Glad you are liking your hankooks on your xk. The break in with the hankooks on my 996tt was not just scrubbing off the top layers. PS2's were great from the beginning. With the hankooks there car was never as stable as it was with michilins even after break in (high or low speeds). If you read some of the reviews (ex. Tire rack), you will see some of the same complaints that I had.
My 996tt with michelins was very solid at higher speeds. That car was designed for high speed autobahn runs with a top speed of 195.

 

I'm with OCTurbo -- I will never buy another set of Hankooks. I had the V12s on my Z, and they were terrible in the wet and didn't really have that great of dry grip over the life of the tires... which was a lousy 14k miles. They were 'hard' and were prone to sliding regardless of temperature or dry/wet conditions. I switched to the new Pilot Super Sports and the difference was night and day. They were cheap, and they showed it. <shrugs>

 

No offense, but the Z has a bad reputation for uneven tire wear, so you probably have to be more "careful" about what shoes you put on that car.

I can't help but giggle whenever I see a Z ... during "snowmaggedeon" a few years back, the majority of abandoned cars scattered around the Tysons Corner/Vienna/McLean area were, by and large, Nissan 350 Z's. Across from Tysons Corner Center, in fact, there were three of them, two right behind each other!

 

What do you consider "higher speeds"?

The Porsche 911s are basically WV bugs with a terrible engine location that no other manufacturer would want on their cars. Porsche tried to stop production of the 911s decades ago but, American customers protested the move. Reason being; at the low speeds Americans drive the 911 is fine. I only test drove the 911 Turbo once at high speeds and it almost killed me with its charasterically nasty behavior. I would never try 195 MPH in a Porsche on anything other than the glass smooth surfaces of a German autobahn and a reliable downforce device on the front end; without such, one bump on the road and you're history; that is exactly what happened during my test drive of the early 930 Turbo.

New technology has come a long ways to tame the rear-engined blues but, it can not be eliminated. It is like driving a heavy hammer, handle first, into a corner with all the weight back behind the axles; a matter of physics as the weight in the back will swing and wants to spin the car. As the linked comparison test below indicates, the new ones still have the same characteristics as the early ones. I personally would not drive one fast if it was given to me free.

After owning many fast cars with various engine locations, my preference is for a front engined car for the street and mid-engined car for the track. A front engined street car is generally far safer in its handling characteristics than one with the engine behind while likely faster on the street due to the confidence factor. Rear engined cars (engine BEHIND the rear axle) have all been failures for all past manufacturers. For the longest time people joked that more Porsche 911s left the road going backward than forward...

2013 Nissan GT-R Black Edition vs. 2012 Porsche 911 Turbo S Comparison - Motor Trend

Albert

 

I have the same Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus (Ultra High Performance All-Season) . When I bought my Jag used from the delaer I said to seal the deal I want all new tires as I do not like the summer only Dunlops that come on the car that cost $550 each. I really like these new tires and have no complaints, they hook up well and the noise level is fair. They wear quickly but that is from my heavy foot.
I do need the dealer to alighn the car again as the tires are still wearing out super fast on the inside due to squating from my heavy acceleration. This time I will ask them to add + camber to compensate for the squating.

 

Just saw this on the TireRack's site "NOTE: Pilot Sport A/S Plus tires can be mixed with earlier Pilot Sport A/S tires in axle pairs as long as the Pilot Sport A/S Plus tires are installed on the rear axle."

I am good to go then.

 

No offense taken. Only the upper trim levels of the original few years of the 350 had the stability control. The base models just had basic traction and ABS. I will admit that the stability control has saved my bacon a few times in the Z. I've had the car just shy of 10 years now, and the uneven tire wear debacle was due to the fact the factory dialed in too much toe in. Ostensibly it was for high speed stability, but after Nissan decided to spec 0 toe in, the uneven tire wear went away. I got a free set of tires out of it. I don't drive any of my rear drive cars in the snow / ice / or even sub freezing temperatures -- that's what I have a truck for.

None of this changes the fact that those Hankooks wore just as quickly as other summer/performance tires and were hard in the dry weather and had questionable wet grip. Their only 'bonus' was that they cost 2/3 of what their competitors do. One of my favorite tires of all time were Goodyears GSD3s... but they don't make them anymore. Some of the best wet/dry grip ever. And up here in Rainyville, wet grip is something I use on a regular basis.

At this point in time, my inclination would be to replace the Dunlops on the XK with the Michelin Pilot Super Sports. The Michelins dont do the overnight flat spotting the Dunlops do, and they're a little cheaper.

 

I have some Sumitomo tires on my XK and have been VERY impressed with them in the rain, at first glance I thought gawd these are going to bring the severe suck in wet weather with the wide sipeless treads but they actually are very stable in the rain and stick like glue in the dry.

 

Sumitomo owns NTB.

 

You see what I mean about recommendations on tires? You can get all the impassioned testimonials and anecdotal stories on tires you have the time and stomach to read. I recon this will go on for another 3 or 4 pages. LOL

 

Great information guys. I bought the car last night. It still has the original Dunlop SP Sport 01 tires on it. I will get a feel for these and then trade up. My guess is that I will opt for summer tires rather than the all season version. The only all season tires that may work are the Pilot Sport A/S+ and I have read all kinds of complaints about them. Thanks for all of the opinions.

 

It's always good for the economy to get folks spend maga-bucks on things they don't need. There are very few drivers who really need those top tires. Very, very few, so few that I have not met one, yet, on the roads. For most drivers the lower priced ultra-performance tires would be perfectly sufficient.

Besides having the Hankooks on my XK, I run "inexpensive" Sumitomo HRZs on my twin turbo RX-7 that has 500 HP at 2600 lbs. Living in an area of winding roads that are popular for those weekend racers (bikes and cars) I'm yet to meet anyone with any tire combo that could touch that car with these tires on it.

Like I said before, a little bit of driving skill will more than make up for the difference between the top and bottom tires. For instance; learn to left-foot brake (nearly all better racers employ that technique even with manual transmissions) and that alone will give you more cornering speeds than that top tire choice.

Albert

 

I read Tire Rack's tire tests and they state that Continental Extreme Contact DW's are much quieter than the Pilot Super Sports and are close to providing the same performance. Are the PSS tries really that noisy over sharp bumps like paving joints and do they telegraph larger impacts through the tires? Is anyone having that experience with the PSS tires? Has anyone used the DW's? The XK's suspension is pretty firm. As a daily driver I'm looking for comfort as well as a reasonable level of performance. How about the Pilot Sport A/S all season tires? I read they are murder on gas mileage and deliver a very harsh ride. I know, too many questions, too few answers. I need to just go buy something and enjoy driving the car!!

 

People with other cars (Porsches) rave about the pilot super sports. I have had conti's on a previous m3 and they wore quickly and did not have the performance of ps2's. Go for the PSS!

 

Porsches/M3's compared to XK/XKR is apples to oranges!

 

I have a set of Continental Extreme Contact DWs on my XK with about 5,000 miles on them. They are perfectly satisfactory so far. I relied on the Tire Rack recommendation. My criteria was low noise, wet performance and price- in that order. Mind you, I have had all major brands at one time or another without serious complaint.

My car has never been in a drift or 4 wheel slide so you may deduce that I'm a mild/undemanding driver. Moreover, I have never clocked less than 30,000 miles on a set of tires on any vehicle no matter the brand of tire or model of car/truck.

 

Thanks for your thoughts on the DW's. I'm down to those or the PSS's.

 

I'm with you on this matter. Really, how many of us need the grip to do the track or whatever? I drive defensively, always. That means that I can't take country road corners at 60 mph because there could be a cyclist or stalled car or whatever just out of vision. Guess I'm too realist in that bad things can and do happen when driving carelessly.
Comfort/low noise, anti-hydroplaning ability, and wear/price are my governing criteria also.
Sorry, but few of us are going to to be setting any records on our daily commutes! Besides, these beautiful automobiles are GT's, with a racing heritage, not true Sports cars.

 

Thanks, tnt10. I'm glad someone posted the way a lot of us think. I may drive spirited now and then but I'm mostly looking for a good set of serviceable tires appropriate for the car that will last a while and that aren't crap. The O.E. Dunlops on the car I just bought are 6-years old and the ride is very harsh. Any new tire will be an improvement. But, when we're spending $1,500 on a set a little research is in order. I agree with your tire priorities. So, are you running DW's or something else?

 

I have to admit, I currently have 5,000 miles on the O.E. Dunlops that the previous owner had installed. I agree, the ride is pretty harsh for day to day driving. These were replacements at about 27,000 miles on the original O.E. Dunlops. Since I drive <4,000 miles or so per year, it may be some time before I need to replace them. I can't see myself putting on the Michelins (with around 6,000 miles treadwear life?) no matter how great they hold the road, or how good the ride.
Hopefully, by the time I need replacements, there will be a more satisfactory replacement available with a better treadwear record.