V700's or Victoracers????
12-12-2002, 10:42 PM
#1
Yes I race a HONDA!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Va Beach
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V700's or Victoracers????
It's simple which is better and why?
I'm thinking V700's but I'm up for opinions.
Thanx
Michael
D stock SpecV
I'm thinking V700's but I'm up for opinions.
Thanx
Michael
D stock SpecV
Last edited by vbspec; 12-12-2002 at 10:45 PM.
12-13-2002, 03:18 AM
#2
///m thrizzle
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Charleston
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think im going to get a new set of victoracers for xmas... i believe that the sidewalls are stiffer but they dont have as good wet weather traction as the v7000. I think sr20ve (steve) runs the v7000s so im sure that he will put in some input.
12-13-2002, 04:13 AM
#3
Mr. Inconspicuous
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hampton
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, It would be better to say the Ecsta vs Victoracer. Both are called the V700 after the first name. Several of my friends and other forum members have complained about the Ecsta. They have had problems with chunking (caused by overheating) on a roadcourse or sometimes on an autocross. I have a article that describes the Ecsta VS the VictoRacer on an autocross. THey basically said that the Ecsta was easier to drive at the limit. THey both had similiar times (depending on driver, etc). I choose the Ecsta due to this fact. I hear that the ecsta Likes a lot of negative camber. I run a lot of negative camber and that was not an issue for me. Its a tough choice. I like my Ecsta's. I think the Victoracer might be slightly better for a car that does not have a lot of negative camber (ie: stock class car). Call tire rack and talk to one of thier techs. Very helpfull with me in the past. Maybe Eric will chime in and give his thoughts.
12-13-2002, 05:13 AM
#4
old guy
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Suffolk, VA
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My take on the two is that Ecsta is more of a track or street/track tire that can be run in the rain. It is a real tire in that the sidewalls do something like a real street tire. It is probably easier to drive. I don't see them laststing longer like it is claimed that they should.
The Victoracer is a racing tire as closely disgusied as a street tire as possible. They have very still sidewalls, designed to compensate for production based cars that don't have enough camber gain or static camber built into the suspension. They are a little tougher to drive well, but ultimately a faster tire.
I personally would chose the Victoracer, but it very much comes down to personal preference.
The Victoracer is a racing tire as closely disgusied as a street tire as possible. They have very still sidewalls, designed to compensate for production based cars that don't have enough camber gain or static camber built into the suspension. They are a little tougher to drive well, but ultimately a faster tire.
I personally would chose the Victoracer, but it very much comes down to personal preference.
12-13-2002, 05:28 AM
#5
Mr. Inconspicuous
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hampton
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To muddy the water a bit more. The ecsta is made in some sizes that the victoracer is not. My next set of tires will be 225/45/15 (more then likely) and this size is not available in Victoracer.
12-14-2002, 09:44 PM
#6
OpenTrack Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by roadRacer
My take on the two is that Ecsta is more of a track or street/track tire that can be run in the rain. It is a real tire in that the sidewalls do something like a real street tire.
My take on the two is that Ecsta is more of a track or street/track tire that can be run in the rain. It is a real tire in that the sidewalls do something like a real street tire.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post