specific tire question

[dben]

I'm getting some 215/45/17 tires for some rims I'm getting soon. I'm looking at the following: good deal, all season, and very important: good treadlife. I am so used to driving with tires with no tread, and I don't need soft tires becuase I don't drive hard around corners and stuff like that. Best snow traction isnt a priority, however I live smack in the middle of New England.

I'm looking at:
Kumho Ecsta AST
Kumho Ecsta ASX
Yokohama Avid H4S

Which would you recommend? and why?

[deckeda]

Compare the treadwear number for all three. That, and hopefully a temp rating of A for each. But I can't really see most 45-series tires fitting the "long life" description. Maybe I'm wrong.

[DilutedImage]

Well, the only difference between the Kumhos is the speed rating. They both have A ratings for traction and temperature, and have the same load and wear ratings. The Yokohama has the same ratings as the AST (aside from wear), but costs ~$20 per tire. There's no good way to compare treadwear between companies, as they rate them on different scales.

So, in summary: If you don't need to exceed 130mph, then the AST and H4S are both good choices. Seeing as the H4S is a bit more $, I'd go with the AST. If you simply must exceed 130mph though, then the ASX is the only one of the three that is capable.

2¢

[NAiL05]

IM running Yokohama H4S. Its a good tire I recommend it.

[dben]

Thanks for the replies so far...

I'm not going to go over 130mph...ever. But there isn't anything else i should be thinking of? I thought Yoko might be of better quality then Kumho. Same with ASX being better than the AST. Or, like you guys have implied, the only real difference between different tire manufacturers are the specs?

[dben]

Why'd you buy the Yokos instead of anything else?