Falken ZEIX ZE-512 235/45/17 Question?

[traskw]

From what I've searched, these should work on a 17x7.5 +48 offset rim.

Does anyone have experience with this specific tire/rim combination on a stock suspension car? Here are the complete specs on the tire:

 

Measured Rim Width: 8.0

 

Approved Rim Width: 7.5 - 9.0

 

O.D: 25.4

 

Section Width: 9.4

 

R.P.Miles: 816

 

Tread Width: 8.2

 

Tread Depth: 10/32

 

Weight: 24.1 lbs

 

Max PSI: 50

[sgt]

Ive seen 2 sets of 512 tires. On both sets, the sidewalls were completely soft after only 5k miles. You could rock the car from side to side because of the lack of stiffness in the sidewalls.

 

I would highly recommend against them.

[traskw]

Ive seen 2 sets of 512 tires. On both sets, the sidewalls were completely soft after only 5k miles. You could rock the car from side to side because of the lack of stiffness in the sidewalls.

 

I would highly recommend against them.

 

Not all off the 512's have reinforced sidewalls. This would be the my third set. My last set 225/45/17 with reinforced sidewalls probably saved my life. Midway through a 5 hour drive in the dark northern mountains of PA... I cracked two right rims in half on a concrete block in the road at 80mph++, the tire pressure went out instantly; I was riding on the sidewalls and they held up beautifully. Heck the tire even kept the rim from flying apart which could have caused serious damage.

 

You have to look for th REIN after the tire size. They are great all season high performance tires. I have had Subaru's for years, have sold them for five, and I've tried Yokohama's, NITTO's, Bridgestone, Micheline, etc. etc. These are the best compromise in favor of performance of any all-season I have used. The tread life is fairly accurate at 30,000 miles, but heck tires every two years is not a big deal to me, besides, they are not too expensive.

[LawGT]

Not all off the 512's have reinforced sidewalls. This would be the my third set. My last set 225/45/17 with reinforced sidewalls probably saved my life. Midway through a 5 hour drive in the dark northern mountains of PA... I cracked two right rims in half on a concrete block in the road at 80mph++, the tire pressure went out instantly; I was riding on the sidewalls and they held up beautifully. Heck the tire even kept the rim from flying apart which could have caused serious damage.

 

You have to look for th REIN after the tire size. They are great all season high performance tires. I have had Subaru's for years, have sold them for five, and I've tried Yokohama's, NITTO's, Bridgestone, Micheline, etc. etc. These are the best compromise in favor of performance of any all-season I have used. The tread life is fairly accurate at 30,000 miles, but heck tires every two years is not a big deal to me, besides, they are not too expensive.

 

Have you compared the 512's with the Contiextreme? I'm now torn b/w these two (was set on Conti until a guy at TireRack told me that they have a very high defect rate - tires won't balance). I'll either gamble with the contis or get the 512's in 225/45/17 REIN. How are the 512's in the snow and at low (single digits farenheit) temps? I live in Chicago...

[traskw]

I'm originally from New England and I found these tires were amazing in the rain, and had good snow traction compared with other V rated and above (these are W Rated)performance tires. The RE92A's were awful in the snow. The NITTO's were decent in the snow, but wore quickly. I have tried several different Yok's H and V rated performance all seasons and they are a decent all-around tire, but did not offer the performance I was looking for. These tires are better in every aspect then RE92A's, though just about any good performance all-season tire is an upgrade. I've been very happy with the 512's (My third Set) I wanted a tire that compromised as little as possible in the wet and dry, yet I did not want to switch to snows in the winter, some days the roads are awful and others they are crystal clear and snow tires are way too soft. The weather is too unpredictable in the northeast.

 

After trying 5 other high performance all-seasons (I have 4 Subaru's) these were the 1st tires I re-purchased. After my recent wheel incident, I'm further sold. I hit a light bump when I had the RE92's on and bubbled the sidewall, they would have probably shredded with this last incident, I crossed two lanes of traffic and slowed from 80+ riding on just the outside sidewalls of the Falken 512's, the inside of the rim was actually separated from the hub. They held up so well I almost considered re-using them. I'll have to take photos.

 

The 225/45/17 fit with out any clearance issues. The diameter was closer to stock than I expected a 225/45/17 to be, hence the 235/45/17 which should give me the extra measure of rim protection I'm looking for.

[LawGT]

Awsome, thanks. And yes, photos would be cool. Someone else here also got their rim split in half by a pot hole.

[Legasee]

the 512's does have pretty soft sidewalls...but if you are looking for a nice softer ride, these are pretty comfy

[AWDDAD]

im rockin 215/45-17's on stock 2.5i suspension. Rides fine to me.

[traskw]

Softer sidewall compared to what? Summer tires? The reinforced sidewall versions are a lot stiffer than the RE92's. I have compared the two deflated side by side. They also seem as stiff as any of the other simalar sized high-performance-all-seasons I have tried.

[sgt]

Compared to ANYTHING.

When the tires were new, they were just fine. Within 5k miles the sidewalls had become soft enough where I could push on the car with a finger and move it laterally about 1" back and forth. RE92s are much better than that.

 

If its true that they make a version with a reinforced sidewall, that would be the only one I would consider.

[Effin Ponderous]

Ive run 512's on my G35 sedan (a heavier car than the LGT). They were a great blend of handling and ride compared to my stock Bridgestones. The other huge benefit is the life. I put over thirty thousand on them myself and had at least that much more left. They are the only performance tire with a manufacturers mileage warranty (30K). I will buy them myself when it's time.

[sgt]

I never recieved any information saying that they had a mileage warranty. Hmmm, I wonder if I could have claimed a warranty?

[traskw]

Ooops.

[traskw]

Compared to ANYTHING.

When the tires were new, they were just fine. Within 5k miles the sidewalls had become soft enough where I could push on the car with a finger and move it laterally about 1" back and forth. RE92s are much better than that.

 

If its true that they make a version with a reinforced sidewall, that would be the only one I would consider.

 

Most are not reinforced, the reinforced models say "reinforced" right on the side wall of the tire and have a criss-cross pattern inside the tire. Even after my incident with the block in the road the sidewalls on the 512's with 9K seem stiffer than the RE92's in my garage with only 7k on them.

 

They have a 30k OR 60k mileage warranty depending on the model.

 

I hit a 3" tapered ramp shaped median avoiding a cement truck with the RE92's and bubbled the side wall, I hit a 6" high square shaped cement block with the 512's and they held up amazingly well. They are however, stronger pushing toward the rim versus side to side, as they should be, your tire pressure will greatly effect the side to side "soft" feel of the tire. I run about 40lbs in the 512's.

[LawGT]

Softer sidewall compared to what? Summer tires? The reinforced sidewall versions are a lot stiffer than the RE92's. I have compared the two deflated side by side. They also seem as stiff as any of the other simalar sized high-performance-all-seasons I have tried.

 

Are you saying that the ride quality of the 512 in REIN (like the 225/45/17's) is harsher than the R92's? I definitely don't want a harsher ride.

[traskw]

Are you saying that the ride quality of the 512 in REIN (like the 225/45/17's) is harsher than the R92's? I definitely don't want a harsher ride.

 

Nope, the 225 has a thicker sidewall, but your tire pressure will make all the difference in ride quality.

[traskw]

I've have the 235/45/17's on the car, no rubbing, but I wouldn't want to go any bigger. I took a harder look at the sidewall's today, they are harder toward the top and toward the rim, but with some isolation in the middle. The RE92's are not has hard toward the tire or rim, but harder in the middle. Anyway, the 235/45/17 have a softer ride compared to the 225/45/17's. The larger sidewall height certainly smooths out the road bumps. I'll have to test cornering when I get a chance. I know I am running a heavier tire/rim combo (the rims are a stronger density alloy then the ones they replaced) and a slightly higher drive ratio, but the stage I helps make up for it. I'll have to go stage II to make up for it =).

 

I'm starting to feel like I'm driving a true GT.

[Dazma]

I have a set of these in 225/40/18.

They came with a set of Oz wheels that i bought from another member here and have around 5000 miles on them.

Last night I going through some road works near my house I hit a 3 inch step in the road at around 25 mph and blew out the sidewall on the right rear. Cant believe it! Not sure if I am going to replace 1 tire or get a new set.

 

Here are my impressions of the tires:

Dry grip is way better than the stockers. However I have been suprised at the softness of the sidewalls during spirited driving. When I first drove on them it felt like the fronts were rolling off the rims!! They do hang on well but the side walls are def. soft.

 

Wet weather grip has been a real disappointment. The RE92 were better in the rain ... and that is saying something. They have never aquaplaned but the overall level of grip in the wet is extremly limited under acceleration (stage 1 TDC tune) and cornering. The car is very loose in the wet. I have no suspension mods BTW.

 

NHV is up from the RE92 and has been getting worse. Most notible at slow speeds esp. in corners. I thought I might have had a wheel bearing issue at first but it was just the tires. Its not a howl ... more a rough tread noise ... hard to explain.

 

Now I have to decide what to do

1. Replace damaged tire with the same

2. Replace all 4 with a more aggresive summer tire and run RE92 for winter

3. Replace the RE 92 with a move aggresive winter tire (snowboarding will start soon!!) and wait till spring to replace the Falkens

 

What to do !!!!

[traskw]

The current set has only 2000 miles thus far, at 38lbs I do not have any sidewall play and my cornering speeds through tight corners are much better than the RE92's. I threw the RE92's back on before I sold them just to see if I was going crazy, I wasn't, and they were louder (RE92's). Who knows, but I've been really happy with the three sets I've had.

[Dazma]

Needed to do something quick so I switched back to the Stock set up (rims and RE92) and did around 50 miles on this today in the rain.

 

The Stock set up is stiffer than my 18 Falkens and there is NO doubt that the wet grip is much better on the RE92.

 

Call me crazy but the stock set up is much better than the Falken Zeix on 18.

 

My only thoughts on my 18 inch set up is that i am running a 225 tire on a 8 inch rim ... the tires are narrow for these rims .... perhaps that created the roll issues .

 

Anyway .... the Falkens are going ... And I think to are the RE92 for some more aggressive winter rubber.

 

Ill look into some sweet Summer rubber in the Spring.

 

PS. the car doesnt look nearly as cool on the stock rims as with the 18 Oz Wheels:(

[TSiWRX]

Dazma -

 

What were your inflation pressures on the ZIEX?

 

I've found mine to be *extremely* sensitive to pressure variances. Even just 2 PSI off optimal (for winter, I cold-fill to 38 front, 36 rear; 225/45/17 sizing; stock rims), and they're noticeably different in behavior.

 

Properly inflated, I've never had aquaplaning issues with the ZIEX, and I drive fast enough in the rain (which is why I chose these tires), when traffic allows, to raise eyebrows among even my Scooby enthusiast friends. And although my summer Fuzions (225/40/18 on 18x8 PFF7s; filled to 40 f/38 r, hot) are decidedly not at the top of the performance heap where wet-traction is concerned, I can say with assurance that the ZIEX easily out-perform them where such traction is concerned, especially when it comes to high-speed stability through standing water.....

 

A few pounds off, though and I can easily spin all four ZIEXs up through second gear (I'm at typical "Stage II" power levels).

[traskw]

Dazma -

 

What were your inflation pressures on the ZIEX?

 

I've found mine to be *extremely* sensitive to pressure variances. Even just 2 PSI off optimal (for winter, I cold-fill to 38 front, 36 rear; 225/45/17 sizing; stock rims), and they're noticeably different in behavior.

 

Properly inflated, I've never had aquaplaning issues with the ZIEX, and I drive fast enough in the rain (which is why I chose these tires), when traffic allows, to raise eyebrows among even my Scooby enthusiast friends. And although my summer Fuzions (225/40/18 on 18x8 PFF7s; filled to 40 f/38 r, hot) are decidedly not at the top of the performance heap where wet-traction is concerned, I can say with assurance that the ZIEX easily out-perform them where such traction is concerned, especially when it comes to high-speed stability through standing water.....

 

A few pounds off, though and I can easily spin all four ZIEXs up through second gear (I'm at typical "Stage II" power levels).

 

Good point, I run 38-40lbs in mine, no center wear issues, and they have been great in the wet, I've run the 225/45/17 on a 7" rim and now with the 235/45/17 on a 7.5" rim.

 

BTW the ASA wheels are heavy(shot peened), but so far they have taken the pot holes without incident, they seem pretty rugged.

[Dazma]

Dazma -

 

What were your inflation pressures on the ZIEX?

 

I've found mine to be *extremely* sensitive to pressure variances. Even just 2 PSI off optimal (for winter, I cold-fill to 38 front, 36 rear; 225/45/17 sizing; stock rims), and they're noticeably different in behavior.

 

Properly inflated, I've never had aquaplaning issues with the ZIEX, and I drive fast enough in the rain (which is why I chose these tires), when traffic allows, to raise eyebrows among even my Scooby enthusiast friends. And although my summer Fuzions (225/40/18 on 18x8 PFF7s; filled to 40 f/38 r, hot) are decidedly not at the top of the performance heap where wet-traction is concerned, I can say with assurance that the ZIEX easily out-perform them where such traction is concerned, especially when it comes to high-speed stability through standing water.....

 

A few pounds off, though and I can easily spin all four ZIEXs up through second gear (I'm at typical "Stage II" power levels).

 

Interesting Points.

I have pretty much run them at a consistant 40psi cold all round and the wear pattern on all 4 tires is very even. Like I said in my openning post, I have never had any aquaplaning with the ZIEX, rather it has been overall traction in the wet. I could spin the tires in 1st and 2nd at will (Stage 1 TDC tune, stock suspension) and the attitude of the car went from mild understeer to snap oversteer under accelleration (being a former rally driver this is fun !!) in the wet (as opposed to terminal understeer from the RE92 :lol: )

 

Unfortunatly we are comparing apples and oranges with our set ups. You guys are running them on a 17x7 rim with 225/45 and mine are on 18x8 with 225/40 . The way the sidewalls perform may be a function of the wheel width .... the pressures ... ect.

 

Since putting the RE92's back on yesterday (40psi cold) I have noticed a significant increase in wet traction. The rear doenst break away like it did with the Falkens and high speed stability is up, noise is down.

 

Looking closley at the ZIEX, it seems to be designed with many built in comprimises that come with a all season tire. The tread pattern (block size and design) is similar to traditional summer tires with larger spacing between blocks and wide central channels from water dispersion. This does make it great for preventing aquaplaning.

However, being that they also have a 30,000 mile warrenty, I imagine the rubber compound in rather hard, thus wet traction is comprimised.

Also, the lack of any sipping makes me think these would be terrible in the snow.

 

thoughts?

[TSiWRX]

Unfortunatly we are comparing apples and oranges with our set ups. You guys are running them on a 17x7 rim with 225/45 and mine are on 18x8 with 225/40 . The way the sidewalls perform may be a function of the wheel width .... the pressures ... ect.

 

Very much agreed.

 

Undoubtedly, it's likely this type of fundamental difference that's causing our widely differing opinions/experiences with this tire.

 

Looking closley at the ZIEX, it seems to be designed with many built in comprimises that come with a all season tire.

 

Completely so. Again, agreed.

 

The tread pattern (block size and design) is similar to traditional summer tires with larger spacing between blocks and wide central channels from water dispersion. This does make it great for preventing aquaplaning.

 

Agreed yet again. The common reaction from people who first see these is almost always "they must really pump out water." Those channels run deep, and there's quite a bit of them.

 

However, being that they also have a 30,000 mile warrenty, I imagine the rubber compound in rather hard, thus wet traction is comprimised.

 

This is what's somewhat confusing for me - I agree, the 30K-mile warranty would make on the harder side of things, but it's also somewhat known that tire-wear is an issue with the ZIEX ZE-512s.

 

Also, the lack of any sipping makes me think these would be terrible in the snow.

 

They're actually not that bad - compared to the Toyo Proxes 4 and Pirelli P-Zero Nero twins, these Falkens actually are slightly more capable in the snow (but they do give up a bit of dry-weather performance in-compromise).

 

I've had the 512s on two of my previous decently-powerful front-drivers, and traction was more than acceptable in snow/slush. Compared against the RE92s that my LGT came with and also shod on the wifey's WRX, despite the 512s wider footprint, it has yet to show that it's any less capable.

 

Here in the snow-belt sectors of NE-Ohio ("Lake Effect" snow), the 512s are very hot sellers among the masses. It's seen as a good all-season tire with decent snow and slush capability. It's also viewed quite favorably among our local Scooby enthusiast club, with many members using this tire year-round, including in the winter.

 

However, it's by no means a true winter tire - and even in its all-seasons circle, it's still nowhere near as true winter-capable as, say, a comparable Nokian. And furthermore, I think that it's "capability" as a winter tire for snow/slush also depends highly on what the vehicle's driver asks of it. As with most of the commuting masses, I turn into a pussycat when the white stuff starts to fall, and I would imagine that I am riding well within the safety-zone that these tires offer. I have only once attempted to probe the outer limits of its winter traction envelope, and while I found it to be an improvement over the RE92s, I still wouldn't be comfortable deliberately "playing with"/pushing the LGT using these tires under such conditions.

 

As temperatures dip below farther below freezing and the roadway becomes covered in sheet ice, these tires really start to show their weakness against dedicated winter tires.

 

----

 

I can't help but wonder what will happen this coming summer - and how my outlook on this all might change - when I'd likely replace my Fuzions with Goodyear F1 GS D3s.

 

Although the D3s are known to have a rather soft sidewall when compared to their chief market-competitor, the Toyo T1R, I think I'd be willing to compromise on this issue given that the former is also reported to give a more compliant ride (which will be important for those times that I do have the wifey in the car) - I would imagine its wet-traction capability to easily exceed that of the Falkens, and this might shed a bit of light, especially given the fitment differences, between what we're reporting.

[traskw]

I had a tricky time last winter on the RE92's, one of the reasons I went to the Falken's, since I'd had them through a winter before. I'll have to see how the current size effects winter handling, but I can say for sure that it was much easier to spin the RE92's in the wet. You might attribute it to larger tire, but the 225/45/17 was almost the exact same center circumference as the RE92. The 235/45/17 on the other hand is a good 2" larger in circumference.