Printable View
is there a new part number or way of telling which Kenda tires are the new tread compound that is supposed to last longer?
I have not seen a good auto tire for the front in the OEM exact size 165/55 R15 front tires. this is for my 2013 ST-S spyder. burning thru the OEM ones in 8k miles! Local dealer has stock of Kenda tires but says there is no part number changes so not sure when they were made.
the fronts are not the problem. At least I have not heard any complaints on front tires. But also don't know if they have come up with a new replacement part# . I would think if they have new improved tires they would not be selling the defective ones...I know..there I go thinking logically...nojoke
they are not defective per say but the tread is too soft. I went about 15 to 20k mile on my old 2010 RTS Spyder with the OEM front tires.
This 2013 ST-S, I have about 7k miles and the tires have a few thousand miles left before I hit the tread bar where the wet traction starts to deteriorate. The tires wore down about 2 x as fast as the pre 2013 tires I had on the 2010 RTS.
On the rear, I am going with the car tire Kumho AST. But I am looking for a FRONT Tire solution. the only ones for cars that I saw in the exact size had poor wet tire performance (at least on cars). I ride rain or shine so I need to look for a good wet AND dry front tire. I don't want to mess with shimming the front fender to fit a different sized car tire.
:agree: My front tires still look great at 8,000 miles on my 2014 RT, but just had the rear tire changed out -- not to the OEM Kenda but to a Kumho Ecsta AST (same size as OEM).Quote:
Originally Posted by Chupaca
I had a 2012 RT and the rear tire had 8,000 miles on it when traded for my 2014....I think I could have got another 6,000-8,000 miles out of it before it looked like my 2014's.....certainly a change (for the worse) in the tire that came on my 2014 RT.
Good luck!
ask your dealer what the manufacture date is on the tires in stock. If around 2012 or earlier they would be good. I got 22,000 on the rear and the fronts are still good...:dontknow:
But i wonder when the new tread compound was released. They supposedly changed to harder comp.
2012 and earlier wouldn't be 15 in tires
Have you taken a look at Kumho's Solus, in 155/60-15? :thumbup:
I'm not familiar with riding the ST, but 8000 miles doesn't seem like much for the front tires.
My RT has 15 K on the fronts (second set) and they look pretty good, maybe 10K more on them.
What's the wear pattern look like ?
Do you think you might have an alignment problem ?
Maybe the ST just lends itself to riding more aggressively?
I'm going to swap out my existing Kumho onto the new 2014 when I pick it up.
After 6 K miles, the Kumho still looks brand new, but that's the rear tire, not the one you're looking for.
rnet (Ron) is my tire guru. He'd know if anyone does.
I hope to see him over the weekend (Sunday). if I do, I'll quiz him a bit! :thumbup:
I have my Spyder aligned at spyderfest this year by Bullant (Erick) .
Have to see about the kumho Bob. But that is not the oem size. It's going to be 10mm more narrow
sent from my Amazon Kindle Fire 8.9 HDX Tablet
Federal makes a fantastic tire that size for the front & several of the 2014 RT tires had serious cupping and wore out at less than 9000 miles. Mine wore out at 8000. my federals now have another 10000 on them and show no wear whatsoeverQuote:
Originally Posted by clueless
Federal makes 2 tires in that size but both got bad reviews for wet traction and handling
Wow, you're worried about 10mm? I have a 215/ 60/ 15 rear tire that works fine.
We're talking FRONT tires highway man. And yes I am worried about 10 mm width on the front narrower... 70 % of your stopping per is up front
sent from my Amazon Kindle Fire 8.9 HDX Tablet
Got 18,200 on my Kenda front tires and should get another 5,000 at least. After 2 Kenda rear tires in 16,000 miles I went with Kumho. So far so good. 2,000 miles and no noticeable wear. :yes:
I don't imagine that the width will affect much... perhaps the best of us, would notice a change in the handling capabilities of the bike... (I wouldn't!)Quote:
Originally Posted by clueless
And the overall diamter is within about a whisker of the OEM size, so Nanny will still be happy! :thumbup:
Ran it thru an online tire calc and see attached:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Denman
Tire 1 is OEM size and Tire 2 is the Kumho's Solus in 155/60-15
The Kumhos are Speed Rated at T. what are the OEM Front Kenda tires rated at?
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...omCompare1=yes
there is also Continental ContiPro also T rated = https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...omCompare1=yes
Less than a 1% difference in the height of the tires, and revolutions per mile...
I wonder if normal manufacturing variances are that good? :dontknow:
Speed ratings... :shocked:
I've never paid much attention to them, because I'm just not built to think or act like that... (anymore!) :D
super close in size as the OEM but all the trade offs are in the less performance
- narrower tire
- more sidewall
- slightly larger diameter
- assume lower speed rated tire
The two tires in the size in question are T rated and not a directional tire ... so at least you could rotate them left right...
A bit more sidewaill will help to make the front end of the bike more compliant on rough surfaces. nojoke
I'm also still looking for the correct-sized replacement; but these'll do if nothing else shows up. :D