Falken ZE912 or FK452? 265/35ZR18 on S210 E320?

[jefrs]

Quick question regarding the relative merits of Falken tyres?

Which Falken, the ZE912 asymmetric or the FK452 directional?

My Michelin PS have (a) punctured (b) worn out and I need a pair of affordable rears.

Staggered AMG 9J 265/35ZR18

So I hear the FK452 are a bit noisy,
but the ZE912 are "for small to medium cars up to 250hp"
and the E320 is 220-odd hp and it is a big estate and it does get loaded up from time to time.

The ZIEX ZE912 265/35ZR18 is 97W XL - I presume XL is "extra load" ?

The FK-452 265/35ZR18 is 97Y - but no load rating given ?

please advise...

TIA, jefrs.

 

[moonloops]

452's are noisier if your precious about sound intrusion. I guess they are grippier of the two, worked well on my CLK

 

[rf065]

I have the ZE912's on my CLK, far better than the Bridgestone RE050's that they replaced. The 912's do not have the v tread pattern like the 452, the v pattern seems to make my car pull to the left.

Russ

 

[jefrs]

I am a little concerned that the ZE912 may not be up to the power and weight of the E320 (if you'll forgive me, a CLK220-CDi is a bit shy on weight and power).

Plus the E320 S210 has ADS which lets it corner a bit quicker. I like grip, I like to stay on the road.
I expect a tyre to grip wet or dry, but I don't expect any tyre to cope well with extreme weather.

 

[noops]

Mine and Olly's C43's have 912's on them and trust me when I say this they can handle the power, Olly took me for a run in his to demonstrate his de-cat and he floored it, I like to drive my car hard rain or shine (depending on mood) and they have never let me down especially on a country lanes.

 

[DSM10000]

Quick question regarding the relative merits of Falken tyres?


The ZIEX ZE912 265/35ZR18 is 97W XL - I presume XL is "extra load" ?

The FK-452 265/35ZR18 is 97Y - but no load rating given ?

please advise...

TIA, jefrs.

The "97" is the load rating, a 97 rated tyre can take a load of 730Kg

See here for a load rating table:TYRESAVE: Tyre Load Ratings

XL tyres often have stiffer construction over and above the load rating I believe.

 

[rpe2]

FAiling the Falkens, Kumho KU31's

 

[jefrs]

Thanks folks, most votes are for the 912, which sews it up 'cos I have to order them tomorrow.

 

[MarriedBlonde]

452's are noisier if your precious about sound intrusion. I guess they are grippier of the two, worked well on my CLK

I have heard this a few times and I am running 452's on the back of my merc as the standard conti's didn;t last long so thought I would try a more reasonable priced tyre.

I've not noticed a difference in noise compared to the standard fit conti sports.

J.

 

[C43AMG]

I have 452's on the S-Class,these are my third set. Just changed the rears, 21,000 miles,which is roughly what i got out of the two previous sets. Don't find them noisy, which is one the priorities on a working S-Class.

275/35/20 £ 192.00 each fitting and vat.

 

[proser]

Had the 452's and now have 912 on the back. no problem with them and they are marked as XL so should be up to the job.

 

[moonloops]

FAiling the Falkens, Kumho KU31's

Agreed..

 

[jefrs]

Well I got the 912s. They seem ok so far. I will say I've had the ESP light up a couple time where the Michelins would not have done so. I shall put this down to new tyres for now.

The last couple days have been a little wet, more importantly greasy after the dry spell. So although the ESP lit up, the rear Falkens gave no sign of going sideways, note I had the Michelins light the ESP in the same location (bend on a steep road built over an old stream bed) in bad weather.

I have already found that if the tyres let go, the car can snap away with little warning. I suspect this is an artefact of the ESP, there's no gradual drift. It sticks to the road remarkably well but I like to know the limit of adhesion wet or dry.