By mileage, by how much the tread had worn, or by any other indicator. I want to see how others' experience compares with mine, which I'll post in due time.

Thanks in advance.

Norm

 

I have 21k on mine with plenty of tread left and they still suck.

 

Mine sucked in the rain since day one. I almost lost control about 2 days ago on a small 2 way road.

 

I was traveling interstate in a driving rainstorm one time and the Max had my hands full and my nerves shot. Everytime I hit any significant collection of water, it made the car severely pull to one side. Made me wanta pull over and wait it out. I barely had 3k miles on new replacement RE92s.

Albeit, I never had any serious traction problems when it was merely wet, I think that the tread design does not channel away puddles of water as effectively as, lets say the Michelins Pilots. However, this should get even worse as the tires wear down.

2K 5 Speed SE

 

Maybe it's because I've had rear wheel drive cars in the past, but the RE92's don't seem so bad to me

On my beater car (93 MX-6) the tires really suck...forgot what kind they are though.

 

i feel the same way. i get a nice forearm workout in the rain everytime. i think the tire psi has something to do with how bad or good it handles in the rain. and i think the less tread the better when it comes to my craptenzas in the rain. but overall its still ****ty.

 

.01 miles

 

So, how's life treating you Norm?

 

Funny you should say something now, I just hydroplained bad yes. I have never been that sure that something bad was going to happen. I got lucky though and slid out of teh puddle and onto damp pavement. I have 16k miles on my 2k2.

 

Right out of the gate.

Pilot Sports are a god send. Much better in the wet.

 

Instantly. I've heard from others that they get worse, but they've never delivered good traction in the wet.

 

They sucked in the rain since day one. I recently put 18s on with Yokohama AVS ES100s. Since it has been doing nothing but raining here, I can say that the yokohamas are awesome in the wet. I think I made the right choice.

 

Day 1. It wouldn't be so bad if they were like glue in the dry.

 

well, you get what you pay for...If I'm not mistaken the P/S cost more than the RE92's....

I've had my RE92's as since day one, no probs here...of course the P/S are probably better....guess I'll know in about 30,000 or so more miles...P/S are rather price when I've got pratically full treads on stockers...

 

Day 1. Craptenzas Blow!

 

If you have no problems in the wet with the RE92's, then you drive like my wife. j/k!

Mine sucked from day one, and they were off the car in less than 1,000 miles.

 

I drive the car pretty hard (hence the sig)....In the rain though I try to behave....not because of me or the car, but because other drivers think that rain enhances grip (unless you have wet weather shoes)....cutting cars off, braking suddenly, and my fav, folowing too tightly

I've notice that the majority of the disappointment with the potenzas are in the wet weather (snow or rain)...but really, do I want to go 80 in poor weather (and I have), or take a ramp at 40 or 50?

To each his own I guess....just drive smartly and responsibly IMHO (again the sig)...

 

I drive hard as well, and a couple years of AutoX experience taught me that tires are the single most important component on your car. I refuse to ride on a tire that's unpredictable or unsafe for my driving habits. I generally drive at 75-80 mph, and I don't slow up much in the rain. Riding on a tire like the ES100's means I don't have to slow down in the wet, but more importantly, it means that I'm far more likely to be able to react safely to the ******** you refer to above.

 

I drive hard when it's dry. In the wet, I drive speed limits everywhere. Like you said, for some reason other drivers seem to percieve distance differently in the rain/snow. They cut you off constantly, then you look in your rearview and there is NO ONE there! Couldn't they just have waited that 1 second for you to pass? Guess not. I didn't buy the AVS so I could go fast in the rain, rather, I chose them because I wanted to get rid of that floating feeling on the wet roads. I am surprised the Potenzas are so crappy in the wet. They are NOT a cheap tire!

 

Like many others mine sucked in the wet the day I drove it off the lot.

 

The funny thing is, it was raining the day I bought my car home.

 

my poortenzas were good until about 1000miles...now they suck ***** with 2200 on the odo

 

I think my car slid off the truck!

 

Since Day one....!

I will say that I am surprised that after 10k miles, they don't suck ANY WORSE than they did ON day one!!


AND I am constantly surprised at the cornering ability of these things in the DRY when I push them REALLY hard through tight on-ramps, etc. -- it's not THAT bad!!!!

But Don't get me wrong -- THEY STILL SUCK the High Hard one....!

I frequently 4-wheel power slide in the WET through some of my favorite twisties just to test the traction (just like in the snow!) limits of my tires.....at 1/2 pace.

Hydroplaning has become a way of life on ANY form of standing water on the highway -- and we've had our share here in ATL this year.

I find it comical when controlled -- but SCARY when it's not!!

I CANNOT WAIT TO BURN THESE THINGS OFF MY RIMS!!! I've stopped rotating and inflating properly just to give myself an excuse....

If I could afford it -- I'd have dumped these things the day I bought the car.

Ask me how I feel......

gr

 

Well...it was raining when I test drove the car, so i'd say it was then.

 

this is at 4-5K miles.. Plenty of tread. BUT the outer tread block is closed.. these tires belong on a hydrofoil, not a car.


I've never had a tire so poor in rain.

 

if you want a great way to burn em out shortly, do what I do...light dem mufukaz up at intersections and traffic lights!

 

Never noticed that before.....

GREAT POINT Tim!

NO wonder these things are like water-skis...!
gr

 

I have 20K on mine and they haven't been that bad. Tread is still pretty good, but I might replace before winter. I've driven wet and dry with no problems. However, I don't drive as aggressively as some (once in a while I gotta have some fun, tho').

 

You mean you 'idle' everywhere??

Those things sucked, even just keeping a steady pace with traffic.

 

I have 11,000 miles and mine have lost much of the tread pattern. I am down to the secondary pattern and they are Terrible in the rain. I am going to replace them today.

 

61,350 miles and still good on dry pavement. But in wet, it's intermittent good and bad. Depending on how much water. I still have legal tread left (Lincoln's head is still covered on penny). 90% highway miles since day 1 7/31/00 , and mine is a 2000 SE

 

I thought in the wet they were a disappointment from day one.
I never had much problem with them at all in dry.
They are very forgiving (I'm embarrassed to say) about running under inflated.
The sidewalls are too stiff for ride comfort but that's kind of cool when sliding around corners.
They stick adequately off the line at least for 3.0 torque.
They are too noisy.

I guess overall they are suitable for OEM tires. Just slow down in the rain.

 

I'm close to 28k now and the Potenza's are getting worse and worse. The last couple of days or rain here in Houston leaves me terrified thinking of more rain.

From a stop, not even gunning it - the tires slip and TS takes its turn.

I can't wait until i can afford some better tires.

 

Right now I've got about 29,000 miles on them, which is really a lot for a tire that carries a 160 treadwear rating. Truth be told, I wasn't expecting much past 20,000.

Until quite recently (let's say somewhere around 25,000 and just under 2 years), I'd never felt that they were either terrible or good in the wet. Better than old and balding Dunlop SP8000's but nowhere near the wet weather capability of new Firestone SZ50 EP's. Good but not great in the dry. Adequate for occasional driving in snow. IOW, just your average "mid-level OE" quality tire with a "V" speed rating to appeal to the performance enthusiast, I guess. But, as already mentioned, too damn pricy.

But now that the small criss-cross sipes in the outermost tread ribs are almost nonexistent, these tires feel like slicks at highway speeds if you can see any amount of standing water. Second gear will turn them over on wettish pavement around town that doesn't have standing water. Scary is on the highway when one front tire hits a puddle or drainage in a truck rut.

That's going to put me between the same rock and hard place as many of you have found yourselves as regards available tire makes/models/sizes and the lame callout by Nissan of minimum-width wheels even for the 225/50's. That unfortunately are attractive enough to keep . . .

Norm

 

In sizes for my 4th Gen the RE950 is much cheaper ($104 vs $140) and is rated much higher by customer feedback - Clicky. Not sure if the link will work, it's like 10 lnes long, but it's easy enough to compare two tires a tirerack. And here is a comparison of all high performance all season tires Note the RE950 is #1 and the RE92 is at the bottom, and they are in the same performance catagory. Why would a companys cheaper tire be so much better than their more expensive one ?

The Sport A2 is even cheaper ($90, again for my forth gen) than the RE950 and rated nearly as high. My car currently has some very crappy all seasons on it that are useless in the rain and I am trying to decide between the RE950, Sport A2 or Conti Extreem Contact. But my current tires have good tread so I hate to replace them.