Kumho Ecsta 712's wearing too fast? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Bill '90 300E · #1 01-10-2003, 02:21 AM

I've got a set of Kumho Ecsta 712's with about 10k miles on them currently...looks like I'll only get about another 2-3K miles more on them SAFELY...when new they were very good, especially in the wet. Lately, not so good..I drive "moderately" aggressively...rotated and pressure checked regularly along w/4 wheel alignment from reputable shop...lowered w/Bilstein Sports...am I expecting too much in terms of tread life???

#2 01-10-2003, 06:42 AM

These are performance tires. They are gumballs. They are a soft rubber compound for good grip rather than long wear.

Although they have a treadwear number in the 280 to 340 area. That is relative to other Kumho tires, it is not relative to the treadwear numbers from other tire manufacturers. The treadwear numbers are only useful when comparing tires of the same manufacturer. They all seem to have their own means of using this scale.

I am assuming they are wearing evenly across the tread and not only in one area, which, of course, is problems with the car, not the tire.

Good luck,

Bill '90 300E · #3 01-10-2003, 01:50 PM

thanks for your response...the tires are wearing evenly, just more quickly than I'd hoped...I understand that the Kumhos are more on the "sticky" side than an "all-weather" tire, but I guess that I expected a little more tread life...any suggestions as to a tire with comparable wet and dry performance, but with longer wear characteristics?? I like the Sumitomo HTRZII, but it isn't offered in 205/55-16 (at least not by Tirerack)...other choices?? Thanks again, Bill

#4 01-10-2003, 04:03 PM

Doesn't your car take 195's? I currently have 205's on mine only because I got a great liquidation deal on them from Tire Rack.

If you go to 195's I expect you will have a much bigger selection.

I have the Kumho's on my 4th. generation Corvette in 255/50 16. I'm not one for sticky tires on my sedans that I drive much more often. I have had really good luck and great dollar per mile luck with Continental Contitrac's. There round, they are made in a radially sectioned mold and they balance out well. The tread life is much higher than such gumballs as the Ecsta's.

If you want gumball sticky tires, I expect the Ecsta's are the most economical to purchase, but dollar per mile, they aren't.

I am a total believer in Michelins, but for my purposes and with as many cars as I have to keep going with a total annual mileage between, myself, my wife and my daughter of over 100,000 miles, I am FORCED to use longer life, rather than more fun to drive tires.

Best of luck,

Flash Gordon · #5 01-10-2003, 04:19 PM

I have Mich Pilot Sport A/S on my Acura CLS, ordered from Tirerack. These got to be the best all around tires in the market. They are great in dry, wet, and snow. They are not cheap, but I think you get more value from it in the long run

Bill '90 300E · #6 01-10-2003, 05:18 PM

I upgraded to the 16" x 7.5" AT Italia 8-hole wheel (from OE 15" 15-hole) from Tirerack...therefore to keep the "same" rolling diameter, I am running 205/55's...Luke, are you out there? More suggestions? again guys, thanks for the responses, Bill

Potomac Pat · #7 01-13-2003, 01:47 PM

First of all I am surprised that no one has mentioned this.

Too many times have I heard this scenario about quick wearing tires. People want to lower their car to give it that agressive look & for better handling. The only prob is that when you do that, you screw w/ the geometry of the suspension design. When you lower a car like that you increase the negative camber so much that it causes excessive & speedy wear of the tires.

A four wheel alignment won't do a whole lot for you UNLESS you install a camber correction kit for the rear.

Bill '90 300E · #8 01-13-2003, 02:19 PM

Prior to lowering the car w/Eibach Pro Kit...I did an extensive search and spoke personally by phone w/people from the Forum (techs and several others) who had already done the same set-up on their cars...I was advised that lowering by 1-1 1/2", it would not create any wear problems...was I incorrectly advised? Do I really need a camber kit? On both points, the answer is "I don't think so" (as always, I could be wrong)...I think the problem is, as Larry stated, the wear characteristics of the Kumhos and similar performance tires...maybe I should just resign myself to more frequent new tire buys...although I don't relish the idea of spending money unnecessarily, we all know the "rush" of buying and breaking in new rubber...any other suggestions for tire options??? thanks, Bill

Potomac Pat · #9 01-14-2003, 09:31 AM

I don't want to discount the information that you got from here @ the Mercedesshop.

There are many more people here that have considerably more knowledge about this than I.

I was just adding my $.02

I was under the impression that if you were to lower the car 1.5" that you would create 10+degress of negative camber in the rear. I believe that running 10-12+ degree of (-) camber may be normal for a race car (AutoX or SCCA), but for everyday driving it would cause accelerated wear on your shoes.

Ashman · #10 01-14-2003, 01:50 PM

I have about 7k on mine. I rotate them every 2500 miles. STill plenty of life left on em, in fact the tread still looks pretty much new.

I guess it depends on the tire. Mine have a high tread wear rating of 340 I believe. I'm happy with them. even if they only last to 15k miles, $400 for the set in 225/45/17 aint bad.

And I'd buy em again, cause I think they are very nice tires. Quiet, handle great in wet and dry, and for the price, They can't be beat..

I had conti's on my 16's, and those were worn after 10k miles. I think it depends on the batch. I've seen pirelli p6's get 60k miles before. I've seen other tires with supposed high ratings go low mileage, and I've seen tires with low mileage ratings go for very long.

I had some michelin ltx on my jeep, got 70k out of the set. not bad at all, but those were truck tires.

If using stock rims, I'd go with michelin hands down, but when you trade up to larger wheels, with more expensive larger sized tires, its hard to choose between excellent rated tires at two different ends of the price spectrum.

Alon

#11 01-18-2003, 10:45 PM

bill 90 300e,

i am VERY interested to get your impression of the AT's from TR. how would you describe the overall quality of these wheels? compared to MB-OE? fit? finish? balancing? etc? any bolt/lug problems?

i am considering going to 16" on my w202 (stock = 15"), and the AT's seem like the BEST alternative for me at this time.

TR has quoted me $998 for the AT painted 8-slots in a 16x7.5 with 205/55/16 MXV4's. thats mounted/balanced and shipped to my door. my local tire shop wants $600 drive-out for 15" MXV4s.

my experience with TR in the past was exceptional. i guess it COULD be possible to get elsewhere for a few less $, but i think that TR will stand behind their product better than anyone.

your input will be a HUGE help to my decision process! any and all info is GREATLY appreciated. thanks, - benton in atlanta
you can email me at bencad@mindspring.com if you prefer to reply offline of MS-SF.

ps- not that it will make your feel any better about your wear, but, i also ride sportbikes, and a good rear tire cost ~$200 and can be done at 3-5K miles if i get in some good mountain riding!

larry, if your listening: would you predict any SIGNIFICANT ride quality impact going from 195/65/15 to 205/55/16 utilizing the MXV4s? my C-280 rides like a DREAM on the current 15" MXV4s!

Bill '90 300E · #12 01-19-2003, 02:01 PM

I've had no problems whatsoever w/the AT's...although this is my first venture into aftermarket wheels, the fit, finish and overall quality IMO are excellent...I bought them from TR already mounted and balanced (inner weighted) w/the Kumhos and have had no problems at all w/balance...no issue w/bolt pattern or lugs, except that the finish on the lugs has chipped/flaked in less than one year, but as they are well recessed into the wheel opening, they are not really noticible ...let me know if I can help any more, Bill