My Vredestein vs Kenda ramblings.

[h0gr1der]

All,

Just a quick run down on my Vredestein installation. Installed 175/55R15's on the front. Waiting on the rear to come in. A car tire shop installed and used a road force balancer. That machine is great. I can't quit grinning! My gums are sunburned along with the rest of my exposed skin. Started at 18 PSI, will work the 4 lb. rule when I can run it more. Much smoother, much less darty (is that a word?). Took the Kendas to the dealer for a re-balance. it helped but between 50-60 MPH the tires were so out of round it made the fenders flap. I like specs, so please don't bash me for posting this. It may be insightful to some other new guy.

Vredestein 175/55R15 Specs as measured by me not installed.
Diameter (Inch) 22.4
Circumference (Inch) (Tape Measure) 70.75
Section width (Inch) 7
Tread width (contact patch) (Inch) 5.75
Weight (Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 13.25
Load Rating 77T (908lbs) @118 MPH (at max sidewall of 51 PSI)
Tread 2 Ply Steel 1 Ply Polyester
Sidewall 1 Ply Polyester

Kenda 165/55R15 Specs as measured by me not installed.
Diameter (Inch) 22.375
Circumference (Inch) (Tape Measure) 70.50
Section width (Inch) 6.375
Tread width (contact patch) (Inch) 5.50
Weight (Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 15.625 (#1 Tire)
(Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 15.00 (#2 Tire)
Load Rating 55H (481lbs) @130 MPH (at max sidewall pressure of 30 PSI
Tread 2 Ply Steel 1 Ply Polyester
Sidewall 1 Ply Polyester

I had 800 miles on the Kenda tires. They were bad from the get go. Pulling out to pass an 18 wheeler on a 4 lane with a crown and some tire rutting was truly a frightening experience. Once the Kenda broke over the crown, coupled with the wind from the truck, and adding in the ruts affecting the rear tire at different times and amount than the fronts, made the Spyder take off aggressively for the ditch.

After the swap to the Vredestein (front only) I had the same opportunity to pass a big truck. Same conditions as before. The big RTL wallowed a bit, but didn't dart or shuffle. I suspect BajaRon's bar will correct the wallow. Very much improved tracking. I'm doing one change at a time so I can quantify in my mind how much benefit vs how many dollars. So far, the front tires seem like a very good value and easy to accomplish.

Looking closely at the specs, you'll see the Vredestein's are about 2 lbs lighter each. Both are 3 ply tread and 1 ply sidewall. I'm not the technical suspension guy who can talk spring rate and damping, but I know less unsprung weight is better for control. As in tire in contact with the road more type control. Also note the 2 different tire weights for the Kenda. One was fully 5/8 Lb heavier than the other. Folks, that's 10 U.S. ounces. The tires were unmounted, so it was an exact comparison. The ± 1/4 lb isn't the difference in the tires, it is the accuracy of the scale I used. I saw no such discrepancy in the Vresestein tires as far as weight. Both weighed out exactly the same.

The vast experience in miles ridden represented on this site tells me several things. While they are a crappy tire, I don't think the Kenda's are actually excessively failure prone, but just poor quality control items. I also believe that a good car tire inflated to appropriate pressure for the load and duty it's called to do will add a good margin of safety to the bike.

 

[Peteoz]

“Ramblings” ??? I wish I could “ramble” like that......great review, Hogrider, especially the stats. Thanks.

Pete

 

[LeftCoast]

Not trying to change the subject but I’ve got 20k on my Kenda fronts with tread left and they seem to behave ok although I’ve got nothing to compare them to. I still want to get rid of them though.

 

[h0gr1der]

On an added note, if you apply any kind of lubricant to the lug studs the torque requirement goes down. I'm not going to get real specific due to liability reasons, but in the industry I worked in we had chance to use various hydraulic torque machines and there were 4 different numbers for torque to achieve exactly the same clamping force. Highest and usually listed as the printed spec was dry threads. Second was lightly oiled threads. Third on the list was various anti seize compounds, and last and lowest was a Molybdenum paste. We were torquing to some huge numbers, and the difference from dry to anti seize was pretty dramatic. I know a lot of purists will poo-poo me, but I've galled and wrung off enough lugs to not want to do it again. Be aware- The book says never, ever do this. Along with installing car tires and many other things that become necessary. So, long story short, if you were to happen to add some lubricant to the threads, do your due diligence and find out how much the torque needs to be reduced to achieve the same clamping force (bolt stretch).

 

[stmike 1800]

All,

Just a quick run down on my Vredestein installation. Installed 175/55R15's on the front. Waiting on the rear to come in. A car tire shop installed and used a road force balancer. That machine is great. I can't quit grinning! My gums are sunburned along with the rest of my exposed skin. Started at 18 PSI, will work the 4 lb. rule when I can run it more. Much smoother, much less darty (is that a word?). Took the Kendas to the dealer for a re-balance. it helped but between 50-60 MPH the tires were so out of round it made the fenders flap. I like specs, so please don't bash me for posting this. It may be insightful to some other new guy.

Vredestein 175/55R15 Specs as measured by me not installed.
Diameter (Inch) 22.4
Circumference (Inch) (Tape Measure) 70.75
Section width (Inch) 7
Tread width (contact patch) (Inch) 5.75
Weight (Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 13.25
Load Rating 77T (908lbs) @118 MPH (at max sidewall of 51 PSI)
Tread 2 Ply Steel 1 Ply Polyester
Sidewall 1 Ply Polyester

Kenda 165/55R15 Specs as measured by me not installed.
Diameter (Inch) 22.375
Circumference (Inch) (Tape Measure) 70.50
Section width (Inch) 6.375
Tread width (contact patch) (Inch) 5.50
Weight (Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 15.625 (#1 Tire)
(Lbs ± 1/4 lb) 15.00 (#2 Tire)
Load Rating 55H (481lbs) @130 MPH (at max sidewall pressure of 30 PSI
Tread 2 Ply Steel 1 Ply Polyester
Sidewall 1 Ply Polyester

I had 800 miles on the Kenda tires. They were bad from the get go. Pulling out to pass an 18 wheeler on a 4 lane with a crown and some tire rutting was truly a frightening experience. Once the Kenda broke over the crown, coupled with the wind from the truck, and adding in the ruts affecting the rear tire at different times and amount than the fronts, made the Spyder take off aggressively for the ditch.

After the swap to the Vredestein (front only) I had the same opportunity to pass a big truck. Same conditions as before. The big RTL wallowed a bit, but didn't dart or shuffle. I suspect BajaRon's bar will correct the wallow. Very much improved tracking. I'm doing one change at a time so I can quantify in my mind how much benefit vs how many dollars. So far, the front tires seem like a very good value and easy to accomplish.

Looking closely at the specs, you'll see the Vredestein's are about 2 lbs lighter each. Both are 3 ply tread and 1 ply sidewall. I'm not the technical suspension guy who can talk spring rate and damping, but I know less unsprung weight is better for control. As in tire in contact with the road more type control. Also note the 2 different tire weights for the Kenda. One was fully 5/8 Lb heavier than the other. Folks, that's 10 U.S. ounces. The tires were unmounted, so it was an exact comparison. The ± 1/4 lb isn't the difference in the tires, it is the accuracy of the scale I used. I saw no such discrepancy in the Vresestein tires as far as weight. Both weighed out exactly the same.

The vast experience in miles ridden represented on this site tells me several things. While they are a crappy tire, I don't think the Kenda's are actually excessively failure prone, but just poor quality control items. I also believe that a good car tire inflated to appropriate pressure for the load and duty it's called to do will add a good margin of safety to the bike.

What size of rear tire are you getting .I like your wright up are you going to do the same for the rear ??

 

[h0gr1der]

I'm a novice at Spyder stuff, I'll be the first to admit. Some very knowledgeable folks on here, read everything they wrote and more (including dissenting opinions). Decided on the Vredestein brand front and rear. This time I'm going 175/55R15 front and 205/60R15 rear. The Quatrac 5 has a 400 wear rating, so it should be soft enough to handle pretty sportingly, yet not so soft you can't get some decent mileage from it before wearing out. Read what Mr. Blueknight911 and Peter Aawen write, there's a few more I'm getting around to studying. So far with just the front rubber changed my ride and handling have improved greatly. Much easier to keep in a straight line. Next is the rear tire, then laser alignment, then BajaRon sway bar. Man's gotta pace themselves! I think they call this Farkling.

 

[Dennis in Lodi]

we must have a special batch

Not trying to change the subject but I’ve got 20k on my Kenda fronts with tread left and they seem to behave ok although I’ve got nothing to compare them to. I still want to get rid of them though.

I have trashed the stock tires on this forum multiple times based on my tire experiences with my 2015 RT. I am very anal about handling and tire performance. Yet, I can't explain how I have 17,000 miles on the stock front tires on my F3L. The tires are not cupped, don't shimmy or shake, track true at speeds and corner just fine. I have had my finger on the BUY button from tire rack multiple times yet I keep asking the same question. Why am I changing a tire that is still doing a good job?
How is it possible that a picky performance person like myself can't find fault in my current stock front tires? Did Kenda have a special batch made for them????
Dennis

 

[LeftCoast]

I have trashed the stock tires on this forum multiple times based on my tire experiences with my 2015 RT. I am very anal about handling and tire performance. Yet, I can't explain how I have 17,000 miles on the stock front tires on my F3L. The tires are not cupped, don't shimmy or shake, track true at speeds and corner just fine. I have had my finger on the BUY button from tire rack multiple times yet I keep asking the same question. Why am I changing a tire that is still doing a good job?
How is it possible that a picky performance person like myself can't find fault in my current stock front tires? Did Kenda have a special batch made for them????
Dennis

Ha ha you’re not the only one here that has been fine with the Kendal’s but not sure who wants to admit it due to tire sensitivity on the forum. Or we got special batches :yes:

 

[Peter Aawen]

....... How is it possible that a picky performance person like myself can't find fault in my current stock front tires? Did Kenda have a special batch made for them????
Dennis

I think it's just that it's the Quality Control on their 'Special Motorcycle Use Only' Kendas that's the problem! If you get a good one (or pair?!) of them on your Spyder, especially on the lightly loaded front end of our Spyders, they can work and last pretty well. It's not as if the 'compound' of rubber that they use is that bad at all - it's not much different to that used in most other tires. It's not even as if the tread pattern itself is that bad at all - it's not outstandingly different to the patterns used by many other tire brands - & it's quite similar to many. Yes, it is made using lighter denier thread in the poly plies than most & it only has 2 'steel belt' tread plies while many others have those & more, but then our Spyders are very light when compared to the loads imposed upon their tires by most other vehicles and they really don't need a heavier, stronger tire to carry the load and withstand the stresses that our Spyders impose... :dontknow:

It's simply that very few of these tires seem to come off the Kenda production line manufactured to the same standards or quality of construction as the few 'good tires' that do happen to sneak thru!! They largely weigh in at oddly different weights; the sidewalls have varying thicknesses & are either lumpy & thick or fragile & thin at random intervals around the tire; the steel belt layers that are meant to support the tread & keep it firmly on the road wander all over the place & at times support more of the sidewall rather than the tread, so the tire itself just can't track straight & true or smoothly on the road surface; various ply &/or belt layers aren't applied in properly position &/or overlap unevenly, making lumps or divots in the tread or sidewalls & rendering the tire wobbly & un-balanceable; the tread pattern itself often hasn't been moulded straight or correctly into the surface of the tire, so that tire has no chance of ever running straight & true on the road; there are tires that quite simply are not & seem never to have been made truly round; there are some tires that are lumpy & unbalanced and some that have almost paper thin sidewalls &/or tread sections due to manufacturing faults; and the list goes on and on!!

And it seems to be a random crap shoot as to which Spyders get the good tires & which Spyders get the crap tires as they come off the production line, and it's just as much of a random deal when buying replacement Kenda tires!! It'll be interesting to see if the same holds true for the tires BRP supplies for the new Rykers?? I wonder if many Ryker owners will also be forced to seek better tires, tires like those originally intended for heavier vehicles similar to us Spyder Ryders, just to maintain some degree of confidence in the tires they run on those even lighter machines?! :dontknow:

 

[PW2013STL]

I agree with Peter on the quality of the OEM tires.
On our 14 RT the front tires cupped within the first 1000 miles. On my 2015 F3 I purchased it used with 23,000 miles on it, but did not replace the front tires until around 31,000 miles. The right front looked like it could go another 10,000 miles, but the left was past the wear bars.
Knowing the first owner I asked when the right tire had been replaced. I was told no front tires had ever been replaced!
Also looking at how many wheel weights used to get the OEM tires in balance (one had 10 more than the other) shows how good, or better the lack of, their quality control is.
If you are lucky you could get good OEM front tires, but for less $ you can get better front tires from tire companies that have high quality controls in place.

 

[h0gr1der]

That's kind of where I am going in my quest. I read a bunch different posts about the greatly varied mileage before replacement. My Kenda's had a 10 ounce difference in weight between the front pair, piss poor quality control. Along with apparently widely divergent alignment specs from the factory, this makes for a long and arduous journey to get it dialed in. I prioritize as such; 1. Safety, 2. Performance, and 3. Comfort. So to make my 2018 RTL as good as it can possibly be for safety I've decided to replace the tires with something I know works (it's been done before so I don't have to be the test pilot), Laser Align (because mine darted worse than a scared rabbit), and sway bar (because in the ruts mine wallows). Don't know if I need all that, but if you do all that you know it's the best it can be.

I've also never been introduced to Nanny, performance wise. Trying out the new Vredesteins at very low mileage (yes, I know about the mold release and installation lubricants) I had all three tires howling around a slow speed curve. But as I've read, the Nanny is conscious of how far we get from the OEM ratio of tire size. If you put too big of tire at either end, you take away some of your tolerance before the nanny thinks you have a problem. Best to try to stick near the center of the zone by either no increase in size, or making the same percentage of increase at both ends of the bike.

Although generic as far as recommendations go, https://www.tacomaworld.com/tirecalc?tires=165-55r15-175-55r15 is a good place to start. Roughly speaking, in sizes you can get, combinations of 175/55R15 front and 205/60R15 rear, and possibly 175/60R15 front and 215/60R15 rear keep the front/rear sizes fairly close to normal. But it's hard to find some sizes. The 175/60R15 may have limited choices. I chose what had already been settled on by other peoples tests, saving me time. One good thing with larger tires is that they increase ground clearance.

 

[Thopper]

Curious....is the Spyder speedometer gps based? If not how do you compensate for the different size tires?

 

[Peter Aawen]

Curious....is the Spyder speedometer gps based? If not how do you compensate for the different size tires?

Firstly, the OE Spec Kenda tires are actually a 'small' tire for the 'nominal' sidewall size, and many tires with the same 'nominal' size are somewhat larger!

Knowing that, understand that the speedo on your Spyder takes its reading from one of the speed sensors on the wheels, usually the rear. And since the OE Spec Kendas are a little small for that nominal size, so every Spyder comes off the production line with a speedo that reads a little bit faster than your true speed due to that anyway. However, it's a fact that most bikes and cars have this same error in varying degrees, I suspect mainly because manufacturers really don't want to get blamed for peoples speeding fines, so virtually all production vehicles we can buy have speedos that try to fool you into thinking you're going a little faster than you actually are, ie, than your true speed! Here in Aust (& possibly in your country too, cos I don't see the manufacturers adjusting their production line or tire sizes, different speedos ect to vary their speedo errors to different standards for different countries) that 'optimistic speedo' is enshrined in legislation. Our Australian Design Rules demand that manufacturers ensure their speedos will read fast by anything up to 10% faster than the true speed - it used to be that there was a 10% up + or down - limit, but I believe it was in the early 70's that we came into line & standardised our legislation so that the +/- allowance was replaced by 'may read up to 10% faster and 0% slower' so that all current speedos here are no longer allowed to read slower than actual true speed at all! What this means is that many if not most vehicles on the road that are still running factory sized tires and/or speedo settings have speedos that read faster than true by something/anything up to 10%! :shocked:

All of which boils down to you being able to fit a tyre (that may or may not be the same 'nominal' sidewall size as the 'small' OE Spec Kendas) that has a larger rolling circumference to return an 'up to 10% slower' speed than the stock/factory wheels and in doing so, you are making your speedo more accurate than when your Spyder left the factory! The bad news is that while most Spyders have a 'similar' speedo error that means you are travelling a little slower than you expect, very few speedos &/or tires are really showing EXACTLY the same error, so YOU need to check your particular speedo error yourself, then be careful when you choose a replacement tire, because it's also true that very few tires are EXACTLY the size that is printed on their sidewalls! Hence the 'nominal' tire size info and why those tire size comparison charts & apps aren't quite as truly helpful as some might think - they only compare NOMINAL sizes, and you need to choose an ACTUAL physical sized tire that doesn't make your speedo show a slower indicated speed than your actual true speed, or at least one that doesn't make your speedo read slower than your actual true speed by very much!

Oh, and this 'virtually all factory speedos read fast/optimistically by some degree' thing also applies to trip meters & odometers.... virtually all odo/trip meters are optimistic about how far you've travelled, and once again, this can be by as much as 10%, and also, it is not necessarily exactly the same variation/error as the speedo on that vehicle! So that 10,000 mile service interval you've been working to off your odometer might just mean that you've really been regularly servicing your vehicle at something closer to 9,000 miles, or 1000 miles early! :shocked:

So if you've got a GPS that turns on with your vehicle ignition, reads the speed & distance travelled info whilever you are moving, and turns off with your vehicle ignition, then it's very likely going to provide more accurate speed & distance travelled readings than the vehicles speedo & odo/trip meter. There again, since pretty much everyone else has speedos that are reading faster that their actual true speed & odo/trip meters that are telling them they've travelled further than they actually have, so does it really matter?? Just so long as yours aren't reading a SLOWER speed and LESS miles than you've actually travelled, you shouldn't get into too much trouble! :2thumbs:

 

[h0gr1der]

Peter,

That's what I'm going to try to do today during tire testing. The storms have finally passed, life is good. I had a Kawasaki Nomad 1600, the speedometer and odometer were 3% wrong. It was linear, and at a GPS indicated 70 mph, my speedometer was indicating 72 mph. The odometer was as far off, as verified by my GPS. Trading the OEM tire for what was referred to as a "stage 2 upgrade" Metzler ME880 got me very close to perfect.

I've got my GPS temporarily mounted, and before I rip that crappy Kenda off I'm going to do a tire pressure test run and measure speedo vs GPS error, and the percent off the odometer shows for the Kenda 225/50R15. Then after I mount the Vredestein 205/60R15 I'll do the same for comparison. I'll post the results as I can.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Speedo accuracy

Peter it's the rear tires that produce the speedo / odo readings ...the sensor is on the rear wheel …… Mike hyea:

 

[canamjhb]

I installed a product named Speedohealer on my Gold Wing several years ago. It corrects the Speedometer electronically. I believe it is available for the Spyder also. What it does is correct the percentage the speedo is off. Do several runs with the GPS and determine the amount of error percentage and plug that into the Speedohealer. It is a plug and play fix for speedo error. My Gold Wing is spot on speed with stock tires. My Spyder is spot on after changing the rear to a CT..... Jim

 

[billybovine]

It is my understanding is there is an international agreement that speedometers will be accurate to within -0% to +10% of actual speed. Then this is followed by rules or laws in many countries following this agreement. Most vehicle manufacturers follow a policy of -2% to +8% giving them a margin of error to the regulations.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

It is my understanding is there is an international agreement that speedometers will be accurate to within -0% to +10% of actual speed. Then this is followed by rules or laws in many countries following this agreement. Most vehicle manufacturers follow a policy of -2% to +8% giving them a margin of error to the regulations.

Interesting …. however I would prefer almost perfect ….rather than … S.W.A.G. ………..jmho ….. Mike hyea:

 

[FlyBoy2121]

Hello everyone

the speedometer it's plugging on the front or rear wheel ?? Tank You

FlyBoy2121

 

[h0gr1der]

All,

I'm doing testing right now, saw a funny thing with my speedo vs GPS. Usually, there is a very linear discrepancy. Say at 40 MPH you see 2 MPH error, then at 80 MPH I'm used to, and have seen in the past, the same 5% error, or 4 MPH. On my 2018 RTL, after I got the new 20.8 firmware revison. I saw 1 MPH at 40 MPH, 1 MPH at 50, and 2 MPH error at 60,70, and 80 MPH. Not normal. Wonder if they did something in the firmware revision that affects the speedometer, because it felt like after the revision I was being passed less for a given MPH. Error is between 2-3% (Speedo showing faster than you're going).

The speedo comes off of the rear wheel as I understand it. I'm still running the stock 225/50R15 Kenda, the numbers above are from the OEM wheel, and it is being replaced right now with the Vredestein. I'll see if the 205/60R15 corrects the error or simply stays the same.