recent 2021 . pzero and hifly are dead even... pzero and falken were even a few years ago so itd be safe to assume falken has dropped in the ranks too unless proven otherwise.. not saying falken are bad.. imo u can pick any of those tyres in the test #1 to hifly and you will have the same experience

[Manaz]

An even better cut of that table from the 2018 test.



I'd be upset to pay the premium price for the Pirelli or Goodyear when the substantially cheaper Kumho beat them both, and the Falken came so close to equalling the Pirelli's score. The Dunlop looks to be the value-for-money winner in my eyes for this test (and I'm not a big Dunlop fan, but the numbers are hard to argue with).

I'd love to see the 2021 results (and read the full article to get the details - that's often where the devil is). It is worth noting that tyre can perform differently on different cars - FWD vs AWD vs RWD, weight distribution, etc can have an impact as well. The 2018 test was on an i30N, a different car, with different sizes/etc, may actually result in different outcomes, even for the same group of tyres.

[amunra]

No, they had several options (although sadly not the Pilot4S which were my preference - there were stock shortages across Australia at the time).

The Falkens generally test very well and are great tyres. Two of us have explained how to read the statistics in our posts above - you are misunderstanding the results. The pecking order says very little - dig deeper. If you are seriously suggesting that the Hifly and the Falkens are close in terms of measured performance... you are wrong

They were also $220/corner (as I managed to convince a mainstream retailer to match Tempe Tyres prices) in 235/40R19 which is a screaming bargain in my books.

yeh i can see the individual characteristics champ its 1 of the first things i looked at.. but in the end an overall score means something too.

you most likely want to have something thats very good at what you do regularly on your commute and durable. the rest is a trade off between brands

[petemac110]

well going from the most recent 2021 . pzero and hifly are dead even... pzero and falken were even a few years ago so itd be safe to assume falken has dropped in the ranks too unless proven otherwise.. not saying falken are bad..

No, the Falkens don't have to prove anything... they weren't included in the latest test on the same car with the same profile under the same conditions. You aren't comparing apples with apples here. Your assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Sheesh!!

imo u can pick any of those tyres in the test #1 to hifly and you will have the same experience

My goodness...

[Manaz]

itd be safe to assume falken has dropped in the ranks too unless proven otherwise.

That doesn't necessarily follow.

[amunra]

That doesn't necessarily follow.

why. they were worse than pzero before.. you would 'assume' they are still the same until proven otherwise

[amunra]

No, the Falkens don't have to prove anything... they weren't included in the latest test on the same car with the same profile under the same conditions. You aren't comparing apples with apples here. Your assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Sheesh!!



My goodness...

Best Pwice. QUality Guaranteed

[petemac110]

yeh i can see the individual characteristics champ its 1 of the first things i looked at.. but in the end an overall score means something too.

The overall score YES, the ranking less so. Things can be closely ranked but separated by a large margin (thus performing better vs worse).

you most likely want to have something thats very good at what you do regularly on your commute and durable. the rest is a trade off between brands

As is the case with most tyres - there are almost always trade-offs. There is no perfect tyre.

What do I want? Relatively quiet tyres with good wet and dry grip and very good wet and dry braking performance (i.e. a high safety threshold) with the ability to stand up to the occasional weekend hills run. The FK510 do this nicely. I am very satisfied with my purchase.

[petemac110]

why. they were worse than pzero before.. you would 'assume' they are still the same until proven otherwise

Read the other replies - that's a false assumption.

[amunra]

The overall score YES, the ranking less so. Things can be closely ranked but separated by a large margin (thus performing better vs worse).



As is the case with most tyres - there are almost always trade-offs. There is no perfect tyre.

What do I want? Relatively quiet tyres with good wet and dry grip and very good wet and dry braking performance (i.e. a high safety threshold) with the ability to stand up to the occasional weekend hills run. The FK510 do this nicely. I am very satisfied with my purchase.

for $220 for a performance tyre its not bad.

[petemac110]

Best Pwice. QUality Guaranteed

Better quality than bloody Chinese tyres, that's for sure.

[amunra]

Read the other replies - that's a false assumption.

why is a "false assumption"..

not having any current data would be the Right assumption based off the last test of the 3.. the falken is the same name and numbered model too it hasnt changed so you would assume its the same tyre and formulation which was beaten by the pzero in scores.

it would be false to assume its better without having any further proof or comparison to the current pzero / hifly that scored the same... maybe hifly have improved their formulation to catch up to the pzero and make it look worse.

[petemac110]

As I mentioned above:

No, the Falkens don't have to prove anything... they weren't included in the latest test on the same car with the same profile under the same conditions. You aren't comparing apples with apples here. Your assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Sheesh!!

Each to their own, but from what I've seen across this forum, you are very good at the selective use of data and arguments which support your own biases. Think deeper champ...