| Author | Message | ||
     Toniportray |
I am more cautious with the front tire wear. I don't dare let it get as bald as the rear tire as shown. The first tires on the bike were of course Dunlop stocks. They were used for the first 5k miles. Then it was time to replace the rear tire so I shopped around and found a guy on Ebay selling both Front and Rear for under $40 (shipping included). He claimed the tires had 1k miles on them. They looked brand new except for not having the chalk marks that you get straight from the factory. I didn't plan on buying Dunlops but for that price, I'd be a fool to turn down both tires. That's what I've been using ever since. I've never changed the front tire from dealership purchase and it's got just over 10k miles on it with what looks like quite a bit of tread left. I always inflate to the 36R/32F settings in the manual so maybe my higher pressures get me less wear and better longevity. I expect to get at least 8k out of my stock rear thats on right now. Based on tires from other motos I've owned I was disappointed to get such low mileage from the Buell sized tires, but if I was getting 3k miles out of them I'd be furious. 90% of my commute is freeway so maybe that contributes to longevity (?). | ||
| Toniportray |
I just found a site that has some of the cheapest tire and shipping prices I've ever seen. They seem to carry just about any tire. americanmototire.com Just thought it'd be nice to share. | ||
| Ezblast |
What air pressure do you run your tires at? - as a freeway commuter - could well be. EZ | ||
| Berkshire |
I usually order new tires when they start to have no tread, and then I usually don't get the chance to change them out until after the cords start to peek through. ditto - somewhere between when the last of the tread disappears and when chords show through, there is a transition from one layer of rubber to another - it looks like a blister in the rubber, then the cord will start showing in a hundred miles or so. I figure when I see the blister, it's about time. If I was only interested in commuting efficiency, I'd put my Michelin Gold Standard 140/70 tire back on and air it up to 36 psi - it's dual-compound for long life in a straight line and good grip when leaned over, and even though it's a scooter tire, it has higher load & speed ratings. Metzeler makes a dual-compound scooter tire, called the "feelfree", in both the 140/70 and stock sizes, but speed & load are lower, and it's hard to find. | ||
| Joshuasanders |
Finally got my bike back from the dealer with the new shoes. Followed the forum and had them put on the Pirelli tires. Much better ride! Still not sure how the stock tires were both bald at 3.5k, but that's my bike . . . Also, cost for two new tires with labor = $337 - ouch. BTW, any reason why the front brake is much more sensitive after a tire change other than just from bleeding the brakes after fitting the new tire? | ||
| Berkshire |
Brakes get spongey when they need to be bled, so that explains most of it. I've heard new tires don't grip as well until they're broken in - if true, that explains the rest of it. | ||
| Reuel |
Wow! That's like $200 for labor! I would pay $20.  | ||
| Nite_blast |
hey ya'll has anyone tried the pirelli diablo scooter tires? they are a radial and rated to 130 mph and come in stock sizes and have a 130/80-16 rear do ya'll think that would fit with no mods? I liked the viper stryke but can't seem to find it in stock in the stock sizes then I saw the pirelli. Thanks in advance RICH | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
Please click this link. At least 2 other Blasterds now run the Diablos. http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/201 64/297470.html?1217885873 I doubt the 130/80 will fit without the hammer mod as it should be taller than the 140/70. | ||
| Toniportray |
I'm pretty sure a 130/80-16 and a 130/90-16 will fit. The 16 inch wheel diameter needs to stay constant for the rim, but I think the 120 and 80 can be bumped up to 130 and/or 90 without any issue. Does anyone concur?  | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
No. There is very little clearance for a taller tire, hence the need for a hammer. 120/80=96mm 130/80=104mm 130/90=117mm 140/70=98mm tire heights in a perfect world. Tire pressure, rim width and manufacturers variances hardly ever make these accurate figures. Not sure how much clearancing is required, whether just a hammer, hammer and heat or outright cutting and welding for the taller tires. | ||
| Toniportray |
So a 120/90-16 or a 130/80-16 could work, but not a 130/90-16? It must be an either-or but not both thing. I just looked at my '02 and with a stock dunlop rear, the tread is pretty close to the rear shock absorber, though it looks like there is maybe 20-25mm of space left (my center tread is worn flat though). When you mention using a hammer, are you referring to the removal of that little bracket that is welded to the swingarm? It seems like taking that off wouldn't negatively affect anything (not sure why it's there), and would give an extra 20mm of tire space from the swingarm. | ||
| Xgecko |
actually I don't think most 120/90's will work even with the swingarm mod | ||
| Ezblast |
Concur | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
A stock rear tire is 120/80x16. 16 is obviously the rim size. 120 = 120mm. 80 is the percentage of the width that the tire is tall or 120mm x .80 = 96mm. The stock Blast swingarm with a stock (new) tire has about 3/8" or 10mm of tire height clearance. So add 10mm to the 96mmm and a tire with that height, 106mm, will rub. 120/80=96mm 120/90=108mm 130/80=104mm 130/90=117mm 140/70=98mm In a perfect world you could rely on those figures however, tire pressure, rim width, growth at speed and manufacturers variances hardly ever make these accurate figures. I am talking about the little shock bracket. If you cut off the cross piece of that shock bracket, you will weaken it. If you bend it in, you retain most of its structural integrity. | ||
| Xgecko |
So the best choice would actually be a 130/70 if such a tire was sold... (Message edited by xgecko on August 06, 2008) | ||
| Berkshire |
I dunno - I'd rather have a 140/70 tire on a 4-1/4" wide rim, or the 120/80 Pirelli on a 3-1/2" rim (its "native" size). As mentioned above, there are several factors that will throw the actual size off from the "ideal" measurements, and none have as big an effect as rim width. All the above sizes are meant for a wider wheel - mounted on a Blast they'll be thinner and taller. | ||
| Ezblast |
Brad - what tires you running and have you tried the Avon 63's - in stock sizes - the Pirrelli are great performers, wish to try the Avon 63's in stock size, however, the lower profile of the over sized tire and the resulting handling improvement prevents me from going there - seriously - or I would never recommend them over my old 6 year favorite the Pirrelli - even when others nay said the Pirrelli - I knew they where the best tire for the beginner rider or performance rider - and now they are the stock tire - one campaign worked (wish the Das Boot one would) - now though I'm liking the Avon for great responsiveness, quick turning, sticky, much better life, and not having to go to the edge to get the turns I want is very gratifying to me (perhaps a 130/70 would be ideal, but so far they only come in fronts)- their end life is similar to other tires but longer, so more noticeable - I'll take that over short lived though. EZ | ||
| Berkshire |
I've got a balding MT75 on it now, and a new one ready to go on. I'd try a 63 in the stock size if the cost was comparable to the Pirelli, but I can't see paying that much more for a tire that has lower speed & load ratings - especially if it needs more warmup to get sticky. The 140/70 does not have a lower profile. It's *designed* to be a lower profile tire, but it's designed for a 4" rim, which is what Avon measures it on. On a rim that's almost 1/3 narrower, it gets 11+mm thinner and also a little taller (has anybody measured height?). "By the numbers" as listed above, it should only be 2mm taller than a 120/80 (96 vs 98mm), but swingarm rubbing wouldn't be an issue if it was only 2mm taller! It's got to be taller than that. IIRC, stock swingarm clearance is at least 1/4" (6mm), so maybe 102mm and a litle more at speed, or possibly even a bit more. That would put it close to the "textbook" dimensions of a 130/80, but a few mm narrower and maybe a bit taller, and of course having the overly-round tread profile, which is opposite of the shape you normally see in a low-profile tire. Ironically, I think this is the reason people like the way it handles. Narrower rubber gives bikes a more flickable feel - quicker turning. The extra diameter gives it a smoother ride, and the extra mass and longer radius both produce extra gyro effect for more stability at speed. The same characteristic also dampens acceleration in 1st gear (which is usually when I run out of grip), although probably not by enough to make a noticeable difference. But the rounder tread still lays a narrower contact patch on the road, all other things being equal. It's possible that the 63's have a silicon-formula rubber in the tread, which gives better wear AND grip than regular type rubber for any given hardness, but I've heard that the silicon compound gets "greasy" when overheated, and grips well when cold. It's also possible that the 63 is more supple and flexible, so the tire conforms to the road surface a little better, which helps grip in the same way as lower air pressure. The downside would be vulnerability to damage. It's easy to tell when a tire DOESN'T grip well, but aside from skid pad or lap time data, there's really no safe, practical, or accurate way to compare tires with good grip - but logically, it seems likely that wider contact patch and softer rubber will give better grip. | ||
| Berkshire |
CAUTION!!! Don't anybody go buy a 130/80, thinking it will be the same size as what a 140/70 ends up, but without the over-round tread. That was the "nominal" size of a 130/80 I was comparing a 140/70 to - when a 130/80 is mounted on the Blast wheel, it too will get narrower, taller, and rounder, and being taller to begin with, it would almost certainly rub. | ||
| Jra |
Any good tips to support the blast while changing the front tire? | ||
| Ezblast |
"Honey come out here and hold the bike for me!" to the wife - is one idea, but another is a jack and wheel chock at the rear, resting on the kick stand, an engine hoist will work, also a jack stand under each peg would work, wheel stands are the classy way to do it. EZ | ||
| Luke_sidewalker |
I used 2 tie down straps from the handlebars to the garage rafters. Seemed to do the trick nicely. | ||
| Evilbetty |
I just bought a 2000 Buell Blast. I did all the research I could on bikes and especially the Blast before I headed over to inspect it and buy one. When I got there I thought the tires looked worn but the owner insisted they had just changed the rear tire last year. I bought the bike and when I got home I looked up these tires on the web. I noticed mine no longer have the center grove. It's worn away. Will this pass safety inspection in MO? How worn can these tires get before they need to be replaced? I've waded through a lot of your tire discussions, are the Pireli's the way to go as far as replacements go for a daily commuter? Thanks! | ||
| Ezblast |
Avon for a commuter unless you are very light of weight. EZ | ||
| Johnnymac |
I agree...go with the Avon Viper Strykes in 140/70. Do NOT go with the stock size in this tire though since lately we have been hearing about early wear out of the treads on stock size VSs. The 140/70 VSs stick almost as well as the Pirelli but last as well or better than the Dunlops. | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
I'm sure they wont pass a state inspection. | ||
| Toniportray |
I finally got the answer I've been looking for about why motorcycle tires are so short lived compared to cars, and it was obvious all along. Turns out motorcycle tires are indeed made from a VERY different rubberized compound. The difference between car and motorcycle tires IS the material. Compared to a motorcycle tire, a car tire has almost no traction to the road surface. You're probably saying, "duh" but so am I. But then again, I've yet to get a reasonable answer from another biker about why motorcycle tires are so short lived... So you could make a motorcycle cruising/touring tire that has longevity comparable to a car, but it would have super low grip to the road surface. And I was starting to think this was some sort of conspiracy against motorcyclists...  | ||
| Reuel |
Here's another factor when looking at V-twin engines, and thumpers even more. When you're applying power, the whole power stroke is present for a short amount of time, so one spot is receiving a whole lot of stress, followed by no stress at all for a bit. You can say that, theoretically, the Blast is putting power to the road about 1/4 of the time. So, if you figure that 3/4 of the time, there is no power whatsoever going to the tire, that 1/4 of the time must have a lot more stress applied to the tire than if you had an I-4, V-6, or V-8. In reality, if you look at the power going to the crank from the piston, it is somewhat less than 1/4 of the whole cycle, with peak power being applied to a much smaller portion of the whole cycle. Add that to the soft, sticky rubber, and now the Blast averages 3-5K on a tire where other bikes are good for 10-15K. | ||
| Johnnymac |
I originally thought the same thing, Reuel. Instead of the power being delivered smoothly throughout the revolution of the tire, it is being plastered out in quick abusive spurts. The way you described it was great. Having said that though, I will have to disagree with that theory as I have changed my thoughts on it recently. First fault to this theory (as I see it) is that other thumpers don't have this issue the way the Blast does. If the theory was sound it would follow for all 4-stroke singles. It doesn't. Second is mileage variation between sizes especially between same make and model tires. Take the Viper Strykes for example. The Viper Stryke in stock size (120/80) is only good for 1500 miles or less. In a 140/170 size they are lasting 4000-6000 miles on average. These tires are, I presume, made with the same rubber compounds and construction materials. I think the simple reason for the tire wear on the Blast is due to poor engineering in regards to tire/rim size and load ratings. While a light bike, the tires on the P3 are just too damned skinny for the bike and the weight of the average rider. For an average sized guy like me @ 200 lbs, I have to be real picky as to whom I can take on the bike with me as a passenger. Thank goodness my GF weighs 120 because with my gear and any extra baggage I am pushing the load limits. While not a power house, I believe it's engine is capable of pulling more weight than the rated 350 lbs. I think what makes it a wimp is the glorified bicycle tires it uses and is limited to. If Buell had designed the bike to accept and use a 150 (or larger) 80 or 90 series tire you would easily see 10,000 miles on a tire. Just my 2 cents. Feel free to correct any of my thinking.   |
