Originally Posted by GTM_Challenge
I agree with everything but the wear. I do know the Star Specs may tend to wear quicker on heavier cars, but on the S2000s and Miatas that we run them on, they outlast the RS3s x2. Ive seen all these tires on a number of cars, and as a generalization, the Star Specs will outlast the RS3s.
Now, on a miata, ive seen the RS3s last 148 autox session and 48 20 minute track sessions over the course of 3k miles - not too shabby. Conversely, I've had Star Specs on my s2000 be tracked for 20 weekends (8-10 sessions each weekend), set a new street RWD track record at Road Atlanta on a set with 4/32 left - sold to a friend immediately after that who got another 7k street miles out of them. I don't think RS3s would have done that. Granted - both chassis are much lighter.
Most of my RS3 experience has been on my 3400lb E46. Maybe climate plays a role? My car runs in 100+ degree days. Maybe the RS3s handle extreme heat better. As I compare the cost of the 17" tires models...the RS3s are also $35 cheaper/tire. I notice things like that being a cheap ass. The SS Z1s used to be about the same price as the RS3s but have creeped up in price over the past 4 years much faster than the RS3s.
One thing we can both agree on is that Dunlop definitely needs to fix the ridiculously long name.