Updates re ContiExtreme vs. Nero MS?

[LawGT]

I have cought my 3rd nail already...A condo is being built behind the alley that leads to my garage, and even though I scan the road surface for nails, they still get me in the odd day that I don't perform the "scan" - it sucks. The 3rd nail hit my FR tire and lodged itself b/w the sidewall and contact patch. 2 tire shops tried to patch it up, but were unsucessfull, so they put a temporary plug in it. All this equals a great excuse to get 4 new tires (but will wait as long as I can for the construction to be over).

 

Still debating whether to go the 215/45/17 or 225/45/17 route, but as the title implies, I am completely torn between the contiextreme and the nero ms. I'm going the HP all season route. I have searched for and read all the posts here re these tires, read other posts elsewhere in the web, and read the tire rack head to head comparision here and other tirerack reviews.

 

I am looking for people in this forum who have owned or currently own these tires (and if anyone has owned them both you get an extra brownie point) to provide any updated opinions. For example, how have the tires worn, noise level, comfort, snow/rain performace, etc.

 

The reviews on these tires are generally all over the place. Very generally, some love their contis for their excellent dry/wet performance, ride quality, low noise, and great snow performace, while disliking the soft sidewall (which I don't really care because it indicates better~"softer"~ ride), higher noise (tread pattern would indicate as such, but are they really louder than the re 92's?) and the fact that "they are hard to balance properly" (very important to me, but were people just experiencing flat spotting?). As you see, somewhat inconsistent. The nero users generally rave about the great dry and wet performance "almost as good as a summer tire", nice "firm" ride, sterring response, etc. but complain about them "sucking"/being horrible in the snow, having "soft" sidewalls (??? inconsistent with "firm ride"), wearing too fast, tramlining and flat spotting.

 

I live in Chicago where we get 3-6 or so heavy snows a year. I don't autocross or race and just want a "solid" tire that will ride well, be quiet, be safe in the wet and snow, and allow me to push the limits of the car every so often in the twisties. Having said all this, I'm leaning ever so slightly towards the contis (51% vs. 49%) because it's supposed to have a better ride than the neros (but tirerack's review appears to state otherwise) and are good in the snow and wet. Otherwise, I'm just F'ing undecided. Any help, updates, opinions, etc. would be very much appreciated. Thanks.

[JuxtaGT]

I wrote a lot on my conti's here: http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25512

 

It sounds to me like you have the right idea. My roommate has the P PZN's in 225/45/17's on his 330xi, I have 215/45/17"s on my LGT. We have compared notes and ridden in each others cars. P-zeros grip better in dry, wet is a wash between the two, though I feel the Conti's resit hydroplaning better in deep water. P-zero's tramline, Conti's "wander" a bit. Both are very quiet, Conti's are much quiter than the RE-92's. Haven't been in his car in snow conditions, but he claims nothing scary happened. I have been in blizzards with my Conti's, very good stuff for an all-season, which is what tipped the buying in their favor. Only thing I don't like about the Conti's is the soft sidewall, even running 40psi front / 38 psi rear, the rears will fold a bit under very hard corning (think 60+ on an offramp). But, as you say, you get a very compliant ride for the soft sidewall.

[LawGT]

I am one of the people who have given rave reviews to my contis. They are MUCH quieter and ride far better than the RE-92s. No comparison. You can search previous threads for my experiences, etc.

 

I havent had any experience with disastisfaction with sidewalls thus far. I have about 1,000 miles on them or so at this point. As for balancing, seems to be ok. The flatspotting doesnt really seem to be an issue either.

 

Overall very happy with dry, wet and snow performance and the tire in general.

Just look at my signature .

 

Others really like the Neros too. You just kinda have to make a decision and live with it. I was torn for a while as well.

 

It does seem that if snow is a concern, the Contis have the edge.

 

I did see your good glowing reviews a while back when searching. Please remind me, did you get yours in the 215 or 225 size? Any opinion which is better? The load rating on the 225 is higher (91W) vs. the 215 rating which is 87W...the lower load rating may account for some of the flat spotting issues. I much rather have better ride quality (as the result of "softer" sidewalls) than better "turn in feel." Chicago roads are pretty bad. What PSI are you filling your tires? How are the conti's high speed stability, i.e., at speeds over 85 mph (safely done, of course ). thanks

[LawGT]

I wrote a lot on my conti's here: http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25512

 

It sounds to me like you have the right idea. My roommate has the P PZN's in 225/45/17's on his 330xi, I have 215/45/17"s on my LGT. We have compared notes and ridden in each others cars. P-zeros grip better in dry, wet is a wash between the two, though I feel the Conti's resit hydroplaning better in deep water. P-zero's tramline, Conti's "wander" a bit. Both are very quiet, Conti's are much quiter than the RE-92's. Haven't been in his car in snow conditions, but he claims nothing scary happened. I have been in blizzards with my Conti's, very good stuff for an all-season, which is what tipped the buying in their favor. Only thing I don't like about the Conti's is the soft sidewall, even running 40psi front / 38 psi rear, the rears will fold a bit under very hard corning (think 60+ on an offramp). But, as you say, you get a very compliant ride for the soft sidewall.

 

This is exaclty what I was looking for...thanks. Wouldn't a "wander" equal tramlining to a lesser degree? How would you describe it? And does this wander occur at high speeds (i.e., above 85mph)? Also, how many miles do you have on them? My brother has a 325xi with the stock contitouring (I think, the ones that come stock with the "sport" package) and he loves them. He takes offramps at 65+mph that I take at 45mph in my stock suby for fear of wiping out.

 

thanks

[adamgt]

I have 225 Neros on my GT sedan. They are LOUD as hell now, I have had them on the car for about 15k and about 7 months. They were nice and quiet up to about the 10k mark. Now they are louder than my burned out/feather edged RE92s that I replaced after 15k. The tread is wearing very well and evenly on the Neros, however. The dry grip is excellent. The wet grip is very good. But they are HORRIBLE in the snow. They are ok in a straight line (accel and braking) but there is no lateral traction in the snow at all. I have tagged my right rear wheel into the outside curb a few times as a result. When these wear out or i get tired of the noise I will not be buying another set. For my purposes and for how these behave I would be better off with two sets of tires.

[JuxtaGT]

LawGT,

Tramlining to me means more of a "stuck in a rut" type of feel, like on the P-zero's, they get stuck in a grove, jump to a different groove after bit, then do it again. The "wander" I described on the conti's is tramlining to a certain extent, but it's just a very slight back and forth oscillation on certain grooved freeway surfaces, nothing that concerns me much, almost all tires do this to some extent. On most surfaces they are dead straight. I can only comment of speeds up to about 110(ish) mph for the Conti's, of which they had no problem. With the Conti's, I have only gained maybe 3-4 mph in the turns, the RE-92's in the dry were not bad, but the Conti's feel like they have better grip in a slide, and thus recover faster. I have about 1,500 miles on the tires now. I should also say that my roommates experience in the snow with the P-zeros is on nearly brand new tires as well. I have not had any flatspotting issues. Nor, did I have any balance issues, the weights were put in almost exactly the same place, and about the same amount, meaning rim imbalance more than tire.

[LawGT]

I have 225 Neros on my GT sedan. They are LOUD as hell now, I have had them on the car for about 15k and about 7 months. They were nice and quiet up to about the 10k mark. Now they are louder than my burned out/feather edged RE92s that I replaced after 15k. The tread is wearing very well and evenly on the Neros, however. The dry grip is excellent. The wet grip is very good. But they are HORRIBLE in the snow. They are ok in a straight line (accel and braking) but there is no lateral traction in the snow at all. I have tagged my right rear wheel into the outside curb a few times as a result. When these wear out or i get tired of the noise I will not be buying another set. For my purposes and for how these behave I would be better off with two sets of tires.

 

Wow, loud after 15K would not be acceptable to me and neither is "horrible" in the snow. thanks for your input.

[LawGT]

LawGT,

Tramlining to me means more of a "stuck in a rut" type of feel, like on the P-zero's, they get stuck in a grove, jump to a different groove after bit, then do it again. The "wander" I described on the conti's is tramlining to a certain extent, but it's just a very slight back and forth oscillation on certain grooved freeway surfaces, nothing that concerns me much, almost all tires do this to some extent. On most surfaces they are dead straight. I can only comment of speeds up to about 110(ish) mph for the Conti's, of which they had no problem. With the Conti's, I have only gained maybe 3-4 mph in the turns, the RE-92's in the dry were not bad, but the Conti's feel like they have better grip in a slide, and thus recover faster. I have about 1,500 miles on the tires now. I should also say that my roommates experience in the snow with the P-zeros is on nearly brand new tires as well. I have not had any flatspotting issues. Nor, did I have any balance issues, the weights were put in almost exactly the same place, and about the same amount, meaning rim imbalance more than tire.

 

I have experienced the wander with the re92's and thought it was the tires following those vertical groves on the hwy. I also thought that the re92's were not that bad in the dry, but would like a little more grip. the '92's suck in the rain, even at low speeds (20mph) I slide all over the place, and let's not talk about snow. Great, thanks.

[adamgt]

I actually found the RE92s to be better overall in the snow than the Neros.

[LawGT]

RE92's better in the snow than the Nero's? Wow, that indeed is horrible. The conti's are looking bette rthe more I think about it. thanks.

[deneb]

I've had a set of the PZero Nero's for about 10k now and so far I like them a lot better than the RE 92's. Significantly quieter and smoother riding than the RE 92's. I can't comment on the handling differences, they seem about the same to me, but I don't push my LGT as hard as others here. I've noticed very slight wandering/tramlining on heavily grooved pavement, but it's not an issue to me, and I don't think it's any worse/better than the RE 92's. The PZero's do well in the rain (and being a Pac NW resident, there's been a LOT of rain lately...), and did fine the one time I had them in the snow, though it was only a few inches worth. IMO, they're probably fine for occasional snow use as long as you drive like you should in snow.

[adamgt]

To clarify, they are not race slicks in the snow by any means. I have gotten through this entire New England winter with them just fine. Perhaps I have been spoiled by the set of Blizzak WS-50s on my father's Saab. But in any case they will not be replaced with another set of Neros.

[Beanboy]

Drove a A4 with ContiExtremeContacts for a few thousand miles on an A4 (roadtrip), Nice tire, easy breakaway, max grip not all that hot. Three tires blistered and three wheels dented with them.

 

Were replaced With the Pzero Neros.. Reported to be (car is friend's down the street) fine in snow, tough to tell since the Contis were cupped and corded when they were replaced after the first snowstorm, hehe. Says they have devent snow traction, quiet, and grip well.

 

-B

[TSiWRX]

I actually found the RE92s to be better overall in the snow than the Neros.

 

RE92's better in the snow than the Nero's? Wow, that indeed is horrible. The conti's are looking bette rthe more I think about it. thanks.

 

Just to clarify.....

 

We're speaking of same width tires?

[adamgt]

No. We are comparing 225 Neros and 215 RE92s. However, the difference in snow performance because of the tread width will be absolutely negligable compared to the difference in snow performance because of the basic tread design differences. The main one that I will point of is that the RE92 has tread blocks which extend all the way to the edges of the tires. The Nero has a rounded shoulder with no defined tread blocks. This greatly increases cornering grip in the dry but has the opposite effect on slippery surfaces, especially snow. Here are pictures of both tires to illustrate my point:

 

The P-Zero Nero M+S:

http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/pirelli/pi_p_zero_nero_ms_ci2_l.jpg

 

The Bridgestone Potenza RE-92:

http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/bridgestone/bs_potenza_re92_ci2_l.jpg

 

Unfortunately, Pirelli does not list tread width measurements for the P-Zero Nero M+S. Therfore, if you would like to compare widths of the tires we must only do it by comparing section width (the width from sidewall to sidewall).

 

Pirelli lists the section width for the 225/45R17 P-Zero Nero M+S to be 8.7".

 

Bridgestone lists the section width for the 215/45R17 RE92 to be 8.6".

 

Big difference in width huh?

[TSiWRX]

^ Ah! I see!

[adamgt]

In addition it is clear from the above photos that the RE92 has about a million more biting edges in the tread than the Nero. This also points to why I experienced better snow traction from the RE92.

[adamgt]

Because I have the time (no classes until 1pm) I will continue my analysis of these tires. I have not run the ContiExtreme but here is a picture of that as well just to compare to the above.

 

http://www.tirerack.com/images/tires/conti/co_xtreme_contact_ci2_l.jpg

 

The ContiExtreme looks much more like a true all season tire compared to the Nero. It has a lot of biting edges in the tread and some more substantial tread blocks that extend further to the shoulders of the tread. Again, without running the ContiExtremes, I would say that if you want a 60% performance/40% all season tire I would look at the Neros. If you want a 40% performance/60% all season tire I would look at the ContiExtremes.

[edmundu]

One caveat about the Re92...Have you tried touching the tire when it is 20 degrees outside? It is hard like plastic, whereas the Pzero is noteably softer. I feel the single largest contributor to the tire's snow weather ability is the plyability of the rubber compound in freezing weather. I had the re92's in snow, and the Pzero's. The Pzero's are definitely better, they are no snow tire or even a match for a Nokian WR, but they can get you through a few snow storms a year easy...

[HansGT]

That pic looks like the RE92 not the RE92A which is only on our cars and is the only Z rated RE92 tire....check Bridgestone. They are similar but I don't think our stock ZR tires have all those little pockets.

[HansGT]

http://www.auko.ru/img/gb1698.jpg

 

what's this?

[adamgt]

Im guessing the Nokian WR. That looks like a very nice tire. I will have to investigate them for my next tire purchase.

[iON Performance]

The Nokian WR's are our recommend tire choice for customers who don't need the dedicated snow tire like the Hakka 1/2 or RSi's. They will out perform the OEM RE92A's no problems. The other "choice" tire is the Continental/Semperit Sport Grip's. They're ~80% of the Nokian WR's for ~70-80% of the price.

 

The tires we'd recommend for those who see more rain then snow would be either the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S's or the Falken Ziex 512's.

[HansGT]

The Nokian WR's are our recommend tire choice for customers who don't need the dedicated snow tire like the Hakka 1/2 or RSi's. They will out perform the OEM RE92A's no problems. The other "choice" tire is the Continental/Semperit Sport Grip's. They're ~80% of the Nokian WR's for ~70-80% of the price.

 

The tires we'd recommend for those who see more rain then snow would be either the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S's or the Falken Ziex 512's.

 

Falken Ziex 512 are cheap too:icon_bigg

 

If you want a bit more performance Pirelli Pnero M+S or Toyo Proxies 4

[jim1969]

I have the falkens on my wife's forester and the pirellis on my legacy. The falkens are better in snow, they're about equal in rain and the pirellis are better in the dry. These are different cars however so I can't push the forester through the turns the same way as the legacy so the results for the falkens on the legacy may differ.