While we’re at it, some visible white or yellow lettering would be a nice touch.

Goodyear *did* provide the “old” Eagle GT for us to compare along with the ASX and the new GT. There’s a considerable gap between the old and new GTs. I didn’t take the test runs in the correct order to really compare the old GT and the ASX, but I have no difficulty saying that the new tire beats ‘em both. The old GT was weak in the slalom sections of the course.

I think the new GT is a better wet tire than the MX but won’t quite match it in the dry. I should also mention that I experienced non-trivial tread separation on a set of Kumho MXes; running at Waterford HIlls in my Boxster S, the outside rear tire simply split a four-inch long seam down to the cords between the edge of the tread and the rounded part of the shoulder. I also used the Kumho MX during One Lap of America 2005 and was not happy with the wet performance. As the saying goes, “the plural of anecdote is not data”, but I have kind of lost my enthusiasm for Kumhos as dual-use tires as a result.

My brother, on the other hand, just jumped ship from the Hoosier A6 to the Ecsta V710 for this year’s Solo Nationals, so your mileage may vary.

Does your scale go: OLD Eagle GT < Kumho Ecsta ASX < NEW Eagle GT?

Oddly, I like my Ecsta MX better than the Bridgestone RE-01R, but that may be confirmation bias (I have never bought the Bridgestones, just experienced them in somebody else’s car). I take it you are saying that the new Eagle GT is almost as good as (i.e. less than 0.1 sec difference on that course you ran) the Ecsta MX.

For someone like me (who thinks Ecsta MX is the greatest tire in the performance compact world) that would be a strong statement worth checking out.