ecsta supra 712 compared to nt555

TaupeGT

New Member
Apr 7, 2004
39
0
0
It's getting to be that time here in Canada and I am needing some tires, I am considering either the kumho 712's or the nt555 the price of the kumho is better but is the 555 going to far out perform the kumho? thanks for any advice.
 
  • Sponsors (?)


i used to have kumhos on my car and took them off when they were only half worn, i feared for my life, i got sideways going 70mph on the highway just out of the blue, i will never own kumhos again, i got my nitto 555's and never looked back
 
i went from NT555s (in the money) to the 712s (broke beyond all measure.. except for pocket change), and as stated before, it is a night a day difference. i ran the 555s completely bald then switched to the 712s... didnt notice a difference. see, the problem with that is that when you get a new tire it is at its peak... and when the peak of the 712s are about the same as the 555s completely bald you realize there is an issue.

the 555s are great and i'd recommend them, I went with BFG KDWs and they are the best i have used... if you can afford it i'd take the KDW over the other two... if you cant afford it, then the 555s. i will never own 712s again. on a bright side, they are pretty quiet, so i really dont know what the above posted noticed... they are virtualy silent compared to both the 555 and especially the KDW, though i'll take the minimal noise especially with the traction.

Torinalth
 
i have stock exhaust and the "horribly loud" KDWs i have now are only noticed when i think about it... other then that it fades into the background... the wind is louder then the tires when the windows are down.... i presume people are just picky... but thats just me.

Torinalth
 
I love those ecsta's. I drive about 700 miles (350 each way) every 2 weeks to my girls place. I've run them up to 115mph on I-75, between Tampa and Macon. No probs, or any complaints. As price goes, they're awesome. As performance goes, I've hit major rainstorms and they're all over that bitch. Looks, winner. But that's my take, from someone who drives that stang ALOT!!!!
Hell, I'd even drive them back up to Toronto if I had the money for a road trip to visit the folks. But flying is cheaper with the price of ethel.
 
roti said:
I love those ecsta's. I drive about 700 miles (350 each way) every 2 weeks to my girls place. I've run them up to 115mph on I-75, between Tampa and Macon. No probs, or any complaints. As price goes, they're awesome. As performance goes, I've hit major rainstorms and they're all over that bitch. Looks, winner. But that's my take, from someone who drives that stang ALOT!!!!
Hell, I'd even drive them back up to Toronto if I had the money for a road trip to visit the folks. But flying is cheaper with the price of ethel.
They're fine and all for regular driving but they basically suck for straight line traction. They are ok in the rain.

275/40s
 
JonJon said:
They're fine and all for regular driving but they basically suck for straight line traction. They are ok in the rain.

275/40s

Okay Nammy, I'll buy you beer, but you better be good to vera... if you know what I mean.

Guess who...

It's Cliffy!


You're right about out of the pocket. But rolling, they're a great tire to me. Rain, sun or other. I'm glad I chose them. Money wasn't a factor. Tire was. I dropped 40's on the rear and 45's up front. Just love them.

In the old days, it was Mickey Thomsons for me. I swore by the tire. Today, there's too much competition.

Hey bunny, I'm sure you're right. I just chose the these shoes and they fit well.
 
Torinalth said:
i ran the 555s completely bald then switched to the 712s... didnt notice a difference. see, the problem with that is that when you get a new tire it is at its peak... and when the peak of the 712s are about the same as the 555s completely bald you realize there is an issue.Torinalth
That's a misconception. When the tire is nearing bald, it is closer to its peak performance, not when the tire is new. Thats why competive racers shave some of the tread off their tires to get max performance out of them. For the same reason, Goodyear F1 Supercar tires come new with only 6/32"s of tread depth when most tires come new closer to 10/32"s tread depth - that way the tires perform better while near new.
 
I run 712's at 275 all around and they are awful. They also run oversized and the Nitto's run undersized. This means that on a stock rim, the Kuhmo's will shake back and forth and be sloppy while the Nitto's will be tight and happy.
 
I dont think 712's were really meant for high HP applications, they seem to be more a lower torque budget street tire. I just bought two for my car to sell it, they grip decently straight line, rain could be a little better though
 
Thundermouse said:
That's a misconception. When the tire is nearing bald, it is closer to its peak performance, not when the tire is new. Thats why competive racers shave some of the tread off their tires to get max performance out of them. For the same reason, Goodyear F1 Supercar tires come new with only 6/32"s of tread depth when most tires come new closer to 10/32"s tread depth - that way the tires perform better while near new.

Not quite right on this one. True about tread depth, the less the better. Most competition tires have very little tread depth compared to a stock tire. Less tread depth=less tread squirm under hard cornering. Take a stock tire though and wear it down to the same tread depth will not give you the same results. As a stock tire heat cycles it makes the rubber harder as you wear the tire down. Since the rubber is harder it does not give the same traction as a shaved tire at the same tread depth. Thats why its so easy to spin old tires, the rubber is way harder than when new.