Once again your tyre test ( evo 238) was conducted with a front-wheel- drive car. I have owned hot hatches with frontand four-wheel- drive and they were great, but I really needed an up-to- date tyre appraisal for my rear- drive AMG. Instead I had to read elsewhere for tests reflecting my kind of car.
I’m not saying front-wheel drive should be eliminated any more than evo is saying the majority of its readers prefer front- drive cars. All I am asking is, next time, please also show some support for us rear- drive and fourwheel- drive owners who want to know what behaviour we can expect. Maya Ostrom, London
We have endeavoured to conduct our tyre tests on cars other than frontdrive cars. The issue with rear- drive performance cars is that most have different sized front and rear tyres and these sizes may be unique to that car, limiting the test’s relevance. Many manufacturers have tyres specifically tuned to their cars, too: Porsche, Aston Martin, Mercedes and Jaguar do.
We used an MX-5 a few years ago but there were limited tyre brands in its size, and we generally select best-selling sizes for the greatest relevance. Also, many of the objective tests – wet and dry braking, aquaplaning, rolling resistance and weight – are independent of the vehicle. The subjective elements are more bound up with the vehicle, but how much different is understeer from oversteer? At heart, it’s the tyre at the limit.
Tyre tests aren’t perfect. It’s a specific tyre and the results might not extrapolate, but it’s the best source of independent info out there, which is why we invest in them. – JB