SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Tires -- old designs vs new designs
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1178465035

Message started by Oldfeller2 on 05/06/07 at 08:23:55

Title: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/06/07 at 08:23:55

Been shopping for some front tires .....

Was struck by the strong difference between what front end tread designs have become over the years. Was also struck by how much more expensive the modern high performance designs have become.

I have a thought or general theory to accomodate this long term change in tire designs.

Motorcycles did not have 100 hp engines in years past. Rubber tire comounds used to be a good bit harder in years past. The old hard rubber tread designs with the little hair-fine sub-grooves were intended to increase tread flex and provide conformance to the changing road conditions when using a harder rubber.

Front tires were intended to grip and steer, not to carry very heavy braking loads as their primary duty. This falls in line with old style front brakes not being as super strong as they are today.

A rib style front tire is the dead worst tire for a modern machine. It may not be the worst thing out there for a Savage (but we do brake fairly hard and rib styles can't handle that sort of braking action without cupping).

There is a generation in between rib tires and the soft grippy tires that might be optimum for our Savages -- these would be the all weather touring front tire designs as developed by Michelin and Metzler.

Dunlop 404 was the start of the soft grippy compound tires -- you lost all your sub-grooves and began the march of the wide simple groove styles. I remember when these were new and were all the rage for the street rocket crowd. I wore them front and back on my Yamahas and I wore them out every two years. In my experience they worked very well but tended to wear the centers out too quickly due to their sharp apex form. Good gripping tires though.

Now they are listed as "classics" and are getting phased out by the newer grippy designs.

Modern tire compounds are very soft and grippy -- they are not mechanically strong enough to allow (or need) the fine sub-grooves detailed tread designs of years past.
They wear out FAST, too.

We don't require a high speed carcass construction -- we can't break the ton without a lot of work and modifications. 130 mph ratings are totally wasted on us. Most of us don't even lean our bikes over very much (well, are your pegs ground up very much? Mine aren't, really -- just a little bit.)

If you want to see the older hard rubber designs -- look at the old Dunlop designs and wince at the high cost. Or look at Dunlop's most dedicated copier of their older designs -- Cheng Shen. BTW, this Cheng Shen name brand is only used for the old Dunlop and Michelin/Metzler design copies any more, if you want a rip-off copy of a new design you may have to upgrade to Maxxis (Cheng Shen's upscale new brand name).

I was torn between a Dunlop 404 clone and a touring type Michelin/Metzler clone for my front tire. I finally picked the higher priced touring clone because of the good all weather rating. Dunlop 404s sometimes didn't care for heavy rain (lacked all the rain grooving and fine conformance sub-grooves that the touring tires have).

Now, I am assuming the tire compound will match the groove design -- if they screwed up and pressed the tire using soft modern comounds it will wear out just as fast as any other modern tire would. If they stuck with the old harder rubber compounds I may get a tire that will last more than a single season or two.

I bought my 2002 LS last year with 400 miles on the odometer. The IRCs were new looking and still had nibs once you left the straight up position. Now my front tire is about at the legal wear limit and my rear is somewhat past that -- all in 5,350 miles.
This sucks for tire life.

I had bikes that kept front tires for 3 years or more -- this level of 1-2 year tire wear that you guys simply accept as "normal" gives me the hives. I dont' like changing tires all that much, really it isn't my favorite thing to do by a long shot.

Let's see if an old hard rubber "fine detail thread" designed front tire can give decent wet performance characteristics and still manage to live a good bit longer while doing so.

www.bikebandit.com/product/3412

<grin>

Oldfeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 10:21:26

Mighty fine post, Old Feller. I am running the Maxxis tires. OEM rear was slimy & slick for the whole 5,000 miles. It should have been off no later than 4,500 miles. It was worn out. Front ran to ( I think) Yes, right at 12,000. But was so cupped it had been causing serious handling issues, tho I was so green I had no idea what the deal was. The thing was like riding a cow thru the turns, a drunk cow,, I dont want to accept a tire on the rear every 5,000 miles, but am on schedule for just that. I will need a tire before summer is done. Front is looking fine, so far. Maxxiss, also. When this rear is toast, I want someone who KNOWS tires & knows what it means to grind the pegs to help me decide on what to put on. I need grippy more than I need a tire that lasts for years, but, the susp[ension on a 650 will only go so far, so buying a tire that will work oon a Race Bike, is more tire( grippiness) than I will ever see the need for, I can compromise toward longevity( harder compound) & still have all the grip I need for the G forces a 650 will see in a turn. ( IF this thinking is based on insanity, stipidity, ignorance Or just moronic ideas, PLEASE tell me now, cus I dont want to be getting up thinking the bike shoulda held that turn,, ;) Is the Dunlop the tire>?? Metzlers? Or, just stick with the grippy little Maxxiss & replace as needed? Is it as grippy as a Metzler? I dont want to spend a sack O $$$ & wish I had bought a cheaper, softer tire.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/06/07 at 10:50:46

My predecessors on the old fart side were touring riders and they rode BMWs and Gold Wings for hundreds of thousands of miles in all kinds of weather.

I think they knew what they were doing. I don't think they traded off too much wet weather handling for mileage, but I think they got their mileage out of their Michelins and Metzlers because in their game mileage counted.

Admittedly, I'm shopping for rip-offs of proven designs. I just hope the copies are FAITHFUL copies, right down to the rubber used.

I've got a pair of Dunlop Max Cruiser rears that I bought when Sluggo spotted them on clearance at MAW. I've now got a pair of BikeBandit fronts coming along with some tire irons and a spare tube for each end of the bike.

(me and tubes have a tire changing history, mostly bad)

Looking forward to wrassling that rear Max Cruiser on to the rim -- that is a firmly constructed tire and looks to be a good fight coming to get her on.

Fronts are so large a diameter they should be a piece of cake compared to the rear.

Have you priced a spoke wheel weight lately? $10 to $15 dollars EACH !!! Yikes !!!

Now that's a real rip-off. I cast me some lead bullets of various sizes and I think a .44 or .45 caliber heavy slug that has a hole drilled down the center of it that is spoke sized and a counter bore in the base that is nipple sized combined with a kiss on the band saw to give you an entry path for the spoke to get into the middle of it sounds like about like free to me.

Has more character, too. More than a big salt water slider weight would have (that's another alternative source of inexpensive spoke weights, BTW)

Oldfeller

========================

PS justin-o-guy -- I peeked at the current rip-off copies of old hard rubber constructed tires and what I found was distressing. There is only ONE (1) old style hard rubber detail tread copy of a rear tire left in production that will fit our bikes at this point in time.

Our 140x90-15 rear tire size is increasingly becoming a rarity in hard rubber style aftermarket tires.

www.bikebandit.com/product/3424

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 11:47:40

Hey OF, save yerself some trubble, get a fishing weight on a swivel, cut the swivel off, drill & slot accordingly, cut one end off. So close to free it's just OUTrayjuss!

So, you understand I am after a sticky tire that will last enough miles to be worth the $$? Also, I can run the taller tire. I have the grunt & need the ground clearance.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/06/07 at 12:38:32

Are you saying you can mount a 150x90-15 tire without side or top clearance problems? Great!

Then you are back into the Maxxis tires at $88 a pop. You are back into the much softer modern rubber compounds also.

Bet you the old style 140x90-15 Cheng Shen hard rubber fine detailed tread construction tire for $43 will outlast the $88 Maxxis even though the Maxxis is clearly the bigger wider taller tire.

(I'm betting it's made from a modern softer compound too)

Oldfeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by georgekathe on 05/06/07 at 13:40:27

justin o guy - I know the metzler sports touring tires I ran on my departed BMW were evidently grippy but only got about 6000 out of a back tire, 12000 miles out of a front. know bike was lot more powerful & heavier than savage so obviously this had some bearing on the wear.

metzlers for savage seem pricey but seem to have a good rep for grip on this site so...

I use dunlop 404 & am happy with grip but though think I ride a little harder than thumperclone don't drag pegs & such so maybe not ideal choice for you. not had for long enough to tell you their wear life - sorry.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 16:23:45

Just looked at the rear. 3,000 miles & on the wear bar. That's not very dang good. I guess I'll need to cough a little harder, dig a little deeper & get a tire that will hang a bit tougher, but still stick,, What Metzler model is the sport touring?

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by georgekathe on 05/06/07 at 17:40:00

sorry justin - sold bmw only couple of weeks ago so can't check type & forget what one it was. think sizes were mainly for bigger sports tourer types anyway.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 19:25:39

I think Ill try to get a Cheng Shen Cheepo. If it wears like an eraser, so what? For that kind O $$$, if it makes 3,000 miles I will be tickled & if it's a piece O crap for traction, I'll run it a while & look for a better tire. No Big loss. I guess I'll spring for the longet tire bars, I dont want to spend 15 or 20 bucks to mount a 45 dollar tire. I think I better talk to my "dealer". They treat me good up there. Maybe if I buy the tire from him I can get a deal on mounting.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by WD on 05/06/07 at 21:39:56

I have a Cheng Shin on the back, ME88 clone. Installed in 2000, put a few thousand miles on it, parked the bike. Tire still looks okay tread-wise, but is cracking pretty good. My stock IRC was trashed by 5K miles.

Have a take off IRC on the front, came off another Wa member's bike (he doesn't play here anymore). Typical piece of junk. When I get the drum front wheel installed (needs bearing work), I'll be running a Grand Sport (now Cheng Shin) GS690 90/90-19 rib tire with modern side lugs. JC Whitney has them for under $35. Mine is a new old stock from my last bike shop job. Paid all of $10 for it, $7 for the tube.

If I could find a 90/90-19 and 130/90-15, whitewall like Holodeck's, but with vintage tread, I'd run them exclusively. Modern tires look goofy on our bikes. The bike will handle so much better on the correct size rubber... stock tires are technically oversized for the stock rims.
-WD

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 22:31:11

I dont care what sidewalls look like. I just want a tire that hangs in the corners, hauls the bike down with the brake & lasts long enough I feel like I got my $$'s worth. The Maxxiss was cheap, but not cheap enough I feel good about it goin away in 3.000 miles.
Who makes a 130-90-15 that does the job? I'm game for a different profile. The bike handles better( bunches) with the superbrace, but still wallows in long sweepers. The shocks are crap, we all know that, but I wonder how much that has to do with the aspect ratio of the tire (rear) & the wear it has oon it? The wear affects the aspect ratio, since the thing is shorter & then relatively wider, due to wear.. Right?

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/06/07 at 22:42:41

I didnt mean the shocks & tire's aspect ratio have anything to do with each other. I know the shocks are crap, but the wallowing.. how much of that is from tire wear? It is worse than it was, & last time the front tire was worn, cupped bad, it handled like a drunk cow. Now, its the rear that so worn, but not cupped. It LOOKS even, but, Ill bet its not. I cant have worn it evenly. Only randomly.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Rockin_John on 05/06/07 at 23:43:17

I don't see any problem with using the "old style" ribbed tread Cheng Shen on the front as Oldfeller suggests, but I'm a bit concerned about trying to use the 140/90-15 Cheng Shen I have for the back. Here's why: Deflated, it measures about 2-6mm wider and about 10-12mm shorter than the 140/90-15 Dunlop 404 on the rear of my other Savage.

Now, by width, that Dunlop just barely fits in there with a fender support bracket bolt removed. So... if the Cheng Chen doesn't grow in diameter, and get a bit more slim with inflation, it might rub, or drop my gearing a little bit; neither of which I want. It's gonna be a really close fit, if at all. Here's the JCW # of Cheng Chen I have: ZX621983A

I got the tire for practically nothing, and already tried to get a couple of local shops to give me even just a $20 trade in towards a Dunlop 404 for my brand NOS 2005 Cheng Chen w/ cardboard bands and plastic stickers still on it, and they aren't interested. So...I'm probably gonna give it a shot on the old '87.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/07/07 at 04:05:53

Rockin John,

Rib styles on our bike would look fine, but I brake too hard with the front tire and the top ribs would wear unevenly (cup) badly for me. Always have.

If you mostly use engine braking or rear petal braking they could be a good lower cost alternative for you.

Discussion on downsizing the front tire a bit rings true, the stock IRC front is a just a wee bit big just looking at it. Shame I already ordered the standard OEM size -- I'd have reconsidered it now.

Tire irons, I bought a $26 dollar set of three (long longer and longest) because the ones I have now are short and really not up to the job of handling that rear tire.

Oldfeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/07/07 at 07:43:18

I went to 3 shops looking for tire irons. The Hardley shop considers them a "specialty"item & doesnt stock them, the other 2 had them, but longest was 8 inches, so it was just a race for the $$ at that point. The shop I finally found, where the people are cool & they will order whatever I need & are even decent on the prices, has some LONG irons. I spose I'll just HAVe to pay them another visit. It's also very nice that they are just far enough away to make a decent ride out of it.. I wish you folks had such a place.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Rockin_John on 05/07/07 at 16:47:29

Oldfeller2 wrote:

I might be able to get by with the old "ribbed style" front tires myself, as I seldom do brake radically hard with the front or rear brakes on the Savage. While my braking style involves use of front, rear, and engine, usually in that order of amount of force, it is just unusual for me to dive close into a corner at high speed, and then stand hard on the brakes to set up for the corner. Since I usually ride alone, there is nobody I'm trying to out-brake for position so...

Of course there are the rare occasions where I need to slow or stop quicker than I care too, but I'm usually eying the road far enough ahead to avoid those situations.

At any rate, though I ride pretty hard, I don't think i ride so close to the edge that tire type is that critical in my general riding. However, the next front tire I install will probably be a Dunlop 404; because I got one with almost no miles on it given to me when I bought the '99.

As I continue to change the setup on the '87, I may try a lower profile front tire to go along with the planned taller rear shocks and big rear tire. The combined effect should decrease rake a little bit, and also raise ground clearance some. Along with my 32" wide bars, the bike should be a blast on twisty backroads!

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by justin_o_guy on 05/07/07 at 19:54:25

Oldfeller2 wrote:

Just went & looked. The Maxiss is a 140-90-15 & it's close in there. A 150 might fit, but would need different bolts on the fender braces.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/08/07 at 15:19:01

Here is a link to click on. But before you go there, know in your heart these two small facts....

Volkswagens and Karman-Gia sports coups ran a 15 inch narrow tire that just "might" fit our frames and fenders. 135x15 and 140x15 was the designation that they are still sold under today.

There are brand new econo-boxes coming out of Europe and Asia that are coming out using 15" rim diameter MODERN narrow tires.

I suspect that you can buy a silica impregnated rubber tire for one of these bad boys as listed above with an 80,000 mile warranty that won't cost any more than your premium motorcycle tires that only last a year.

Here's that link -- you see I am not alone in my madness.

http://lifeisaroad.com/stories/2004/10/27/theDarkSide.html

<grin>

Luke, beware the Darkside ....

Oldyodafeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by barry68v10 on 05/08/07 at 17:11:09

So, Oldfeller, do you have a car tire on the back of your savage?

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Rockin_John on 05/08/07 at 17:31:55

Oldfeller2 wrote:

Here is a link to click on. But before you go there, know in your heart these two small facts....

Volkswagens and Karman-Gia sports coups ran a 15 inch narrow tire that just "might" fit our frames and fenders. 135x15 and 140x15 was the designation that they are still sold under today.

There are brand new econo-boxes coming out of Europe and Asia that are coming out using 15" rim diameter MODERN narrow tires.

I suspect that you can buy a silicone impregnated rubber tire for one of these bad boys as listed above with an 80,000 mile warranty that won't cost any more than your premium motorcycle tires that only last a year.

Here's that link -- you see I am not alone in my madness.

http://lifeisaroad.com/stories/2004/10/27/theDarkSide.html

<grin>

Luke, beware the Darkside ....

Oldyodafeller

If the profile were right, I don't think I'd hesitate to run a car tire on the back. I'd certainly find it much preferable to some of the nearly slick treadless cycle tires so common today. Those things may be gummy enough to have good dry traction, and barely enough grooves to shed water and not hydroplane badly, but there are lots of situations where having no real tread pattern is downright dangerous. I'll relate an example in a post in "The Cafe."

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by barry68v10 on 05/09/07 at 03:12:39

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/135R-15-TIRES-VW-135-15-135X15-135SR-15-CITROEN-DRAG-PR_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ66473QQihZ004QQitemZ140115599574QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

Oldfeller, here's a link to some pretty grippy looking tires. These would definitely fit on the back of our Savage...

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by barry68v10 on 05/09/07 at 03:14:12

I suppose you could use the stock tube as well ;D

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/09/07 at 04:08:51

What was it that Gene Wilder said when he was reading his grandaddy's lab journal in "Young Frankenstein"?

"It .....could.....work!"

(accompanied by a crash of lighting and a resounding thunder clap of course"

http://www.tireco.com/Images_U/325200432129PMN-803%20200x280.jpg

More checking is needed -- what we have here is normal automotive rubber (which will last longer than motorcycle stuff, but isn't the newest silica impregnated high mileage stuff that is becoming all the rage for wet handling and super mileage)

No, I've got two Dunlop CruiserMaxs that I bought six months ago that I need to either get rid of or wear out before I'm in the market for a new rear tire.

But I'm interested -- if I could find a silica rubber tire at a decent price I'd jump on it.

Oldfeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Rockin_John on 05/09/07 at 06:02:34

Oldfeller2 wrote:

Just by coincidence, I just bought a set of four like-new Michelin 'take-offs' from eBay for my Envoy. Regular cost around here is a bit over $800 + mounting etc... I got these from eBay for $325 + $100 shipping:

http://catoosatrading.com/images/vehicles/tires1.JPG

Even after paying for mounting/balancing etc... I'll still come out with well over $300 savings pocketed.

I might be willing to split a pair of those Nankang tires with someone. No kidding. I'd bet donuts that the incident I had with the sand on that expressway bridge/curve the other night wouldn't have been near as scary with that tire as with these bald treadless things we call motorcycle tires nowadays.

However, about fitting... It's gonna be close on the width. As here's what my digital calipers measure the 140/90-15 Dunlop 404 on the back of my '99 Savage at:

http://catoosatrading.com/images/vehicles/tires2.JPG
And those Dunlops are an extremely tight fit!

They list the Nankang 135s at 5.59"
I checked the dimensions on their 145's, (5.98") and I'm pretty sure they are a no-go on the width.

Another thing... Those 135's are going to be a bit shorter (at least 1/2") than my Dunlop, so it means a slight drop in gearing and maybe as much as a couple hundred more RPM at highway speed. Having the chain conversion would be really handy... In fact, the tire/belt clearance is the thing that would concern me most about trying a wider tire. Perhaps with a chain it might be possible to squeeze another eighth to quarter inch of tread width under there???

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Dr_Jim on 05/09/07 at 07:41:44

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Rockin_John on 05/09/07 at 11:31:43

That's just the deal... some say you can and they do use 15" car tires, and some say no-way... it ain't safe. I would suppose it would matter somewhat on exactly which car tire and motorcycle wheel (rim/bead) you were combining.

I just discussed this subject with one of the most experienced riders I know, and according to him, the car tires "Handle like crap" and "scared the he11" out of him on winding roads. Though he also said that it is not uncommon amongst the drag bikers to use them, even at high speed. But then they are hoping to go in a perfectly straight line, and cornering at speed is of little concern to them.

So... I might abandon the idea of trying a car tire on the back of one of my Savages, but I still might look for an older "universal tread" bias ply type rear tire to try at some point in the future. I've already searched high and low for a trail or knobby tread that will fit the standard Savage rear wheel. There are none that I could find anywhere. The only 15" knobby I found was such a small profile that it probably wouldn't even stretch onto the wheel. If it did it would probably look like a rubber band!

The mention of popping the bead cords in a tire... I've got some old huge 3 foot tire irons suitable for changing car tires by hand. Some years ago, I got tired of fighting a big knobby onto the rim of a dirt bike and broke out those bars to get the tire on,,, It went on, but made some terrible pops and ripping sounds. I know there were some bead bands busted getting it on there, but the thing was still so tight that it never gave me any problems. Didn't seem to wobble or be out of balance or anything, so I just rode it.

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/09/07 at 13:48:48

That's why they call it the "Dark Side"

nobody who actually doesn't do it will believe it -- no matter what is said by those that do it.

Found a cheaper source that will peddle the tires one at a time. Note the more expensive ones at the top are a slightly shorter configuration compared to the slightly taller cheaper ones at the very bottom of the page.

www.bfyobsoleteparts.com/Tires-c-338.html

Oldfeller

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by mpescatori on 05/09/07 at 13:54:45

Two things:

1) Car tires have a squared-off profile, while bike tires have a round(ed) profile; this is because a ar will steer only through its steering wheels, while a bike will also lean;

2) When a bike tire is badly worn, it wil generally look "squared out" and will handle like shyte on bends... which is exactly what you can expect from a car tir in the first place !

On my previous (glorious) Guzzi I had Pirelli Mandrakes, also known as... MT48 I believe, 3.25x18 front and 3.50x18 rear, same design front and back (they actually had rotation for both front and back on the same tire!) with a big-ish central groove and the typical snakey grooves on the sides. They would work wonderfully on my Guzzi (500cc and 47hp) and never let me down.

The MT48 eventually gave way to the MT53, and now they sell the MT66

Old tires were really good tires...

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by barry68v10 on 05/09/07 at 15:32:57

John, Oldfeller, tell ya what. I've got a few thousand more to put on my current rear tire, then I'll take the plunge and test this out ;D

Title: Re: Tires -- old designs vs new designs
Post by Oldfeller2 on 05/09/07 at 16:56:15

Now for some numbers ---

Our stock tire is 25 inches tall. Our stock tire is 5.2 inches wide. We have 0.7" of clearance on each side of the tire. On the right we hit the lug that holds on the right hand passenger peg (this could get trimmed if needed). On the left we hit the belt guard (which could be relieved if needed). We have clearance to the U of the swingarm to the tune of .880" which cannot be moved.

The fattest tire we could theoretically swing without taking out the grinder would be 6.5 inches wide. Ideally, we want to stay at 25" in diameter or get even shorter as we get wider (wishing to keep some clearance to the top of the fender during bumps, etc. -- as you get wider you take out the radial clearance as a wider straighter flat gets inserted to the same distance into the same round air clearance.

If we were willing to grind, we could go to 7" wide (but we could count on having other complications at that width such as needing a fatter fender).

Our rim is 3.63" wide. VW tires were intended for a wider rim, so you can count on some slight bending of the flat part of the tread (and having one hell of a wrassel hassel putting the tire on the rim).

Look here and here for some data on current metric tire physical attributes.

WARNING: Many tires are shorter-thinner-and some are WIDER than the general specs listed here. Goodyear tires are generally WIDER than what is shown here, the cheap imports seem to run a bit skinnier as a rule of thumb. YOU NEED TO GET SOMEBODY TO ACTUALLY MEASURE THE TIRE, then you need to remember it grows a bit with air pressure.

http://www.angelfire.com/on/geebjen/tires.html

http://clubs.hemmings.com/clubsites/chevylist/tech/tire_size_conversion.htm

So, not only are the VW tires listed in posts above possible darkside choices, but some new small 165 and 175 wide current 65 series metric tires could work as well.

Specifically, the new style Minicooper tire, the 175/65R15 just about totally fills out the maximum space between your swingarm rails -- but your real-world actual tire does not line up like that (rats, our stock tire is offset some) and there is a mounting boss on the right side of the swingarm that sticks out in the way making this a no fit.

But if it was easy, heck, anybody could do it.

Once you pick your actual tire out, get in touch with the seller and get him to actually measure the width and height as every tire brand is slightly different than the "standards" say they should be.

That's Darkside talk for "it .... could .... WORK"

(if you are careful picking the out the actual tire)

<a big grin & a crash of lightning and thunder>

Oldfeller