Rear Kenda OEM Tire Mileage Concern.

[Mikey]

" Ultamax " ???? - typo ???? ....I'm not familiar with this tire ..... Mike

Hey I type with my thumbs!!!

[Deanna777]

I just got a new Altimax to replace the factory Kenda (at 7,300 miles) on the rear of my 2020 RTL. From the inside it appears to have a reinforcing belt down the center of the tire; I hope this will prevent the donut wear effect that my kenda had. The kenda's seem like crummy tires; I put 16" Federal AZ01's on the front last winter and don't regret it.

The Altimax has/says when to replace the tire, it is built into the tire( in the center of the tire).

Deanna

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

The Altimax has/says when to replace the tire, it is built into the tire( in the center of the tire).

Deanna

Yes it does have this feature - However, this appears long before the WEAR reaches the LEGAL WEAR point. I have them on the front on my 14 RT ( I don't advise you try them on the front, the brackets will need shimming to get them to fit ) ...... and have put another 3000 + mi. on them AFTER the warning appeared ...I now have 37,700mi. total on them .... good luck .... Mike

[spyderdave]

14-15 psi on the AZ01's; the new Altimax (rear) isn't on yet, I'm guessing 26-28.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

14-15 psi on the AZ01's; the new Altimax (rear) isn't on yet, I'm guessing 26-28.

26 to 28 is what a CRAPENDA needs ..... your Altimax only needs 18 to carry the same load ..... this is based on tire Science ..... good luck .... Mike

[spyderdave]

Thanks, Blueknight; 18 it is.

When I put the 16" AZ01's on the front, I used an online tire calculator to ascertain whether the circumference and rpm was close to the factory "Krapendas". The same calculator show a significant difference between the factory rear and the Altimax; any insight as to affects in speedometer error and/or traction contol on the new rear tire (AKA "the Nanny's" algorithms)? Thanks in advance.

[Peter Aawen]

....... any insight as to affects in speedometer error and/or traction contol (AKA "the Nanny's" algorithms)? Thanks in advance.

Running the OE Kendas will mean that your speedo was reading anything up to 10% FASTER than your real/true speed (ie, you only thought you were doing 50mph when the speedo showed that, you were really only doing something closer to 45mph! ) so by putting on a tire that's a little larger the speedo is going to be reading something closer to your real/true speed - most like that.

As for the Nanny, she's not going to be all that upset by running a slightly larger tire, she has to be able to safely manage things even if you have a completely flat tire ( maybe 3"+ smaller in dia) or a massively over-inflated tire (maybe as much as 1.5-2" larger in dia) anyway - so unless the tire you're running now has a rolling radius that's something over about 3/4"/20mm larger than that of the OE Tire, then it's very unlikely you'll notice any change. Btw, most who DO notice any change at all feel that it's a change for the better!

So now that you've got real & stronger tires than the OE Kendas and you're running them at the right sort of pressure for the (lighter) load than they'd usually be carrying in order to need 28 psi in them, you're all set! Now you can get out there &....

Ryde More, & Worry Less!

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Thanks, Blueknight; 18 it is.

When I put the 16" AZ01's on the front, I used an online tire calculator to ascertain whether the circumference and rpm was close to the factory "Krapendas". The same calculator show a significant difference between the factory rear and the Altimax; any insight as to affects in speedometer error and/or traction contol on the new rear tire (AKA "the Nanny's" algorithms)? Thanks in advance.

with what Peter told you ..... Those " tire calculators " are based on Mathematical formulas .... Actual tire measurements are often quite different. .... the manufacture's of the tire will have the exact measurements ...... use those ..... Mike

[spyderdave]

Thanks!

[Fat Baxter]

I imagine Kenda is the only company willing to invest in manufacturing a tire that has such low volume sales... .

They wouldn't have this low-volume problem if they went with slightly different tire sizes all around, using more widely-used tire profiles. Most of the recommended non-OEM replacements are readily available.

It's BRP's stubborn refusal to let their dealers mount non-OEM tires that pisses everyone off. They're awfully tone-deaf as to how much of an issue this is to the owners.

[2dogs]

They're awfully tone-deaf as to how much of an issue this is to the owners.

Not listening to customers' complaints is a foundation stone to going out of business.

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

It's BRP's stubborn refusal to let their dealers mount non-OEM tires that pisses everyone off. They're awfully tone-deaf as to how much of an issue this is to the owners.

It's not BRP, it's Federal Regulations. Every tire mounted on a vehicle must have a suitable use designation showing what type of vehicles the manufacturer of the tire has designed the tire for. No manufacturer other than Kenda and Vee Rubber, AFIK, has tested and certified their tire to be suitable for use on a Spyder, or for that matter, a Slingshot. That's why you see designations like LT for light truck, P for passenger cars, "Trailer Use Only", "Lowboy Use Only", "Motorcycle Use Only", "Mobile Home Use Only", "Not for Highway Use", and now for Kendas, "Special Motorcycle Use Only". We are fortunate that so many regular tire dealers are willing to ignore the regs and mount car tires for our Spyders.

You really don't expect BRP to condone dealers flaunting Federal Regs when there is a totally compliant option available, do you?

Unless BRP has put themselves into a corner with their contract with Kenda, what we really want them to do is convince makers of car tires (at least 1 or 2 of them) to do the necessary testing to demonstrate that the car tires they manufacture are perfectly suitable for Spyders. But, for all we know, manufacturers may already have engineering analysis and test results that indicate to them that in fact car tires are not ideal Spyder tires. Vee Rubber states they have designed the Arachnid specifically for the Spyder. Users on this forum have stated they are no better than the Kendas. That indicates to me that the tire characteristics BRP has specified for the Spyders doesn't fit into the design parameters for car tires. It would be interesting to know what characteristics of a typical car tire don't fit within the parameters BRP has specified for Spyder tires. Users here sure haven't identified any from thousands of miles of use.

The Federal Regulations were written to help prevent unscrupulous manufacturers from selling tires to consumers that are not safe for the consumers' vehicles. The problem with tire regulations, as with all Fed regs, is how to write them as blanket requirements while still allowing reasonable and safe exceptions. And before you say we need to get rid of the Federal Regs altogether keep in mind history shows by and large corporations, given the choice, always put consumer welfare behind profits. The regs wouldn't be needed if greed didn't exist.

[Little Blue]

But Wow. .....

Hello Peter Aawen please give me your thoughts.

I will wait for your reply. .....

Have a Blessed Day Everyone. .......

[Wmoater]

Update:
I replaced the worn out Kenda with this new - VREDESTEIN Quatrac 5 - 205/60R15 tire. it took .8 oz to balance.

The BRP Kenda took over 3 oz to balance!
Today I put 240 miles on this new VREDESTEIN Quatrac 5 tire riding 2-up with 18 psi staring cold and my Spyder rode great. It was fairly warm today.

That’s a GREAT find figuring they have been discontinued! NICE!

[MeudtPG]

That’s a GREAT find figuring they have been discontinued! NICE!

I always keep a new tire in on hand so I used it up.
Go with the newest version Vredestein " QUATRAC " ( without the "5" ).
Q-5 Was a great tire, but Vredestein has re-placed it with an up-dated tire the " QUATRAC " ( without the "5" ). Check it out!

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

It's not BRP, it's Federal Regulations. Every tire mounted on a vehicle must have a suitable use designation showing what type of vehicles the manufacturer of the tire has designed the tire for. No manufacturer other than Kenda and Vee Rubber, AFIK, has tested and certified their tire to be suitable for use on a Spyder, or for that matter, a Slingshot. That's why you see designations like LT for light truck, P for passenger cars, "Trailer Use Only", "Lowboy Use Only", "Motorcycle Use Only", "Mobile Home Use Only", "Not for Highway Use", and now for Kendas, "Special Motorcycle Use Only". We are fortunate that so many regular tire dealers are willing to ignore the regs and mount car tires for our Spyders.

You really don't expect BRP to condone dealers flaunting Federal Regs when there is a totally compliant option available, do you?

Unless BRP has put themselves into a corner with their contract with Kenda, what we really want them to do is convince makers of car tires (at least 1 or 2 of them) to do the necessary testing to demonstrate that the car tires they manufacture are perfectly suitable for Spyders. But, for all we know, manufacturers may already have engineering analysis and test results that indicate to them that in fact car tires are not ideal Spyder tires. Vee Rubber states they have designed the Arachnid specifically for the Spyder. Users on this forum have stated they are no better than the Kendas. That indicates to me that the tire characteristics BRP has specified for the Spyders doesn't fit into the design parameters for car tires. It would be interesting to know what characteristics of a typical car tire don't fit within the parameters BRP has specified for Spyder tires. Users here sure haven't identified any from thousands of miles of use.

The Federal Regulations were written to help prevent unscrupulous manufacturers from selling tires to consumers that are not safe for the consumers' vehicles. The problem with tire regulations, as with all Fed regs, is how to write them as blanket requirements while still allowing reasonable and safe exceptions. And before you say we need to get rid of the Federal Regs altogether keep in mind history shows by and large corporations, given the choice, always put consumer welfare behind profits. The regs wouldn't be needed if greed didn't exist.

Your first paragraph flies in the face of reality tho .... Harley Davidson has been using Auto tires ( ie. DUNLOP ) for decades on the trikes they manufacture and SELL. ...... Mike

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

Your first paragraph flies in the face of reality tho .... Harley Davidson has been using Auto tires ( ie. DUNLOP ) for decades on the trikes they manufacture and SELL. ...... Mike

I knew you would come back with that!

All I can figure is that HD has written the performance specification for the rear tires in a manner that encompasses the characteristics of passenger car tires. Or, there is some behind the scenes documentation and agreements with NHSTA where they agree to the CT use on HD trikes. Have you seen brands other than Dunlop on HD trikes? Maybe Dunlop has done the testing and design analysis to allow their tires to be used on the trikes, but because of the low volume of them being diverted to HD they've gotten an exemption from the tire marking requirement.

Also, keep in mind we're talking about rear wheel trikes vs reverse trikes. The specified performance specs may be quite different for the two applications. What I'm sure of is that HD's use of Dunlop CTs conforms in some way or another with Fed regs, or is allowed by an approved exception. It's either the same with other trike converters, or their volume is so small they just take their chances and fly below the NHTSA radar.

Maybe I'll send an email to NHTSA asking about this. I also wonder what California Side Car and others use on the front wheels of their reverse trike conversions.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I knew you would come back with that!

All I can figure is that HD has written the performance specification for the rear tires in a manner that encompasses the characteristics of passenger car tires. Or, there is some behind the scenes documentation and agreements with NHSTA where they agree to the CT use on HD trikes. Have you seen brands other than Dunlop on HD trikes? Maybe Dunlop has done the testing and design analysis to allow their tires to be used on the trikes, but because of the low volume of them being diverted to HD they've gotten an exemption from the tire marking requirement.

Also, keep in mind we're talking about rear wheel trikes vs reverse trikes. The specified performance specs may be quite different for the two applications. What I'm sure of is that HD's use of Dunlop CTs conforms in some way or another with Fed regs, or is allowed by an approved exception. It's either the same with other trike converters, or their volume is so small they just take their chances and fly below the NHTSA radar.

Maybe I'll send an email to NHTSA asking about this. I also wonder what California Side Car and others use on the front wheels of their reverse trike conversions.

.... Good luck finding any EXACT info on this topic .... personally it doesn't affect me so I'm not terribly concerned .... There are always lots of " Possible reasons " .... I stated what I've seen live and in person ...... Mike

[Peter Aawen]

Here in Oz, & I believe in your country too, there's a Tire & Rim Industry Standard Manual fairly readily available that details all the rim & tire requirements & specifications etc for same, and it's published as part of International Agreements on the Standards & Regs that apply to all Automotive Tire & Rim use. BRP's 'Special Motorcycle Use Only' moniker on the sidewalls of the Kendas doesn't get a mention (so far as I can find to date, not anywhere in the World! ) There's no mention of any specific Federal Regs like those referred to earlier as maybe applying to Spyders &/or Slingshots either... altho there is mention of LT & P type tires as well as some application restrictions like 'speed restricted & 'trailer use only' etc for lesser demanding spec'd versions of those. BUT, there is a lot of discussion about what sort of tire you can use on what sort of rim....

And without going into a whole lot of detail & discussion that most readers really don't want to go thru (again!! ) it basically boils down to this....

If the tire you want to fit onto your Spyder's 'J' type Car Rim meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings on the OEM Tire and it's within your local Authority's approved size change limits, then it's OK to use it (at an appropriate pressure for the 'lighter than usual' load )

So I reckon Fat Baxter got it right -

They wouldn't have this low-volume problem if they went with slightly different tire sizes all around, using more widely-used tire profiles. Most of the recommended non-OEM replacements are readily available.

It's BRP's stubborn refusal to let their dealers mount non-OEM tires that pisses everyone off. They're awfully tone-deaf as to how much of an issue this is to the owners.

Ps: Just a little bit of by the by.... while we actually have some anti-monopoly laws et al that are even stronger here in Oz, there are many Countries in the World that have something similar to your Moss-Magnussen Act that basically imply that where an alternative/after-market product which satisfies the Form, Fit, & Function requirement (ie. it goes in, fits, & does the job) and meets or exceeds the OEM specification has been used, then in the case of a dispute it's up to the Vehicle Manufacturer who claims that only their approved parts are acceptable to prove that an alternative used in this way caused any faults/issues/accidents.... sure, they probably can afford more expensive lawyers than you, buuut.... Just Sayin'

[2dogs]

Yes it does have this feature - However, this appears long before the WEAR reaches the LEGAL WEAR point. I have them on the front on my 14 RT ( I don't advise you try them on the front, the brackets will need shimming to get them to fit ) ...... and have put another 3000 + mi. on them AFTER the warning appeared ...I now have 37,700mi. total on them .... good luck .... Mike

How'd they get that feature in there?

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

How'd they get that feature in there?

........... If you find out let me know .......... Mike

[2dogs]

........... If you find out let me know .......... Mike

Has me baffled too. I wouldn't have known if Deanna hadn't said something about it. The RT with a trailer hitch covers most of the tire from view.

[Deanna777]

Has me baffled too. I wouldn't have known if Deanna hadn't said something about it. The RT with a trailer hitch covers most of the tire from view.

Here is a link:http://generaltire.com

It shows the "Replace Tire" monitor in the center of the tire.


Click on the tab , that says "all Tires" Passenger,( 2nd column ) Altimax RT43.

Deanna

[WilcoJunoHotel]

How'd they get that feature in there?

If it is actually red like the picture on their website, they probably inserted a small strip of red rubber between the carcass and the tread rubber before the tire is molded (tread rubber bonded to carcass). Much like how whitewalls and raised letter tires were(are?) made.

Tire manufacturing has changed very little since I was with Michelin back in the 80s but Michelin would not make a whitewall or raised white letter or red letter tire because it made the tire weaker due to the differing rubber compounds and additional molding seams and layers. However I have seen some new tires for motorcycles with harder rubber compounds in the middle and softer rubber compounds on the sidewalls so perhaps the technology is there to do this safely now.

[Wmoater]

Here’s a video on YouTube that explains the altimax Wear indicators. Mine doesn’t have any red. My dad’s was replaced on his old bike and we never saw any red. The word “replace tire” is all that’s left. It’s been around a long time. The video was made back in 2011.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRMpzgGkFuA