[cor66vette]

I will be a C5 owner in a week or so (can't wait) and have heard a lot about the run flats and how horrible they are. Along with the column lock bypass LMC5 module it seems like the tires are one of the first stock items of the car to get addressed. Are they that bad and if/so what makes them so?

 

[vettex2]

They suck but they do have their place for some owners.

 

[glasguydj]

well i purchased two for the rear of my c5 put 3000 miles on them then ny fronts went bad. I changed all for to sumitomo htrz II. they ride like a dream compared to the run flats. so if anyones looking for a set of 275-40zr18 with hardly any miles ill sell them for 50.00 each plus shipping lol

 

[G_A_B24]

I have replaced the run flats with Hankook. These tires are great. I ran these in the rain at Watkins Glen and they performed great.

Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110

 

[Bucwheat]

They are loud and wear out quick.

 

[Gigity]

I loved my Firestone Firehawk run flats, but I needed something that would stick a little better. If my car was still stock, I would still be using them.

 

[C5inSB]

They are loud and wear out quick.

The Hankooks ?

Agreed. A friend of mine has an M5 and his wore out after 10k miles.

BUT, comparing them to the cost of Ps2's, he bot another set of Hankooks.

My son and I are building a track car for 24hoursoflemons and they have minimum wear ratings. Evos are rated 280...

I have a pair on the front of my C5. They are okay but since I put R888's on the rear (to replace PS2 A/S runflats) they are showing their faults..atriot:

 

[rjkrumb]

got rid of goodyear runflats and went to michelin zero pressure amazing difference in noise and handling stayed with runflats because wife drives the car on interstate

 

[Last C5]

got rid of goodyear runflats and went to michelin zero pressure amazing difference in noise and handling stayed with runflats because wife drives the car on interstate

:thumbsup3: Did all the same for all the same reasons. They're a much better tire.

 

[sdderr]

:thumbsup3: Did all the same for all the same reasons. They're a much better tire.

Yeah, I third that. Replaced my Goodyears with the Michelin PS2 run flats and could not believe the difference. I haven't compared them to non-run flat models but I'm very happy with the Pilot Sports.

 

[Pappytinker]

Since I am not "into" racing and "spirited" driving on public roads, I probably don't know the difference between good performing tires and lousy performing tires. However, the original tires that came on the car have almost 30K miles on them and the tread is between 4/32 and 5/32 remaining. The tires on all 4 corners are about the same. I will probably go with the Michelins when I replace them.

 

[Vettemagnet]

Like the others have said. They have their place. If it was a commuter car and I didn't drive it like a sports car then I would consider the run flat. I would also consider it for my wife, since I can't see her trying to change a tire nor would I want her to.

Since I have a 2004 Z, it comes with a kit similar to the Slime kit like the ones in AutoZone or Wal Mart. These kits are not designed for pressure sensors either.

I've had both over the years. My vote goes to the non run flat for performance. They are quieter and in colder weather they feel better that the run flat.

 

[oh1vette]

Harder sidewalls to support the "runflat" aspect...

Recently ditched mine and went with Nitto NT555s...

Only a couple weeks and no track time yet...but no complaints so far...

Smoother, softer ride, no "trammeling" on the road imperfections...