Would it not be true to say that the M&S jokes are retired for our American friends............

I would not want to tread all over your fine humour though.......

And we could go on all night.

Hope these jokes don't last as long as your Hankooks.

islider wrote:

And we could go on all night.

Hope these jokes don't last as long as your Hankooks.

Please guys your wearing me Thin!

I have Hoankooks. No matter the so-called rim protection, I already have a couple of rims kerbed .. and apparently I did not touch any kerb.

They are labelled M&S but I just went fot Yoko for winter time.. I do not relly trust these M&S tyres, I think this is just a commercial issue which allows you to drive legally, at least in Italy, when it snows, since they are seen as chains.

Price wise, I paid some 540 euros delivered for all of them (on the web), but I have seen the price is even getting cheaper now.

Don't see a particular wear, although I am not very impressed on slightly wet surface, with some oversteering in some specific situations.

However they have a good value for money, although I believe the load index does not fit RRS.
Can somebody confirm this?  My gallery: http://www.rrsport.co.uk/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=994

The Conti SportContact tyre, which is standard fitting, has a load index of 106.
The Hankook also has the same load index of 106.

Only difference between the two is the speed rating. Conti is Y which means 186mph.
Hankook are speed rate W which is 168mph

Otherwise no difference in specs.

WIll let you know how I get on with them.

islider wrote:

Coko I was being funny (or maybe not) haven't you seen the Marks & Spencer adverts?

S&M being sado masochistic - you need to be to run Contis, as I do.

See my earlier post for advice I offered to original poster, I was referring to the XL as being reinforced sidewall.
I'd assumed he knew what M&S was.

TheDB wrote:

The Conti SportContact tyre, which is standard fitting, has a load index of 106.
The Hankook also has the same load index of 106.

Only difference between the two is the speed rating. Conti is Y which means 186mph.
Hankook are speed rate W which is 168mph

Otherwise no difference in specs.

WIll let you know how I get on with them.

Sorry but because of the language I said load index although I was referring obviously to spped index, the "Y" and "W" issue.  My gallery: http://www.rrsport.co.uk/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=994

gianluca wrote:

I have Hoankooks. No matter the so-called rim protection, I already have a couple of rims kerbed .. and apparently I did not touch any kerb.

They are labelled M&S but I just went fot Yoko for winter time.. I do not relly trust these M&S tyres, I think this is just a commercial issue which allows you to drive legally, at least in Italy, when it snows, since they are seen as chains.

Price wise, I paid some 540 euros delivered for all of them (on the web), but I have seen the price is even getting cheaper now.

Don't see a particular wear, although I am not very impressed on slightly wet surface, with some oversteering in some specific situations.

However they have a good value for money, although I believe the load index does not fit RRS.
Can somebody confirm this?

Oversteer in a sport?.... im going to have to get me a set of these  WINNER - 2008 Best All New Photograph
WINNER - 2009 Best All New Photograph

ViewWise wrote:

gianluca wrote:

I have Hankook. No matter the so-called rim protection, I already have a couple of rims kerbed .. and apparently I did not touch any kerb.

They are labelled M&S but I just went fot Yoko for winter time.. I do not relly trust these M&S tyres, I think this is just a commercial issue which allows you to drive legally, at least in Italy, when it snows, since they are seen as chains.

Price wise, I paid some 540 euros delivered for all of them (on the web), but I have seen the price is even getting cheaper now.

Don't see a particular wear, although I am not very impressed on slightly wet surface, with some oversteering in some specific situations.

However they have a good value for money, although I believe the load index does not fit RRS.
Can somebody confirm this?

Oversteer in a sport?.... im going to have to get me a set of these

Apologise .. I meant understeer..
It's like i am fighting with my English recently..  My gallery: http://www.rrsport.co.uk/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=994

A belated report back on the Hankooks after 2,500 miles and the British winter.

The tyres have been great. Quiet and handled the snow just fine. Really no difference to the Contis that were on before, except the Hankooks felt a smoother ride once fitted. This may be due to having 4 perfectly balanced wheels than any feature of the Hankook tyre. So at £130 cheaper a corner I am very happy.

If anyone is concerned about rim protection the Contis are marginally superior in this regard. The Conti tyre bead projects 15mm approx beyond the rim. On the Hankook it is just 10mm, so the Contis may save your rims if you kerb them. So far with the Hankooks I have brushed kerbs three times and have not scratched my rims.

Hope you will find this feedback useful.

Last edited by TheDB on Sat Mar 06 2010 11:35am. Edited 1 time in total

Guys, I have bought and fitted (only to the rims) 275 40 20 Hankooks and will get them on the car during April (after winter tyres come off).

I have read stacks about these and the poor performance of Conti's etc, and thought it's worth a shot.

I will feedback when I have some mileage on them.

The overall impression I got from my research on them was that they are not great in the snow (come on though) and the wet performance isn't quite as good as Conti's - but most of the tests were under extreme test conditions, not real life.

I don't compromise on safety so if they feel dodgy I will throw them off in a flash, but at the price it's worth a try - not keen on lining the tyre manufacturers pockets

Tornado34, I also did quite a bit of research before buying the Hankook 275/40/20's. I live in a ski resort and the Hankooks handle fine in the snow. I rearched one site www.tires-easy.com that had averaged the reviews and Hankooks scored extremely well and were fairly inexpensive compared with some of the other XL tires.
Cheers! Mike mike murphy

Had the RRS just over 2 months and just realised I have Hankooks fitted. They have been great in the snow/ice up here and on the dry. They are Ventus ST

Why have I just realised they are Hankooks? A female mini driver decided she needed more than half the road and I ended up having a wee ramash with a kerb! Took a bite out the side wall.

So...... can anyone recommend a supplier that can get to me in Aberdeen?

Much obliged Now - MY11 RRS Autobiography TDV6, Orkney gray, tints, steps, daylight running lamps and allllll the toys!!!
Ex- RRS HSE TDV6 07 Java Black, bi xenon, corner lights, side steps, tints, cool box, smoke side repeats, chrome "sport" boot sill
Ex - Audi A4 Cab 3.0TDi Quattro
Ex - Freelander2 SE TD4
Ex - CRV Auto

TheDB wrote:

I have been to Marks & Spencer -

Well somewhere else really. Set of 4 Hankooks cost me £380 delivered to my home.

Turns out there is only one type in the market and it comes with rim protection and M&S markings.

Will let everyone know how I fare once they are fitted to the RRS and have done 500 miles or so.

Cheers all.

How do you find such prices. Here, in France, I pay 800 € for a set of 4 tires.
http://www.popgom.fr/find?mode=size&wi...son=toutes
http://auto.kelkoo.fr/ni/d-pneus,Hankook,2...rentPage=3 2010 TDV6 3.0 HSE Santorini Black Tan Full Leather