Yet another tire thread

[CC2099]

I only put around 1000km per year on my 1979 GS850G so as a result, I last changed tires 9 years ago. The current tires are Bridgestone S11 Spitfires, 110/90-19 on the front and 130/90-17 on the rear. I was going to order a new pair of Spitfires but to my dismay I found that although Bridgestone still makes Spitfire S11 tires, they no longer make them in the 130/90-17 size. In fact, it would seem that if I want to continue riding with 110 on the front and 130 on the rear the only manufacturer that makes both sizes is Shinko - models 712 or 230.

I guess I could try 100/90-19 front and 120/90-17 rear - it would give me a wider range of options including Batlax BT45 or Michelin Commander II.

I'm just wondering if anyone here has ridden on both Batlax & Shinko who could comment on their experience?

Also wondering if anyone here has ridden on both combinations of tire sizes 110 front/130 rear vs 100 front/120 rear?

 

[Brendan W]

Hi CC2099 and welcome.
You may be over thinking this. The 850 is hardly going to explore weaknesses in tyres at it's performance.
Consensus on that bike appears to be 100/90/19 and 130/90/17. They are closest to original fitment with low speedo error. That's what I have.
Differences would be small and maybe noticeable for the first hour after new rubber and then you forget about it.
I have Continental Conti-Go and TKV11 and 12

 

[jlyon40]

Have either of you guys tried IRC Durotours before? I only paid like $160 for both of my tires and I've already gone 4,000 miles and they still look new.

 

[Brendan W]

Never even heard of them before now.

 

[jlyon40]

I never heard of them until my dad got them on his 850 a couple of years ago, so I thought I'd give them a try and so far they are great and they grip really well. Here's what they look like.

 

[Steve]

Until recently, we have had FOUR GSes in the stable, all on Shinko 230s. The two Gs were on 100/90-19 and 130/90-17, the two GLs were on 100/90-19 and 130/90-16.

They feel great and have minimal speedo error, as mentioned. The 100 tire will feel a little 'quicker' than your 100, but you will like it with the bulk of the 850. I don't have any numbers to report for mileage, but they do OK. Others have tested them and found them acceptable, but had personal preferences for going back to another tire. With your limited miles per year, the Shinkos will do just fine. Not sure how much they are in Canadian dollars, but they are about $135 US for the pair.

I mentioned "recently" because we only have three GSes now, the 650L is gone.

.

 

[bwringer]

Handling will be MUCH improved with a 100/90-19 up front. And, as mentioned above, 130/90-17 in the rear.

The Spitfire S11 is very old design dating back to the late '80s/early '90s, and frankly never was that great a tire in the first place. There are MANY excellent choices in much more modern rubber nowadays, and I think you'll be very pleased with your revitalized GS850.

For your light usage, I'd bet the Shinko 712 or 230 would be just the ticket. My bike is currently wearing the Shinko 712, and I don't recall any complaints about the pace in the Missouri rally. Both handle great and stick well in the wet or dry, they handle great beginning to end, and they're an incredible bargain. The one downside is that they don't last as long as some other choices. However, that's not really a factor for you unless you like the way the bike feels so much that you end up riding a lot more.

Other great choices include:
Avon AM26 RoadRiders (careful -- the front 100/90-19 can be used front or rear, so some catalogs get confused and list it with the rear tires)
Bridgestone BT45 Battleax
Continental GO!
Michelin Pilot Activ
Metzeler Sportec Klassic
Pirelli Sport Demon

The only ones I'd avoid are the Kenda Challenger (horrifying in the wet), the Bridgestone Spitfire S11 (short-lived, and they turn nasty as they wear), the Dunlop 404 (short-lived, and they also turn evil as they wear), and the Metzeler Lasertec (eye-wateringly expensive, short-lived).

 

[Guest]

I'm just wondering if anyone here has ridden on both Batlax & Shinko who could comment on their experience?

I have used both, but on my 1100E, not an 850. I am currently running the 230's in 100/90-19F / 130/90-17R sizes. I would say that the BT-45's maybe offer a touch more grip, but I have not had issues with either on the street. My 230's are scrubbed edge to edge, so I am not exactly babying them. I think the 230's are good enough that I would do a track day on them without hesitation. Current mileage is around 5200km of mixed solo and two up riding. The front looks like new and the rear is showing a bit of a flat spot but has lots of tread left in the middle and has given no funky handling yet. The BT45's wear much quicker, I got maybe 5000km out of the rear and it was completely bald in the middle at that point. That tire saw almost no two up riding, either.

I would say the 230's offer slightly better handling with more stability than the 45's with no penalty on quick direction changes. It isn't a big difference, though. I think the 230's work better in cool weather, which is a big deal for me where I live. We have lots of cool mornings with cold pavement and my tires need to work well in those conditions. The 230's do. I don't ride in the rain much but the bit I have done shows the 230's are acceptable for my uses. The BT45's were fine in the wet in my experience as well.

I am in a similar boat to you, where I don't put tremendous mileage on my 1100 (the 5200km is about half of last year and all of this season so far). Lots of people say that the Avon Roadriders are a better value per mile, but I chose the 230's because my tires usually get old before they wear out. I figured changing them twice as often at ~half the price worked out to fresher tires for me at very similar cost overall. The only extra effort for me is I change tires twice as often, which I can live with.


Mark

 

[Burque73]

Handling will be MUCH improved with a 100/90-19 up front. And, as mentioned above, 130/90-17 in the rear.

The Spitfire S11 is very old design dating back to the late '80s/early '90s, and frankly never was that great a tire in the first place. There are MANY excellent choices in much more modern rubber nowadays, and I think you'll be very pleased with your revitalized GS850.

For your light usage, I'd bet the Shinko 712 or 230 would be just the ticket. My bike is currently wearing the Shinko 712, and I don't recall any complaints about the pace in the Missouri rally. Both handle great and stick well in the wet or dry, they handle great beginning to end, and they're an incredible bargain. The one downside is that they don't last as long as some other choices. However, that's not really a factor for you unless you like the way the bike feels so much that you end up riding a lot more.

Other great choices include:
Avon AM26 RoadRiders (careful -- the front 100/90-19 can be used front or rear, so some catalogs get confused and list it with the rear tires)
Bridgestone BT45 Battleax
Continental GO!
Michelin Pilot Activ
Metzeler Sportec Klassic
Pirelli Sport Demon

The only ones I'd avoid are the Kenda Challenger (horrifying in the wet), the Bridgestone Spitfire S11 (short-lived, and they turn nasty as they wear), the Dunlop 404 (short-lived, and they also turn evil as they wear), and the Metzeler Lasertec (eye-wateringly expensive, short-lived).

It's interesting you mention the Dunlop 404 as one to avoid. I have well over 9k miles on a set now. They have worn very evenly and privided ample traction for my riding style. Granted theyre at the wear limit and need replacing but I'd buy another set without worry. Of course everyone has different results, just giving my $.02

 

[jlyon40]

It's interesting you mention the Dunlop 404 as one to avoid. I have well over 9k miles on a set now. They have worn very evenly and privided ample traction for my riding style. Granted theyre at the wear limit and need replacing but I'd buy another set without worry. Of course everyone has different results, just giving my $.02

It also depends on your riding style. Maybe you are more of a cruiser which is why your D404's lasted so long. If it were me they wouldn't last that long. I like to take corners pretty fast and sharp so that's why my D404's didn't last. Plus everyone has their opinions on which tires they prefer. Everyone rides a little different. If you like to be sporty I would not suggest the D404's. they are alright but that's about it.

 

[bwringer]

It's interesting you mention the Dunlop 404 as one to avoid. I have well over 9k miles on a set now. They have worn very evenly and privided ample traction for my riding style. Granted theyre at the wear limit and need replacing but I'd buy another set without worry. Of course everyone has different results, just giving my $.02

Agreed. I put tires through a lot more stress than most. Normal humans get at least twice the mileage out of their motorcycle tires than I do and would never notice a problem with any of these tires.

During one trip to the Smoky Mountains in North Carolina/Tennessee, I reduced a fresh set of Dunlop 404s to a greasy, wobbly, scalloped, evil handling mess. The total mileage at replacement was around 1,800 miles, so they're off my list. Same for the Bridgestone S11 Spitfires -- one trip to the mountains and they turned evil halfway through.

Most people never push motorcycle tires hard enough to discover these differences. For street use, they all stick well enough (except the Kenda Challengers; crikey those were slippery...) so for me, the true measure of a tire is whether it stays consistent and safe beginning to end. Some do, and some don't.

 

[salty_monk]

Everyone still buying from these guys as the place of choice?

http://www.americanmototire.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=33_892_905

I need a set soon (and probably a set for the KLR too - what do you run their Brian? I'm coming to the end of life on a pair of Heidenau Scout K60's with about 9-10,000 on them.)

 

[CC2099]

Hi CC2099 and welcome.
You may be over thinking this. The 850 is hardly going to explore weaknesses in tyres at it's performance.
Consensus on that bike appears to be 100/90/19 and 130/90/17. They are closest to original fitment with low speedo error. That's what I have.
Differences would be small and maybe noticeable for the first hour after new rubber and then you forget about it.
I have Continental Conti-Go and TKV11 and 12

Thanks for the quick response! I don't think I'm overthinking this decision as the tire combination will have an effect on the handling characteristics. I don't take this particular motorcycle out all that often but when I do, I push it pretty hard on winding roads so it would be nice if the tire combination I end up ordering doesn't result in heavy/awkward handling through curves.

Most imperial to metric conversion charts that I've found show a 1/4" of range eg: 3.25" to 3.5" x 19 = 100/90-19 for the front and similarly, 4.25" to 4.5" x 17 = 120/90-17 for the rear. Based on rim charts, it looks like 100/90-19 is the widest recommended tire for a 1.85" rim and the widest recommended tire for a 2.5" rim is 120/90-17. I guess I've just been lucky riding around with tires too wide for the rims for the past 9 years?

I've been reading through a lot of previous tire related posts but haven't been able to find who first determined that the best metric conversion of the original 4.5-17 rear tire is 130/90-17. Was the conversion & subsequent consensus based on measurements of an original set of tires or was there some guesswork involved? Maybe the consensus on the rear tire size is wrong?

 

[CC2099]

I have used both, but on my 1100E, not an 850. I am currently running the 230's in 100/90-19F / 130/90-17R sizes. I would say that the BT-45's maybe offer a touch more grip, but I have not had issues with either on the street. My 230's are scrubbed edge to edge, so I am not exactly babying them. I think the 230's are good enough that I would do a track day on them without hesitation. Current mileage is around 5200km of mixed solo and two up riding. The front looks like new and the rear is showing a bit of a flat spot but has lots of tread left in the middle and has given no funky handling yet. The BT45's wear much quicker, I got maybe 5000km out of the rear and it was completely bald in the middle at that point. That tire saw almost no two up riding, either.

I would say the 230's offer slightly better handling with more stability than the 45's with no penalty on quick direction changes. It isn't a big difference, though. I think the 230's work better in cool weather, which is a big deal for me where I live. We have lots of cool mornings with cold pavement and my tires need to work well in those conditions. The 230's do. I don't ride in the rain much but the bit I have done shows the 230's are acceptable for my uses. The BT45's were fine in the wet in my experience as well.

I am in a similar boat to you, where I don't put tremendous mileage on my 1100 (the 5200km is about half of last year and all of this season so far). Lots of people say that the Avon Roadriders are a better value per mile, but I chose the 230's because my tires usually get old before they wear out. I figured changing them twice as often at ~half the price worked out to fresher tires for me at very similar cost overall. The only extra effort for me is I change tires twice as often, which I can live with.


Mark

Yeah, cooler weather handling is important to me as I'm just outside Calgary & will often take my bike into the mountains. I see you're in Alberta too - whereabouts?

 

[Guest]

Yeah, cooler weather handling is important to me as I'm just outside Calgary & will often take my bike into the mountains. I see you're in Alberta too - whereabouts?

I never noticed you were in Cochrane last time. I am in Didsbury myself.


Mark

 

[bwringer]

< klrmode="on" >

Everyone still buying from these guys as the place of choice?

http://www.americanmototire.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=33_892_905

I need a set soon (and probably a set for the KLR too - what do you run their Brian? I'm coming to the end of life on a pair of Heidenau Scout K60's with about 9-10,000 on them.)

Lately I've been buying all my tires (sorry, "tyres") from Rocky Mountain/Jake Wilson (they're the same company). Their prices are under or within a dollar or two of the prices at American Moto Tire ("American" is right there in the name, so I guess they have to spell it "tire"). But the main reason is that they have a 5% rewards program, so I at least get some benefit from the vast sums I spend on rubber.

Anyhoooo... I've been through two sets of Metzeler Karoo 3 on my KLR, and they've been fantastic. Very aggressive tread that seems to work well off-road, and they stick wonderfully well on pavement, even in the wet. Reasonably priced (currently $158) a set, and pretty good life for a tire this aggressive (although not nearly as long as the Heidenaus). They even handle quite well when they're nearly worn out, which is unusual for knobby tires. They're noisy (some people care; I don't) and like any knobby there's a noticeable bit of rolling resistance.

The Heidenau K60 lasts a long time and works well off pavement, but from what I've observed and heard, they're a bit slippery on pavement and scary in the wet; the rubber is a bit too hard.

It's just about new tire time for my KLR as well, and I've been thinking about trying a set of the Shinko 804/805 knobbies in the name of Science. The online feedback is very good, and pricing is similar, perhaps a bit less. ($156/set right now, although the rear is backordered.)

The Shinko 244 works quite well and at $94 a set, they're the undisputed bargain leader for the KLR.

Michelin stopped making my favorite "pure" knobby, the T63. These were phenomenal, but wore out quickly. They're trying to get people to use the new Anakee Wild which just happens to cost about $70 more a set.

</ klrmode="off">

OK, hijack over -- back to your regularly scheduled GS programming...

 

[Nessism]

Handling will be MUCH improved with a 100/90-19 up front. And, as mentioned above, 130/90-17 in the rear.

The Spitfire S11 is very old design dating back to the late '80s/early '90s, and frankly never was that great a tire in the first place. There are MANY excellent choices in much more modern rubber nowadays, and I think you'll be very pleased with your revitalized GS850.

For your light usage, I'd bet the Shinko 712 or 230 would be just the ticket. My bike is currently wearing the Shinko 712, and I don't recall any complaints about the pace in the Missouri rally. Both handle great and stick well in the wet or dry, they handle great beginning to end, and they're an incredible bargain. The one downside is that they don't last as long as some other choices. However, that's not really a factor for you unless you like the way the bike feels so much that you end up riding a lot more.

Other great choices include:
Avon AM26 RoadRiders (careful -- the front 100/90-19 can be used front or rear, so some catalogs get confused and list it with the rear tires)
Bridgestone BT45 Battleax
Continental GO!
Michelin Pilot Activ
Metzeler Sportec Klassic
Pirelli Sport Demon

The only ones I'd avoid are the Kenda Challenger (horrifying in the wet), the Bridgestone Spitfire S11 (short-lived, and they turn nasty as they wear), the Dunlop 404 (short-lived, and they also turn evil as they wear), and the Metzeler Lasertec (eye-wateringly expensive, short-lived).

Great post here. Should be a sticky for the Newbie's.

100 front and 130 rear are tried and true sizes for the shafties. No reason to question further.

 

[bwringer]

Thanks for the quick response! I don't think I'm overthinking this decision as the tire combination will have an effect on the handling characteristics. I don't take this particular motorcycle out all that often but when I do, I push it pretty hard on winding roads so it would be nice if the tire combination I end up ordering doesn't result in heavy/awkward handling through curves.

Most imperial to metric conversion charts that I've found show a 1/4" of range eg: 3.25" to 3.5" x 19 = 100/90-19 for the front and similarly, 4.25" to 4.5" x 17 = 120/90-17 for the rear. Based on rim charts, it looks like 100/90-19 is the widest recommended tire for a 1.85" rim and the widest recommended tire for a 2.5" rim is 120/90-17. I guess I've just been lucky riding around with tires too wide for the rims for the past 9 years?

I've been reading through a lot of previous tire related posts but haven't been able to find who first determined that the best metric conversion of the original 4.5-17 rear tire is 130/90-17. Was the conversion & subsequent consensus based on measurements of an original set of tires or was there some guesswork involved? Maybe the consensus on the rear tire size is wrong?

I think the consensus came about for a couple of reasons.


For one, there are very, very few choices in 120/90-17. At the moment, I can find only three rear street tires in this size:
IRC Durotour
Bridgestone BT45
Avon AM26 (actually a front that can be used on the rear).

The Bridgestone and the Avon are fairly recent. For many years, the IRC was the only choice in this size. There don't seem to be any street tires currently available in 4.50X17.


Secondly, the 130/90-17 has been used hard for millions of miles of thousands of GS shafties. It's pretty well proven that it handles perfectly well. We've also proven that handling is much better with a 100/90-19 up front instead of the 110/90-19. I have no idea why, but it's common to find that some past shop or owner has stuffed a 110 on the front of a shaftie where it doesn't belong (the GK does use a 110/90-19, and has the correct wider wheel and forks) -- I suspect many of these started from a shop selling whatever they have on the shelf, not what's correct.


All that said, I don't know of any direct comparisons between a 120/90-17 rear and a 130/90-17 in the same brand. And it is true that the GL models with 130/90-16 rears came with 2.75" wide rear wheels. The G models came with 4.50X17 rears and 2.50" rear rims through 1983. Whether 2.50" rim is "correct" for a 130/90 tire is debatable -- some tire/rim charts show this as OK, some do not.

Anyway, 130/90-17 gives you a lot more choice and is correct or close enough for the rim width, and has been proven in real life use to work quite well on GS shafties. I will continue to use 130/90-17 rear tires on my GS.

 

[Steve]

Based on rim charts, it looks like 100/90-19 is the widest recommended tire for a 1.85" rim and the widest recommended tire for a 2.5" rim is 120/90-17.

Bwringer has given the best description of what works and why, I will just add that the '82-and-up GS1100G and GK have a front wheel that is 2.15" wide. Seems the GL kept the 1.85" wheel, probably to maintain that "chopper-esqe" look. I have a set of 1100G wheels on my 850, but I did it for the look of the different spoke pattern, not because the wheels were wider. Can't say that I noticed any difference in handling with the wider wheel. Used the same tire on both wheels to minimize the variables.

.

 

[CC2099]

I think the consensus came about for a couple of reasons.

For one, there are very, very few choices in 120/90-17. At the moment, I can find only three rear street tires in this size:
IRC Durotour
Bridgestone BT45
Avon AM26 (actually a front that can be used on the rear).

Secondly, the 130/90-17 has been used hard for millions of miles of thousands of GS shafties. It's pretty well proven that it handles perfectly well.

Well, that could be how the consensus came about. Most people here have been exchanging information with each other for quite a long time but as you've probably already guessed, I'm one of those people who always questions "common knowledge". I find that it's become far too easy these days to echo & thereby amplify misinformation.

OldVet66 has a differing opinion which was posted back in 2013: http://www.thegsresources.com/_forum/showthread.php?211522-81-GS-850-G-Shaft-Drive-Rear-tire&p=1904257#post1904257

130/90, 100/90 is a bad combination. 130/90, 110/90 however, is excellent, or as said before 120/90, 100/90. Increasing the back only, causes it to fall into the turns and take longer than it should for the back to catch up with the arc of the turn, not very confidence inspiring. I have run them both ways and know what it does. I am also running Shinko 230's.

This post seems to support my initial thoughts on tire size combinations - if the front tire width remains constant then as the back tire width is increased, the angle into the pavement is increased resulting in more pressure on the front tire and heavier steering.