Why don't the tire companies make a rear radial in a size to fit the 500r/ex? I see a number of radials for the 110 front, but it seems that for rear radials we have to compromise with a 150-60-17, which according to other posts I've read has the effect of pinching the tire down to fit the rim...got to think this is not the best solution.
Why no 130/140-70-17 radials?
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Joined
·
4,348 Posts
Have you looked at Michellin Pilot Activs? they make those in a size for this bike. reason for no radials is probably that this machine just doesnt go fast enough to justify having radial tires.
No, the no Radials is because the tires cannot be designed for such narrow rims. The radial sidewalls are very thin as that's where all the flexing takes place so to get a contact patch apropriate for the ex's power curve the rim needs to be a good inch wider. If you bend in the sidewalls of a 140 size say, you seriously weaken them and the tire will squirm and handle badly ( the rear will steer). Remember the breaker tread of a Radial is very stiff and won't bend so you get a very strained side wall too. Bad news.
Typically radial rims are the same width as the tire size.
FOG
Typically radial rims are the same width as the tire size.
FOG
Michelin Pilot Activs are what I've got on now, and I'm very satisfied with them...but they are a conventional bias ply. I was just curious as to why we did not have any stock size rear radials available. On your answer Fog: since the front stock size is available from several manufacturers as a radial, I'm not sure I fully understand your answer...i.e. that it's too narrow for them to manufacture right. If they can make a 110-70-17 in radial, why not a 130 or 140-70-17, as the 130/140 is obviously a wider tire?
I'm not privy to the tire co. information. but with a certain size tire comes an expectation of a certain level of performance. Perhaps it's not possable to build a radial tire that will have the expected level of performance in those size parameters.
Fog
Fog
Joined
·
25,498 Posts
well there's one way to think about it...FOG said:
I'd be willing to guess that it boils down to supply, demand, and the money involved. While they might sell a few 130s and 140s, most people are going to be fine just jumping on up to a 150 (especially if it's going on the wrong rim anyway and will void the warranty - they've made their money and while they don't WANT you to get hurt they're no longer liable, either). The tooling and setup to run batches of 130s and 140s is probably too great to justify their production, especially for a market where 170s are considered a small sport bike tire.
Yea Nick D - I think it's most likely related to dollars. Since the serious racing bikes are running the larger rear sizes there is a good market, but not so for the 500ex/r size. Oh well, guess I'll make do with the Michelin Activs which are serving me well.
Joined
·
146 Posts
Well, the Avon AV45/AV46 comes in a 140/80/17. So do the Dunlop D205's, though the Avons get much better tread life and are more stable on the highway. Dunlops handle awesome, but are prone to cupping which drastically reduces their life span.
The Avons also come in a 110/70/17 and a 110/80/17.
I love the Avons, they're great tires. I use them on my V65 Magna, and it handles like it's on rails.
Charles.
The Avons also come in a 110/70/17 and a 110/80/17.
I love the Avons, they're great tires. I use them on my V65 Magna, and it handles like it's on rails.
Charles.
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
