Is it just me but are these tires absolutely HORRIBLE - I can't imagine what these are like on a none AWD car.

Do all of the g35x come standard with RS-As? Have people changed them out for anything?

 

I think all G35's come with the RS-A's stock.

I agree, I have a Journey and I get a LOT of hydroplaining and it even slipped on the freeway going around 75 mph. (It was kinda like a bump... those parts where the new asphalt/concrete meets the old ones.)

I was thinking of getting ResponseEdge next... it got pretty good reviews...
Maybe some Nitto tires... anyone know how much Nitto's go for?

 

No, not all do. The G35 Sport comes equipped with Bridgestone Potenzas.

 

I took mine off at about 100 miles.

I put Blizzak WS-50 on the stock rims for the winter and run 245/45/18 Michelin Pilot Sport A/S on aftermarket rims the rest of the time.

 

We have rehashed this question many times and it depends on the climate IMO. RS-As have been just fine for me. 9,000 miles, lots of bad weather driving, not one problem here...

 

Mine came with Michelin Pilot Sport, stock... looks like they're downgrading for the newer cars. Just get Pilot Sport PS2 tires and never look back.

 

I have a G35S 6MT but wanted a touring tire. I swapped wheels with the dealer for a set of 17" with the RS-As and then swapped the RS-As with a Goodyear dealer for a set of Eagle ResponseEdge "performance touring" tires.
They're not the quietest tire I've ever seen but, IMHO, a big improvement over the RS-As.

 

Oh yeah... I forgot.

Yeah... unless you have the wheel package/sport trim you'll pretty much get the RS-A?

 

The stock RSAs suck. As soon as they're done, I will put a set of Yoko or michelins.

 

Anyone knows why for the G35S, the front is 225/50 and 245/45 on the rear? Why can't they just make it 45 all front and rear? It would be a PITA to shop for tire or having a blown tire and having to replace one.

 

That'd make the car more pricey.

 

The price difference is minimal.

The staggered wheel setup provides a more aggressive appearance and puts more rubber where it's needed. This has been the standard on the coupe from the start. The difference in contact patch between the rear and the front also provides some understeer, which many consider a margin of safety with a high powered rear wheel drive car (so you don't fish tail the rear end).

Please note the VDC expects this stagger and it will not operate properly with a non-staggered setup.

 

What I meant was why don't they make the front 225/45? Trying to find same brand name tire with 225/50 and 245/45 is a lot harder than 225/45 and 245/45.

 

Yes, those tires suck. I had them on my other car. Performance with those tires pretty much blow all around, wet or dry. When I replaced them with Yokohama AVS db tires, they were noticeably stickier, much better performance, and resisted hydroplaning much better. I even got more miles out of em' to boot.

I've since moved on to Michelin Pilot Sport A/S, which much superior to the yokohamas in performance. They were spendy, but for my G35, they also wore quite quickly. (At least the rears anyways).

I'm now trying the Potenza RE960AS. They are quite promising, as they appear to be handling just as good as my old Pilot Sport A/S, but they have a treadware warranty, so hopefully it will ease the wallet a little.

I happen to have 2 Michelin Pilot Sport A/S in 245/40-18 with 8/32" tread left, that I'm looking to sell... (I had to buy 4 Potenzas to ease the VDC, since it didn't like mix-n'-match)

 

The reason for this is the aspect ratio of the tire (45 vs. 50 in this case). This is the ratio of the tire width to the sidewall hieght (in percentage, i.e. 45%). Basically, a 225/45 will will have a shorter sidewall height than a 245/50 by about 0.44in, resulting in a smaller tire.

You can calculate the sidewall heights as follows:

for 225/50
(225mm)*(1in/25.4mm)*50% = 4.43"

for 225/45
(225mm)*(1in/25.4mm)*45% = 3.99"

for 245/45
(245mm)*(1in/25.4mm)*45% = 4.34"

You can see that the sidewall height is similar for the 225/50's and the 245/45's. You should run different aspect ratio tires in a staggered setup, with wider wheels in the back.

Here is a link to tirerack.com for more info:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=46

from Tire Rack:

Sidewall Aspect Ratio

Typically following the three digits identifying the tire's Section Width in millimeters is a two-digit number that identifies the tire's profile or aspect ratio.

P225/50R16 91S

The 50 indicates that this tire size's sidewall height (from rim to tread) is 50% of its section width. The measurement is the tire's section height, and also referred to as the tire's series, profile or aspect ratio. The higher the number, the taller the sidewall; the lower the number, the lower the sidewall. We know that this tire size's section width is 225mm and that its section height is 50% of 225mm. By converting the 225mm to inches (225 / 25.4 = 8.86") and multiplying it by 50% (.50) we confirm that this tire size results in a tire section height of 4.43". If this tire were a P225/70R16 size, our calculation would confirm that the size would result in a section height of 6.20", approximately a 1.8-inch taller sidewall.