I’m looking at buying new tyres; the Vredestein 205/45 R17 I currently have are a bit rubbish in the wet.
I I’m looking at the popular brands on black circles (like the Michelin pilot sport4, Bridgestone potenza sport & Goodyear Asymmetric 5) and they are all fairly similar in price and performance stats however…
The Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 3 K127 caught my eye. apparently they have good grip and good fuel consumption. Has anyone used these?
Kumho x 2 sets, MX-5 and for the daily driver. Can’t fault them, a very good mid range (affordable) choice. Ho and they are very good in the wet stuff too.
Bridgestones??
PS4 or assy5, - ime the former have a softer sidewall and give a slightly less harsh ride. Bridgestones are very unpredictable, especially in damp or wet conditions. Edit. Referring to S001.
I know the ps4 are good I have never seen a bad Michelin tyre tbh 
: I just wanted to check if anyone had used these Hankook’s ?
This is my second set of ps4’s . The first set wore down very quickly 6000 miles, to a point where they made steering very unpredictable and pulling to the side. I had my geo checked at WIM but they said the alignment was perfect and just needed new tyres.
So I have another set of 4 ps4’s. They have now renewed my confidence and are just fab, quiet, wet grip brilliant, dry grip brilliant and no pulling. wonderful tyres but I cover at least 6000 miles a year in this car so if they wear that quickly again I may be tempted to switch to another brand.
The Bridgestone Potenzas are pants like Overdrive said, sketchy in the damp, noisy, wear quick and very poor value (I’ve had the S001 on the MX-5 2.0 and RE050A on a DS3 160hp).
Michelin PS4 is without doubt the best tyre I’ve ever used on anything it’s quiet, grippy, wears reasonably and responsive; the Goodyear Eagle F1 Assy5 was not as nice although still very good - the price difference between them reflected this.
The Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 3 K127 was not made in the size I wanted, and Hankook’s other performance tyres were no cheaper than stuff I already knew and trusted - if the GYF1Assy5 is not much more, I would just get that.
I’m currently running Falken FK510 but they’re wider than anything I had previously on the ND so harder to compare, they amazed me with grip when new in the summer but could be down to the width increase from 205 to 215? Now it’s become cold and damp and they’ve worn a bit you can see why they’re cheaper than Michelin or Goodyear, particularly without heat in the tyres it’s much easier to wheel spin or slide.
Kumho PS71 (replaced the KU39) gets recommended a lot as a mid-market tyre but I have no experience of them, I was put off by a reported batch of “egg shaped” ones!
I have 17 alloys in my NC sport roadster and the Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 3 K127 was available in 205/45 R17 but not in 215
Is the 215 width the standard width tyre size for the 17" ND wheels? I wouldn’t mind a bit wider tyres tbh if (they fit my wheels)
The ND 2.0 is 205/45 R17 from the factory but I’ve upped mine to 215/45 (on the same rims) and I prefer it. They are often also cheaper at the wider size.
thanks that’s now another option.
I recently put Michelin pilot 4s on mine and iv got no complaints
The OEM ND 2.0 wheels are 7Jx17 ET45 (4/100 d54). Not sure what the NC runs but probably still 7Jx17. I put some thoughts down and some figures about clearances and regearing with the wider tyre at New Tyres for ND - #51 by ckyliu although note since then they have lost a bit of their shine in the cold and damp
thanks for the link. I have just gone through the thread and you mentioned that “If you are considering going to 215/45 R17 tyres (from 205/45), here’s some figures you may find handy: 5% wider and 1.5% taller diameter”
If the aspect ratio is the same there shouldn’t be any height discrepancy if you simply use a wider tyre on the same wheel. How did you arrive to the “1.5% taller diameter” statement?
Because height (profile) is expressed as a percentage of width (aka aspect ratio), not an absolute figure. At 45% of the width, 205x0.45 gives you a 92.3mm sidewall, whereas 215x0.45 gives you a 96.8mm sidewall - a difference of 4.5mm in overall tyre radius.
17" rim I’ll just presume for ease is 432mm diameter, then adding the sidewalls (twice remember, top and bottom) gives you 616.6mm diameter for the OEM spec, and 625.6mm diameter for the wider 215 tyre. 616 / 625 is about 1.45% difference in overall height (diameter).
Technically you should then account for the tyre footprint being slightly wider relative to the rim, so the sidewall angle is a little flatter/less steep, absorbing a small amount of the sidewall height increase above but it’s not really significant at the scales were talking about - although I think it was accounted for at the time. I’m really not proud of this post, showing proper geekery here! 
+1 on Michelin PS4s
A great all rounder in my opinion for the mixed weather we see in the South East, and with reasonable wear rates and road noise.
Nope I’m an engineer and completely understand where you are coming from. I just find it bizzare for tyre manufacturers to specify aspect ratio in terms of tyre width and not tyre height lol.
Thanks for your reply. Makes perfect sense 
Agreed, I’ve always found the notation weird; it would be a lot simpler in absolute millimetres! Instead there’s an odd situation where 355/25 has almost the same sidewall height as 225/40, despite it sounding a lot less to a layman. It’s a “gotcha” to watch for when moving away from OEM tyre size.
Try Uni Royal Rain Sport 5s
As has been said above, Kumho PS71’s in 215/45 17 on one set of wheels, Michelin Pilot Sport 4’s on another and Goodyear Eagle F1’s on another on my NC1. I use the Kumho on the road and on a wet/damp track and they haven’t thrown me off yet. They are well priced too at around 70 quid or less per corner.
Maxxis Premitra HP5’s are very good indeed. 
Another vote for Kumho PS71’s. I have put Kumhos on everything I’ve owned for the last 25 years and generally been pleased with them.
On my NC2 they made a massive difference in terms of road noise and ride quality, and they seem to grip in all conditions for my unchallenging driving style. Then again, compared to the Chinesium super-budget tyres on there before, I suspect I could have replaced them with chocolate digestives and seen a large improvement