Kumho 712's speed ratings?

[Larry C Leung]

Performance (from what I hear on the list) is pretty similar, you may
wish to check the survey results on TireRack.com. From what I've read,
the Kumho is a little bit softer in peformance, but the difference is
incremental (though bigger than the diff between the V and Z's) only
likely to really notice when runnig on the track for time. From what I
can gather, the difference between driver to driver will probably be
bigger than the difference between a well driven SP8K and ES712.

LL - NY

On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 00:47:53 -0400 coolian <coolian at mediaone.net> writes:
>I'm in much the same situation...They offered the Kumho tires. I opted 
>for 
>the Z rated ones in 205-50-15.  Anyone have any experience as to how 
>they 
>compare to the SP8000?
>
>The Kumho is offered mounted, balanced and road hazarded for 95. The 
>SP8000 
>will be like 128. Seems like I should be getting kissed before I get 
>f'ed.
>
>On Sunday 29 April 2001 10:10 pm, Luke Rickert wrote:
>> I called a local tire shop yesterday and had them order a set of 
>kumho
>> 712's for my 4kq (with 15's). Anyway they asked what speed rating I
>> wanted, I said the lower would be fine since my car can't get to 
>130,
>> let alone 180 or whatever the high rating was. Now I have started to
>> wonder, what is the deal with the same model and size of a tire 
>coming
>> in two different speed ratings for very similar prices? Does anyone 
>have
>> any idea what this is about? Is there any reason I should call them 
>back
>> and get the high rated tire?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Luke