Tire wear

[the Ferret]

After this last trip I am at 6200 miles on my oem Dunlops. This morning I used a tire tread depth gauge to measure how much trad is left on the tires. Front measures 3/32" rear 5/32". Normal replacement for me is 2/32", so I have 1/32" left of front and 3/32" on rear to go... Figure maybe 8000 miles front and rear, or about 1 season on this bike. Thats about what I got out of the Dunlop 205 s on my 750 Nighthawk if I remember right.

Better start looking into getting some new rubber.

Wonder how many miles Randy B has on his rear Bridgestone now?

[Randy B]

I'm somewhere between 11,500 and 12,000 on the rear.

[the Ferret]

Front tire. 110/80ZR-18 Bridgestone BT-54
Rear tire 140/70ZR-18 Bridgestone BT-54

[Oboro_imp]

I'm not too crazy about these Bridgestones. They don't feel as sticky as the Pilot Road 3s on my XR. I think I'm gonna opt for the Pirelli Sport Demons when the time comes to change.

[the Ferret]

The Pirelli Sport Demons are a bias ply tire are they not? Our bike calls for radials. Not sure what the difference is or if that would make it handle funny. According to what Ive read Honda spent a lot of time and research matching these particular tires to this bike.

I must admit though other than this bike and my Nighthawk 750 which also took a weird sized tire, I have basically only used Michelins on all my motorcycles, cars and trucks for the last 20 years. Wish Michelin made tires in the right sizes for this bike.

[flynrider]

That's the second post I've seen about front tires wearing faster than the rear. That strikes me as odd. I've had a lot of bikes over the years and all of them would wear out the rear tire faster. Seems logical, since the rear tire is almost always under power.

My CB750 gets about 10K miles out of a rear tire and 12-13K out of the front. Same with my older Yammies and Kaw bikes.

Anyone else find this surprising?
That's the second post I've seen about front tires wearing faster than the rear. That strikes me as odd. I've had a lot of bikes over the years and all of them would wear out the rear tire faster. Seems logical, since the rear tire is almost always under power.

My CB750 gets about 10K miles out of a rear tire and 12-13K out of the front. Same with my older Yammies and Kaw bikes.

Anyone else find this surprising?

[the Ferret]

Front tires start out with less rubber. According to Bridgestone, their front tires start out with 4/32 tread and rears with 9/32. If that is true with the Dunlops as well in 6200 miles I have used up 1/32 on the front and 4/32 on the rear, so the rear is wearing faster than the front.

http://www.totalmotorcycle.com/photos/ti...e-BT54.htm

[The Spaceman_imp]

The Pirelli Sport Demons are a bias ply tire are they not? Our bike calls for radials. Not sure what the difference is or if that would make it handle funny. According to what Ive read Honda spent a lot of time and research matching these particular tires to this bike.

I must admit though other than this bike and my Nighthawk 750 which also took a weird sized tire, I have basically only used Michelins on all my motorcycles, cars and trucks for the last 20 years. Wish Michelin made tires in the right sizes for this bike.

This info matches a recent article I read in one of the moto-journals about how bike and tire manufacturers work closely with each other to get the best possible results from both products. They conduct joint testing, and bike and tire components are "tuned" until they have the right combination on both sides.

Even more interesting: tire makers will build "special editions" of tires that are specifically for a certain bike. You might go and buy the same make, model, and size of a tire at Cycle Gear as what came with your bike, but there are other indicators such as a product code stamped on the tire that indicate that it was made for a specific bike/vehicle.

Personally I'm not fanatical enough about it (or rich enough to spend the money) to go buy OEM tires at the Honda dealer. Selecting one of the two options presented in the Owner's Manual from an online vendor or Cycle Gear is close enough for my purposes.

However, I would never install a bias-ply tire on a bike designed to use radials, or vice-versa. Nor would I install different tire sizes, even if they seemed to fit. I like my skin too much to risk even a small chance of scraping it off with asphalt.

Honda spent a lot of time and effort designing and creating specifications for my bike, and I really doubt I, or some guy in a local shop, can do a better job of it than they did.

[The Spaceman_imp]

The link to the Michelin article didn't work on my mobile. I'll try it again at home, it sounds interesting

On the VStrom forum there was a "Darkside" thread that extolled the benefits of using CAR TIRES on the bikes. I cuss you not, they put passenger car tires on their motorcycles. They had endless anecdotal information about mileage, handling, braking, wet grip, which brands and sizes to use, etc. I guess if that argument can be made, there's not much that can't be argued.

Yeah I'm very conservative when it comes to the bike. Maybe its because I know what skin debriedment feels like.

[The Spaceman_imp]

Don't get me wrong; I doubt putting bias-ply tires on a bike that came with radials caused anybody to crash in and of itself. As ferret said, it probably just feels "different." Could it make a difference in a panic maneuver? I don't know, but if it did, it would (again, probably) be a very minor difference.

The truth is more riders are going to crash because their tires are worn, are brand-new and still have the mold wax, are under/over inflated, or are not the right model choice to begin with (like running knobbies on wet pavement) than because they picked tire model "A" over "B".

What would be the advantage of bias-ply over radials? Cost? I wouldn't think they'd have better performance; seems like if they did, more bikes would come with them. Radials cost more to produce, and we know manufacturers like to cut costs anywhere they can.