Tire Compositions

[MisShift]

Hey everyone. With so many tires to choose from out in the market place its hard for me, who has never bought a motorcycle tire in his life, to choose a brand and composition. I ride in the Pacific Northwest and there is all kinds of terrane, terrane? oh well its not about spelling anyways. When I start my ride its really loose and rocky with gravel, then it goes to hardpack, to always shady and damp where there is alot of traction due to the moisture content, trails where there is a mud puddle every 50 feet, and the most feared TREE ROOTS and SMOOTH, NO BARK LOGS!!!! I know, logs don't bark.... Pretty much I am a strictly woods rider who loves technical trails such as tight turns, logs, tree roots and such. So make a long question longer, what is a matching composition and tire for my riding applications? Maybe a little help in the size department too...I'm currently stock on the front and rear.

P.S. I never ride in the sand. Not because I suck at it, which I do, but because there isn't any out here.

 

[Sage]

sounds like your going to need a soft to intermediate tire, here are some to look at -

Michelin S12, Dunlop 755 or 756, IRC M5B, Pirelli MT44 (real soft, almost a paddle with some knobs) or the MT32, Metzeler MC4, Bridgestone M39 frt & M40 rr or ....... these should keep you busy for a while, the tire of choice seems to be the Michelin's or Dunlop's.

 

[fishhead]

I run the michelin s-12 rear and m-12 front combo for around here. Dunlops are popular as well if you ride east of the mountains in the rocky areas go for the 756 or 755 combo.

I run a 120 rear but some guys run a 130. I like a small tire to keep the flickabilty of the bike. The S-12 has great forward and lateral bite so I don't feel I need more tire.

 

[MisShift]

fishhead wrote:

I run a 120 rear but some guys run a 130. I like a small tire to keep the flickabilty of the bike.

Does this mean that the wider the tire, such as a 100 series, gives better overall traction but makes the bike harder to turn quickly. ie: roostin the rear around to get around a tree or somethin.

 

[spanky250]

Originally posted by MisShift
fishhead wrote:


Does this mean that the wider the tire, such as a 100 series, gives better overall traction but makes the bike harder to turn quickly. ie: roostin the rear around to get around a tree or somethin.

You are correct. A tire that is too wide for the rim will also feel very squirmy in turns.

 

[fishhead]

To turn you have to overcome the gyroscopic force of the wheels and tires and to a smaller extent the rotating mass in the engine. So the lighter the wheel and tire combo the quicker you can flick it. Conversly the heavier the combo the more stable the bike is at speed.

In the mid 80's the sport bike world was set on its ear by the new generation of bikes that had 16" front wheels instead if 18" or 19" that were common at the time. The results were astounding as it was possible to snap the bike to full lean faster and with much less effort than before. The industry settled on the 17'' front and rear that is pretty much the standard on race bikes from GP level down to the club level. Michelin makes a 16.5 rear for GP use.

Dirt trackers use 19" front and rear. honda has a 20" front available and who knows if we will see a revolution in tire size like that which occured in the 80's occur in the dirt scene

 

[headbanger]

My new S12 120-80/18 had a 100/100-18 sticker on it. Same size just a different way of sizing it. I also run a M12 on the front. Work much better than the stock tires (rim protectors)!!!
Good Luck