Originally Posted by Ray S

I think it is really a disservice for anyone to imply Porsche's N-spec program is little more than a certification program that tire manufacturers simply pay money to get their tires on the list. At least one magazines I have seen did a detailed article about the testing and certification process and they described it as an extremely involved and intense process. If memory serves, the article went so far as to say that Porsche puts more effort into matching tires to their cars (and truck) than any other manufacturer on the planet. Finally, it is my understanding that Porsche N spec tires often differ in many ways (tread pattern, construction, compound, etc.) from the same model tire that is not N-spec. Porsche has built much of it's reputation on the outstanding handling characteristics of its cars. It makes little sense for them to risk that reputation by putting on substandard tires that they made some certification money on.

That being said I think there are many reasons one could have for choosing a non-N spec tire. One example could be track use as the only R-compound or track tire Porsche currently test (that I am aware of) is the MPSC for the GT3. A second reason might be cost as there are many lower cost alternatives available in the correct sizes.

In my opinion, this situation differs greatly from the "oil" debate for one simple reason. It is very easy for even a novice enthusiast to swap out the tires, drive the car around (or better still take it to the track and compare lap times) and make a seat of the pants judgement about the handling and ride tradeoffs. With oil, the only way you can really know which oil is absolutely better would be to perform life tests on multiple motors (under different environmental conditions) and then tear the engines down to check how each oil worked. Additionally, if you decide to experiment in your own car with oil you may not see the ultimate wear problems (or benefits if your are right) until years down the road.

The bottom line (in my opinion once again) is;
It's easy to throw on a new muffler and judge the sound, or put on some headers and check the results on a dyno, or put a bigger shim in a GT3 spoiler and judge the handling/straighline speed trade-off, or measure lap times on a set of tires. I just don't see how you accomplish the same kind of tests with oil without a huge amount of raw speculation or big money.

Originally Posted by newport996

I wasnt implying that paying is the only way to get on the list, but I was implying that I am sure there are tires that would pass that are not on the list because the tire manufacturer didnt pay to have them tested. There are alos LOTS of tires that wouldnt pass the test.

Originally Posted by Jake Ok

Why only 2 weeks. Toyo makes a great tire. Please share

Originally Posted by jamie645

If there is a difference between N and non N (and I don't doubt that there is) why don't the tire manufacturers use different names for them and make it that much easier for the world to comprehend? Dunlop is the only company that has come close to doing this with their 9090 (the 9000 is the non N version). I say close because there are some Audis running around with 9090s.
Simply adding "N" does not seem to be enough for a lot of people to e convinced.

Originally Posted by CosmosC4S

Do people who stick religiously to Porsche's recommended 0-40 oil,
also strictly use only N-Spec tires on their cars?
Just as with oil, I'm sure Porsche's experts have spent lots of $$ and time on research for the best performance and safety tires for their cars.
Afterall, tires are just as important, if not more so,
The whole car, and it's occupants depend on them.

Originally Posted by Tippy

Wow, old thread but I have some new input on this. I put my stock wheels and non-N tires back on, the rear feels very loose. I had conti N- spec and now have my old Potenzas on, better grip but the you can really feel the sidewall "give".

Moral of my story is to go with N-spec tires for sure, there is a difference.