Ugh. Another Rear Tire Sizing Concern (Sorry)

[DaniBoy]

I am getting really worn in the center the OEM Kenda. Seriously considering either the Altimax or Vredestein. Seems that 215/60R15 is used a lot, but on bikes a lot newer than mine. Mine is a 2010 RS. My concern is that the 215/60 stands 1.3” taller than the factory 225/50. Seems like a significant increase. I just want to be sure it doesn’t mess with the inner fender, especially when loaded with a passenger together, we’re approaching 400 pounds. I’m also concerned about complaints from the nanny, as my fronts are OEM 14”.

[BajaRon]

You'll be fine with this tire on your 2010. Not a problem.

[Peter Aawen]

Considering that the number of Spyders sold by BRP passed 100,000 quite some time back now, and very many of those Spyders sold will have by now swapped out their original OEM Kendas for better performing a/mkt tires, most of which are similarly larger than the OEM Kendas to that size you've mentioned (cos there are very few a/mkt tires on the market anywhere that have the same notoriously poor quality control or undersized rolling Dia as the OEM Kendas ) so by now, there are probably thousands of Spyders out there (if not TENS of thousands! ) that have
successfully run similar sized tires on their Spyders with ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUES either in fitting them in the hole or with the Nanny, so I'd hazard a guess that you too will have no problems!!

Go On, Just Do It!! You Know You want to!

Many, many other Spyder Owners have already done this without any concerns or issues, and just as is the case about fitting an upgraded a/mkt Sway Bar, by far the most often repeated comment afterwards is:

"Why didn't I just listen to everyone and do this sooner?!"

Just Sayin'

[oldgoat]

I have recently installed the Altimax 215/60 R15 on my 2008 GS.

It fits just fine with the added bonus that my speedo now reads the same as my Garmin Zumo GPS.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I am getting really worn in the center the OEM Kenda. Seriously considering either the Altimax or Vredestein. Seems that 215/60R15 is used a lot, but on bikes a lot newer than mine. Mine is a 2010 RS. My concern is that the 215/60 stands 1.3” taller than the factory 225/50. Seems like a significant increase. I just want to be sure it doesn’t mess with the inner fender, especially when loaded with a passenger together, we’re approaching 400 pounds. I’m also concerned about complaints from the nanny, as my fronts are OEM 14”.

As the other posters said that rear tire will be great .... Vredestein still makes an excellent ... 14-inch front tire ... not in exactly the same size as a Kenda, but close enough that they won't be a problem ..... Mike

[KX5062]

I have recently installed the Altimax 215/60 R15 on my 2008 GS.

It fits just fine with the added bonus that my speedo now reads the same as my Garmin Zumo GPS.

I did the same thing when I owned my 2008 GS. It worked perfectly.

[Wrongway]

I just had the General Altimax RT45, 215 60 15 installed on my 2015 RT about 500 miles ago.
Clearance isn’t an issue and both my wife and I feel the spyder is a lot smoother now.
I haven’t noticed any difference is performance but I’m a conservative rider.
I was worried about clearance because I have a showchrome mud flap on mine for prior to having the tire installed, I reversed the bolts but now that the tire is on it doesn’t look like there would have been an issue.

[safecracker]

I ran Altimax tires on all 3 wheels. No issues. Bruce

[Jetfixer]

For a graphical representation of what different size tires will look like and what/which specs will change, use this calculator.

https://www.tire-size-calculator.info/

[Peter Aawen]

For a graphical representation of what different size tires will look like and what/which specs will change, use this calculator.

https://www.tire-size-calculator.info/

But do please bear in mind that the info shown, and the size representation depicted applies specifically to the NOMINAL size shown on the sidewall of the tires you are comparing, not necessarily their ACTUAL sizes; and VERY FEW tires are exactly the NOMINAL size shown on their sidewalls!

It's the tire manufacturers that get to choose and label their tire sizes using Internationally Agreed Standard Format Size Terminology, but there's NO Agreed Standard on how to determine or apply that size! So because some tire manufacturers use the naked 'carcass size' to select the nearest Nominal size for their tires, before adding all the tread layers and a fair bit more rubber; other manufacturers might use the fully completed tire with all the tread layers included; some others might choose to use the pre-tread mould size instead; and some others again might just take the nearest Best Guess &/or try any other method that seems to make sense to them at the time.... so the ACTUAL size of a tire can vary somewhat from that shown as the NOMINAL size on its sidewall!

The biggest variation between the Nominal size printed on the sidewall of a tire and the Actual size of a tire that I've seen so far has been 50mm/2 inches - yep, a tire that had the Nominal size of 32/10.50R15 printed on its sidewall DID NOT have a rolling diameter of 32 inches, it Actually had a rolling diameter of 34 inches!!

So sure, use any of those tire size calculators &/or comparison tools as a guide to help you decide what tire sizes to look for, but regardless of what vehicle you are choosing tires for, you should still ALWAYS find & compare the ACTUAL physical size/dimensions of the specific tires you're considering with the ACTUAL physical size/dimensions of the tires you're replacing! Most tire manufacturers will publish those physical dimensions with their specs for each tire, and many of the tire retailers will provide those in their tire detail, or at least access those for you if you can't find them.

But REMEMBER, those tire calculators/comparison tools are just an aid/guide to assist in your tire selection, because the sidewall sizes are ONLY NOMINAL SIZES & not necessarily the 'Actual physical dimensions' of any tire, so they DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE TRUE TIRE SIZES of any tire!!



Just Sayin'.... again!

[FrogmanDave]

The biggest variation between the Nominal size printed on the sidewall of a tire and the Actual size of a tire that I've seen so far has been 50mm/2 inches - yep, a tire that had the Nominal size of 32/10.50R15 printed on its sidewall DID NOT have a rolling diameter of 32 inches, it Actually had a rolling diameter of 34 inches!!

What the hell? This some kind of tractor or construction equipment tire or something?

[Peter Aawen]

What the hell? This some kind of tractor or construction equipment tire or something?

Nup, but it was a pretty aggressive tread pattern on a 'road legal 4WD tire'!!

However, that was just the biggest variation I've ever come across; I have also seen other car tires with 'more normal' or 'more common' tread patterns getting significant differences, some even close to that extreme, in size variations between the tire's Nominal & their Actual sizes since.... It seems that some tire manufacturers just don't bother to use any 'real measurements' when choosing whatever Nominal size they decide to put on the sidewalls of their tires; instead, apparently they simply just guess at whatever looks nice; or maybe they just use whatever Nominal size will fill a gap in their tire range/sizes, pretty much regardless of whatever the tire's ACTUAL physical size might end up being!!

So as I mentioned earlier, you really shouldn't RELY on those tire size calculators or size comparison sites, you NEED to check/compare the physical dimensions of any tire you might be considering fitting if you want to minimize your chances of getting an unwelcome/nasty surprise after forking out the $$ for a tire that should fit if the Nominal/sidewall size was anywhere near the tire's Actual physical size!! Cos as I found out the hard way, sometimes, they just aren't!