|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|03-25-2008 01:54 AM|
I had the OEM Dunlops on my VN750 when I purchased it used. Hated them and replaced them with Bridgestone Spitfire S11's. These were not the OEM Bridgestone's that Kaw used. The Spitfires were like the poor man's Metzlers and they preformed pretty good. A little loud from what I was told, but the price was right for the time. In 2003 I replaced the Spitfires with Metzler ME880's and have not looked back since. Longest lasting tires that I've had on the VN750 and still in great shape.
On my Nomad, it came with OEM Bridgestones and I hated them. Rear tire was ready for replacement at 9k, so I replaced both the front and the rear with Metzler ME880's (see a pattern here?) and once again - LOVE THEM!!!
Not a big fan of OEM anything, so take it with a grain of salt but I recommend the Metzlers on ANY bike any day.
|03-25-2008 12:22 AM|
|jworth||I've spooned on a pair of Pirelli MT66s and I'm pretty happy with them. The fact is, tires are too subjective and most people don't ride hard enough to really push a tire to it's limits. Everyone's opinion is a seat of the pants thing and very very subjective. About the only thing people can say with any degree of certainty is which brand of tire they got the highest mileage out of and what was the cost of the tires. Good luck to you. For what it's worth, I got about 12K out of the original bridgestones on my 2000 and just replaced them last summer.|
|03-24-2008 09:13 PM|
|niterider||I have been wearing dunlops for 2 yrs. now 20,000 miles. And I will wear them for one more year. They have been good to me.|
|03-24-2008 08:48 PM|
|Vulcaneyez||Thanks everyone. AFAIK the tires are original as I bought the bike from the original owner last August with only 4,300 miles. The tires have decent tread left, but the dry rot has me worried and my health and well being are worth more than a new set of tires. Not much more, but more.|
|03-24-2008 06:33 PM|
Let's all just hug.......
In all seriousness, IIRC the general rule (I have no idea who made the rules) is that after anywhere from 2 - 4 years, tires should be replaced. How often depends on several factors, including how much you ride (wear) and where it is parked (UV damage from the sun). Look for the manufacture date on the side of the tires, it should be in month / day format. Anything older than 3 years (my personal opinion) should be replaced, because new rubber is cheap compared to the alternative.
|03-24-2008 05:46 PM|
|curtis97322||And I'll add that just because it's a 2003 doesn't mean the tires are 2003 (which IMO is still pretty old for tires). I personally would change tires that have ANY dry rot. I like having my skin attached thank you very much and a tire failure on a car can cause an accident (ford explorer anyone?) that you'll probably walk away from, one on a bike can get ya killed.|
|03-24-2008 05:36 PM|
Originally Posted by adamhornik View Post
If you are not there to look at his tires, you should not be making judgement calls like this. There is a diffrence between minor and severe cracking do to dry rot and one of them can get you killed.......
|03-24-2008 05:31 PM|
I just installed 2nd set of OEM bridgestones on my 2004. DennisKirk.com had good prices.
BTW, I wouldn't worry about the dry rot if its a 2003. My new bridgestones will have some dry rot by end of the season.
|03-24-2008 05:22 PM|
|AJCruzin||It really comes down to what you want out of your tires. I recommend reading any / all reviews you can find for the specific types you're looking at. Personally, I love my Avon Venom tires.|
|03-24-2008 03:15 PM|
|stan||I like the bridgestones, never had a problem with them and I just put on my second set at 20K.|
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|