Kumho Vs Michelin Pilot

[matt17081]

i used to run Khumos on a Pajero and have to say that they are a superb tyre they gripped vey well on the road in both the wet and dry and off road they were excerlent and in total cover 65,000 miles before being replaced !!!(i do however fully appreeciate that these are two completly different vehicles though with the mercedes being fitted with independent suspension all round and my pajero being fitted with torsion bar at the front and live axle at the rear)

 

[kit17]

Well I've also gone against conventional wisdom as the CLK is wearing Nankang NS2's after a very good experience with Nankang on the Subaru which really gave them some punishment but they stood up so well. So on the NS2's went and they are brilliant, staggered set up and £280 for all 4 corners, only had limited use in the snow but handled it well went up our cul de sac which is on a hill when my FWD Volvo on Pirreli P7000's wouldn't even look at it. Very quiet as well much quieter than the Falken 452's they replaced (although they were good) so so far so good, will keep you posted.

Im a fan of Nankang too!

Ive been using Nankang SV2 (225 x 45 R17) winter tyres on my w203 C320 over the winter and they have been outstanding in all conditions. I do on average 260 miles a week mainly commuting on fairly fast back roads. They have barely worn aswell. 4 tyres only set me back £336 fitted!

Im putting my summer tyres back on today - I have a set of Michelin pilots to go on the front which were left over from last summer. Im trying a set of Nokian Z G2's (245 x 40 R17) on the rear as they only cost £206 a pair fitted and have excellent reviews. I certainly wont be paying out for michelin pilots anymore!

 

[horsesuitedfool]

I just fitted 225/18 fronts and 255/18 rears on my C Class with AMG V alloy wheels and the grip etc is excellent, although this also down to having the alignment done on hunter machine at same time. However the price was amazing, £280 fitted incl everything for Kumhos at KP Tyres in Ewell.....

 

[R2D2]

UPDATE. Well it's been a month now and I've now had chance to bed them in and get used to the Kumho 31s. I have to say I am very impressed. They are great in wet and dry, no noisier than the Michelins and so far I'm very pleased indeed. My Michelins lasted 18,000 mile until they were down to the wear indicators and I,ve worked out that if these tyres do 11,000 then they are at break even point with the Michelins, but if these tyres do 18,000 miles then they are an absolute bargain. Just so that I remember - if I get to 90,000 on my car then the Kumhos will have done 11,500 miles. So if I get to 96,500 miles on these then they to will have done 18,000 and I won't be buying Michelin again!

 

[survey]

My C Class is due replacement tyres. On Bridgetsone Turanza 300's at present and the rears are worn at 21K. I understand this is good for a RWD MB!! Anyhow, I think the Bridgestone's are noisy but that may be because the tyres are worn; others seem to think Bridgestones are like driving on iron rings but has anyone else experience of these? Should I replace with Turanza's again? I am torn between these, Kumho 31's and Michelin Primacy HP. Which is likely to be the quietest comfort tyre?

 

[crockers]

I'm a heathen so go shoot me down in flames..

I have run Continentals, Goodyear Assymetrics F1 and Michelin Pilot SPorts / Primacy HP on my car.

Findings are - they all sound the same - all handle the same but wear at differing rates..

Best for wear Michelin worst Goodyear. Most expensive Michelin.

Sorry I can't wax lyrically about handling characteristics etc etc I just drive the car normally ...

As for driving in the snow - wouldn't take the car out in snow...rear wheel drive and summer tyres = recipe for disaster. Use the wife's CR-V on all weather tyres for that game.

 

[R2D2]

UPDATE. Well it's been a month now and I've now had chance to bed them in and get used to the Kumho 31s. I have to say I am very impressed. They are great in wet and dry, no noisier than the Michelins and so far I'm very pleased indeed. My Michelins lasted 18,000 mile until they were down to the wear indicators and I,ve worked out that if these tyres do 11,000 then they are at break even point with the Michelins, but if these tyres do 18,000 miles then they are an absolute bargain. Just so that I remember - if I get to 90,000 on my car then the Kumhos will have done 11,500 miles. So if I get to 96,500 miles on these then they to will have done 18,000 and I won't be buying Michelin again!

UPDATE: Well I have already driven 10,500 miles on the Kumhos and will achieve the 11,000 miles, mentioned above, this coming week. The Kumhos are quiet, grippy and IMHO every bit as good as the Michelins that they replaced. Cost wise at 11,000 miles they are breaking even with the Michelins on a cost per mile basis and from here on in they represent better value than the Michelins. The fronts still have 4-5mm left on them but the rears are down to 3mm in the middle (as usual) and therefore will need replaced fairly soon although they are still handling fine at the moment. I have enjoyed the performance of the Kumhos and guess I treat them fairly hard given the rate at which I get through tyres of any make. Would I buy them again -Yes definately. What will I put on next -kumho Winter tyres maybe... Watch this space.

 

[crockers]

What tyres are these? How will they wear in the spring / summer? Will be interested in following your views .

 

[R2D2]

What tyres are these? How will they wear in the spring / summer? Will be interested in following your views .

Kumho KU27's from memory-I haven't decided yet though.

Anyone care to value my set of AMG ivs with the Kumhos on. Good condition, rims very good, some scratchs from air gunners and a few stone chips but pretty good overall.

EDIT; This is a photo at one of the Bluewater meets recently which shows the wheels a bit.

 

[whitenemesis]

What tyres are these? How will they wear in the spring / summer? Will be interested in following your views .

Might be useful?

Test reports for car winter tyres Kumho - KW27

http://ssl.delti.com/cgi-bin/rshop...._pro_Seite=20&Transport=P&dsco=110&sowigan=Wi

 

[clk270]

Blackcircles were dong the KW27s for about £90 each fitted last month, but not even listed now. Camskill don't list them either and quite a few of their 225/45/17 offering is out of stock.

Continental have been doing a bit of a market message purge on winter tyres this month; combined with last winters weather and this year will be interesting sourcing tyres. Thankfully i ordered mine 3 weeks ago. Prices in general seem to be on the rise too.

 

[clk270]

The Kumhos are quiet, grippy and IMHO every bit as good as the Michelins that they replaced.

Not surprised by this comment - a lot of BMW M5 owners say the same, and this months EVO magazine likens them in character to Michelins too.

 

[R2D2]

Not surprised by this comment - a lot of BMW M5 owners say the same, and this months EVO magazine likens them in character to Michelins too.

See I'm wasted, I should be writting for EVO. LOL.

I'm struggling to find KU27s at a good price though.

 

[whitenemesis]

KU27 are all season tyres. KW27 are winter tyres.

Why choose the KU over the KW?

 

[R2D2]

I hadn't spotted the difference -thanks!

 

[daveandfleur]

We had a quite high spec A class hire car in Spain last year (free upgrade). I was surprised to find Kumhos all round on a nearly new car with only 2000km on the clock. Standard fit in Spain?

Dave

 

[R2D2]

FINAL UPDATE: Well today I changed the rear Kumho KU31s because they were below 3mm. They had done 12,000 miles. The fronts still have 5mm all over and I've kept them on.
My last set of Michelins cost £459 and all four needed changed at 18,000. That equates to 2.5p/mile.

My Kumho KU31 94 Y cost £290 and the backs did 12000 miles. Had I changed all 4 then the running costs would be 2.4p/mile, however, I have only needed to change the rears as the fronts will propably do another 12000. The pair I fitted today cost £157, if we assume i get another 12000 out of the front and rears then 6 tyres will have done 24,000 miles at a cost of £447 or 1.8p mile ie. 28% cheaper then the Michelins.

Conclusion. The Kumhos never let me down, never aquaplanned, never lost traction, and didnt act as nail magnets. I think they are not only cheaper then the Michelins but they are IMHO a better tyre especially in bad weather. The Michelins I had on before aquaplanned badly and were dangerous in cold weather in Scotland. I also think that the Kumho's were a quiet tyre and certainly no noisier than the Michelins and loads quieter than conti's.

PS. When I ordered todays Kumhos from Event tyres online I made an error. I intended to order Kumho KU31s 94Ys but I actually clicked Kumho HM KH31s 91W. When they arrived and I realised my mistake I was annoyed but then I read this European Motor News | KUMHO ECSTA HM KH31 RATED
and some tyre tests saying that they are unusual in being summer tyres that work in snow as well as dry weather. They seem to be able to cope with some bad weather as they have a Silica compound like a winter tyre. Time will tell but it'll be fun to test them out!

 

[crockers]

So they come in KU, KH and KW. Summer, all season and winter. That's confusing.

 

[R2D2]

So they come in KU, KH and KW. Summer, all season and winter. That's confusing.

Well I managed to order a tyre I didnt know existed but given that its November I'm pleased

:bannana:

 

[rpe2]

I may have mentioned this before, but please, give the Kumho KU37 a wide bearth. I changed from the 31's to 37's earlier in the year, and although quiet, wet weather grip is terrible. Will be going back to 31's at the next change.