| Author | Message | ||
     Buellathebuzzer |
In another thread someone said: I'm currently running an Angel front (proudly purchased at HC '10 directly from EBR for cheep), and a Pilot 2CT rear- happy with both. How common is it to run different tires from different manufacturers at the same time? What are the pluses and minuses of doing this? | ||
| Danger_dave |
For road use you can still strike a combination that won't work well together, but it is reasonably rare these days. As a tester I often run unmatched tyres because I get given them to try. Generally they work OK unmatched. As well as a matched set? Probably not. but close enough for road and street work. Track might be a different story. The manufacturers recommend against it. | ||
| Aesquire |
Pretty common actually. I've done it for years. The front and rears have different roles, and IF you choose tire with close traction natures in cornering, not a problem. If there is a large difference in traction, the front or rear will wash out, slip before the other, enough to make riding difficult or dangerous. An uber-mileage rear and a very sticky front the rear will step out on you, Vice-versa the front will wash out.... Mixing triangular profile tires ( like classic Dunlops ) and round profile ( or flatter oval with round ) is a bad idea. | ||
| Trojan |
There can be huge differences in internal construction between two outwardly similar tyres (even tyres by the same manufacturer) depending upon their intended use etc. This is in addition to different tread patterns, speed ratings, mileage use and a heap of other factors. This means that mixing tyres may work, but is generally a bad idea. In the event of an accident your insurance may decide not to pay out or in extreme cases you may be held responsible by the police for failing to maintain your machine if you have mismatched or even 'non approved' tyres fitted. At the end of the day it is your decision, your money, your bike, your licence and your life  | ||
| Crusty |
Continental was the first to offer matched tires, back in the '70s. the K 112 rear and the RB 2 front. Before then, you would use whatever you liked. Even in club racing, people would use Dunlop K 81 (TT100) tires both front and rear. However, once the other tire manufacturers realized that having to change out both front and rear tires at the same time, instead of as each wore out, would net them more money, then they all came out with matched sets. The days of using a Goodyear front with an Avon rear came to a rapid end. It only took a couple of years for people to be appalled if somebody put mixed brands on their bike. The funny thing was, decades later, the absolute worst mismatched set of tires I put on a bike were from the same manufacturer. I had put a Metzeler ME 99 on the rear and a ME 33 on the front of my FLHS. When the rear wore out, I replaced it with a ME 88. The combination of the 33 front and 88 rear turned my dresser into one of the most squirrelly and evil handling motorcycles I've ever owned. Once I got rid of the 33 and put an 88 on the front, the handling returned to normal. Nowadays, I pretty much stick to matched sets, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't put on a different brand if circumstances warranted it. | ||
| Glitch |
For me, I have to have a matched set. I don't buy a rear tire without buying the front. It's a confidence thing with me (with a little OCD thrown in for extra measure). Usually people end up with mix/match because they wore out the rear and the front looks good. I did this once, and didn't care for the feel of the bike, not to mention I had it on my mind I was on a worn tire. That said, I'm agreeing with Matt with regards to the manufacturing differences. Just my 2cents | ||
| Jaimec |
Metzeler used to market the ME33 Laser as the perfect front tire to use with ANY rear tire. It worked well on my 1985 K100 with just about any rear tire I used. Guess they only tested it on German bikes. Funny thing is, when I was in Estes Park at the Americade West in 1989, I had to replace my tires. I was running the ME33 front, and ME88 rear. Metzeler didn't have the ME33 with them, so they gave me the matching ME88F tire instead. I HATED it. Even though that was supposedly the matching tire for the ME88 rear, I never felt confident on that tire; it always felt vague and squirrely... not something you wanted on some of those mountain passes out there, or even the Blue Ridge Parkway and Skyline Drive. Fortunately MOST of the ride home was interstate droning with only an occasional side trip onto twisties. When I got home I mentioned it to my dealer. Unbeknownst to me, he contacted Metzeler on my behalf, and they offered to replace the ME88F with my preferred ME33 for half price, and they'd pay for the mounting and balancing. After that, I never used any other tire brand. I never used another servicing dealer either, until he went out of business a few years ago. | ||
| Guell |
I'll run a new rear to a used front, but they are the same tires. Last year when I bought the xb it had a worn dunlop qualifier that was old, and a squared off pilot power 2 ct on the rear and I proceeded to lowsided the bike | ||
| Etennuly |
I believe it all depends on the rider. With the right rider a square wooden tire on one end will work with a bare steel wheel on the other end. These kind of persons are adaptable to what comes at them. They do not expect a performance point.....more they find it. Other riders think about and focus on the thread count of a matching set of front to rear carcass' as they are riding into a corner. They tend to expect a more rigid perfect performance point. If I have a front Scorpion Sync at 50% of it's tread life on the front, and the rear is shot, where I am switching to Michelin Pilot Road II's, I tend to put the new Road II on the rear and use up the life of the front Sync. Then when I go out on the bike I find it's new handling balance. I do not expect, or demand of it, to handle like it would with two new PR II's or two new Syncs. Oddly enough though, within a short time on street twisties, I am back to the same kind of speeds through the same corners. Of course there are times a bad match can be had where after a short ride I will change out the other tire. This happened to me when I put a new Sync on the rear and had the original front D616. The front had worn a bit triangularly with a ridge up on the edges. It "pushed" out on a couple of corners when I was feeling it out, so I changed it right away. So IMHO it is up to the rider's ability to read what the bike is doing, the task at hand, the value of tire mileage/life, and where and how far the next trip will take you. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Don't mix a pirelli scorpion sync front with a D205 170 series rear. It makes for a fairly terrifying turn in. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
I've only done it onec, at a drag race for two passes (not enough time to have both done before the next round). New metzler racetec on rear, used, but good condition dunlop on the front (dont remember what it was) Over 100mph the bike started behaving badly, the back end was moving all about. Next round I had both front and rear with the new Metzler on it - zero issues in the same lane. Never had a problem before, just the two passes with mismatched tires. but thats just my one experience | ||
| Buelet |
+1 on what Etennuly said.  | ||
| Preybird1 |
I do it all the time. I like to try different rubber combination's. And on most bikes the front tire lasts longer than the rear so it happens a lot for me. I don't count on more than 2800 miles maximum on my bikes anymore. The worst tire i ever had was on my Kawi KLR650 it was Michelin dot desert tire went 1,800 miles and was bald. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
+1 Glitch. Every time I think about doing something else, I stop to consider how much money I would be saving by using a used front tire with a new rear, and compare it to the total mission cost of buying and maintaining my bike. The calculation looks something like this: Cost of buying the bike and putting it on the road = $10,000. Amount saved by using a front with a second rear = $50. 50/10000 = .0005 . At that point I realize that using up the second half of the front tire is a bit of a false economy. In addition, on the one or two times I have tried it, I didn't like the handling very much. | ||
| Sifo |
I've tried saving money by keeping the old front with the new rear. I just found myself with a bald front and a 3/4 good rear. It's just easier and not much more expensive to get both done at one time. | ||
| 86129squids |
Good advice, all... To clarify my first post: I'd left TN to head up with Vern for HC, thought I'd have enough good front rubber to make it and did- just when I got there, I started wishing I'd gone with 100% new front and rear (new 2CT rear at the time)... All of a sudden I found myself at the EBR factory with a bunch of nuts- then the Elves started the yard sale... after a while they started setting out good race rubber, then street tires- snapped up the Angel front for $50, then the next day had it mounted at a local shop for $53!! Made my trip- even scored a new flyscreen and some kewl stickers... As to the OP: I'd read that "back in the day" with bias ply tires, it was more critical to match front and rear- I had similar experiences with Metzelers on my old Beemer- but today's tires, with steel/kevlar/etc belts and highly updated build technology, not to mention HUGE leaps forward in compounds, make it kind of a non-issue. I fall in line with what Vern said- if you like it, and the profiles/compounds aren't apples/oranges, then git out and RIDE!!  | ||
| Fast1075 |
I once ran a Q2 front with a Pilot Power rear while waiting for the new front tire to arrive. Worked pretty good. Otherwise, I always change them both. |
