Remember, KO2 came in 3rd in most on-road tests i think, which makes perfect sense given KO2 is not really a highway-priority tire. It ONLY excelled in snow and ice over the P-metric tires in that test.
IF TireRack was trying to sell KO2, then why didn’t they rank it 1st in everything? Why was KO2 “average or below average” in most of their on-road test? If i was trying to sell something, then i want to glam up the results, right?
I think that some of you guys are looking beyond what this test says to try and rationalize away the point of this test…and thus making random conclusions that are not supported by this test.
Let me summarize to help you guys:
This test does NOT mean that KO2 replaces a proper winter tire. BUT, (only) compared to those other tires in the test, KO2 did great in snow & ice.
KO2 is not to meant to be put on a race car. It did NOT win a single on-road performance test in this comparison other than snow/ice.
What this test does show is that KO2 is not THAT bad on-road (a common presumed weakness of KO2) when compared to other contemporary P-metric highway-bias “AT” tires. Make no mistake about it…Yokohama G015 is a GREAT tire that even up to now is one of the gold standard for highway-bias AT tire. Firestone AT-2 and Hankook AT were new AT tire to the market at time of testing.
What exactly is amiss? When did TireRack say anything about KO2 beating the mild ATs? It only beat those ATs in ONE SINGLE category (snow & ice).
I mean i guess dude? Lol.
But given the differences in compounds involved it is kind of a crazy outcome. Its just very hard to believe. Maybe they got some special sauce but it goes against all conventional tire knowledge.
Let me take them for a spin sometime.