Page 1 of 2
Tires in 2013
Posted: Mon May 13, 2013 8:47 pm
by bdento59
Yes, soooo my tire patch failed on my rear S11 tire on the '80 CBX. Started leaking and the original puncture has started to split open. Time to replace. I looked at my americanmototire receipt from 2009 and it said $59.95 for the Stone S11. However, today that same tire from the same seller is $109.35... WTF man, thats an 85% increase in four years
Just wondering if anyone has knowledge of any recent good tire deals? I'm also open to opines on other similar tires, but not BT45's. I have Dunlop D404's on my '81 XV920RH, but that bike weighs about 100 lbs less than the X.
TIA
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 7:38 am
by steve murdoch icoa #5322
Bill, i use BT45s so i can't comment on other tires but i just bought a pair last week from Jake Wilson and the transaction was excellent.
FAST, free shipping and great prices.
http://www.jakewilson.com/
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Tue May 14, 2013 10:28 pm
by Larry Zimmer
Bill, you might consider either Shinko or Kenda. Check with Amazon.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Wed May 15, 2013 7:41 am
by EMS
Larry Zimmer wrote:Bill, you might consider either Shinko or Kenda.
This may indeed be your only chance if you want to get a tire in the $60.- price range.
19" tires are getting rare and most established brand manufacturers are asking around $100.-
I have seen a Michelin Pilot ACTIV for the CBX for under $100.- for the front and $110.- for the rear. I was surprised, considering Michelins are usually rather pricey but these were cheaper than the S11s from the same vendor.
Continental has come out with a new tire for vintage bikes, the TKV11/12 Sport/Classic. Unfortunately nothing in the sizes for a CBX. But the Conti Go! is available for the front in the low 90s and the rear for $110.- also.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 8:00 pm
by bdento59
Thank you for the input!
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:59 pm
by manxman
Hi,
re Conti Classic Attack radial tyres. I have them fitted on my "Z". They come in 100/90/19 F and 120/90/18 R. I like them, they give a more "crisp" turn in than BT45. A pair cost me £190 fitted.
Dave.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:42 pm
by steve murdoch icoa #5322
Welcome to the site, Dave.
Thanks for the heads up on the new Conti radial. I had not heard of them.
http://www.conti-online.com/www/motorcy ... ck_en.html
Hard to find many reviews other than a couple saying great grip but quick wear rate.
Please report back after a summer worth of riding.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:43 am
by Montana69
I am thinking of these, anyone tried the Shinko 230's?
$137 total cost for the pair delivered.
100/90V-19 & 130/90V-18 is this the correct size for a 1982?
Would a 110 fit under the front fender?
If 110's fit do you guys have a preference or pros & cons
any ideas / comments?
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:14 pm
by daves79x
No experience with those tires, but I'm sure they'll suffice, perhaps even be excellent. But main point is DO NOT fit a 110 to the front. Late models not so much, but a 110 will contact the leading underside edge of the early ones at speed and make it knife-edged or worse (the fender). Go for them and give us a report.
Dave
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 9:50 pm
by pgilliam1
Montana69 wrote:I am thinking of these, anyone tried the Shinko 230's?
$137 total cost for the pair delivered.
100/90V-19 & 130/90V-18 is this the correct size for a 1982?
Would a 110 fit under the front fender?
If 110's fit do you guys have a preference or pros & cons
any ideas / comments?
I'm considering these. Did you get them, and if so, do you like them. I have Shinko Raven 009's on my FJR and really like them.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 1:21 pm
by Montana69
I bought them but haven't mounted them yet, I have used Shinko's on my other bikes and I like them. These look great and the compound feels like it will stick the to road well.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 9:45 pm
by SteveG
I have the Shinko 230's on my 81 CB900F (with a Wiseco 985 kit in it), and recently did a track day with them on it. The tires stuck excellent and felt very good. I don't know how long they will last, but I have never leaned a bike over as far as I have with these tires on them. If they last more than a couple thousand miles they will continue to be my tire of choice (over the S11's).
Steve
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 10:13 pm
by pgilliam1
So that's good to know. Now all I need is someone to say they got a good bit of mileage out of them, because I don't intend to put them through any track days and need a few more miles than 2K out of them. THX.
PS: You got some cajonies running a touring tire on the track! But then again, who runs an '81 CB on the track
.
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 5:37 am
by daves79x
Which brings us back to why guys like the Bridgestone S-11 tires - mileage! Along with very respectable handling in wet and dry and a reasonable price. I'll rest my case AGAIN!
Dave
Re: Tires in 2013
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 7:48 am
by pgilliam1
daves79x wrote:Which brings us back to why guys like the Bridgestone S-11 tires - mileage! Along with very respectable handling in wet and dry and a reasonable price. I'll rest my case AGAIN!
Dave
I have the S-11's on the bike now but I'm afraid to push them because of their age. The one on the front looks like a year 2000 tire. I'm not sure about the rear because the last markings on the tire after the DOT stamp is:
rear - PCJ079
front - PCH0900
I thought the numbers after the DOT stamp were supposed to be 4 numerals with the first 2 being the week and the second 2 being the year. The rear tire only has 3 numerals???
They still have good amounts of tread and I really like the way they handle and ride. I'm just afraid to lay it down too far because of the tires age. They look good with no dry rot or signs of age at all. They're probably hard though.