Lude Generation

Since getting my lude, the weather has been fine and warm (probably a sign that 'The Almighty' approves of me buying her - I am not religious in anyway).

However last week I drove her for the first time in proper wet weather and found little front end grip, almost felt dangerous. Also, under braking she has been vibrating which I put down to likely warped discs. I had the wheels re-balanced which part solved the problem. After cleaning her (again) last week, I noticed that the rear tyres were Continental Premium Contact 2 and the fronts were Accelera Alphas(?), all 4 had at least 5mm tread. I did some research and the general consensus is that Accelera are a cheap brand and terrible tyres especially in wet weather.

So I took the plunge and put some new front boots on her today, Contis to match the rears and what a difference. Straight away the steering feels better and the braking vibration has gone.

Am I putting too much faith into a tyre choice? What do other member's think of cheaper choices? Spending nearly £200 on front tyres would understandably make people seek alternatives that the premium brands but is it worth skimping on rubber?

Given the rubber is the only thing keeping you in contact with the road, don't skimp on them.

you get what you pay for mostly and that is no truer than with tyres

I've had Acceleras on both the ATR and the Prelude and never had a problem with them on the road.
Sure, they're not the best or the stickiest, but they're predictable and fairly quiet.

A chap I know who fits tyres told me that some of their tread patterns are better than others, especially in the wet or cold. (I guess that's hardly news!) He also mentioned that the same factory turns out loads of Contis. In fact, the Accelera PHI is almost exactly the same as a Conti SportContact.

What they are not, is sports tyres. OK for cruising, though.

pattern isn't everything there is a reason they are cheaper and its not just because they have a different name its because the compound is completely different

Lisa had accelera's on her V40. I posted up recently about these - ok in the dry, absolutely jobby in the wet.

Thanks for your comments, mainly backs up what I thought which is you do get what you pay for.

Spoke to the tyre guy today who said that Accelera were far from the worst budget tyre but cheaper tyres have a harder compound to last longer which means they grip less. Not sure if there is any truth in that but I certainly had my eyes opened today. Also made me think about braking distances too.

IMO don't cut corners on tyres or brakes.

Yes, soft tyres generally grip better but wear faster and vice-versa for harder compounds.

bb1boy wrote:IMO don't cut corners on tyres or brakes.

^This. Bear in mind that the TOTAL contact area of your cars tyres is about the same as a sheet of A4 paper. That's a pretty small contact patch to handle 1.3 odd tonnes
Of course, sometimes new tyres are needed when you really cant afford them though

Compound is very important as others have said - as an example, on most yank classics, they go for BF Goodrich or some such and they look cool and will last forever.....but that's because they are hard as nails. Tyre squeal at low speeds too, but then the yanks dont do corners really do they? So the tyres suit their needs.

I have been running Neutons this time around, about £60 a corner and very very good indeed. Wouldn't hesitate to to have them again, but I fancy a change. Was looking at some Rainsports which are pretty good price at the mo, but someone who should be listened too IMO suggested the Contis, maybe even the ones you have I think?

So decisions decisions...

I'm still totally in love with my Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta's, wet or dry they are lovely, as good if not better than the Avon ZZ3's I used to run religiously.