Does rear tire need replacing

[Toddbod1]

Does my rear tire need replacing?165430

[bodymanpainter]

Yes!
Toby

[asp125]

Judging by the amount of tread left on the edges, does this look like the results of over inflation?

[DGoebel]

No, looks normal for some Kenda's at 8 - 12k miles. That's what mine looked like when I replaced it. Safe to drive on, just not in rain with that smooth a center.

PS, Where in MN? I'm in Faribault

[Two cats]

Does my rear tire need replacing?165430
I'd say it's time for a new one. Unless you like living dangerously

[Toddbod1]

No, looks normal for some Kenda's at 8 - 12k miles. That's what mine looked like when I replaced it. Safe to drive on, just not in rain with that smooth a center.

PS, Where in MN? I'm in Faribault

Moorhed MN

[Chupaca]

Here was mine at the wear limit after some 19,000 miles (Kenda)
165435 find the triangle for the wear bar location
165436 This is at the wear bar...

[Rob Rodriguez]

Wow, 19K miles out of a Kenda rear is awesome. Most I've gotten is about 9K. The new one I put on this spring has about 4200 miles on it and its not looking good. I might......might get a couple more thousand out of it.

[Docster]

Hold my beer I wanna try something.....


How about replacing it with a CAR tire??

:yikes::roflblack:

[trikermutha]

Go for it..No sense waiting any longer :thumbup:

[Bob Denman]

I think that the O P's rear tire looks just fine...


That is: if you enjoy hydroplaning and crashing! nojoke

[2dogs]

ASAP! :yikes:

[robhowen]

I'd say YES and I invite you to consider the pressure you are running in the tire as it appears your wear is most signficantly in the middle. An over inflated tire will tend to experience greater wear in the middle. Here is a Pep Boys link that does a nice job of explaining wear patterns: https://www.pepboys.com/auto-care/tires/typical-treadwear-patterns

Rob

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

I'd say YES and I invite you to consider the pressure you are running in the tire as it appears your wear is most signficantly in the middle. An over inflated tire will tend to experience greater wear in the middle. Here is a Pep Boys link that does a nice job of explaining wear patterns: https://www.pepboys.com/auto-care/tires/typical-treadwear-patterns

Rob
Good argument for almost any tire situation except the OEM Kendas on the rear of a Spyder. The most popular consensus it that the Kenda tires are so soft they "balloon" out in the middle regardless of the tire pressure. IIRC, pics have been posted here showing center tread wear for pressures ranging from about 18 all the way to 30.

[Grandpot]

Does my rear tire need replacing?165430

If you thought to ask, you already know you need to change it.

[Road-Kill]

I'm getting 13,000 on the rear tire.
I'm guessing my new rear will do the same.
Some people are getting 9,000ish but I don't know the road type or riding style.

I'm a happy camper with 13,000 miles:yes:

[Chefex]

The back tire on my 2016 RTS did the same thing. My mechanic told me that whiled driving the air expands forcing the center of the tire out causing it to wear while it seams as though the edges get no wear at all. He told me to use nitros as they do in some tires, that it doesn't expand as air does and you'll get a much more even wear to the tire.

But change that tire out either way.

[SpyderAnn01]

Good argument for almost any tire situation except the OEM Kendas on the rear of a Spyder. The most popular consensus it that the Kenda tires are so soft they "balloon" out in the middle regardless of the tire pressure. IIRC, pics have been posted here showing center tread wear for pressures ranging from about 18 all the way to 30.

Mac, you are absolutely correct they will wear out in the center regardless of pressure. Those if you who think you can adjust the tire pressure in a Kenda to make it last longer are sorely mistaken.

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

I'm getting 13,000 on the rear tire.
I'm guessing my new rear will do the same.
Some people are getting 9,000ish but I don't know the road type or riding style.

I'm a happy camper with 13,000 miles:yes:
Partly, it depends of when the tire was made and the rubber formulation used. Somewhere around late 2014 or 2015 Kenda went back to a harder rubber and the tire wear went back to being comparable to earlier years' tires.

[wd8ajj]

Why ask? If its a Kenda the answer is YES!

[canamjhb]

Look familiar......?

8,500 miles on OEM Kenda.

[RapidSpyder]

Hold my beer I wanna try something.....


How about replacing it with a CAR tire??

:yikes::roflblack:

:lecturef_smilie:

[blacklightning]

Def. time to replace. My 2014 RT only got 7k miles before having to replace it. I just replaced the tire on my 2016 F3T at 12k. But I was trying to stretch it out another 300 miles, and then I saw wire, so I changed it right away.

[jaherbst]

Here was mine at the wear limit after some 19,000 miles (Kenda)
165435 find the triangle for the wear bar location


165436 This

is at the wear bar...

That is really great Gene Getting 14.000-17,000 out of mine.

Jack

[MikeT]

I am amazed @how bald some of these rear tires look in pictures in the center of the tire. Last time I visited my friendly, local Discount Tire Store, there was a display showing tire performance vs. tread depth. Won't bore you with all the details. The bottom line on the display is @2/32nds tread depth the tire performance is shot in all types of weather conditions, and the risk of a puncture/tire failure is greatly increased.
We probably have 8 weeks of riding left. Will have close to 13K on the odometer by that time. Will start the 2019 riding season with all new shoes.
Mike

[KX5062]

Good argument for almost any tire situation except the OEM Kendas on the rear of a Spyder. The most popular consensus it that the Kenda tires are so soft they "balloon" out in the middle regardless of the tire pressure. IIRC, pics have been posted here showing center tread wear for pressures ranging from about 18 all the way to 30.


Not only this, but the likely cause is the Kenda are only 2 ply instead of the usual 4 ply. That makes them very soft and causes the ballooning effect. Like Ann said, no matter what pressure, they're going to balloon.

[teninospyder]

I am amazed @how bald some of these rear tires look in pictures in the center of the tire. Last time I visited my friendly, local Discount Tire Store, there was a display showing tire performance vs. tread depth. Won't bore you with all the details. The bottom line on the display is @2/32nds tread depth the tire performance is shot in all types of weather conditions, and the risk of a puncture/tire failure is greatly increased.
We probably have 8 weeks of riding left. Will have close to 13K on the odometer by that time. Will start the 2019 riding season with all new shoes.
Mike

Some have seen previous posts from me wherein I show tire tread depth measurements on our 2014RTL with the original (fronts still on) Kenda tires. I keep this data for ME, and only sharing for those curious enough to look :roflblack:. Now, long story short as I can, related to the REAR Kenda.
I replaced the original rear Kenda tire at 12,111 miles (but only to be extra cautious before our first long trip on this machine, and after doing light reading on SL about the concerns for tire wear) :dontknow::dontknow:


The replacement Kenda now has 13,429 miles on it and tire tread depth measurements (taken at wear bars locations) are: measuring left to right looking at tire from rear of Spyder....6.5mm, 4.5mm, 4.5mm, 6.5mm. I rolled the Spyder around to get a few other sets at other wear points, and the numbers are really close to these at all wear bar locations. I see the 2mm lower numbers for the 2 center bars, but that is still well above the "need to replace" level as I know it.

We always ride 2 up, and total weight for us is...……..oh, OK! ...….pretty close to 400#s total.:roflblack: :ohyea: One final note, I always keep an eye on pressures and run the rear at 24/25PSI, depending on which gage I read :roflblack::roflblack: I have never felt any control or tire related problem with this pressure. Again......just reporting MY experience to date. :yes:

Correction to above ( I always make this typing error) all my measurements are in 32nds of an inch NOT mm. Sorry

[canamjhb]

Looks like some get a LOT more usage from Kendas than others. My guess is that those who mostly ride interstate speeds (70-80 MPH) would get less miles than those who mostly ride secondary roads (45-55 MPH). When I changed the rear to an Altimax, I had a chance to compare both tires next to each other when they were both off the rim. The Kenda was squishy and soft. Felt more like a bicycle tire. The Altimax was firm and felt like a CT should. Trust whichever tire you want. To each his own. As for me, I will never put another Kenda on my bike regardless of what some dealers spew.....

[teninospyder]

Looks like some get a LOT more usage from Kendas than others. My guess is that those who mostly ride interstate speeds (70-80 MPH) would get less miles than those who mostly ride secondary roads (45-55 MPH). When I changed the rear to an Altimax, I had a chance to compare both tires next to each other when they were both off the rim. The Kenda was squishy and soft. Felt more like a bicycle tire. The Altimax was firm and felt like a CT should. Trust whichever tire you want. To each his own. As for me, I will never put another Kenda on my bike regardless of what some dealers spew.....

I agree with your comment about Rider's choice, however I'm not sure about your last comment, so to clarify about me...…..I am not a dealer, or anyone associated with one, or with BRP. :roflblack:

[canamjhb]

There are dealers who say Kenda is the ONLY tire acceptable for the Spyder. There are dealers who tell customers that they will lose their franchise if they install ANY tire brand other than Kendas. There are dealers who say the warranty is void if any other tires except Kendas are installed. There are dealers who say any tires except Kendas will upset nanny. I have personally heard all the above from more that one dealer. And, all the above are completely false. Responsibility for spreading all this erroneous information falls squarely upon BRP. All BRP need to do is tell their dealers that it is OK to substitute other tire brands that meet or exceed their tire specification. The law allows this. (See Moss-Magnuson Act.) But will they, Nooooooo. They are too entrenched with doing business with Kenda. Charging WAY too much for INFERIOR tires. I spent the better part of a year trying to get my bike to handle correctly. I did lots of upgrades, went through two rear Kenda tires and still my bike was unsafe. And I mean it was downright scary at any speed over 65 MPH. Finally got rid of all 3 Kendas and now I have a ride I can enjoy. Do I sound angry? You bet I am. Turns out my front tires, while looking fine, actually had tread separation all along. Riding a bike with dangerous tires put me at risk and all BRP had to do is come clean and admit there are considerable problems with their choice of tires. Not all the Kendas are bad. But mine were. Rant over.....

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

Responsibility for spreading all this erroneous information falls squarely upon BRP. All BRP need to do is tell their dealers that it is OK to substitute other tire brands that meet or exceed their tire specification. The law allows this. (See Moss-Magnuson Act.) But will they, Nooooooo. They are too entrenched with doing business with Kenda.
Let me go through this once again. It has nothing to do with Moss-Magnuson Act. It has everything to do with the NHTSA regulations covering tires. No vehicle manufacturer is allowed to install tires on a vehicle unless those tires have been certified as being suitable for that particular vehicle use. As far as I know no tire manufacturer has certified their tires to be suitable to be installed on a Can Am Spyder except Kenda. Forget about the rim design, bead fit, and all that. Every tire is marked on the side for what use it is suitable for, except car and light truck tires. Any tire not marked is understood to be for car or light truck use, with light truck tires using an LT at the beginning of the tire size number, and has only been certified for that use. Tire manufacturers will tell you do not use trailer tires on a car, nor car tires on a trailer. You sure don't want to use a tractor or ATV tire on a car. Kenda tires are marked "Special Motorcycle Use Only", meaning don't use them on a car even though they will fit a car rim.

We all know, with some disagreement, that the Spyder rims are designed same as car tires and car tires fit and run just fine on a Spyder. But until Michelin, or Dunlop, or Toyo, or any of the others, includes something to the effect of "OK for Special Motorcycle Use" on the side of certain size car tires, BRP is not going to endorse car tire use. When I tried to find information about what tires Vanderhall uses all I could find is a paragraph in the owner's manual that states the tires are designed specifically for the Vanderhall and only use tires that match the OEM tires. What the specifics are, I could not find.

What we need is for someone to be willing to spend $125 for the Tire and Rim Manufacturers Yearbook. Then we would have a better understanding of all the marking and use designations.

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

The bottom line on the display is @2/32nds tread depth the tire performance is shot in all types of weather conditions, and the risk of a puncture/tire failure is greatly increased.
The 2/32nds number is set in stone by the NHTSA regulations. It is conceivable that some tires may be OK at less than that tread depth, and others are already dangerous to use at 3/32nds depth. Interestingly, the tread wear bars on motorcycle tires are set at 1/32nd of an inch in the NHTSA tire regulation. Why? Good question!

Has anyone checked the height of the tread wear indicators on the Kenda tires? Are they 2/32nd or 1/32nd? Since they are designated as special motorcycle use only tires from what I have read they could legally be down at the 1/32nd level.

[teninospyder]

There are dealers who say Kenda is the ONLY tire acceptable for the Spyder. There are dealers who tell customers that they will lose their franchise if they install ANY tire brand other than Kendas. There are dealers who say the warranty is void if any other tires except Kendas are installed. There are dealers who say any tires except Kendas will upset nanny. I have personally heard all the above from more that one dealer. And, all the above are completely false. Responsibility for spreading all this erroneous information falls squarely upon BRP. All BRP need to do is tell their dealers that it is OK to substitute other tire brands that meet or exceed their tire specification. The law allows this. (See Moss-Magnuson Act.) But will they, Nooooooo. They are too entrenched with doing business with Kenda. Charging WAY too much for INFERIOR tires. I spent the better part of a year trying to get my bike to handle correctly. I did lots of upgrades, went through two rear Kenda tires and still my bike was unsafe. And I mean it was downright scary at any speed over 65 MPH. Finally got rid of all 3 Kendas and now I have a ride I can enjoy. Do I sound angry? You bet I am. Turns out my front tires, while looking fine, actually had tread separation all along. Riding a bike with dangerous tires put me at risk and all BRP had to do is come clean and admit there are considerable problems with their choice of tires. Not all the Kendas are bad. But mine were. Rant over.....

Gee, really sorry about your issues above, and don't want to linger on this topic so I'll quit after this. Again, this is just MY experience.
Even though my "original dealer" was overall terrible, and sold me a non BRP extended warranty which turned out to be a "not so good deal" when my ACS failed the second time, he did have a concerned tech at the time that made sure our Spyder tires were balanced, aligned and set-up as best he could before we picked it up. As I said in my previous post, I've never sensed anything was wrong with the handling, that I would definitely want to improve (for safety or pleasure), whether out on our Washington country roads, on curves, and hills, and snaking thru mountain roads at up to 55 MPH, or on the highways at legal speeds up to 70 MPH here and 75 in Oregon this summer. Hands off (although NOT recommended at all) has been done and it runs true and smooth. Prior to the Spyder we had many happy miles on GoldWings. While the ride and handling is obviously different under cornering conditions, I again haven't experienced anything to worry about related to tires or overall performance on the Spyder. I'm HOPING I can continue to be one of the few that it appears gets many more miles out of what we have than the reported norm, but if we don't, I don't have any reason to regret what we have gotten so far.

Tire conversations here remind me of something an old friend told me when we were having different opinions on something. He simply said

"That's why there's Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola :roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflb lack: Have a good weekend :thumbup:

[teninospyder]

The 2/32nds number is set in stone by the NHTSA regulations. It is conceivable that some tires may be OK at less than that tread depth, and others are already dangerous to use at 3/32nds depth. Interestingly, the tread wear bars on motorcycle tires are set at 1/32nd of an inch in the NHTSA tire regulation. Why? Good question!

Has anyone checked the height of the tread wear indicators on the Kenda tires? Are they 2/32nd or 1/32nd? Since they are designated as special motorcycle use only tires from what I have read they could legally be down at the 1/32nd level.

Just went out and checked front and rears. I would have to say it is at 2/32nds on all tires.

[canamjhb]

IMS I'm sure you have researched this more than me. I just find it hard to believe that the NHTSA would certify one brand of tire rather than certifying that tires' specifications. I have never heard of any vehicle manufacturer voiding a warranty for someone using any items that exceed the manufacturers' specifications. That goes for oil, brake pads, spark plugs, brake fluid, tires, cooling fluid, etc. At least not since the Moss-Magnuson Act prohibited them from doing so. It would be interesting if anyone here has any experience of BRP denying warranty coverage for someone not using "genuine BRP parts" or not riding on Kenda tires but rather used parts or tires that exceed BRPs specifications. Not trying to be argumentative......just trying to make sense of it all.

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

IMS I'm sure you have researched this more than me. I just find it hard to believe that the NHTSA would certify one brand of tire rather than certifying that tires' specifications.
I don't think it's NHTSA doing the certification. The tire manufacturer certifies, or more likely, attests, to the fact that they have designed and manufactured a tire to meet certain specifications. The specifications, as I understand, are controlled by the Tire and Rim Manufacturers Association to meet the safety and labeling requirements established by NHTSA. NHTSA is concerned about two things, as I see it. Safety, and consumer information. They have standards for puncture resistance, etc., and standards for labeling for traction and tread wear.

What NHTSA is saying is, if you make a tire for off road use, you must label it for off road use so people will know not to use it on a car. If you make a tire for motorcycle use you have to label it for m/c use. If you make a tire for passenger car use, you don't need to label it specifically because everyone will know it's a car tire by default. But you must clearly state (certify or attest) that the tire is designed and manufactured for passenger car use. As I understand it, that is in the TRA Yearbook.

How much latitude a vehicle manufacturer has, to say such and such tire is suitable for this vehicle, even if the tire manufacturer doesn't say so, I don't know. BRP could very well have the right to say such and such a car tire is OK to use on a Spyder, but then they would have to be able to show to TRA and NHTSA how they came to that determination. With all the dozens of tires out there that would fit a Spyder I'm sure BRP has no desire to take on that responsibility, especially when you consider that tires are redesigned about every 3 to 5 years.

For all we know BRP may have gotten locked into a long term contract with Kenda that they can't economically get out of. Who knows, maybe they did talk to Michelin and Dunlop or others about using car tires on the Spyder when the Spyder was originally designed and were told to get lost. The big boys didn't want to piddle around with a dinky market share, so BRP turned to someone who would work with them, Kenda.

One thing we can be sure of, IMO. BRP will never share with us the real reason for using Kenda.

[Docster]

If you thought to ask, you already know you need to change it.

^^THIS. People need to learn to trust their gut. Validation by others not always needed.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

There are dealers who say Kenda is the ONLY tire acceptable for the Spyder. There are dealers who tell customers that they will lose their franchise if they install ANY tire brand other than Kendas. There are dealers who say the warranty is void if any other tires except Kendas are installed. There are dealers who say any tires except Kendas will upset nanny. I have personally heard all the above from more that one dealer. And, all the above are completely false. Responsibility for spreading all this erroneous information falls squarely upon BRP. All BRP need to do is tell their dealers that it is OK to substitute other tire brands that meet or exceed their tire specification. The law allows this. (See Moss-Magnuson Act.) But will they, Nooooooo. They are too entrenched with doing business with Kenda. Charging WAY too much for INFERIOR tires. I spent the better part of a year trying to get my bike to handle correctly. I did lots of upgrades, went through two rear Kenda tires and still my bike was unsafe. And I mean it was downright scary at any speed over 65 MPH. Finally got rid of all 3 Kendas and now I have a ride I can enjoy. Do I sound angry? You bet I am. Turns out my front tires, while looking fine, actually had tread separation all along. Riding a bike with dangerous tires put me at risk and all BRP had to do is come clean and admit there are considerable problems with their choice of tires. Not all the Kendas are bad. But mine were. Rant over.....
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::c lap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::cla p::clap::clap::clap:……..

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Let me go through this once again. It has nothing to do with Moss-Magnuson Act. It has everything to do with the NHTSA regulations covering tires. No vehicle manufacturer is allowed to install tires on a vehicle unless those tires have been certified as being suitable for that particular vehicle use. As far as I know no tire manufacturer has certified their tires to be suitable to be installed on a Can Am Spyder except Kenda. Forget about the rim design, bead fit, and all that. Every tire is marked on the side for what use it is suitable for, except car and light truck tires. Any tire not marked is understood to be for car or light truck use, with light truck tires using an LT at the beginning of the tire size number, and has only been certified for that use. Tire manufacturers will tell you do not use trailer tires on a car, nor car tires on a trailer. You sure don't want to use a tractor or ATV tire on a car. Kenda tires are marked "Special Motorcycle Use Only", meaning don't use them on a car even though they will fit a car rim.

We all know, with some disagreement, that the Spyder rims are designed same as car tires and car tires fit and run just fine on a Spyder. But until Michelin, or Dunlop, or Toyo, or any of the others, includes something to the effect of "OK for Special Motorcycle Use" on the side of certain size car tires, BRP is not going to endorse car tire use. When I tried to find information about what tires Vanderhall uses all I could find is a paragraph in the owner's manual that states the tires are designed specifically for the Vanderhall and only use tires that match the OEM tires. What the specifics are, I could not find.

What we need is for someone to be willing to spend $125 for the Tire and Rim Manufacturers Yearbook. Then we would have a better understanding of all the marking and use designations.
:banghead::banghead: ……… Harley Davidson has Car tires on their Trikes from the FACTORY ……. THERE IS NO CERTIFICATION by anyone to use them ………. not the NHTSA ...not DOT ….not EPA or any other regulatory body …...

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I don't think it's NHTSA doing the certification. The tire manufacturer certifies, or more likely, attests, to the fact that they have designed and manufactured a tire to meet certain specifications. The specifications, as I understand, are controlled by the Tire and Rim Manufacturers Association to meet the safety and labeling requirements established by NHTSA. NHTSA is concerned about two things, as I see it. Safety, and consumer information. They have standards for puncture resistance, etc., and standards for labeling for traction and tread wear.

What NHTSA is saying is, if you make a tire for off road use, you must label it for off road use so people will know not to use it on a car. If you make a tire for motorcycle use you have to label it for m/c use. If you make a tire for passenger car use, you don't need to label it specifically because everyone will know it's a car tire by default. But you must clearly state (certify or attest) that the tire is designed and manufactured for passenger car use. As I understand it, that is in the TRA Yearbook.

How much latitude a vehicle manufacturer has, to say such and such tire is suitable for this vehicle, even if the tire manufacturer doesn't say so, I don't know. BRP could very well have the right to say such and such a car tire is OK to use on a Spyder, but then they would have to be able to show to TRA and NHTSA how they came to that determination. With all the dozens of tires out there that would fit a Spyder I'm sure BRP has no desire to take on that responsibility, especially when you consider that tires are redesigned about every 3 to 5 years.

For all we know BRP may have gotten locked into a long term contract with Kenda that they can't economically get out of. Who knows, maybe they did talk to Michelin and Dunlop or others about using car tires on the Spyder when the Spyder was originally designed and were told to get lost. The big boys didn't want to piddle around with a dinky market share, so BRP turned to someone who would work with them, Kenda.

One thing we can be sure of, IMO. BRP will never share with us the real reason for using Kenda.
​$ $ $ $ $ $ …...

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

:banghead::banghead: ……… Harley Davidson has Car tires on their Trikes from the FACTORY ……. THERE IS NO CERTIFICATION by anyone to use them ………. not the NHTSA ...not DOT ….not EPA or any other regulatory body …...
I expect if you were to look in the Tire and Rim Association Yearbook you would find a cross correlation between rims and tires that HD states (certifies?) are suitable to be used on their trikes. This page states the subject wheels are for trikes: https://www.harley-davidson.com/store/-pa-19-40900070--1

Tire and rim combinations is a case of where NHTSA, in cooperation with the TRA, has developed specifications of performance and fit but the manufacturers themselves are the ones who say such and such a combination meets those requirements. I agree, NHTSA itself does not certify, or verify, the suitability of specific tire and rim combinations for specific vehicles. I've tried to make that clear.

I guess I should never have used the term "certify" when in fact I meant "verify", "attest to", "declare", "state", etc. I'm using the term certify in a wider sense not limited to a role of a regulatory body.

[UtahPete]

There are dealers who say Kenda is the ONLY tire acceptable for the Spyder. There are dealers who tell customers that they will lose their franchise if they install ANY tire brand other than Kendas. There are dealers who say the warranty is void if any other tires except Kendas are installed. There are dealers who say any tires except Kendas will upset nanny. I have personally heard all the above from more that one dealer. And, all the above are completely false. Responsibility for spreading all this erroneous information falls squarely upon BRP. All BRP need to do is tell their dealers that it is OK to substitute other tire brands that meet or exceed their tire specification. The law allows this. (See Moss-Magnuson Act.) But will they, Nooooooo. They are too entrenched with doing business with Kenda. Charging WAY too much for INFERIOR tires. I spent the better part of a year trying to get my bike to handle correctly. I did lots of upgrades, went through two rear Kenda tires and still my bike was unsafe. And I mean it was downright scary at any speed over 65 MPH. Finally got rid of all 3 Kendas and now I have a ride I can enjoy. Do I sound angry? You bet I am. Turns out my front tires, while looking fine, actually had tread separation all along. Riding a bike with dangerous tires put me at risk and all BRP had to do is come clean and admit there are considerable problems with their choice of tires. Not all the Kendas are bad. But mine were. Rant over.....
I think it's safe to say the Kendas are good, safe tires that are designed for the way Spyders are meant to be driven. BUT, the rear tire in particular has 1/2 the service life of the fronts and is the most likely to be replaced by a car tire when it wears out.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I expect if you were to look in the Tire and Rim Association Yearbook you would find a cross correlation between rims and tires that HD states (certifies?) are suitable to be used on their trikes. This page states the subject wheels are for trikes: https://www.harley-davidson.com/store/-pa-19-40900070--1

Tire and rim combinations is a case of where NHTSA, in cooperation with the TRA, has developed specifications of performance and fit but the manufacturers themselves are the ones who say such and such a combination meets those requirements. I agree, NHTSA itself does not certify, or verify, the suitability of specific tire and rim combinations for specific vehicles. I've tried to make that clear.

I guess I should never have used the term "certify" when in fact I meant "verify", "attest to", "declare", "state", etc. I'm using the term certify in a wider sense not limited to a role of a regulatory body. Are Trikes " MOTORCYCLES " or something else ??? … My whole point in this discussion was to clarify that BRP is throwing a lot of HOOEY about the Spyder tire - wheel thing. They actually have NO FACTS to back up THEIR claims and HD is living proof of that.....Question - how can one manufacturer claim one thing and another ( ie HD ) do exactly the opposite and sell their product Legally....You seem to deny that Gov't is in the Verbiage business to make things so Obscure that no one really understands what the regs are ….. Have you ever called the IRS, ask the same question of ten different agents and I'll bet you get 7 different answers...…….. :thumbup:

[Deanna777]

I changed the rear tire(OEM) at 5,824 miles. It was not safe to drive, so I am running a General Altimax RT 43. I know have 18,588 miles on the General Altimax Tire.

Deanna

[ARtraveler]

Are Trikes " MOTORCYCLES " or something else ??? … My whole point in this discussion was to clarify that BRP is throwing a lot of HOOEY about the Spyder tire - wheel thing. They actually have NO FACTS to back up THEIR claims and HD is living proof of that.....Question - how can one manufacturer claim one thing and another ( ie HD ) do exactly the opposite and sell their product Legally....You seem to deny that Gov't is in the Verbiage business to make things so Obscure that no one really understands what the regs are ….. Have you ever called the IRS, ask the same question of ten different agents and I'll bet you get 7 different answers...…….. :thumbup:

I am betting 10 different answers. :thumbup:

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

They actually have NO FACTS to back up THEIR claims and HD is living proof of that.....Question - how can one manufacturer claim one thing and another ( ie HD ) do exactly the opposite and sell their product Legally....
Straight from the owner's manual.

The tires have been specifically designed
for the Spyder roadster. Use
only the BRP recommended tires,
which can be ordered only from an
authorized Can-Am roadster dealer.
The only way you can unequivocally say they have no facts is to see and read all the documents related to this part of the Spyder design process. I'm sure you know you'll never get to do that! Maybe, like you said earlier, it is all based on $ $ $, but we probably will never be able to learn if that is the case! They might make some sort of argument that H-D trike wheels travel only in a straight line whereas Spyder tires are used for steering. It probably would be a pretty tenuous argument. In fact they may have at best a tenuous argument why we should only use the OEM tires. Regardless of how strong or weak that argument is, we will probably never see or hear it. I have never seen any documentation of any sort where BRP, as a corporation, has said using car tires is dangerous and must not be done. Have you? The statement above is about as restrictive as they can be without running afoul of the Moss-Magnuson Act.

The upshot is BRP makes the statement quoted above and that is what they are going to stand by. They have no obligation, legally, morally, or otherwise, to make a determination that "P" marked tires are good to use on the Spyder. What we as owners have is tens of thousands of miles of positive experience using car tires with no failures that can be attributed to using car tires.

And you're right, Government regs are often interpreted incorrectly, or differently. Most of the time that is because reading and understanding regs can be just plain tough! I know, I've read many, enforced many, and even written some!