BMW Luxury Touring Community banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,

This is about a 1999 KLT.

I am in need to replace the front tire which right now is a Metz 880 120/17/70 Bias Ply 58 V

I can replace it with the same tire or the new & improved 888 Metz which is actually less expensive & suppose to give better performance & mileage.

It has a 58 H rating.....not 58 V as the 880 tire.

Would this be a tire that is suitable for my bike ? Any one has experience with this tire ?

The other option (Maybe) is this tire:

Avon Roadrider AM26 Front Tire 120/70-17 TL (58V) 90000000655 | eBay

It too has a 58 V rating and is Bias Ply. Would this work & how does it compare to the Metz tires?

The 2nd question is about the rear tire:

I don't need a replacement right now but thinking ahead.

I ran the rear 880 Metz with excellent results but recently replaced it with the Bridgestone Bias ply 020 Battalax.

When I am due for a replacement, I am thinking about this tire:

http://www.bikebandit.com/tires-tubes/motorcycle-tires/shinko-777-heavy-duty-cruiser-tire?gclid=CjwKEAiAkajDBRCRq8Czmdj-yFgSJADikZggaTURjfDrfFQrlhIoH8b3XbTene8naGhrtMw4MwwBnRoCvgHw_wcB

The Shinko tire has a 79 H rating (Not V as the Bridgestone & the Metz) for a much better price. $107 shipped.

I never used Shinko tires....Any advice ? ?? How long do they last compared to the Metz 880 & Bridgestone?

And is there significant difference between 79 H and 79 V for this Particular bike?

Thanks so much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I'm using the Shinko tire on my LT now. I have no complaints about the tire but only have a couple thousand miles on it so far, so I can't say how long it will last. But read this guy's review,

http://www.bmwlt.com/forums/k1200lt/127106-tire-review-shinko-777-h-d-rear-irc-rx-01-front.html
So no issues with the tire not being able to handle the weight/size of the bike especially with a passenger ?

Or in handling around corners or high speed ?

I assume you have the Shinko on the Rear?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,507 Posts
There are folks here that go with Avon roadrider out front. And a Bridgestone BT020 on the back with good results. Or your choice Shinko, Metz. on back. The Avon supposedly gets better mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
There are folks here that go with Avon roadrider out front. And a Bridgestone BT020 on the back with good results. Or your choice Shinko, Metz. on back. The Avon supposedly gets better mileage.
These posts gets more and more confusing as it seems all of it is based on opinions and not facts. I've been told by many people that Avons are more grippy but offer much less mileage (don't last as long as the Metz tires), but now you are saying just the opposite.

For me it gets very expensive to buy a tire if it is not going to last and have to replace it within few months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,507 Posts
Well. That I can clarify for you. Bias are what many here run. I run radials. I had Metzelers on the LT when I first got it. I couldn't wait to get them off. They scared me in wet conditions. Terrible. Replaced with Dunlop Roadsmart 2's(Which are radials) I had just had bought the bike. And didn't know about the need for a reinforced sidewall 79v needed on the back. But wore those down to nothing without incident. Got 9k out of them. They were very sticky tires. Then. I figured. I'd go with the proper rated rear tire. So went with a set of Avon storm 2 ultras. Loved them. Wore those out. Got about 9-10K out of them. Now. I have the Avon storm 3dxm's So far. I'm happy with them. Only got under 3K on them. So to soon to know life span. It's my personal preference. And emphasis on personal that I would rather spend more for radials. And give up long mileage for wet traction. If I get 8-10 K out of a set. And I'm ok with that.If I confused you. Sorry. Bias tire will last longer. Average 12K or so miles. Those who run the Avon Roadrider in front say the traction is better I believe than a metz. But lasts longer than a front Bridgestone. The LT is famous for eating front tires. All I can tell you is this.. If I had to run bias, And couldn't run radials. I would run the Avon roadrider in front. And a Bridgestone BT020 on the back. To me. That I believe would offer the best combo of mileage & traction. My personal experience with Metzelers wasn't good . But that's my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
So no issues with the tire not being able to handle the weight/size of the bike especially with a passenger ?

Or in handling around corners or high speed ?

I assume you have the Shinko on the Rear?

Thanks.
I've had no issues at all with the Shinko rear tire. If I get 9-10K miles out of the rear then I will definitely mount another Shinko.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
Hello,

This is about a 1999 KLT.

I am in need to replace the front tire which right now is a Metz 880 120/17/70 Bias Ply 58 V

I can replace it with the same tire or the new & improved 888 Metz which is actually less expensive & suppose to give better performance & mileage.

It has a 58 H rating.....not 58 V as the 880 tire.

Would this be a tire that is suitable for my bike ? Any one has experience with this tire ?

The other option (Maybe) is this tire:

Avon Roadrider AM26 Front Tire 120/70-17 TL (58V) 90000000655 | eBay

It too has a 58 V rating and is Bias Ply. Would this work & how does it compare to the Metz tires?

The 2nd question is about the rear tire:

I don't need a replacement right now but thinking ahead.

I ran the rear 880 Metz with excellent results but recently replaced it with the Bridgestone Bias ply 020 Battalax.

When I am due for a replacement, I am thinking about this tire:

http://www.bikebandit.com/tires-tubes/motorcycle-tires/shinko-777-heavy-duty-cruiser-tire?gclid=CjwKEAiAkajDBRCRq8Czmdj-yFgSJADikZggaTURjfDrfFQrlhIoH8b3XbTene8naGhrtMw4MwwBnRoCvgHw_wcB

The Shinko tire has a 79 H rating (Not V as the Bridgestone & the Metz) for a much better price. $107 shipped.

I never used Shinko tires....Any advice ? ?? How long do they last compared to the Metz 880 & Bridgestone?

And is there significant difference between 79 H and 79 V for this Particular bike?

Thanks so much.
The V rating is good for 150 mph, H rating for 120 mph. For me H rating is sufficient. The 58 is the weight rating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
let me offer you another option which is working well for me on both the GT & now the LT (front only)... not sure how price compares but great tyre for the LT front so far.
http://www.bmwlt.com/forums/tires/160297-pr4-gt-front-lt.html#post1648505
I just looked at the link you sent.

It looks like a great tire, same price as the Metz front. It says it is W rated tire & the LT calls for a V rated tire and the V from all of what I seen is Higher speed rating than the W and not the other way around as stated.

Does this michlilin have soft or rigid sidewalls ? The LT would need a very rigid sidewalls to handle the weight and braking.

Maybe I am wrong, the W rating is higher than a V rating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,219 Posts
I just looked at the link you sent.

It looks like a great tire, same price as the Metz front. It says it is W rated tire & the LT calls for a V rated tire and the V from all of what I seen is Higher speed rating than the W and not the other way around as stated.

Does this michlilin have soft or rigid sidewalls ? The LT would need a very rigid sidewalls to handle the weight and braking.

Maybe I am wrong, the W rating is higher than a V rating.
yup, I thoroughly checked it out before going down that path...
Tyre Speed Rating - Ratings Explained | Blackcircles.com
and I ran the PR4GT tyres for over 12 months on my K12GT before putting one on the LT front.... very impressed with them, perfect option for the LT front (not the rear).

The PR4GT is the heavy duty spec version of the tyre (as opposed to the standard PR4), just a shame they don't make one that suits the rear as well!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,543 Posts
The V rating is good for 150 mph, H rating for 120 mph. For me H rating is sufficient. The 58 is the weight rating.
What most don't realize is that the speed rating represents multiple attibutes. A higher speed tire needs additional strength, to withstand the force that wants to fling the tire apart at high speed. It also needs to handle heat better which may mean stiffer sidewalls for less flex or different compositions that generate less heat as they flex. It also will hit bumps faster and needs appropriate frequency response to disturbances to avoid nasty resonances. Many vehicles have tire speed ratings well above their top speed, let alone any reasonable cruise speed they could ever be expected to maintain. Do you ever ask yourself why? If you don't know the answer for your particular vehicle, selecting a lower speed rated tire, just because you will never ride that fast, could be a fatal mistake.

I'm retired after 32 years of engineering and R&D at a Fortune 500 company (nothing to do with tires) and I know how many such decisions are made by product designers. Often any given part rating is selected, not because the rating is needed directly, but because it is a surrogate for another characteristic that is important. To the poster wanting facts rather than opinion, the only facts are that only a couple tire makers produce tires designed for use on the LT, especially the 2005 and later models. Bottom line, if the tire maker doesn't list the LT in their fitment chart or they won't send you an email or written letter clearly stating that a given tire is OK for the LT, then it is not OK for use on the LT. Them's the facts. All else is speculation and you are assuming all risk for what happens on the road.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,543 Posts
What most don't realize is that the speed rating represents multiple attibutes. A higher speed tire needs additional strength, to withstand the force that wants to fling the tire apart at high speed. It also needs to handle heat better which may mean stiffer sidewalls for less flex or different compositions that generate less heat as they flex. It also will hit bumps faster and needs appropriate frequency response to disturbances to avoid nasty resonances. Many vehicles have tire speed ratings well above their top speed, let alone any reasonable cruise speed they could ever be expected to maintain. Do you ever ask yourself why? If you don't know the answer for your particular vehicle, selecting a lower speed rated tire, just because you will never ride that fast, could be a fatal mistake.

I'm retired after 32 years of engineering and R&D at a Fortune 500 company (nothing to do with tires) and I know how many such decisions are made by product designers. Often any given part rating is selected, not because the rating is needed directly, but because it is a surrogate for another characteristic that is important. To the poster wanting facts rather than opinion, the only facts are that only a couple tire makers produce tires designed for use on the LT, especially the 2005 and later models. Bottom line, if the tire maker doesn't list the LT in their fitment chart or they won't send you an email or written letter clearly stating that a given tire is OK for the LT, then it is not OK for use on the LT. Them's the facts. All else is speculation and you are assuming all risk for what happens on the road.
Since I am an electrical engineer, not a tire engineer, let me try a simpler analogy and one I am more familiar with. Most of us are familiar with standard electrical fuses. Let's suppose you have some device that is rated up to 10 amps and it blows its internal fuse. You find it has a 20 amp rated fuse inside and the manufacturer specifies a 20 amp fuse even though the device itself is only rated for 10 amps. Since you never plan to run more than 7 amps through the device, you should be able to replace the blown fuse with a 10 amp fuse, right? Please post your answer.

Hopefully, everyone can see the analogy above to putting a tire rated for say 149 mph (V) on a bike with a 130 mph top speed (same as H rated tire), but which the user never plans to ride faster than say 100 mph.

I will chime in with the "rest of the story" after a few opinions are posted as to whether the 10 amp fuse will work in the scenario above.
:smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,254 Posts
Since I am an electrical engineer, not a tire engineer, let me try a simpler analogy and one I am more familiar with. Most of us are familiar with standard electrical fuses. Let's suppose you have some device that is rated up to 10 amps and it blows its internal fuse. You find it has a 20 amp rated fuse inside and the manufacturer specifies a 20 amp fuse even though the device itself is only rated for 10 amps. Since you never plan to run more than 7 amps through the device, you should be able to replace the blown fuse with a 10 amp fuse, right? Please post your answer.

Hopefully, everyone can see the analogy above to putting a tire rated for say 149 mph (V) on a bike with a 130 mph top speed (same as H rated tire), but which the user never plans to ride faster than say 100 mph.

I will chime in with the "rest of the story" after a few opinions are posted as to whether the 10 amp fuse will work in the scenario above.
:smile:
Many electronic devices have a surge at start up before they come to a normal steady sate. Motors draw much more at start than when running. Electronics having capacitors to charge draw heavily until they reach a charged state. This surge is a normal occurring condition far beyond the normal operating range of these devices so that 10A fuse would likely blow at power on depending on the specific device. Not an EE but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,543 Posts
Many electronic devices have a surge at start up before they come to a normal steady sate. Motors draw much more at start than when running. Electronics having capacitors to charge draw heavily until they reach a charged state. This surge is a normal occurring condition far beyond the normal operating range of these devices so that 10A fuse would likely blow at power on depending on the specific device. Not an EE but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.
You raise a good point, but this is typically addressed by using a slow blow fuse or circuit breaker rather than by over rating the fuse. Over rating to address transients will compromise protection during steady state over current conditions.

I will further qualify my scenario to say that the current will never exceed 7 amps. No transients to worry about.

You get an "A" for effort, however, still not the issue I am looking at.
:smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,254 Posts
You raise a good point, but this is typically addressed by using a slow blow fuse or circuit breaker rather than by over rating the fuse. Over rating to address transients will compromise protection during steady state over current conditions.

I will further qualify my scenario to say that the current will never exceed 7 amps. No transients to worry about.

You get an "A" for effort, however, still not the issue I am looking at.
:smile:
Well, if the current will never exceed 7A then a 10A fuse will certainly work unless there is something about the consistent utilization being that close to 100% utilization and suffering some sort of failure due to a fatigue factor.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,543 Posts
Well, if the current will never exceed 7A then a 10A fuse will certainly work unless there is something about the consistent utilization being that close to 100% utilization and suffering some sort of failure due to a fatigue factor.
It is subtle, but I can guarantee you that in my hypothetical device, 7A of current will blow a 10 A fuse and a higher capacity fuse is necessary for a good reason. Just as a V rated tire is needed for an only H speed capable LT.
:smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
i got alot of crap for not getting a 79 rear... u have to remember bmw spec's the tires on what the worst types of conditions the bike may see and what tires where available at the time. almost 20yrs ago. motorcycle tires have come along way since then. another example most race bikes were spec'd 530 chains but chain tech has come along way and its very normal to swap to 520 chains with zero problems . have you ever seen the carnage from high speed chain failure?

my 04 rc51 came new with a 190/50 17 rear most racer's took those off and put on a 190/55 or even 180/55 tire for better handling for road and track use. change the factory ride height affecting factory geometry ect ect

if you think your gonna die by not getting the correct oem tire then get the factory tire by all means.........
just giving you something else to consider>:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,219 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,543 Posts
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top