|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> New Tire Discussion /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1446588890 Message started by cheapnewb24 on 11/03/15 at 14:14:49 |
|
Title: New Tire Discussion Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/03/15 at 14:14:49 Thanks, Serobot; you're awesome I assume you mean the lightness of the bike is an advantage. Yeah, that rear tire has so much tread on it. I gather that those Metzlers are notorious for getting old and hard before they actually wear out. I am trying to get some use out of it before I finally have to break over and throw it away (what a shame). I am trying not to start a money pit. (I guess I had better not buy a Harley anytime soon ;D, or any plastic-laden sportbike, for that matter. I have been considering a 140/90-15 for better highway performance or a 130/90-15 otherwise. Does the 140/90 have better handling, stability, or safety than the stock 140/80 size or is it worse because it is bigger? I don't mind changing the bolts on the sissy bar for clearance as I had to buy bolts for that thing already. Is clearance/rubbing going to be an issue, considering lumps, bumps, potholes, loading, shock settings, and mud in the fenders? Thanks alot for the vent tube advice. That was helpful. As far as the compressed air was concerned, I wasn't really a fan of the idea anyway--seemed a bit fruitless. I think he was going to do it with the fuel line off the carb, so the diaphragms wouldn't be involved. You may have a point about the tank seam, assuming he can even get a good enough seal on the tank using an old rag to actually break the tank. I doubt I'll let him do it anyway. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Dave on 11/03/15 at 14:20:01 5E55585C4D53584A5F0F093D0 wrote:
My vote would be for the 130/90-15 tire.....the bike doesn't need a wider tire, and a narrower tire has been reported to improve handling by the folks who have bought one. The Savage is a bike that can be a "beginner" - but you don't have to trade it in to get up interstate speeds. An awful lot of us on this forum have been riding for a long time (more than 50 years for me....with a 35 year gap), and although we have ridden and may own other bikes, we still find the Savage a fun bike to own and ride. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/03/15 at 14:35:02 Thanks, Dave I am wondering how the 140/90 actually handles compared to the 140/80. Do you have any experience with that? I am really interested in a little taller gearing for the highway; however, I have never actually taken it on the Interstate before, so I don't really need it yet. I do wonder about a little taller gearing like a taller tire or chain conversion combined with a custom made 5th gear. It'll do 70 no problem when its running right, and its not really uncomfortable, though the engine does start to whine a little going that fast. The thought of doing around 4700 rpm constantly on an engine that peaks around 5400 and redlines at 6500 has me wondering. I do wish that 4th and 5th were spaced a little farther apart. On the other hand, if I make the overall gearing too much taller, I may have lugging issues going up steep hills/rough terrain at low speeds. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Serowbot on 11/03/15 at 15:07:18 A 130 tire will be a little quicker steering in the twisties,.. but a 140/90 would serve you better on a muddy stretch... with a wider surface area... Everything is a compromise... Here's some speed charts you might find interesting... Note... the 130 shown is an 18"... not applicable to you. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1341162964 |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Dave on 11/03/15 at 15:14:44 252E232736282331247472460 wrote:
A custom fifth gear would be nice.....although most people would not be qualified or willing to remove and disassemble the engine just to change fifth gear. Until you start doing a lot of 70+ mph traveling, you don't need to worry about gearing changes, and with gearing changes a bit of a HP increase is helpful as well. If you ride less than 70 mph the stock gearing does just fine. It is possible to use a Kawasaki pulley on the engine to bump up the gearing a bit - but it does take some machine work on the pulley. It is also possible to use a Kawasaki rear pulley on the back for even more of a change. However....this is something to explore later when you have a bike that actually runs reliably. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/03/15 at 15:27:36 Hmm... that's interesting. A wider tire does better in the mud? Why do dirtbikes have such narrow tires? But then, with pedal bikes, dirt bikes are usually the ones with the wider tires compared to road bikes. I would guess that a 140/90 would be better in curves than the 140/80 given that the 90 is more round compared to the 80, but not as good as the 130/90. Does the 140/90 fit the rim really well, or is it a little too wide for the rim? should I worry about flexion or any other negative handling characteristics? Or is it simply a choice between quick steering and traction behavior, and (as others have mentioned) straight line stability? Perhaps having a tire that leans and turns too easily could invite more of a fight on the highway with crosswinds, as light bikes are supposedly notorious for this. (I haven't been blown away yet ;)) Maybe my own weight has something to do with it :D. I do realize this is not a tire thread ::) |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Art Webb on 11/03/15 at 20:19:41 I currently run a 140/90 rear. There is no benefit except very slightly lower rpm at highway speed, the Savage is, like most cruisers, over-tired for looks from the factory For comparison, my now sold XS1100, a 600lb bike with 95 HP, ran a 130/90/18, with no traction issues that's 1 1/2 Savages, with 3x the power, on a narrower tire Some riders, myself included, have noticed a LOSS of top end in hotter weather with the bigger tire. For me the clearance issue was slight, and cranking up the spring preload fixed it, and that's with saddlebag brackets on the rear I plan on going to the 130/90 next, I need all the help I can get in the curves (THEY CALL ME CAPTAIN SLOW ;D) *also captain unintended capslock |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by zipidachimp on 11/03/15 at 22:14:24 my bike has the 140/90 Kenda challenger. the weight I saved on the dyna muffler was pissed away on the 140/90 tire, it's heavy. Go for the 130/90! By the way, the 140/90 on the stock rim looks like a Dunlop Triangular race tire from the '60s, weird! 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Dave on 11/04/15 at 02:26:47 The important thing about getting a tire, is to get one that fits the rim. When you put a wide tire on that was not made to fit on a narrow rim, you pull the side walls in and make the tread cross section too round, and you wear out the center of the tread too soon and get a tire that feels like if "flops" over when you begin the turns. Here is a link to my discussion on the "Too Wide" tire for a Cafe' conversion using the 18x2.50 rear rim. http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1435340395 For the stock 15x3.25 rim any of the tire sizes you mentioned are suitable to fit on the rim, and will work. The 140/90-15 is obviously the biggest and heaviest and it will slow the bike down a bit as the mass makes it less willing to change speed or direction. However....the actual changes aren't going to make a night and day difference to a new rider.....the bike will ride just fine with any of the tires and you most likely won't be able to tell the difference in a week or two after you adapt to the new tire. Dirt bike use wide tires if they want to float on top of mud/sand, and narrow tires if they want to cut through the slop and get to the firm dirt underneath. Any tire that you can buy that fits the Savage rim is going to be a pavement tire, and not so good on gravel or mud. Cruiser tires tend to have a lot of rubber and a smooth design down the center to get good tire mileage and quiet running - and it will be slick in the mud. For best traction in mud you need to get some tread down the center of the tire....however you are not going to find a tire for this bike that is going to be able to "dig in" to dirt/mud. I still believe the 130/90-15 is the best tire size for you as it will help the tire to get through the slick mud on top and down into the dirt underneath, and it also gets you a wider selection of tires to choose from. There is very little to choose from in the 140/80 stock size, a better selection in the 130/90 size, and the largest selection in the 140/90 size. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/04/15 at 09:56:58 Houston, We have a problem. :-? I checked the rim sizes both on the net and on my bike. It is 2.15 on the front and 2.75 on the rear, not 3.25. Anyway, from the looks of the chart, the factory stuffed the widest thing they possibly could have onto that rear rim (140). It looks like 130 is well within the range of recommended widths. Actually, the 130/90 could theoretically go on a much larger rim. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that the rear rim is so narrrow that it would theoretically take a tire with the same profile (width and a/r) as the front tire :o. Imagine running around with a 100/90-15 on the rear! I noticed that the Shinko 712 is only available in 140/90, AFAIK. The shinko 734 (the one that looks like a Dunlop) is available in 130/90 and its cheap :D. The 734 has center tread, but the grooves are rather small. If I went 130/90, then I would have to mismatch tires. What would you recommend? I bet the 130 would be more likely to be blown around on the highway than the stock tire given that it is rounder and easier to steer. I'll probably try to get a few miles on the tire I have before I throw it away. I'll probably try to get the thing running today if I can get the chance. I'll keep you posted. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Art Webb on 11/04/15 at 10:07:20 Pirelli MT 66 is cheap, a good tire, and comes in 130/90 last I checked A 100/90 would steer sharply indeed I don't think tire size matters a spit in a hurricane so far as being blown around on the highway, that's more down to bike size / weight / design, and not really an issue anyway, since the bike will correct any blowing around itself if you let it |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Dave on 11/04/15 at 10:33:23 Sorry about quoting the wrong rear rim width....I was trying to do it from memory. The 2.75 rear rim width makes it even more important not to get too wide of a rear tire. 646F626677696270653533070 wrote:
I don't believe that your above statement is necessarily correct. Just because a tire has a narrower width - doesn't mean the tire becomes tippy or is more likely to get blown around on the highway....provided that it is on the correct size rim. Look at the sketch below where I had a 110/80 on a 2.50 rim and a 130/70 on a 3.50 rim....both are on the recommended rim and the tread cross section is identical - however one is wider than the other and most likely will have a bit more rubber on the road. http://i59.tinypic.com/173dlj.png I believe that most likely the bike will be less stable if you put a wide tire on a narrow rim....as it pulls the sidewalls in too far and the tire loses some of the support it was designed to have. And if you don't drop the air pressure down a bit, the overly rounded tread cross section will put less rubber in contact with the pavement. This is a comparison of the 130 tire mounted on the 2.50" rim and the 3.50 rim. You can see how the narrow 2.50 rim arches the tire out of the proper shape, and the overly round shape will provide less tire on the road surface. http://i60.tinypic.com/2evbxnb.png Once combination of tires I had on my Cafe' bike last year was a 90/90-18 front and a 110/80-18 rear tire. The rear tire looked a bit narrow by modern standards - but it rode just fine and is plenty of tire for the Savage weight and HP. I have copied the tire fitment chart here....so you can see what tires are recommended for the 2.75 rim. http://i61.tinypic.com/291nvvt.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by verslagen1 on 11/04/15 at 10:54:39 5D565B5F4E505B495C0C0A3E0 wrote:
While logically I can see how you can justify this, but I don't think it's true. If the tires are more responsive, then less control is required to keep it straight. Beast feels like a precision tool compared to the stocker. She goes exactly where pointed. 90/90-19 and 130/90-15 plus other things 8-) |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/04/15 at 10:56:40 I get what you're saying. It is not about aspect ratio or width, especially since the aspect ratio may not necessarily take into account the actual tread profile. Rather, it only indicates how tall the tire is compared to its width. Is that not correct? Most importantly, what is really happening is that too wide a tire for the rim could cause the tread profile to actually become steeper, which may be initially counter-intuitive, but given that it is pinched into a narrow rim, this makes sense. Tread profile is a combination of factory tread contours along with rim/tire size match. Tire size alone gives a clue, but it can sure fool ya. The above combination will probably encourage a lowside crash, don't you think? http://i60.tinypic.com/2evbxnb.png |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by cheapnewb24 on 11/04/15 at 11:01:06 Here's an interesting link to the Rebel forum. http://www.rebel250.com/rebelforum/viewtopic.php?p=176629 From what I gather the rear rim size is the same on the Rebel, and the factory tire is 130/90-15. |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Dave on 11/04/15 at 11:04:20 I don't know about inducing a crash.......but it does result in a lot of tire that is rolled over onto the sidewall where it becomes unusable. This photo is a 100/90-18 front tire on a 2.15" rim, and a 130/70-18 rear tire on a 2.50 rim....the rear tire is supposed to be on a 3.50" wide rim. If you look closely for the slightly brown edge at the front tire you can see about 1/4" of chicken strip that I don't use...while the rear tire is rolled so far over onto the sidewall that I had more than 3/4" of chicken strip that I could not ever begin to use. This is a good example of what happens when you put a tire on a rim that is too narrow, the tread rolls over onto the sidewall so far you can't use it. http://i60.tinypic.com/2ymwrqp.jpg |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/05/15 at 03:51:13 Another thing to notice about the 130/70-18 tire shown in the image (2) that was posted. When the tire is mounted on the 3.50" rim that it is designed for.....I measured the width of the tread to be right at 130mm, and that is no surprise. When the tire is mounted on the 2.50" rim ad the beads are pulled closer together by a full inch....the width of the tire actually measured 116mm - which means the tread width has been pulled in 14mm by the use on a "too narrow' rim. You would actually get more usable tread by using a 120/80-18 tire.....and that is the tire I will be using on the 2.50" rim from now on (Cafe' bike conversion). |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/05/15 at 04:23:36 TIRES THAT FIT: (Most likely this post will be moved to a separate thread after it has been discussed): Here is a list of matching front/rear tires in the stock 100/90-19 front and 140/80-15 tire sizes. IRC -GS-18.....These are the OE tire and work OK (but are not great tires). Here is a list of matching front/rear tires in the 100/90-19 and 130/90-15 size. This has a rear tire that is 10mm narrower - but most likely the difference will actually be a bit less as the OE 140/80 tire was made to fit on a 3.50" wide rim and can be mounted on a rim between 2.75" - 3.50"....while the 130/90 tire fits a rim between 2.50"-3.50". Dunlop D404 Shinko 230 Pirelli MT66 Kenda K671 Here is a list of matching tires that uses the stock 100/90-19 front tire and a taller 140/90-15 rear tire. This taller rear tire has been used by a lot of forum members and it does increase the gearing a bit, tends to make the speedometer read more accurately for most, and it provides a lot wider selection of tires. Some folks have rubbing issues with the rear fender bolts (especially if the bike has saddlebag supports), and you can can likely correct this problem by using fender bolts with low profile heads. The tire is bigger and heavier and may slow the acceleration and steering down a little bit - however the tire is suitable for use on rim widths between 2.75"-3.50" and is a proper size for the stock rim. Bridgestone Exedra Dunlop D404 Michelin Commander (The highest mileage of any known tire). Shinko 230 & Shinko 712 Metzler ME 888 Pirelli MT66 And one other weird option is to go to a 110/90-19 front tire (not sure how well that fits), and use either a 140/80-15 or 140/90-15 rear tire. Metzler ME880 |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by 12Bravo on 11/05/15 at 06:00:43 I was running a Metzler 880 140/90 and have since switched to a Shinko 130/90 and have not noticed any changes in handling through the curves. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Bubba on 11/05/15 at 09:30:48 I run a Pirelli mt66 and it hasn't slowed me down in the twisties...can still drag a peg...which is not something I try to do! I haven't tried a 130 but I bet I wouldn't notice... |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by WD on 11/05/15 at 10:13:09 645344444717161E15260 wrote:
Without switching the front to a 90/90-19, you won't notice any difference. Swapping the entire combo at the same time, you will. Problem is in finding the 90/90-19, very slim pickings. Avon "Skidmaster", IRC GS-80, maybe a Dunlop or two, Heidenau (spelling)... |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/05/15 at 10:25:41 Commonly available 90/90-19 front tire for Cruiser motorcycles are: Dunlop D401, Pirelli Route 66, Bridgestone Spitfire S11, Avon AM20 Roadrunner http://www.bikebandit.com/tires-tubes/cruiser-tires/t11lk8d8 So if you wanted matching front/rear tires that are the same brand and styles....Pirelli MT66 would be the only matching set available. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by WD on 11/05/15 at 10:39:55 063D3027363A21273C343926550 wrote:
D401: Harley Davidson badged sidewalls, you'll pay extra. Rte 66: good tire. S11: pure junk. No tread life due to very soft compound. Sportbike tire with cruiser tread. AM20: see S11. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/05/15 at 11:32:46 Keep the comments coming on the type tire you use and the good/bad. I know MMRanch has about 18,000 miles on his Michelin Commander tires - but when he told me that he can slip around in the rain on them, I wonder if the high mileage doesn't come with a bit of a price in wet weather traction. It would be nice to come up with some tire recommendations for folks that want a bargain and don't ride a lot of miles - something in between - and the somewhat expensive but very durable Michelin Commanders. And also recommendations for those willing to explore the upsize and downsize options. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by WD on 11/05/15 at 12:12:36 My Shinko 712F (on the bike when I bought it from Pine) has gone at least 2 summers and 2 rear tires. Still has viable central rib tread, with around 30K on it. Bike odometer is at 18K and change, but did not work at all for a year. Still reads way off, every mile recorded is 3 miles or so traveled. I've gotten 40K out of D404s on another, heavier and higher powered cruiser. The Cheng Shin on the back of Pokey (98 Savage) has roughly 20K on it. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by sw1991 on 11/05/15 at 12:56:34 I just switched to a 140/90 shinko 712 rear tire. It deffinetly handles a little different.. You can feel the width of the tire of that makes any sense, maybe slightly less nimble but not a lot, gives the bike a better feel in my opinion. It did rub. I had to remove the brackets for the saddle bags which I was able to do without removing the tire.. Just get a wrench in there and take your time. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Art Webb on 11/05/15 at 20:57:18 526572727121202823100 wrote:
what size MT 66 are you using? |
|
Title: Re: Help! Fuel starvation or ignition problem? Post by Art Webb on 11/05/15 at 20:59:56 59525F5B4A545F4D58080E3A0 wrote:
yes, the factory tire is a 130 /90 on the Rebel |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Tocsik on 11/07/15 at 10:51:24 I totally agree with the stock or more narrow rear tread providing better cornering etc. and that's especially important for going to a cafe setup. That said, I went to the 140/90 rear when I bought new shoes for some of the reasons already expressed by Dave (who has one of the nicest cafes out there!): "This taller rear tire has been used by a lot of forum members and it does increase the gearing a bit, tends to make the speedometer read more accurately for most, and it provides a lot wider selection of tires.". I went with the Commander II's. My bike's apart right now waiting on my 'slavy but you can definitely see some chicken strips on the sides of the rear tire; mostly because it's used almost entirely for commuting. I just don't get out to the hills near as much as I would like >:( . As far as looks go, I think it looks better with the bags I run (again, for commuting in multi-weather Denver :-/ ) but I didn't really do it for appearance. One thing about the Commanders, the design of the margin where the tread meets the sidewall may give less sidewall rollover but it's still a little too much tire for this rim. I do like the way it rides, though. Here's how they look mounted as an FYI: http://i1115.photobucket.com/albums/k548/Tocsik87/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_111655_zpspgwezday.jpg (http://s1115.photobucket.com/user/Tocsik87/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_111655_zpspgwezday.jpg.html) http://i1115.photobucket.com/albums/k548/Tocsik87/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_105504_zpszy8jebj4.jpg (http://s1115.photobucket.com/user/Tocsik87/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_105504_zpszy8jebj4.jpg.html) http://i1115.photobucket.com/albums/k548/Tocsik87/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_114421725_zpsw0l8urmg.jpg (http://s1115.photobucket.com/user/Tocsik87/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_105308092_zps4htdkbkg.jpg.html) http://i1115.photobucket.com/albums/k548/Tocsik87/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_105308092_zps4htdkbkg.jpg (http://http://s1115.photobucket.com/user/Tocsik87/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_20151107_114421725_zpsw0l8urmg.jpg.html) |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/08/15 at 05:48:38 Well I got a bit of a surprise yesterday. I wanted to check the speedometer error on the 2002 that I recently brought back from being a barn find to a rider, and I recently bought a used Garmin GPS that displays the current speed.....so I suction cupped it to the tank and went for a ride. The tires are the stock IRC 100/90-19 front and 140/80-15 rear, and they are 13 years old and look great.....although the rubber is turning hard and they are not very sticky in corners anymore (as I found out while sliding around one corner recently). We have a pretty open highway a mile from my house that goes from Alexandria to Ashland Kentucky (A-A Highway), and it has limited intersections and on Saturday mornings it is not very busy. I started out going south and was surprised to see the speedometer and GPS were identical at lower speeds. I cranked it up in one open area an got up to 78 mph, and the speedometer and GPS where showing identical numbers. I turned around and headed north.....and found out that I had been riding with the wind while going south, and I had an incredibly strong wind hitting me head on.....and it was only 50 degrees that morning and I really hadn't dressed very warmly.....YIKES! There are big valleys where you can see if there is any traffic ahead, and when I got to an open area I held the throttle wide open and got to 80 mph, and it just wouldn't go any faster with that much head wind - but the speedometer and GPS were both showing 80mph! So I guess you can have a stock speedometer that reads accurately with the stock tires......but your results may vary. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by raydawg on 11/08/15 at 06:25:14 Same topic, just a different need of info, hope that's cool :) I have a metzler 880 on the rear and a dunlop on the front. Does mixing brands/treads effect the ride in a negative way? Also, what, other than visual, do you look at to determine the need to put on new tires? I have almost 20,000 on my 2014. The stock tires went about 8 thousand and were really squirrelly when compared to the new set-up, but I didn't know any better, other than I got to slip and slide a lot more, but the tires still SEEMED to have decent tread. I am beginning to notice less sureness in turns and lane/road surface changing, but again, these guys look good but performance seems to have dropped off somewhat. Tires on a car are important, for sure, but on a bike, it seems they are critical to safety :o Thanks |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by Dave on 11/08/15 at 06:36:02 The only downside I see to mixing tires, is the potential that the tires could have different performance abilities. If one tire is poor in the wet, then that end of the bike may not be able to handle the wet weather as well....but is one loose end worse than having 2 ends sliding around? As tires age they become harder, and they lose their ability to grip in turns. Wet weather is the place where it is most noticeable. Also the harder rubber tends to cup or wear unevenly, and the ride quality suffers. The little Ninja 250 I bought last year had the original 11 year old tires and 9,800 miles on them, and when I put on new tires the ride and handling really improved. If you do a search on motorcycle tire recommendations, they claim you should check the tire code and never mount a tire that is more than 3 years old, and replace your tires when they are more than 5 years old. You should also plan on buying tires that will provide no more than 3 years worth of riding for you....there is no benefit to buying Michelin Commander tires if you only ride 1,000 miles a year - as the rubber will turn hard long before you ever wear the tread off. The 2002 Savage I bought this year has the original tires on it with 4,000 miles on them and they look great, and if I rode at a moderate and mild pace they would be just fine - but if you push them you soon discover they are hard and don't grip the pavement well. My Chevy Avalance has tires on it that were made in 2006, and they are downright scary when the roads are wet....they slide all over the place. |
|
Title: Re: New Tire Discussion Post by raydawg on 11/08/15 at 07:45:14 Thanks Dave, just to clarify your answer..... If I noticed a change in performance, rain being a big factor where I live, then I should entertain new ones, yes? I bought the best rated rain tires that they had ( at least it was advertised as such). But I am not as comfortable on them now as I was as when they were new. I guess that is to be expected, as with all things, they wear, and everyone of us has different expectations and comfort levels when riding too. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |