R-Comp production date question

Matt McGrain · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:50 pm

I'm getting ready to buy an unmounted set of V710's for the Integra that I found on the SCCA forums and had a noob question about the production date. Apparently it's #3805 and was wondering if anyone know what this translates to.

I'm assuming it's '05. If so is that something to stay away from due to it's age?

The gentleman selling them was really friendly and works for Kumho doing tech support for road racing events as well as spec Miata racing in Illinois. He claims to get tires now and again as 'perks'. Bartles Taylor's the name... anyone heard of or raced with him by chance? I know it's a Wolfpack's chance in Cameron unfortunately ( :cry:

), but it doesn't hurt to ask.

-Matt

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

That would be week 38, 2005.

Me? I'd stay away. No idea how they were stored for the last 2 1/2 years.

JamesFeinberg · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:14 am

I've never heard of the guy but you'll find that date is fairly typical for Kumhos. According to Tire Rack and a bunch of other top drivers, as long as they weren't used 3 years ago and then stored away, they will be fine. There are a few threads floating around sccaforums that go into the details and you'll find that a few national championships were won on "2-3 year-old" tires.

The rear tires David and I ran on down in Dixie are dated 2505 and they were purchased new just before nationals last year. The fronts were purchased new a few weeks ago and they are dated 1506. Those Korean boats must be really slow.

If unmounted means never run on before and you can get them for a great price, I'd be inclined to take a chance.

Jim

Matt McGrain · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:13 am

JamesFeinberg wrote:

The rear tires David and I ran on down in Dixie are dated 2505 and they were purchased new just before nationals last year. The fronts were purchased new a few weeks ago and they are dated 1506. Those Korean boats must be really slow.

If unmounted means never run on before and you can get them for a great price, I'd be inclined to take a chance.

Jim

I figure $500 shipped is a decent price since they just jumped up to a Hoosier-like $182 each.

I found this recent post from the SCCA forums about the Tire Rack's lack of FIFO (first in first out) inventory rotation:

Soma07:
Interesting, the V710's I just got from TireRack in Dec. have a late '05 build date on them. So Kuhmo is going to raise prices on tires they made over 2yrs ago citing increased production costs?

that's a tirerack inventory management problem. I recall seeing a number of posts with people receiving old build dates close to Nationals. Occasionally they seem to ship some very old tires from the back corner of a warehouse.....

JamesFeinberg · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:06 am

FWIW, I've heard of the same issue with Kumhos coming from other suppliers so it seems like it isn't specific to Tire Rack. :whoknows:

Jim

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:38 am

I guess my talk with Chris Harvey at the TireRack gave me more knowledge that I can also give to this thread. About a year ago, Michelin paid the TireRack to run some testing on 3 year old Pilot Sports that had been stored properly (at the Tire Rack) vs. 1 week old Pilot Sports. They were trying to find out if older R compounds, if stored properly, would be just as fast as newer build dates.

The results proved that there were ZERO loss in time on autocross/track when the tires were new and stored properly. In other words, Kumhos with build date of 2505 would have the same grip and longevity as Kumhos with 0808 build date.

I'd buy them Matt. - AB

Matt McGrain · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:23 am

That's helpful info Aaron, thanks.

What's the proper storage for race tires? I've read in a temperature controlled environment as opposed to a shed or garage.

Now the only issue is making sure they get here by Friday from Illinois so I can get them mounted by Saturday at the latest. Fedex should be two days from there though.

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:26 am

Matt McGrain wrote:

That's helpful info Aaron, thanks.

What's the proper storage for race tires? I've read in a temperature controlled environment as opposed to a shed or garage.

Now the only issue is making sure they get here by Friday from Illinois so I can get them mounted by Saturday at the latest. Fedex should be two days from there though.

Preferably inside the house so that the temp stays fairly consistent. I think if you're using them regularly though, it's not a big deal to have them in the garage.... probably makes more of a difference for long term storage (6 months or more without usage) - AB

BriceJohnson · **Joined:** Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:33 am **Posts:** 2230

How finicky are non r-comps about weather? Currently storing my wife's Azenis's outside, wondering if its worth clearing space inside for them. Storage in our house is kinda tight.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:00 pm

Aaron Buckley wrote:

I guess my talk with Chris Harvey at the TireRack gave me more knowledge that I can also give to this thread. About a year ago, Michelin paid the TireRack to run some testing on 3 year old Pilot Sports that had been stored properly (at the Tire Rack) vs. 1 week old Pilot Sports. They were trying to find out if older R compounds, if stored properly, would be just as fast as newer build dates.

The results proved that there were ZERO loss in time on autocross/track when the tires were new and stored properly. In other words, Kumhos with build date of 2505 would have the same grip and longevity as Kumhos with 0808 build date.

I'd buy them Matt. - AB

FYI, all that this test on Michelin Pilot Sports proves is that there was no difference with Pilot Sports. Doesn't actually tell anything about Kumho's even assuming that the design/compound haven't changed. Not saying that the Kumho situation isn't the same, just saying Kumho's weren't the tested tires. :lol:

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:09 pm

My favorite place to store tires is the walk in crawl space under my house. Even at my most serious, I never stored tires inside the house. The smell of fresh tires is not something I ever wanted to breath for hours at a time . . . :lol:

I did store DOT and race tires on my apartment's 3rd floor balcony in Calif . . . but I was young and foolish then (instead of "not young" and foolish) and had no other place to store them. I also got harassed for years afterwards by coworkers who helped me move to a house. :lol:

The main thing is minimize max heat and for "race tires" try to avoid freezing. For any tire, but especially real race tires, keep them out of the sun. Even in the crawl space I use plastic bags (double if I'm really serious).

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:45 pm

DickRasmussen wrote:

FYI, all that this test on Michelin Pilot Sports proves is that there was no difference with Pilot Sports. Doesn't actually tell anything about Kumho's even assuming that the design/compound haven't changed. Not saying that the Kumho situation isn't the same, just saying Kumho's weren't the tested tires. :lol:

I guess I didn't mention that Chris and others at TireRack did their own non-paid for study of Hoosiers and Kumhos with the exact same results as the Michelin study. - AB

MikeWhitney · **Joined:** Wed Aug 20, 2003 9:15 pm **Posts:** 4724

Aaron Buckley wrote:

I guess my talk with Chris Harvey at the TireRack gave me more knowledge that I can also give to this thread. About a year ago, Michelin paid the TireRack to run some testing on 3 year old Pilot Sports that had been stored properly (at the Tire Rack) vs. 1 week old Pilot Sports. They were trying to find out if older R compounds, if stored properly, would be just as fast as newer build dates.

The results proved that there were ZERO loss in time on autocross/track when the tires were new and stored properly. In other words, Kumhos with build date of 2505 would have the same grip and longevity as Kumhos with 0808 build date.

I'd buy them Matt. - AB

Good info, Aaron - thanks for that. Guess I'll change my tune.

DickRasmussen · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:13 pm

Aaron Buckley wrote:

I guess I didn't mention that Chris and others at TireRack did their own non-paid for study of Hoosiers and Kumhos with the exact same results as the Michelin study. - AB

Now that is good info!!! Of course Hoosier keeps "improving" their tires from year to year . . . slicks too. At least the the New Old Stock tires will be as good as they ever were. Who knows, they might be better than the latest improved version. :lol:

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:51 pm

DickRasmussen wrote:

Now that is good info!!! Of course Hoosier keeps "improving" their tires from year to year . . . slicks too. At least the the New Old Stock tires will be as good as they ever were. Who knows, they might be better than the latest improved version. :lol:

As much as some like the newer Hoosiers, I would take a "new" A3S03 from about 4 years ago over any of the current stuff. This was before the DOT requirement change that meant a steel belt had to be added to the build. The S03 was a lot lighter than the current crop of tires and were more cord resistant (outside of tire lockup) than the current crop of A6's.

Kumho had a major step forward with the V710 and I would say they are every bit as good as the A6, but their sizes do leave a bit to be desired, even though the lifecycle of a Kumho is usually a lot longer. I would love for them to soften their sidewall a bit to make mounting easier when squeezing it on a rim, but the best thing they could do would be trying to match the sizes of Hoosier.

For those that didn't know, Hoosier is coming out with a 255/40/13 which might be the cat's meow for CSP/DSP in cases where the 275/35/15 raises the ride height too much. - AB

THSCC Forums

R-Comp production date question

Who is online