If your only changing 2 tyres at a time, its best not to do rotation and waste money (doing rotation). Only rotate if you wanted to change 4 tyres at a time, so all got even wear on the thread.

Based on your post, you might be doing 2 tyres changes at a time. Put the new tyres behind, so got more grip at back. Note that if front lesser grip, you can still control your wheel but if back got no grip, car can buang wan. You won't feel the impact of new tyres as much (cons) but got maximum safety (pro)...which did you prefer?

These has been promoted by most of all major tyres manufacturers nowadays for maximum safety reason although lots of tyres man still insist on new wheel at front.

Yes, you can use 2 different sets of tyres in front or back....just don't use left tyre NCT5, right tyre Assurance. At 60 height, most performance tyres does not cater, so mostly its comfort tyres. You might want to consider the now very popular CC5 (good review) or Michelin XM2 (new tyres, so not much comment).

Our new PE, all NCT5. Truth is I quite like NCT5 for a standard longer lasting OEM tyres. Comfort and grip for everyday driving before reaching 50% is quite ok for non rev kaki.

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 09:15 AM

It does have the benefit of drowning out all other rattling sounds of PE. Normally up 110km/h, noise should still be bearable. Rarely exceed that except during runs in Kesas Highway to Klang when I need to contribute to nature after jam in KL..

Or maybe I'm so used to louder tyre noise (PP2 and directional V12)...NCT is softer..

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 09:41 AM

The tyre compound is soft. Used it on my City that has a short and hard stock suspension, along with its pretty hard seat. This tyre IMO is MADE for City.

The dry grip is solid although IMO, not as good as PP2 / PS3 but wet grip is excellent, on par with PP2. Big longkang means more noise but at low to medium speed, sound is pretty ok, lesser noise than NCT5 although it depends on what road you're on.

During rain, I can run at high speed with confidence and when going thru puddle of waters, it just cut thru them. Have pretty loud noise when cutting water but can feel it glide thru.

Soft sidewall means have to pump more air than usual but its soft compound absorp all nooks and rough roads impact pretty well. Putting PP2 on City is like riding on stones when compared to this.

One tech i notice it mentioned in brochure, most would not notice, is its claim of even wear on tyre tread (left tread sometimes makan more than right, as happen in so many tyres, PP2 not withstanding). I always have one side tread makan on my left tyres of City but after V12, its even after 3 years liao. I checked all 4 tyres...all even tread on each tyre (meaning same tyre, left and right tread same wear).

If one is to consider Falken Ziex 912, I would recommend forget abt that and switch to V12. Its that good for its price range and beats 912 at all aspect from dry to wet grip, noise (almost same), even wear and comfort. And definitely tread more YENG than boring 912.

At 60%-70% wear, dry grip still there (degrade a bit but ok) and wet performance still good. More noisy a bit but still silent at lower speed.

I would rate this a budget UHP tyres where the performance exceeded the price range. However with recent increment, I'm not so sure abt its price value anymore. Im using 195/55/R15 on City.

One thing I notice, if you put similar air pressure as current, side sidewall might flex a bit, so when riding, sometimes feels it can runs (unstable), but put enuf pressure (City 220, I used 240 to 250), this issue does not appear.

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 10:20 AM

Cons,

Actually handling is good. Just pump more air, unlike others, it will still not feel hard. As a matter of fact, pumping a couple of PSI more, its still feels softer than PP2, comfortable. It absorb all road roughness very well. Cornering so far so good, prob gave the wrong impression earlier but if fill up more air, cornering DID NOT suffer albeit can't compare with PP2 but actualy quite near.

Thread life same with PP2 kuah. I used highway/city 60/40 drive, 3 years, still got 40% left. Quite ok. Bad road noise...mmm..yes, its a bit noisy when tread worn but for me, the loudness almost same with NCT5. So the cons you listed is not really cons for me.

As for 912, I've tried on my club's City (TeamCity), comfy ok but compare with V12, almost same but tread wear rate teruk. Cutting water not good compare with V12 (actually I consider no match). Dry grip ok but I feel V12 might have advantage there esp after some wear. Once 912 wear down to 60%, degraded quite badly while for my V12, even at 40% still maintain a certain level of performance.

For me, the soft compound is a major pro for City, not con, as it improved drivability, comfort, grip, rough road bumpiness and handling (absorb bumps, easier to drive as usual).

Yes, tread life depends on driver, some use 20K habis, some 40K. Mine abt 30K mileage with 40% left. As mentioned earlier 195/55/R15 on tyre size. Of course I have to compare tyres at same price range. Ziex Japan Made price can buy PS3 tyres and have some money left for teh tarik at luxury restaurant..

Its my City wheel that kena, balancing, alignment, camber all change liao and yet still got uneven wear on only left front tyre. V12 solved this, not sure how.

Adding abt 2-3 psi more for tyres won't cost any harm especially for V12. Kena paku a few times also ok...

I had to say tho...as good as V12 is, it's still not on par with top range RE and others. Its gives very good performance vs average hp tyres moving into UHP (and of course value for money) but still not fully at that category. PZero as such is a range above this tyre. You won't be satisfied....put it this way...after 10 years of driving a stock audi as main ride, would you want still want to switch to a civic...civic is good....but its not THAT good...

---

Added on July 20, 2011, 1:44 pm

At least something to be proud of...always kena tapau by those b/m-line manual PE...

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 01:46 PM

Both michelin and nct5. Same prob. So its not michelin problem this time. Now michelin used in my other City (household got 2 city, 1 parent use) and rear of Civic.

Mmm...my parent's City have uneven wear earlier. Supposedly re-aligned, balanced, etc, have to wait till it botak and change new tyre only will see. Rear using PS3 already. The uneven wear exactly same with my City...wonder if its a production defect since both my city comes out 2 months from each other. Michelin tyres has one advantage tho, it loses air more slowly, so no need much maintenance compared with V12 and NCT5.

Many says michelin overprice...it is. But I did get dealer price thru my uncle...so michelin it is. PS3 seems to garner pretty good review. So far both Civic and City (parent) rear using PS3. Did not feel impact much coz front still NCT5 and worned PP2 respectively.

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 02:08 PM

Hey..I mana ada swear my life on Michelin. Only swear by V12 for VALUE For Money thingy and that also not as good as those ultra UHP...

I used PP2 and PS3. PS3 IS good but not sure on tread wear coz both my cars used PS3 at rear. On PP2, I already mentioned tread got uneven wear on front left just like my other City using NCT5 previously, so cannot blame on PP2 until I change tyre.

I only swear by the dry and wet performance of PP2 and PS2. Cornering also very good with solid grip. Wet grip lagi solid tho my V12 is not losing out at this performance. And finally I used them coz I can get dealer price. XM1 I never use and never consider using coz my City is using HP (V12, PP2, PS3) tyres already...mana boleh downgrade.....remember the audi thingy.

On PE I had no choice coz I wanted to maintain original size 60 height and comfort, no HP tyre got that height lar...so next time might consider EITHER CC5 or XM2....now more leaning to CC5 if needed to change for PE.

Thats the exact reasoning some mechanics are giving to put tyre in front. However recently (a few years back), most manufacturers (conti, michelin, etc) recommended putting at back, not for best grip feeling BUT more for SAFETY purpose.

As mentioned, if front no grip, we can still compensate by manual steering to control handling if grip lari...but if front grip kau kau when brake and the rear grip not enuf, rear tyre will slip. When that happens, wish you good luck lor..

For some that have experience tyres slipping at high speed, damn scary...always consider ourself lucky when we could compensate by readjusting thru steering wheel...at high speed, if rear slip...chances are you might be facing the facing car following behind you a while later and give the finger before you fly kite...

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 03:31 PM

Oh...I tot you say I swear my life on everything of PP2 and PS3...that means including even tread.

If wet and dry grip...I swear lor...coz I'm still using it. I'm still alive....so far.

Anyway the tyres I used is up to these range only....so any higher I tak boleh comment coz cannot afford...I still want to kasi anak makan...sekolah....

For ppl with no budget constraint, can ask Xan for those UHP tyres...



This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 03:36 PM

Darn XM1 and CC5 same price with V12....

I swear by my life I won't touch it also....coz XM2 is out..haha. Should go for CC5 nowadays since its a proven reliable tyre. XM2 still new.

Anyway for those interested, could always check out Autoworld tyre and wheel thread maintained by bro VR2Turbo. Pretty knowledgable and if they don't know, would definitely say don't know rather than bullshit..esp the moderator (VR).

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 20 2011, 03:47 PM

Alignment no need. Only do if it runs. Balancing yes. Normally if buy new tyres, they balance for you foc. Just have to pay balancing for the other 2 old ones. That is why I mentioned if no intention to change 4 tyres at 1 go, can forget abt 10K rotation, save money.

If change 2 tyres at a time, run until front wear out. Buy new rear, put old rear to front and balance. Next time, do the same again when front runs out.

Then better change all 4 at 1 go.

I'm thinking, if PE so darn heavy and underpowered at low torque, switching to 17" lagi teruk. Unless you go for those really expensive lightweight rims...tyres also weight more. Makan minyak like nobody's business in City jam..

The rear seat rest angle is a bit too straight. Anyway, I find it uncomfortable seating at rear on the test drive m-line unit due to the a bit high angled rest.

However when I got the H-Line with leather seat, it turns out to be quite ok. The angles turns out to be better than expected (still a bit too straight for my liking but acceptable while earlier test drive really dislike the angle). The seat width is ok (not as wide as City), rear leg rest a bit low vs the seat but if front seat not push too far to the back, still ok.

Someone said leather seat got bigger meh...than the fabric. It is a tad more comfortable than the m-line I've tested...maybe thats the case if its true.

Overall if you get H-Line, I think its ok for rear seat tho those used to bigger seats and comfortable angle might complain a bit..but its not a deal breaker for me (I mean its a deal breaker, I almost did got get PE becoz of the rear seat but decided to go for it due to budget). Turns out when test covered with plastic, not comfortable, take out the plastic, better than my initial low expectation, I can rest my back alright tho can be better.

Ada magnatec fully sync meh...I tot its Castrol Edge only for fully.

I'm wondering if 5W30 suitable for Campro. Very hot ler. Hotter than those Japs wan. So wonder 30 can tahan the heat or not, wait viscosity too thin, piston wall habis...

So I think 10W40 might be the safest and most balance bet.

I'm wondering abt CVT. CVT gearbox are very expensive, remember the City's CVTs, costing near 30K a piece. CVT are general fragile, so how can Proton cover the cost of it for under 50K cars.

If installed in Saga, sure lots of ppl abused it...can Proton tahan the cost of replacing them under warranty?

As usual, I won't envy the ppl buying it. Maybe after at least half life and next FL after that where most critical transmission issue has been solved..then can consider.

Remember those the 1st gen PE, then next FL, improve quite a few things...so always wait for mid-life FL to get a more stable ride. Same happens with cars of other made...

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 24 2011, 10:41 AM

I have never heard of any CVT having any problems when VTEC kick in. I'm quite active in TeamCity club before and there is absolutely no prob with CVT vs VTEC. Some Audi's are using CVTs, high rev engine no prob. There's many type of CVTs. For City, the CVT are meant for FCs, not high revving.

The main reason Honda junk the CVT is not becoz of premature spoilage. It's more becoz most Asian (thats the target market of City) on this target market, the younger to 30s market prefer a more revvy transmission. Honda CVT does not give any satisfaction of revving as it control it tightly for max torque vs Fc balance. Its a bit more fragile vs the avg auto tranny.

FYI, the new Altis is using CVTs, so does many of other bigger cc and larger segment cars that usually goes long distance as well, just not revvy type.

The rubber band affect are mostly due to the above mentioned tight control to balance max torque vs fc, thus for most ppl that are used to auto way of tekan minyak and tekan more than it really needs to, the car will pull back to suit the smooth raising for torque/fc increment thus the so-call lag.

If you sit in my City while I'm driving, you can never feel any lag nor rubber band effect, coz if you know how to drive the way CVT are meant to be driven, albeit slower 0-100 increment (less revvy), the torque is there fully.

Unfortunately for Honda, the misjudge the way most Asian at 30s or less drive...unlike those in Japan where CVT were used a lot for FC saving and smooth driving.

btw. Honda used the wrong ATF for CVT tranny early on thus lots of CVT failed during the earlier generation of City's CVT. These failures gave a bad impression on the durability of CVT tranny. Most of those tranny that used the corrected CVTF a year or 2 later has very little failure rate. Also similar to failure rate of avg auto tranny.

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 24 2011, 11:17 PM

Zen already mentioned Sylphy performing at maximum band (meaning at it raise it speed, it will push the torque to the maximum allowable for that speed without over revving to save FC. Thats one of the main reason its famous for FC saving and infamous for feeling no power.

Its not the lack of power, its the lack of feel of staying in low end of a gear ratio and push the car to max for that range of ratio...means more power but staying at lower end for power while car increasing speed, will sure makan more minyak than if the gear ratio follows upward with the speed (less power ala CVT). Thats auto for you.

Max band at all range, thats CVT at work....the difference, although cannot feel power especially when increasing speed comparing with auto tranny, as you go higher and higher and higher, you realise one thing, power keep increasing as if it just don't run out of breath. Thats the reason I mentioned before I might lose out from start to cars like VIOS and NHC but when you hit 130, 140, 150, 160, those newers cars, you will feel its starting to take toll and breathing hard, for CVT drive, it keeps increasing like its not even breathing hard, and keep increasing upwards.

Try the CVTs of Audi or at the least, try the high speed drive of Lancer. You will realise at high speed increment, powers keep on coming non-stop as if there is no limit until it hit the top speed....(engine still limit mah...)

btw...CVT tranny sounds so mystical that some might be wondering, how it maintain hundred of ratios, if you've seen the inner part of CVT gear box, you will understand why. There's a metal belt links like caterpillar with all the legs and side and there is a clamp that clamp the link, as gear ratio changes, the clamp to move to next link, and next continuously at high speed. Thus feeling of no gear changes when in fact, its tens of changes vs each gear changes at auto tranny, so no pulling back feel (no rev feel lor)...maintain optimal torque at each band/speed/gear ratio thus no wasted fuel...

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 25 2011, 09:00 AM

"The way a CVT works is that it utilizes the car's motor to produce the same amount % of power equal to the % of throttle. That way, your car doesn't rev up and shift through the gears, but rather it moves continuously (generally at a steady RPM) while gradually accelerating."

"The engine runs a bit faster but it stays at the same rpm when accelerating as the transmission continuously changes the ratio so the engine does not leave the max torque rpm."

Copied from one of the answers in Yahoo forum.

Inspira equal Lancer on CVT and Engine, as they're being left unmodified as per Mitsubitsu requirement. Lack of power feel has been explained in my above post. As for speed increasing fast at high speed, same happens to my City. The 2nd quote above prob explained better on this. At 4th or 5th gear ratio in auto, gear ratio stays mostly the same and pull slower..but CVT does not slow down and move at constant increment in tandem with speed increment...no out of breath feel there...the recent 6th gear addition close the gap nearer.

Still there is concern on the durability and since the latest CVT tranny tech are still consider pretty new and have not finish improving, we're still in the dark of how durable is it. Of course the more expensive the car, the better quality CVT tranny was used as those are designed for higher cc and better rev engine...

Thats leaves Proton CVT....in a gray area in terms of reliability and durability. Only time will tell..

This post has been edited by Cavino: Jul 25 2011, 10:00 AM