derek, i would take the C&D tests with a grain of salt. it really depends on what you're planning to do with the car in order to really have the "best" tire choice. From the review, the treadwear from the Neova seems really low to me. given that it boosts performance by 10%, it is worth the lost of treadwear?

other stuff that needs to be considered are stuff that weren't tested, like road noise. To some it's important, I know I for one don't want to have my tires roaring when I drive just to have the extra grip. To me, daily drivers just don't really need that kind of near-track tires. It's just abit excessive in my mind.

 

You are absolutely right noodle,

Please note:
"...in order of performance..."
"...if a Gatorback still has half the tread depth left but has turned into a squeeling puck, and no longer offers any semblance of original performance, then that's no better than a tire that's on the wear bars after the same mileage but has yeilded great performance through its entire, albeit seemingly shorter life. If I am disappointed with my car's performance, half the time, were the savings worth it?)... "
"...Whether one owns a sport sedan or sport coupe, unless one only use it for groceries, what would lead one to choose a non-performance tire? The only answer I can arrive at is someone that is replacing their tires monthly, following autocross thrashings as my friend does. If that's not the deal, then I'd recommend at least considering some quality tires..."

I think in a few places in my post, I've aptly expressed the notion that my comments are biased to someone wanting to enjoy performance from their fifty thousand dollar Canadian sports sedan or coupe, and I elaborated on a notion that is often overlooked when comparing treadwear ratings.
I wholly recognise that we each own our cars for different reasons, and that different things are important to us. To that end, I've given acknowledgement of a sound source of info for details on all of those considerations that you might suggest:
"...Certainly, tirerack's test are of great value too..."

I'm not expecting that someone is required to arrive at the same decision as I have come to (does everyone have two brother-in-laws that save them 45% on Michelins?). In fact, I went as far as exposing my own reason for bias, so that my comments would not be misleading.

Conversely, there are many who, in replacing OE, are disappointed/disgusted with their cars, within 5K kms after putting on more economical rubber. Some are actually surprised. "Hey, where'd my car go?"

Hopefully, by providing the info from C&D, and from TR, some will be able to avoid that pitfall, and make a decision based upon controlled (if not completely scientific) findings, rather than a board where someone says, "Yeah, these x tires are killer."

As for your Q ref the Neova, isn't there a little guy inside you, that after reading the comments on that tire from various sources (if you're a buff that eats monthly car mag subscriptions for lunch)... don't you just close your eyes and wonder "I love this car, this baby rocks, but man, I wonder what she'd handle like with those? I bet she'd stick like glue. Mmmm, I wonder...handle like it was on rails, I'll bet. [over-used expression I know, but fitting]"

Over the years, I've had BFGs, GYs, Michs, Contis, Pirellis, Yokos, Stones, Toyos, and of course, more Michs (normally including their best tire, before it was widely available to the public; MXX3 for example). I've tried many more. Never have I been so fascinated by the thought of trying a new tire, so much so that I would consider new wheels, and suffer the wrath of the family

Cheers,
Derek

 

Pardon my ignorance, would tires that haven't been on rims for 2 year still maintain their integrity? If they were had at a reasonable cost, would they be worth the cost of mounting them ? The tires that is.