Yamaha Starbike Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Yes yet another car tire on a bike thread.
I know I've been one to post all the negatives when ever a dark side thread is posted. I have mentioned that I have done a lot of research on the subject and always fall on the negative side due to the fact that near 100% of my riding is in extreme mountain twisties..
I am re visiting the Idea again simply because of the expense of MC tires has got to the point of whether I ride or not. I'm about out of tread on my 5th tire at 18,000 miles. That's one riding season and half of this years season. Average $225 per tire and $50 to mount times 5 is $1,375 plus one more if I want to get through the rest of the season, $1,650 times two bikes,:eek: $3,300 for two seasons:eek: I would be better off trading them in for new ones every two months. The only problem with that is these bikes devalue almost $2,000 as soon as you ride them off the lot.
I've tried some of the best mileage tires on the market and can't get 5'k miles off them and stock tires can't get 4k miles. This is between 1 and 2 months of riding. And Now times two Strykers. My wife has had her Stryker for 4 weeks and the tire is about shot at a little over 3k miles, and we have almost two months of good riding weather left.
If it means we have to slow down and be a bit more careful using car tires, at least we will be riding is what it has come to.:(
Any feed back, thoughts and opinions will be appreciated, negative or positive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
It would be a great help to know which tires lasted longest and which were a waste of money since you have been through so many.

Being the Stryker is similar to the 1300 tourer I can assume you did not have much luck with Metz's as they seem to wear down in 5000 miles on the rear of our bikes. Personally I think they are overrated and most choose them because the brand name and looks.

I am curious if you tried the C2 and if you ever tried the Excedra Max.
Also curious on what tires you thought handled best no matter the mileage. Being most of us go years without replacing your insight would be a great help!

Being you are so active in the twisties, I wonder if you would be happy with a darkside not that I would use one or try one simply because I do not do half as much riding as you, so no need, by the time I get new tires I am jsut glad to replace them as they get older.
Currently have 5,275 miles on my front and rear tires which are EXCEDRA MAX, not just Excedra but Excedra MAX. Put them on 6-13-12 and as of today I have 5,275 miles on them. (between work and weather it has not been a good riding year for me, but starting to catch up in the last week!)

Anyway, I LOVE these tires and SO FAR they are holding up well, I really do not see much wear but how can I remember from when they were new, I will be happy to get 10 K out of the rear and 12k I would be thrilled. We will see. Most of my riding is fast rural roads 45 to 65 but also A LOT of interstate on longer then 1 hr trips. Interstate where I live I commonly go 80 to 85 MPH indicated on the speedo which is really 73 to 77MPH on a GPS/ true speed.
Last trip on Sunday a constant indicated 80 to 85 for a 2 hour run to Charleston and later in the days two hours back. Tires NEVER are swayed by groves in the road etc which is nice when you hit construction zones where they grooved the road to lay a new surface, now of course that is extreme and you will feel it to a certain degree but other areas of grooves and cracks the tires take in stride and really inspire confidence, nice and firm as well and why I like them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
It would be a great help to know which tires lasted longest and which were a waste of money since you have been through so many.

Being the Stryker is similar to the 1300 tourer I can assume you did not have much luck with Metz's as they seem to wear down in 5000 miles on the rear of our bikes. Personally I think they are overrated and most choose them because the brand name and looks.

I am curious if you tried the C2 and if you ever tried the Excedra Max.
Also curious on what tires you thought handled best no matter the mileage. Being most of us go years without replacing your insight would be a great help!

Being you are so active in the twisties, I wonder if you would be happy with a darkside not that I would use one or try one simply because I do not do half as much riding as you, so no need, by the time I get new tires I am jsut glad to replace them as they get older.
Currently have 5,275 miles on my front and rear tires which are EXCEDRA MAX, not just Excedra but Excedra MAX. Put them on 6-13-12 and as of today I have 5,275 miles on them. (between work and weather it has not been a good riding year for me, but starting to catch up in the last week!)

Anyway, I LOVE these tires and SO FAR they are holding up well, I really do not see much wear but how can I remember from when they were new, I will be happy to get 10 K out of the rear and 12k I would be thrilled. We will see. Most of my riding is fast rural roads 45 to 65 but also A LOT of interstate on longer then 1 hr trips. Interstate where I live I commonly go 80 to 85 MPH indicated on the speedo which is really 73 to 77MPH on a GPS/ true speed.
Last trip on Sunday a constant indicated 80 to 85 for a 2 hour run to Charleston and later in the days two hours back. Tires NEVER are swayed by groves in the road etc which is nice when you hit construction zones where they grooved the road to lay a new surface, now of course that is extreme and you will feel it to a certain degree but other areas of grooves and cracks the tires take in stride and really inspire confidence, nice and firm as well and why I like them.
To start with I would like to make it clear that the Stryker is not like the 1300 or any other standard cruiser style bike as far as geometry and ergonomics. You set down in the bike at a lower center of gravity and a fist in the wind drag bar style with forward controls. Then the geometry is designed for a more aggressive riding style, despite how it looks and what you would think how it would handle with the rake, wide rear tire and bigger front tire. Also it has a more aggressive fuel mapping to go along with it and taller gear ratio than the 1300.
The low profile wide radial tires wear out faster than standard cruiser tires to start with. Then you add the ability to get down into curves and that equates to burning through tires .
Doesn't matter which brand or model tire they all wear out between 4k to 5k. And I mean before 5k they are bald starting at the sides first. This is opposite what others are getting that live in flat land big city areas. They are getting 8k to 12k of the stock tires wearing them in the center first. And of course better mileage when they go to other brands and 240 and up series tires.
To address your questions, to start with, the 950 and Strykers come stock with Bridgestone Exedras, not the max. I don't think they make a Max in any size that will fit the Stryker rim.
The problem with the Stryker is there is only two brands that make the 210 series, Bridgestone and Metzler.
So far I haven't been able to find a bias ply in anything above a 200 series. We put a bias ply C II 180 on the 950 and it had over 3k miles on it when we traded it in and it still looked almost new. This was far better than Bridgestone, Metzler and Dunlop, all were more than half way to the wear bars at 3k miles and wearing out before 7k miles. Metz getting the best mileage out of the three.

The thing about Metzlers is, from all my research I found they seem to get, on average, close to the same mileage no matter what part of the country you ride in. This isn't true with all other brands. In parts of the country like where I live that wear tires out fast, the same tire in other areas will last more than twice as long, except Metzler. That's why I chose Metzler because I figured I would get the best mileage off them which I did off three different bikes over several years. 7k+ miles on standard cruisers and 4,800 miles on my Stryker.
The thing about Metzlers however, when the tread got low the tire was squirrely. The Bridgestone was still sticky even when it was bald.
The Michelin C II is a far better tire than all of them. I have almost 5k on the C II 240 on my Sryker. It is almost bald on the left side, normal, and past the wear bars every where else. But the difference is it is wearing evenly as far as keeping it's round form where the others would squared off and/or cup. Also very sticky still, even more so than the Bridge. When the bridge was bald you could feel it sliding in hard corners but never felt like it would come out from under you. Now so with the C II it stays right there.

First picture is the first Bridgestone 210 on my Stryker completely bald from side to side at 3,100 miles. I still had some tread in the center at 2,500 miles. Paper thin but no belt showing. The bike was new so I was testing its limits. Could have got another 1,000 miles off it if I was a little easier on it lol.
Second pic is the Metz 240 at 4,800 miles. You can see with the wider tire it gave me more side tread that i really couldn't get all the way down to even scraping pegs.
Then the next two pics are the Michelin C II at 5k miles now.
The last pic is my wife's Stock 210 at 3k+ miles and you can see that some of the side chicken tracks are completely gone.
My concern is a car tire not designed to be on it's side may wear even faster on the edges but I wont know until I try.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
So I revisited the idea of a car tire and have decided against it again. It simply wont work on the style of bikes we have on dangerous mountain roads. Well here you guys go, some more negatives, not about car tires on a bike rather from the use of car tires on bikes.
I got responses on other forums from guys that have put car tires on their Strykers. All negative. One saying that he had it come out from under him in an intersection. Didn't describe how but I can tell you the reason is obvious. When he expected/needed it to perform like a bike tire it DID NOT. He also said it wore out faster than a Metzler. I can tell you why. On a bike like the Stryker that was designed to ride aggressively, really get into the cornering, with a tire that was not designed to be on it's edge all the time, or at all for that matter, heated up and quickly left all it's rubber on the road.
So I will not be putting a car tire on any bike, especially not my Strykers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
Thanks for correcting me Toby, I wasnt thinking when I made that post. True our bikes share the same engine and around the same weight, I didnt even think to think we were talking about different tires sizes and frame etc.

I know the "gearing" is different, in fact there is someone looking for a front pulley from a 1300 tourer to trade. Front pulley has an extra tooth on the Stryker (from what I am told) and it is something I would like because the 1300 tourer does get a little buzzy at 80 to 85 - 90 indicated MPH. I do a fair amount of interstate and the front pulley from the Stryker should lower the RPMs on the tourer by about 250 at 85 indicated MPH from what I am told. That would be perfect, as far as mapping that is not a concern.

A LOT of people do not know the speedometer on the 1300 tourer (not sure about the Stryker) is almost a FULL 10% to fast. So at 85 MPH indicated you are only going 77MPH GPS speed. If you never checked your speed with a GPS I would be interested to know about the Stryker, if the "error" is as great as the tourer.
So all the tourer riders who think they are doing 75MPH on the interstate and cars still flying by them is only because they are only going 68 MPH. That is significant and a knock on Yamaha for sure.
I think intentional, how can it not be?
Would be great to know if stryker is the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks for correcting me Toby, I wasnt thinking when I made that post. True our bikes share the same engine and around the same weight, I didnt even think to think we were talking about different tires sizes and frame etc.

I know the "gearing" is different, in fact there is someone looking for a front pulley from a 1300 tourer to trade. Front pulley has an extra tooth on the Stryker (from what I am told) and it is something I would like because the 1300 tourer does get a little buzzy at 80 to 85 - 90 indicated MPH. I do a fair amount of interstate and the front pulley from the Stryker should lower the RPMs on the tourer by about 250 at 85 indicated MPH from what I am told. That would be perfect, as far as mapping that is not a concern.

A LOT of people do not know the speedometer on the 1300 tourer (not sure about the Stryker) is almost a FULL 10% to fast. So at 85 MPH indicated you are only going 77MPH GPS speed. If you never checked your speed with a GPS I would be interested to know about the Stryker, if the "error" is as great as the tourer.
So all the tourer riders who think they are doing 75MPH on the interstate and cars still flying by them is only because they are only going 68 MPH. That is significant and a knock on Yamaha for sure.
I think intentional, how can it not be?
Would be great to know if stryker is the same.
This is not a knock on Yamaha. This is a common practice for all vehicles. The US standard of speedo error is 10% (UNECE) Regulation 39[3] meaning 5% in either direction I think is how it works. Manufacturers set them on the high side intentionally.("Vehicle manufacturers usually calibrate speedometers to read high by an amount equal to the average error, to ensure that their speedometers never indicate a lower speed than the actual speed of the vehicle, to ensure they are not liable for drivers violating speed limits.") Quote from this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedometer
The Stryker and the 950 were of by almost 5 mph at 50 mph and 7 mph at 90 mph indicated on the speedo. Percentage increases with speed. So when my speedo said I was doing 130+ it was probably below 125.
With the larger 240 on my Stryker it's off by only 1 mph. at 55 indicated by radar speed check boards.
It also shows up on the trip meters. When we travel side by side exact miles my bike with the 240 shows 5 miles less at 100 miles than my wife's bike with the 210. It was the same with the 950.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
I have never drove car with a 10% error on the speedo, not even close, my Dodge Durango is right on the money with the GPS. I mean EXACT. My wifes Altima is off by about 5% to fast at higher speeds only at 70MPH plus. My bike at 70 MPH is doing 63/64, that is significant no matter what the "standards are>

I believe and heard but NOT fact that Harleys are close to 5% not 10%.
If that is correct, I cant help but wonder if bikes with 5 speeds are closer to 10% off and the bikes with 6 speeds are closer to actual speed. Conspiracy theory would be 5 speed metric bikes would need to have the bike feel not as "buzzy" and let the rider think he/she is going faster then they are. In this day and age it is not impossible to have a correct speedometer. To me its an excuse.

BTW- I am only have fun with you and this discussion, please dont take it the wrong way.

But I will say I find it unacceptable that Yamaha has a bike model on the market such as the 1300 with a 9 or 10% error. I suspect as word gets out, which is so easy in this multi media age they will have to bring that in line.
I truly believe right now they do not want it closer to real speed because, other people like me would feel let down, knowing your engine has to turn 3,800 RPM to go 77 MPH (speedo says 85 MPH at that speed) 76/77 is a speed not all that uncommon on any major interstate. Instead one has to slow it down to around 3,500/3,600 RPM to get rid of the slight buzz for long trips which is 72/73MPH and the bike cruises like a dream, yet the speedo says 80 MPH. Its more then a little deceptive.

Again, I understand what you are saying and just having a conversation about this but cant help but wonder what other companies speedos are off. I suspect Harley is not and most likely Victory is not either, if not, that would be a ball in their court.

Also if you are correct, and 5% in either direction Yamaha is a full 100% out of the standard with a speedo off 10%. But again, just talking and again, to me doesnt matter what the standard is, 10% or almost 10% is inexcusable in for me personally but of course I live with it and have adjusted to it but will make it known in the bike world for those who have never checked. I wonder if the new 1300 deluxe GPS gives GPS speed, that would be interesting because if you do not have that option you know Yamaha wants to keep the real speed quiet, if the new deluxe if off that much like the other 1300 tourer models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
You are correct for most of what you know, and BTW I know this is just a discussion and respect your knowledge, thought's and opinions, as I do everyone else.
If you read the info on the link I posted you will get a better understanding of the speedo thing.
You are correct with Yamahas being on the extreme side of high readings. Yours seem to be way up there but not rare as I have followed many threads on lots of forums and they all say the same thing, starting with 3 mph off at low speeds increasing to as much as 10 mph off at high speeds. Not limited to Yamahas either. In fact, a friend of mine up here that rides a 06 HD Road King, when we got on the freeway she started dropping way behind. So I slowed down to 60 indicated on my speedo which is only 1 mph off if at all with the 240. She still was not catching up. So I questioned why? She said we were hitting speeds over 75 mph. She said her Harley vibrates too much at that speed, indicated on her speedo, and she wanted to stay at the speed limit or below to be comfortable. My wife said her speedo on the 950 never hit 70 and mine never hit 65. So her speedo was probably more than 10 mph off.
My Ridgeline on the other hand is right on the money according to radar speed check signs and the ticket I got that the CHP said her radar clocked me at exactly what I looked and saw me speedo say when I saw here.
But I bought the Ridgeline used and have no way of knowing if it had been calibrated or not.
When I first noticed that my Stryker and the 950 were both off about 4 to 5 mph between 45 to 60 mph I questioned the Yamaha dealer where I bought the Stryker thinking thy would fix it because it was brand new, the response I got was , "it is within the % of allowed error under the International standard for speedo regulations".
So I researched it and learned a lot.
The things I'm telling you are not my opinion rather things I read that are available to the public.
One of the things if I remember correctly was that apposite of what you would think, Higher end sports and luxury cars were usually further off than cheaper vehicles.
So do some research if you really want to know facts and where you stand if you think your speedo is off further than the percentage that the USA regulations allow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
After hearing all these tire issues with the larger cruisers I am beginning to think it's honestly a defect in the design. I'm not hearing remotely as much "problems" with other bikes in the same categories running through tires like I am for the Stryker/Liners. I can't even begin to comprehend how you are wearing a tire down in 3,000 miles. Have you tried the Michelin Commander II's?

Also you got a ticket? Did your speedo say you were legally within the limit? If it did contact Yamaha consumer relations and say due to a defect in the motorcycle you got cited for riding too fast because the speed is completely inaccurate. 1-3 MPH is normal, 5-10+ is not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
845 Posts
You are correct for most of what you know, and BTW I know this is just a discussion and respect your knowledge, thought's and opinions, as I do everyone else.
If you read the info on the link I posted you will get a better understanding of the speedo thing.
...
So do some research if you really want to know facts and where you stand if you think your speedo is off further than the percentage that the USA regulations allow.
Good post Toby ... ( shortened the quote so not to take up so much room again*L*) and I believe you are correct, I am sure it is within "regulations" but as you might agree, the extreme. At least for me it is and see no reason for it is all I was trying to say, it is what it is and if anything will keep me from getting a ticket but then it brings me back to why I wish I had that 6th speed and again, I dont know of any bike that we wished for at least one thing if given a choice what we would like in a bike, that would be the one thing for me.
Just got a new helmet tonight, took it on the interstate to see how it was compared to the last, I like it not much different then the last except even more super thin and lite 3/4.
Neptune wrote above, have you tried the Commander II ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Yes I have the C II on my Stryker right now. The 3rd and 4th pictures I posted earlier in this thread are of the C II at 5,000 miles. You can see it's bald on the left side and almost bald on the rest of the tire.
The last pic is of the Bridgestone 210 on my wife's Stryker and if you pull up a picture of a new one you will see that hers is already missing some of the side treads, worn out, gone at 3,000. The tire is also starting to square off on the sides. She has had the bike for a little over a month. The C II has been on my bike for a little over 2 months.
The Idea of defective tires could not be, due to a total of 5 rear tires, 4 different brands, on my Stryker alone. A total of 11 rear tires on 4 different bikes, 3 different styles of bikes, with all different brands of tires. All wearing tires out in very low miles. Since October of 2010. The Strykers being the worst. 3,000 to 5,000 on them and no more than 7,000 on any of the others.
So the common denominator hear is NOT tires, style or weight of bikes, riding habits, ( because we practice all kinds of rear tire saving techniques and my wife rode the 950 real slow.
The common denominator is the amount of extreme twisties, some with obstacle course endurance track demanding style of riding with severe grades between 12% to 25%.. This demands constant braking and trail braking to keep slow enough, 20 to 35 mph, to maneuver sweepers and hair pin turn down hill for 5 to ten mile stretches at a time. And to do that in revers demands constant power to the rear tire.
This is why we wear tires out faster than any one you here of.
Guys are getting 12,000 miles off their stock 210 out in the flat lands but others that get low miles live in areas similar to ours.
The problem with the Stryker is the rear tire IS a race style wide low profile radial tire designed specifically for the Stryker and Raider.
These bikes are designed to really move and get into curves far harder than any standard cruiser, thus the race tire.
To give you an idea of what the roads are like up here and how much of them there are, I would compare them to the Tail of the Dragon being a little short kiddy ride compared to hundreds or endless miles of some of the most extreme roller coasters in the world put together as one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
If you want to play you have to pay.
It is more expensive to ride the roads that you like to ride.
There is no "fix" or "magic bullet".
You have chosen an EXPENSIVE pastime and you will always be spending a lot of $$$$ on tires & brakes.
Wait 'till you see how much your bikes are depreciating !
You'll get sick at how much it REALLY costs to ride a Stryker.

JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Yes I have already resigned myself to those facts.
The Stryker depreciates 25% as soon as you ride it off the lot. Then a year later it's worth 2/3rds what you paid for it. Like most other bikes.
We got a good deal on the Stryker we just bought, bran new 2013 for $9,399 and it's still worth $8,315 according KBB. We've had it for a little over a month. That's not to bad. However I paid full price for my 2011 in October of 2011 and 4 months later it was worth almost $4,000 less. Pretty sad but love the bikes.
As for the idea of car tires I have also once again decided against that idea and will never revisit it again. I have once again come up with 10 to 1 negative about car tires on bikes. I'm not talking about the scientific or mechanical facts but stories from people that have tried them or watched others with them or stories directly from friends that have used them.
My conclusion is, guys that use them don't know what the word twisties means, have never rode a bike hard, and do not know what good handling feels like on a bike with a bike tire in twisties.
Further more, guys that put car tires on their bikes because they hear nothing but good stories from guys that have been lucky or really don't know the difference, or just don't want to admit they screwed up, have not done enough research to find the comments from guys that have had problems. Believe me they are out there ten fold to the good ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
"My conclusion is, guys that use them don't know what the word twisties means, have never rode a bike hard, and do not know what good handling feels like on a bike with a bike tire in twisties."

That's just a stupid statement designed to piss off people like me.
It worked man.You got a rise out of me.
It's one thing for you to say you are not into something and quite another to mock out people who are.
For example.
I think your bike is a "pretty boy" bike that looks kinda gay and that most folks would just ride to the bar, but you claim it's a sport bike and that you are a bad ass corner carver.
If you want to ride that kind of bike I can respect that.
That's your decision.
Sport bike riders would LAUGH at your claims.

I know what it's like to ride hard ......
and have the scars from doing it but my Stratoliner,Valkyrie,& V2k are cruisers and because of that they are NOT built to corner aggressively.
The tires are NOT the limitation,the hard parts that scrape are the culprit on a big cruiser..
However,I ride pretty fast considering the limitations of my bikes and I embarrass a LOT of cruiser riders that are running the latest motorcycle tires.

"Further more, guys that put car tires on their bikes because they hear nothing but good stories from guys that have been lucky or really don't know the difference, or just don't want to admit they screwed up, have not done enough research to find the comments from guys that have had problems. Believe me they are out there ten fold to the good ones."

That's another load of crap mister.Simply not true.
You are F.O.S. for sure.
I have been darkside since 1998.
I have 196k on my Valk,123k on my Stratoliner.
I just went darkside on the V2k.

If I had to ride your roads I sure wouldn't ride a cruiser.
I would get a sport bike or an adventure bike.

JJ
Jammin'john, First of all I would like to apologize for pissin you or anyone off, This was never my intention. An oversight on my part..

I didn't intend to imply that people that have successfully used a car tire on certain bikes in certain conditions didn't know anything.
The truth of the matter is virtually no one has a clue to the types of roads I'm referring to. If they did they would agree with me.
I'm not going to stoop to the level you did, calling my bike names, flinging insults directly at you or you bike etc. But I would like to say with no disrespect intended, the kinds of bikes you ride would have a hard time getting up these mountains, if at all, with a bike tire or a car tire. And I have read comments from others that have cars tire on big cruisers the tour Alaskan roads and they are pretty rugged.
I have to admit the tire you are running looks like it would perform pretty well.
For you to call me a liar because you have not read what I have is ignorant to say the least. I stand by everything I said and if you do some research you will find the same comments I did.
The bad stories are out there and like I said just in the past two days I read ten bad to every one good. Raider forum, Stryker forum, this forum, Power Cruiser forum and a bunch of other articles. Sport bike riders laugh at the Stryker? on the contrary, my brother in law rides an R1 that puts out 173 HP to the rear wheel. He does not race professionally but has trained on the track with professional instructors. On the contrary to your statement he did not laugh at the Stryker while me and another buddy that has a Stryker raced him through the San Diego mountains. Instead his comments were he was surprise how well they handled twisties and at the low end torque they had. He said he had to ride pretty hard to pull away from us in some of the slower twisties. Of course in the straighter twisties and straight aways there was no comparison.
I'm not trying to claim it's any where near a sport bike but it's far superior to any standard cruiser on the market when it comes to handling twisties.
Thus the reason they put a race tire on it. If you have never ridden one you will never understand.
Also I am not claiming I'm some kind of bad ass racer, in fact we try to ride as easy as possible to preserve tires. Although I did ride my Stryker very hard the first two months I had it. In fact hard enough to scrape hard parts and wear a tire out completely bald in 3,000 miles. That's not doing burn outs. Just canyon carving to the best of it's abilities wearing the sides bald first then the center. I was pushing it past it's limitations scrapping hard parts but never lost the slightest bit of stability. That's why a car tire just wont work on this bike.
To repeat what one guy on the Stryker forum said, he rides hard in the colorado mountains and he put a car tire on his bike, "the rear slipped out from under me unexpectedly, so I take it real easy now". Also he wore that car tire out faster than the Metzler ME 880 Marathon. So what does that tell you?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #15 (Edited)
Also Jammin john I would like to add the posting pictures of snowy conditions makes me chuckle. We live in an area that it snows 6 to 8 months of the year and we ride all year long as long as the temps come up enough to melt some of the black ice. We have rode over dozens of miles of snowy icy conditions. In circumstances where I had to slide sideways to a stop, I'm sure if I had a car tire I would not have kept it on two wheels. In fact one time I had to pull it down so the peg gouged into the snow to stop. Neither one of us has ever lost control or had the bikes so far over to be off the tires.
A car tire might work on a bike that you can't lean it very far but they just wont work on a bike like the Stryker.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Sorry you're so upset . But really you are calling a liar. We have had snow start falling as early as November, maybe even October and has snow as late as June. Staying on the ground 6 miles from my place as late as the first week of July.
Believe me I'm not bragging and sorry you see it that way. I'm merely explaining my dilemma in hopes that other will give me there opinion to help me make a decision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
OK,I am very sorry.
You love to ride and so do I.
There is no solution to the tire thing.
They charge way too much for them and they don't last.
My Strato came with a 17" on the back which sucks when you try & find tires.
Sorry again.I don't want to bicker.

JJ
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23 Posts
Sorry dude.
I never called you a liar or said that you were gay.
A boaster,a sensationalist,a braggart,a teller of tall tales,but never a liar.{don't get mad again}
If it helps.I think Victory's look more effeminate than your bike.
Effeminate is probably a nicer word.
Ok this kind of "lets get it out side by side and someone get me a ruler so we can measure" seems a little childish for a mature rider. I am a bit disappointed. For someone who obviously rides a couple of awesome bikes in awesome conditions, I really don't think you needed to go here in either of your posts. Besides, I bet MINE are bigger then YOURS and I am a girl *grins*

Yes,I see your showroom clean bike that you posed near some snow.
Not a spot on it. Pretty color.
My bikes DON'T look like that.
I beg to differ with you on how his bike looks. Honestly, if it looks nice in any pic we take, especially lately, it is because I got the lemon pledge out and dusted them off LOL
His bike is just pretty even when it has mud and road tar on it from our rides. I have the white one, it actually shows up dirt more quickly. The pics he posted are not just 'a pretty bike posed near snow'
I have lived in these hills since 2004, I have been shoveling snow out of my driveway in april and june when other people are putting in their garden beds. I have pics to prove it too =) I have a picture of the garden bed he built me in april of 2011, I had just turned the soil, it had been warm and I was thinking 'oh cool I may get the peas in early'. Well the next morning it had a foot of snow in it...
anyway, my point is, unless you come out here and spend the winter and ride with us you yourself just can't know.
I mean, you could have trailered YOUR bike up there to those snowy spots, unloaded it, and pushed it over to the spot you photographed it in. After all, isn't that what you are accusing toby of?
Look,I'm not here to argue so I'm going to butt out & let you tell your tale.
Sorry it got uncomfortable.
Yes you are, and no you're not ... LOL I think you are having far too much fun trying to prove what a clever dick you are ;)

I got upset.
You got upset.
This part, you got right =)

I agree that you should not run a car tire ......... OK ?
I AGREE WITH YOU.........You Win !

I'm not racing up a mountain on the worst roads in the country like you are.
I didn't know that you are from russia or china or somewhere like that since there are no places like you describe in the lower 48 that have snow 6 to 8 months of the year .
If that snow is on a mountain and you dig riding on the crappy roads on purpose then have at it.

We get a lot of snow but it doesn't stay for EIGHT MONTHS like yours so I feel for that.
The three places that hold state records for the most snow in one winter, the most snow in one month and the most snow in one day are all on the plateau, and all within 20 miles of Redfield.
Wait a min. I'm less than 20 miles from redfield.
For the record, they are:
Hooker, with 466.9 inches the winter of 1976-77;
Bennett Bridges, south of Orwell, with 192 inches in January 1978, and
Barnes Corners in the Jefferson County town of Adams, with 54 inches on Jan. 9, 1976.
Update: After this story was published, a one-day record was set in Montague, also on the Tug Hill. From 1:30 p.m. Saturday, Jan. 11, 1997, to 1:30 p.m. Sunday, Jan. 12, 1997, Bill Ottoshavett, a snow spotter for the National Weather Service, measured a total of 77 inches.
Officials at the weather service in Buffalo certified Ottoshavett's measurements, and said Montague had also broken the New York record for total snowfall in a single storm.
From Friday night, Jan. 10, through early Tuesday, Jan. 14. 1997, Ottoshavett measured a total of 95 inches.

So you just have summer and winter and get more snow than me.
That's a drag.
Sorry to hear that.
I thought they road Urals with sidecars in those conditions,not pretty bikes at insane speeds that would shame a sport bike.

I agree that your bike handles the curves better than mine.
See,you win again !

Anyways.
Enjoy your new bike tires.
What the hell.You will be able to get to try a LOT of new tires and it's always fun trying new tires. :)

Good luck and happy trails.

JJ
Anyway, my view as an observer of this conversation is, that Toby did come off with a couple of statements that perhaps could have been worded differently. I think that is all you really had to say, and could have said it in a far more mature manner then you did.
I looked at the pix of your bikes, I think they are pretty nice bikes, I also like your rear tire, and really do wish we could find a car tire that would give us the mileage we desire and work well on the stryker. It may not be possible though because the rear rim is so wide, so what would work well on a Valkyrie or other large cruiser, that uses a MC tire with a high sidewall, probably won't work so well for us.
I also hold the view that the Motorcycle Tire industry is a racket, they have figured out how to milk riders for as much money as possible and are doing it.
They COULD design a tire that would have all the safety features the motorcycle needs and would still give us 20k miles use, but they don't on purpose. It wouldn't be good for their bottom line.
Every picture I have ever looked at of old bikes, from the 30s and 40s all have tires on them that are akin to truck tires...
The cruiser tire as we know it today is pretty recent and like I said, they wouldn't make as much money if they didn't design them to wear out fairly quickly.

The pics are of the spring 2011 and my old virago. Toby was teaching me that bikes don't melt in weather and mud doesn't hurt them a bit ;) I myself didn't start piloting it tho until things dried out a bit.
Anyway, be well, shiny side up and may you have many many more happy trails in your future.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I guess you didn't read my apology ? I'm sorry,sorry,sorry already.
Anyway.
If you love to ride then ride !
There are no MC tires available that last like they should.
I got 4k out of my rear and 7k from my front tire with the stock BS's.
I get from 16 to 20k (depending on car tire used) on the rear and 17 to 20k on the front with a Pilot Activ rear on the front,facing backward.
I get out as often as possible {don't tell the guard please}.
Ride safe & often.

JJ
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23 Posts
I guess you didn't read my apology ? I'm sorry,sorry,sorry already.
Anyway.
If you love to ride then ride !
There are no MC tires available that last like they should.
I got 4k out of my rear and 7k from my front tire with the stock BS's.
I get from 16 to 20k (depending on car tire used) on the rear and 17 to 20k on the front with a Pilot Activ rear on the front,facing backward.
I get out as often as possible {don't tell the guard please}.
Ride safe & often.

JJ
Yes you are correct =) I think we both hit post at the same time on that one.
Someday I am hoping we will be able to move out of the mountains and live lower down so we can explore different options for keeping tread on our bikes.
On the UPside =) they just repaved the road down the back of our mountain with nice asphalt lol so at least 8 miles of our road is smooth (for now, until the heavy stock trailers ruin it)
So our rides around Ruth Lake might not wear our tires out quite as fast for a while.
The tire wear is kinda my fault ;) ever since Toby got me the new bike, he just can't keep me off of it. It is far too much fun.
The snow is coming... it will be here far too soon.
like you said, Ride safe and often!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top