at7000ft

Am down to 2/32" on my front original GY RFs, need to make a tire decision soon and have a question. On this forum the GY RFs (Fred Flintstone tires) get a nearly unanimous thumbs down rating (which I agree with) however people rave about how wonderful the newer Michelin PS2 and A/S runflats are ("like a totally different car compared to the GYs", etc). Makes me wonder how many newer vette owners have given up on runflats forever after their experience with the Goodyears.

Have any of you folks that have tried the Michelin PS runflats also tried non-runflats? Opinions?

RO55

JMO, but I think some of the folks go with non-runflats due to price.

cagotzmann

I went to the Michelin PS2 after 13,000 Mile I got from my GY F1 orig. tires. I lost 75% on 6 track days. First thing I noticed no more tire chatter turning at slow speed turning. Nicer ride and quieter. Mine cost me $2600.00 in alberta canada. That I didn't like. I will consider non-run flats for track days but the cost for me if I get a flat is not worth running non run flats for daily driving. It may never happen but I prefer the comfort of knowing I can drive without rim damage etc.

Gman in NC

I can't really say that the others are better but I've had a very good experience with the GYs. I have a base '05'. After 37,000 miles I've replaced the fronts (at 22,000) and the rears are still on there looking good. I'll do 40,000 on them for sure. They are noisy at times but I'd bet pretty much all performance tires are. It depends if I'm driving with the windows down, top out, or windows up. All different. Might just keep buying GYs two at a time. I'm not going to leave run flats for sure.

Bill Dearborn

I don't think the GYs are all that bad. I was very surprised with the performance of the Supercar EMTs on the highway and track. Even with little tread I got through heavy rain at highway speeds and on the track they were very sticky. Right down to no tread left. On an autocross course they weren't as good as other tires since they didn't have time to get hot enough to be sticky.

The original EMTs that came on the base/Z51 C5s didn't handle very well compared to other tires but they had extremely stiff sidewalls so you could drive them for 200 miles at 55 mph at zero pressure and still be able to repair them. I replaced the EMTs on my 97 with Firestone SZ50 Run Flats and noticed a definite decrease in road noise, handling and wet weather performance. Running a Go Kart Track autocross (consistent layout and consistent ambient conditions) I found the Firestones were 4 seconds quicker in the wet than the C5 EMTs were in the dry. If you looked at the wear pattern on the stiff sidewall EMTs you could see where hard cornering forces would cause the tread to buckle and lift parts of the tread off the pavement. This probably accounted for most of the handling issues.

The C6 versions have much softer sidewalls and can only be driven for 50 miles at 55 mph and zero pressure. Up until GM started installing Michelins on the ZR1 other run flats supposedly couldn't be repaired if they experienced zero pressure operation. Since GM puts them on Corvettes now I suspect Michelins strengthened the tire construction so it would meet GM's 50 mile, at 55 mph, at zero pressure requirement.

Bill

phileaglesfan

I went with non runflats because the Michelin Super Sport is better than even the PS2 ZP in every way possible. PS2 ZP is in another league compared to the Goodyear RF.

I personally would never put an A/S tire on a Vette again. My Vette is not a daily driver though so it usually doesn't see much wet driving, which the Super Sports are probably better in the rain anyway.

RoadReady

I think Goodyear run flats have given Goodyear a bad name. Goodyears on the C4 and C5 quickly became excessively noisy and developed bad belts. After expensive lessons from replacing individual tires I will buy nothing but Michelines for any vehicle. The Goodyears on the '11 have 10,000 miles and the noise level is building rapidly.

GM and Goodyear both should listen to their customers.

MikeyTX

I has the Michelin AS run flats installed yesterday after my GY's started chucking rubber off the shoulder at 70 + on the toll road here in TX. Never again will I have GY's on my car. The improvement is noticeable.

JoesC5

I didn't give up on run flats, I gave up on Goodyear's run flats. I have Bridgestone RE050A runflats on my Z06, thank you.

laconiajack

I beleive the Good Year Run-Flats gave run-flats in general a bad name. But the reason most switch to non-run flats is price, no matter what they say, because they can't afford the safety and security of run-flats.

Mad*Max

It made me switch to Firestone runflats - last longer and handle as good if not better while at a cheaper price.

phileaglesfan

How many non runflats have you had on your Vette? Probably zero! Even Michelin rates the Super Sport better than the PS2 ZP in EVERY category on their website. There is probably a big profit to sell run flat tires to Vette owners that are worried about something that will probably never happen in their lifetime. But if you want to pay 33% more for tires that wear out twice as much then go for it. It is amazing how many German cars have non runflats though and they drive their cars a lot faster than us. You would think they would jump all over buying run flats if there was a big safety difference since they'll cruise at 100-150mph.

hawkgfr

Sadly GOODYEAR gives all tires a bad name..

Supersonic 427

Goodyear= good for a year

BOB'S C6

Maybe GM should give us a choice on tires like they do on wheels so we could get Michelins when the car is new instead of the Goodyears. Then maybe they would see how many Goodyears they would sell compaired to other brands.

NevadaVette

Many first time C6 buyers don't know that GM is sticking them with a set of tires that might only last 8,000 miles, like the Goodyear F1 Supercar runflats, so GM has played something of a roll in the widespread contempt for Goodyear tires by not disclosing what the buyer is getting.

Ninety nine percent of the Corvettes with Goodyear F1 Supercars will never benefit from any of the purported performance edge at the margin over other similar tires. If a buyer actually wants a tire that sacrifices everything else for performance, or wants to pretend like they need a tire not suitable for the street, GM should let them choose it as an option. Those tires really have no business on most street driven Z51's GS's in the first place.

Behind a lot of the contempt for Goodyear is the bloated price and poor longevity of the tires, which are of no real value to most Corvette buyers. When you talk about money, many people don't want to admit that they can't afford to buy a new set those tires twice a year, so they blame the runflat or something else other than money. That's typical consumer behavior on many overpriced products.

TerryL

Just have 4,000 on a set of Firehawk RFs but so far, they're quiet and grip very well. Most of that mileage has been on hiway 1 between Leggett and Mill Valley and Half Moon Bay and Cambria. Running 30 psi cold. A little rough riding until warmed up but that's to be expected with most any low profile sidewall tire.

azvetteguy

It's time (a whole 9k miles) to replace my Goodyear Run Flats. As I understand it, if I go with non run flats and have a flat tire I risk being stranded, ruining a rim or having a blowout which could cause body damage. My solution: stranded = use cell phone and call AAA Auto Club - ruin rim = don't drive on flat tire - blowout body damage = I've never had a blowout.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has had a flat tire with non run flats. I'm a 66 year old geezer. I've had 3 flat tires in my whole life. Each time the tires went flat when the car was parked.

Do I really need run flats?

Am I missing something here? If I am please don't flame me, just advise me.

AORoads

I read all these threads because they are interesting and I follow some of the suggestions because they appeal to me. As to three flats in a lifetime posted above, all in your driveway, is that the only time you'd be concerned about getting a flat? If it is, and is most likely the only time it would happen based on your experience, carry on!

To the original question, no, I don't think Goodyear has given runflats in general, or their specific tires a bad name. I found the runflats to be quite adequate under most (but not all) circumstances. There were several limitations and exceptions however.

As to Goodyear being an overall lousy tire producer, I don't agree with that either. On Corvettes, I've had the GSCs that were fine on a '93, and for many more miles than most would even think including an exec at TireRack who saw them with 55K miles--they can't be rotated either.

Numerous Goodyear GT+4s on three different cars, etc. with zero issues and good performance that differed from platform to platform. And now Michelin PS2 ZPs on the C6. Not enuff miles to say much other than they are good.

Just remember that we all tend to base opinions on what happens to us, and what we hear/read about. Some of it is factual, and some of it is not. And some is a true lack of maintenance.

Example: Have you ever read on these pages about the owner who starts out the day in his semi-heated garage at 28 lbs of pressure, and ignores for weeks the fact that his "very accurate" DIC says the tires are low (meaning 24 lbs or less)?

How much long life will that owner get out of that set of tires (not to mention potentially dangerously low for street or highway use)? Like kumbaya, let's all laff together....

Admiral Ballsy

Goodyear seems to hit, miss, miss, hit, miss, miss, and so on.

The original VR/ZR was a great tire. The GS-C, not so much. The Eagle F1? Nope. Then the F1-D3 or whatever it was that came out around 2000 was fantastic. Now...not so great.

Maybe they try to update too much. Bridgestone has been making RE-050s and S-02s for forever, it seems.