Changes to OEM Rear Tire Construction

[sledmaster]

It looks like BRP has listened. We’ve just learned that BRP has went back to the rubber compound of what the rear tire had back in 2012. A production change took place in June, so all rear tires produced from that point forward have the longer lasting compound, and they actually went back to the 2012 part number.

There have been many part numbers used for Spyder rear tires through the years as the compound has changed. With the 2008 GS it showed 705 500 958, but then went to 705 501 312, then to 705 501 464 (2012 compound), then to 705 501 604 (2013/2014 compound). (edit - there is also 705 501 180 as well.)

This tells us there have been five different part numbers for rear tires since the Spyder introduction, but they all used to supersede to the 2013/2014 number 705 501 604. Now they all supersede to the 2012 number 705 501 464.

When we told BRP dealer support about the unusually short life span we were seeing from the 2013/2014 compound, they confirmed the 2013/2014 rear tire (#705 501 604) was in fact a softer rubber compound and that they were aware of the higher rate of wear. The 2013/2014 tires have a rubber compound with more grip which, unfortunately, reduces its life span.

Now for the good part. No matter what part number you try to get, if a dealer orders a rear tire right now (or since late June) they will get the 2012 compound, as the part number supersedes to 705 501 464. That means if a dealer orders rear tires now or has done so in the past few weeks they will last longer, but will not have the same grip as the softer 2013-2014 tire.

Most dealers order a bunch of tires early in the season, so many will still have the softer compound. Have them check the part number – if it ends in 604 it is the softer 2013/2014 compound. If it ends in 464 then it is the longer lasting compound like what we had back in 2012. It looked like the pricing remained the same.

This info comes from BRP tech support, or maybe more accurately the parts guys in Sherbrooke, so it should be valid. Any dealer can verify this by entering any of these tire part numbers into their ordering system and it will show them what they will be shipped is the 2012 number, which is now also showing as the 2015 number – 705 501 464. This should mean all of the 2015s will be built with this longer lasting tire.

Hope this helps.

[sledmaster]

This is what it shows if you now enter any of the tire part numbers. Whatever a dealer orders, they are now going to get a 705 501 464 compound. OEM tires should now last longer, once again. IMG_20140829_170406_308.jpg

[Mspiv]

Yesterday I had the dealer put a KUMHO on our 2014 RT L. We bought it in May.

my dealer is very very good with one exception, his only source of information re Spyders is from their "dealer network". I guess that is some sort of a dealers forum.

Any way, yesterday they told me that the reason for the reported poor tire wear was due for the most part to air pressure and that air pressure Must be spot on and monitored consistently.

i agree that air pressure should be checked but I think it is less of a contributor to this short life issue than is the coin pound.

I sent them a link to this excellentdisclosure


thank you

[sddinnh]

I'm glad that they reacted, but I've already switched to Michelin. Now if we could them to talk about a stiffer sidewall on the fronts

[SpyderAnn01]

Unfortunately the tire is still a Kenda. I never got great mileage on pre 2013 tires.

[BikerDoc]

This is better than no progress at all but I don't think the 10000 miles I got on my 2012 Kendas is going to make me as happy as the 30000 I got on my Kumho at half the cost

[gypsy_100]

Most dealers order a bunch of tires early in the season, so many will still have the softer compound. Have them check the part number – if it ends in 604 it is the softer 2013/2014 compound. If it ends in 464 then it is the longer lasting compound like what we had back in 2012. It looked like the pricing remained the same.

Very good info. Thanks. Problem is, the dealers pull whatever tire they want off the shelf and invoice it with the latest part #. I bought a rear tire in late June and my invoice shows the 464 number. But the build date is early February. Next time I'll have to have them search for a tire with a build date later than June.

[ThreeWheels]

This is better than no progress at all but I don't think the 10000 miles I got on my 2012 Kendas is going to make me as happy as the 30000 I got on my Kumho at half the cost

Bravo !

[Chupaca]

I got 22,000 miles on my kenda rear (RS 2012sm5). My fronts are still looking good. I replaced the rear with a kenda and will see how this one does. Still think the manufacture runs vary within a tears production. May be the country thier raw naterials come from...

[finless]

I'm glad that they reacted, but I've already switched to Michelin. Now if we could them to talk about a stiffer sidewall on the fronts

I am with you and going to go with the Michelin tire as well. May cost more but the Michelin's on my car last way longer than any other tires I have used. They actually do run to the tread wear life as advertised!

Can I ask what Michelin tire you got?
I will probably need to replace mine after my Reading Ca. run early October. I have 9700 miles on my stock tire now and I am down to the water dams in the middle of the tire so not too much longer to go.

Bob

[AbNormy]

I had a hydoedge got 21k out of might have gotten another 10k but really like good traction wound up getting a defender happy with as well

[sddinnh]

I am with you and going to go with the Michelin tire as well. May cost more but the Michelin's on my car last way longer than any other tires I have used. They actually do run to the tread wear life as advertised!

Can I ask what Michelin tire you got?
I will probably need to replace mine after my Reading Ca. run early October. I have 9700 miles on my stock tire now and I am down to the water dams in the middle of the tire so not too much longer to go.

Bob

I'm running a 215/60/15 Michelin Hydroedge. With 4000 on it now, it's holding up well. That's the problem I had. I was planning a long trip and didn'y want to start with a "marginal" tire.

[StanProff]

I had a hydoedge got 21k out of might have gotten another 10k but really like good traction wound up getting a defender happy with as well

The michlen Hydroedge is no longer available and the Defender is the replacement for it. (that is what my tire dealer said). I just put a set of defenders on my car, they have a 90,000 mile tread ware. Is there any reason a Spyder wouldn't get 40,000 out of one? I bought the T speed rated one instead of the V rated. The T is rated at 118 mph prolonged speed. the V is rated at 130 or 140 or something like that. Seeing as how I don't think I'll be driving at 100 plus for any length of time I used the T rated one. They were about $20.00 cheaper per tire.

[finless]

I'm running a 215/60/15 Michelin Hydroedge. With 4000 on it now, it's holding up well. That's the problem I had. I was planning a long trip and didn'y want to start with a "marginal" tire.

Thank you for the info!

Bob

[Highwayman2013]

I put a 215/60/15 Primacy on mine, it is H rated for speed and 65,000 miles.

[KX5062]

Unfortunately the tire is still a Kenda. I never got great mileage on pre 2013 tires.

Still a Kenda and still only 2 ply.

[sddinnh]

Thank you for the info!

Bob

Hydroedges although discontinued are still out there. I just bought 2 of them the other week. There is also a Pirelli P4 in that size at Tire Rack that looks interesting too.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

.....So if these soft rubber compound Kenda's wear out in say 6 to 7000 miles are they going to re-place them under WARRANTY ? ? ...Mikeguyver

[sledmaster]

The original post was providing information that BRP had changed their compound (and part number) of their OEM rear tire. Many on the forum want to use the OEM tire, thus such information should be of benefit to them. Especially since so many have been wearing out the 2013/2014 rear tires in short periods compared to the previous ones.

I had posted previously that the 2013/2014 tires were of a softer compound and that was one of the reasons why they were going bald so quickly, but many did not want to believe that. I came across new information that was consistent with the softer compound of the 2013/2014 tires, so it was shared.

I for one ONLY use automotive rear tires. And I agree, even if BRP went back to their 2012 compound, I will continue to use an automotive tire on the rear because I believe it to be of higher quality and it wears longer and wears more even. So far I have burned through three different types, 2 of the Kumho, 2 of the Maxxis, 2 of the Toyo, all in the 225/50-15 OEM size.

To that point, we have traditionally believed it was the weak and cheap OEM tire ballooning out at high speeds due to centrifugal force that was the cause of the center wear. Some also believe high air pressure to also contribute to the center section wear. I am of the opinion one should never exceed the 28 psi suggestion, and I believe running lower is going to wear the rear tire better. Even with the OEM Kenda I would suggest going no more than 25-26. I run 25 right now on both of my units with auto tires. That said, the center section still wears faster than the outer edges. Not as fast as the OEM tires, but it could still be better.

So maybe there is more to this than just tire construction and air pressure. It has been suggested the rear rim is too narrow for the 225/50-15 tire profile, and that the 215/60-15 or 205/60-15 widths are going to wear the center even better because the narrower tire will fit the narrow rim better. The theory is the narrow rim pulls the 225/50-15 tire in to the rim, leading to bowing out the center section out on the 225 tires, also contributing to the accelerated center section wear.

I am not proclaiming to know this to be fact, I am just throwing it out there for you to consider. There might be good logic in using a narrower auto tire simply from the fit and even wear on the OEM rim, not just cost and durability and more miles.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

..........Sledmaster , I also dumped Kenda a long time ago.....The narrow rim thing is something I have also thought about. When I switched out my rear tire on my 2011 RSS I tried a 205/60-15 and that tire had absolutely even wear across the width of rear tire which I found interesting.....I have purchased a Michelin Hydro as a re-placement for my rear tire on my new 2014 RT and this is a 215/60-15.....from I have read here most users have gotten very good wear numbers .........But is BRP doing any WARRANTIES on the BAD rear tires that you know of ........Mikeguyver

[KX5062]

The original post was providing information that BRP had changed their compound (and part number) of their OEM rear tire. Many on the forum want to use the OEM tire, thus such information should be of benefit to them. Especially since so many have been wearing out the 2013/2014 rear tires in short periods compared to the previous ones.

I had posted previously that the 2013/2014 tires were of a softer compound and that was one of the reasons why they were going bald so quickly, but many did not want to believe that. I came across new information that was consistent with the softer compound of the 2013/2014 tires, so it was shared.

I for one ONLY use automotive rear tires. And I agree, even if BRP went back to their 2012 compound, I will continue to use an automotive tire on the rear because I believe it to be of higher quality and it wears longer and wears more even. So far I have burned through three different types, 2 of the Kumho, 2 of the Maxxis, 2 of the Toyo, all in the 225/50-15 OEM size.

To that point, we have traditionally believed it was the weak and cheap OEM tire ballooning out at high speeds due to centrifugal force that was the cause of the center wear. Some also believe high air pressure to also contribute to the center section wear. I am of the opinion one should never exceed the 28 psi suggestion, and I believe running lower is going to wear the rear tire better. Even with the OEM Kenda I would suggest going no more than 25-26. I run 25 right now on both of my units with auto tires. That said, the center section still wears faster than the outer edges. Not as fast as the OEM tires, but it could still be better.

So maybe there is more to this than just tire construction and air pressure. It has been suggested the rear rim is too narrow for the 225/50-15 tire profile, and that the 215/60-15 or 205/60-15 widths are going to wear the center even better because the narrower tire will fit the narrow rim better. The theory is the narrow rim pulls the 225/50-15 tire in to the rim, leading to bowing out the center section out on the 225 tires, also contributing to the accelerated center section wear.

I am not proclaiming to know this to be fact, I am just throwing it out there for you to consider. There might be good logic in using a narrower auto tire simply from the fit and even wear on the OEM rim, not just cost and durability and more miles.

Which of the automotive tires did you like the best, since you have good real world experience?

Also, you have an interesting theory about the rim size. That would be very easy to confirm. Measuring the rim will tell the tale. There is a set formula as to rim size and tire width. You could be onto something.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Which of the automotive tires did you like the best, since you have good real world experience?......My 205 / 60-15 on the RSS was a GEneral Altimax and that was on the RSS at 2014 Spyderfest when I won 1 st place in stock class at the DRAGS......I had NO PROBLEM ....Lighting it up at the line .....It actually spun a bit too easy....so I had to modify my launch a bit........PS the RSS is an SE

Also, you have an interesting theory about the rim size. That would be very easy to confirm. Measuring the rim will tell the tale. There is a set formula as to rim size and tire width. You could be onto something.

.........Not my theory my bst friend ( master wrencher and x-drag racer ) is the one I consulted............&..........THE TIRE RACK supplies some very good info on tire width to rim width recommendations ...............Right now I am running a TOYO PROXIS T1R 185 / 55 - 15 on the front of my 2014 RT. This is the largest tire that will fit in the old style fenders ....believe me ......and ,They stick like glue........I took a chance on them because TIRE RACK took the sidewall measurement on this size tire using a 6 inch rim.........ours is a 5 inch (?) rim .....sooooooooo it actually made the sidewall measurement smaller which turned out to be a GOOD thing because it was REALLY CLOSE ..............Mikeguyver

[sledmaster]

..........Sledmaster , I also dumped Kenda a long time ago.....The narrow rim thing is something I have also thought about. When I switched out my rear tire on my 2011 RSS I tried a 205/60-15 and that tire had absolutely even wear across the width of rear tire which I found interesting.....I have purchased a Michelin Hydro as a re-placement for my rear tire on my new 2014 RT and this is a 215/60-15.....from I have read here most users have gotten very good wear numbers .........But is BRP doing any WARRANTIES on the BAD rear tires that you know of ........Mikeguyver

I am not aware of any specific cases of rear tires being covered under warranty simply due to their short life span. A softer compound would not constitute a defect. I did hear talk of a bad batch of tires, but assumed that to be some of the 15" front tires.

I burned through the OE rear tire on my 2013 in 2,500 miles, left it on to 3,750 out of spite. Never had one go so quickly. That's when I started asking questions and was told the 2013/2014 compound was indeed softer for performance and traction. Uh huh. They told me it was my high average speed that was the main contributing factor. I told them ***** was going to hit the fan once people figured put they were going to need a new rear tire at every oil change. And now we hear they are going back to a longer lasting compound, whew.

The fact that you experienced such even wear on a 205 tells me we might be onto something here. The Spyder has a 7" wheel or rim width, and from what I can tell the auto 225/50-15 tires do specify a 7" rim width, but those doing the installs will tell you it seems to be narrow. It does make sense that a tight fit in this manner would bow out the center section more.

I am always curious as to any noticeable loss of traction with a higher-wear tire. I felt the Kumho was a step backwards from the Kenda for traction, especially as it wore. I could always get those to break loose far easier. The Maxxis was an OK tire, good for traction but didn't wear all that much better. The Toyo seems to be the best for traction from what I have seen so far. These were all in the OE 225/50-15 size. Once I burn through my stock of Toyo rears I will be trying a narrower profile.

Back to the front, I am going to try a set of Kumho Solus KH 16 on my 2013. They are 155/60-15 which should be +0.8% diameter and 10mm narrower, on paper, but when you measure them up the tread width looks almost identical to the OEM 15" kendas (165/55-15) that are so terribly cupped. They go on tomorrow so I will let you know how they work. So few tires available as subs for the 15" fronts, this one was AA traction and A temperature, but only 118 mph speed rated. Not the greatest, but worth a try.

[sddinnh]

I have noticed a slight tendency on the 215/60/15 Hydroedge to break loose easier if the traction on the road surface is marginal (ie sand on the road) and I'm really trying to break it loose. I've had zero problems under normal operation or in the wet even on tight and twisty roads. Even when pushed "hard" the traction seems good to me and I've seen no tendency for the back end to come loose. Just what I'm seeing, your results may vary. Keep me informed on the fronts. I feel they are way too soft in the sidewall and though I have no problems with their traction, I do have issues with their handling. In fact I've gone to 25 psi to try to mitigate that and that helps some.

[KX5062]

I am not aware of any specific cases of rear tires being covered under warranty simply due to their short life span. A softer compound would not constitute a defect. I did hear talk of a bad batch of tires, but assumed that to be some of the 15" front tires.

I burned through the OE rear tire on my 2013 in 2,500 miles, left it on to 3,750 out of spite. Never had one go so quickly. That's when I started asking questions and was told the 2013/2014 compound was indeed softer for performance and traction. Uh huh. They told me it was my high average speed that was the main contributing factor. I told them ***** was going to hit the fan once people figured put they were going to need a new rear tire at every oil change. And now we hear they are going back to a longer lasting compound, whew.

The fact that you experienced such even wear on a 205 tells me we might be onto something here. The Spyder has a 7" wheel or rim width, and from what I can tell the auto 225/50-15 tires do specify a 7" rim width, but those doing the installs will tell you it seems to be narrow. It does make sense that a tight fit in this manner would bow out the center section more.

I am always curious as to any noticeable loss of traction with a higher-wear tire. I felt the Kumho was a step backwards from the Kenda for traction, especially as it wore. I could always get those to break loose far easier. The Maxxis was an OK tire, good for traction but didn't wear all that much better. The Toyo seems to be the best for traction from what I have seen so far. These were all in the OE 225/50-15 size. Once I burn through my stock of Toyo rears I will be trying a narrower profile.

Back to the front, I am going to try a set of Kumho Solus KH 16 on my 2013. They are 155/60-15 which should be +0.8% diameter and 10mm narrower, on paper, but when you measure them up the tread width looks almost identical to the OEM 15" kendas (165/55-15) that are so terribly cupped. They go on tomorrow so I will let you know how they work. So few tires available as subs for the 15" fronts, this one was AA traction and A temperature, but only 118 mph speed rated. Not the greatest, but worth a try.

Thanks for answering my questions. The figure of a 7" rim, is that what the book says, or is it a real world measurement? Also, when you pull the front tires, can you measure the rim there also? It would nice to add to the knowledge base. Also, keeps us posted on your observations with the new fronts.