Vredestein Quatrac 5

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I heartily agree with the hard to get aspect of these tires Mike. I ordered mine on May 9, got acknowledgement of my order approximately a week ago, and was told that I would receive notification from the dealer when they would be shipped. I’m still waiting for the shipping date. Thank the good lord that I don’t NEED new tires. tic...tic...tic...tic...tic...tic...tic...tic

From whom did you get yours ….. Mike hyea:

 

[bigbadbrucie]

From whom did you get yours ….. Mike hyea:

As mentioned earlier on this thread, Quattrotires.com....they’re out of Quebec.

 

[Airborne]

Hi all,

Please don't shoot the messenger but according to mu owners manual if i don't use oem replacement tires it may interfere with the Traction/stability systems. ETC

I am happy to convert at some stage but that info leaves a little shadow of doubt, plus dealer tells me not a good idea and there is no car like alternative here in Australia [over to you Peter]

Please feel free to set me straight. I think i'm already convinced, especially after reading these sort of posts. just need a push.

 

[Peter Aawen]

Bosch, who designed & produce the VSS used on our Spyders & a fairly significant range of other vehicles once the working parameters are dialed in seem to be pretty sure that something as trivial changing the brand of tires you run won't upset the VSS at all! It isn't of any concern on any o ne of all those other vehicles either, is it?! Besides, the VSS is designed to handle all sorts of variables, including different tire pressures & therefore differing rolling diameters, traction, road surfaces, etc, so something like a better made tire is going to be absobloodylutely nothing to the VSS!! And then there's the millions of miles of 'free testing' that's been done by thousands of Spyder Ryders over the years, with not one reported concern with the traction/stability systems or the entire VSS reported (in fact, quite the opposite!) IMHO, it's nothing but manufacturer scare tactics & double-speak to make owners scared of using anything but their low quality high priced excuse for a tire! :shocked:

And here in Aust, all vehicles that are approved for sale &/or 'grey import' must be able to run any 'design approved tire' that is within the approved +/- legal size range and that meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings & the construction type. So basically, any Pasenger construction type tire that will fit on your Spyder without modding the swing arms or front suspension under the OE tupperware is almost certainly a legal fitting! :lecturef_smilie: But it is up to you to decide if you want to run any tire other than the Kendas. I know what choice I've made! :thumbup:

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Bosch, who designed & produce the VSS used on our Spyders & a fairly significant range of other vehicles once the working parameters are dialed in seem to be pretty sure that something as trivial changing the brand of tires you run won't upset the VSS at all! It isn't of any concern on any o ne of all those other vehicles either, is it?! Besides, the VSS is designed to handle all sorts of variables, including different tire pressures & therefore differing rolling diameters, traction, road surfaces, etc, so something like a better made tire is going to be absobloodylutely nothing to the VSS!! And then there's the millions of miles of 'free testing' that's been done by thousands of Spyder Ryders over the years, with not one reported concern with the traction/stability systems or the entire VSS reported (in fact, quite the opposite!) IMHO, it's nothing but manufacturer scare tactics & double-speak to make owners scared of using anything but their low quality high priced excuse for a tire! :shocked:

And here in Aust, all vehicles that are approved for sale &/or 'grey import' must be able to run any 'design approved tire' that is within the approved +/- legal size range and that meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings & the construction type. So basically, any Pasenger construction type tire that will fit on your Spyder without modding the swing arms or front suspension under the OE tupperware is almost certainly a legal fitting! :lecturef_smilie: But it is up to you to decide if you want to run any tire other than the Kendas. I know what choice I've made! :thumbup:

:agree: with Peter 200% .. since 09 I've personally put more than a dozen different types and sizes of Auto tires on my three Spyders …. none have caused an issue ….. Similar VSS systems are now on all cars and trks. made today - have you EVER heard of a tire causing a problem with those systems ??? … I haven't …… but as Peter said use what you want …… Mike hyea:

 

[UtahPete]

:clap: ….Wow love the positive feedback …. It is a shame this tire is one the most difficult to acquire..... due to lack of sellers ….. Thanks again for your report ( and I did see the other one from a few days ago ……. Mike hyea:

I got mine delivered in 2 days from when I ordered them online on a Sunday from TireRack.com

 

[FalconAF]

And here in Aust, all vehicles that are approved for sale &/or 'grey import' must be able to run any 'design approved tire' that is within the approved +/- legal size range and that meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings & the construction type. So basically, any Pasenger construction type tire that will fit on your Spyder without modding the swing arms or front suspension under the OE tupperware is almost certainly a legal fitting! :lecturef_smilie: But it is up to you to decide if you want to run any tire other than the Kendas. I know what choice I've made! :thumbup:

:agree: That.

In Australia, it's the law, so a dealer doesn't have to worry about getting their *sses sued off if they "put a car tire on a motorcycle". In the U.S. I can understand the reluctance of dealers to do it. We live in the "Land of Litigation" here. It's been absurd for quite a long time. Some lawyers here make a living by ONLY looking for ways to sue someone...particularly businesses with "deep pockets". A business here can be put OUT of business by someone looking to make a "legal buck". Heck, litigation laws in my country make ignorance and stupidity of the consumer a cash cow sometimes. Order a cup of coffee and spill it on yourself while driving your car? Then find a lawyer who will say you got burned and the SELLER of the coffee should have known better? What about the consumer being stupid? THEY didn't know coffee is hot and if you spill it on yourself it might burn you? So MAYBE they shouldn't have been trying to do the "One Hand Juggle" with a hot liquid while driving their vehicle?

Take your own wheel off and bring it with the car tires to a "put the tire on the wheel ONLY" place and they won't care (well...most of them). They can always claim, "We didn't know he was gonna put it on a motorcycle!". That's the only way they could probably avoid being sued if the car tire "caused an accident or injury" while on the motorcycle in my country.

There are some things dealers should not be expected to do because of the LACK of laws that would protect them if they DID do it. And in the U.S., MOUNTING a car tire on a motorcycle is one of them. It just leaves the dealer wide open to litigation later here. It's sad, but it's true.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

:agree: That.

In Australia, it's the law, so a dealer doesn't have to worry about getting their *sses sued off if they "put a car tire on a motorcycle". In the U.S. I can understand the reluctance of dealers to do it. We live in the "Land of Litigation" here. It's been absurd for quite a long time. Some lawyers here make a living by ONLY looking for ways to sue someone...particularly businesses with "deep pockets". A business here can be put OUT of business by someone looking to make a "legal buck". Heck, litigation laws in my country make ignorance and stupidity of the consumer a cash cow sometimes. Order a cup of coffee and spill it on yourself while driving your car? Then find a lawyer who will say you got burned and the SELLER of the coffee should have known better? What about the consumer being stupid? THEY didn't know coffee is hot and if you spill it on yourself it might burn you? So MAYBE they shouldn't have been trying to do the "One Hand Juggle" with a hot liquid while driving their vehicle?

Take your own wheel off and bring it with the car tires to a "put the tire on the wheel ONLY" place and they won't care (well...most of them). They can always claim, "We didn't know he was gonna put it on a motorcycle!". That's the only way they could probably avoid being sued if the car tire "caused an accident or injury" while on the motorcycle in my country.

There are some things dealers should not be expected to do because of the LACK of laws that would protect them if they DID do it. And in the U.S., MOUNTING a car tire on a motorcycle is one of them. It just leaves the dealer wide open to litigation later here. It's sad, but it's true.

I'm guessing that you missed my Thread about this subject …. Harley Davidson .. SELLS their Trikes with Auto tires mounted as OEM tires … HD lists their Trikes as Motorcycles …… There is ZERO incentive for a dealer NOT to require the tires be Kenda's.... they make a hugh profit for doing this …… JMHO …. Mike hyea:

 

[Airborne]

Bosch, who designed & produce the VSS used on our Spyders & a fairly significant range of other vehicles once the working parameters are dialed in seem to be pretty sure that something as trivial changing the brand of tires you run won't upset the VSS at all! It isn't of any concern on any o ne of all those other vehicles either, is it?! Besides, the VSS is designed to handle all sorts of variables, including different tire pressures & therefore differing rolling diameters, traction, road surfaces, etc, so something like a better made tire is going to be absobloodylutely nothing to the VSS!! And then there's the millions of miles of 'free testing' that's been done by thousands of Spyder Ryders over the years, with not one reported concern with the traction/stability systems or the entire VSS reported (in fact, quite the opposite!) IMHO, it's nothing but manufacturer scare tactics & double-speak to make owners scared of using anything but their low quality high priced excuse for a tire! :shocked:

And here in Aust, all vehicles that are approved for sale &/or 'grey import' must be able to run any 'design approved tire' that is within the approved +/- legal size range and that meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings & the construction type. So basically, any Pasenger construction type tire that will fit on your Spyder without modding the swing arms or front suspension under the OE tupperware is almost certainly a legal fitting! :lecturef_smilie: But it is up to you to decide if you want to run any tire other than the Kendas. I know what choice I've made! :thumbup:

Thanks Peter, makes perfect sense to me but what's available to us here in Oz, Coincidentally i notice Kendas are quite expensive at dealers.

 

[Airborne]

:agree: with Peter 200% .. since 09 I've personally put more than a dozen different types and sizes of Auto tires on my three Spyders …. none have caused an issue ….. Similar VSS systems are now on all cars and trks. made today - have you EVER heard of a tire causing a problem with those systems ??? … I haven't …… but as Peter said use what you want …… Mike hyea:

If anecdotal evidence was needed then yes, i have read thousands of posts on varying sites [Goldwings and others] that what you're saying is right, enough to convince me to go that way. Now to find whats available in Oz. the OUDTRAC 5 does not seem to be available here.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

If anecdotal evidence was needed then yes, i have read thousands of posts on varying sites [Goldwings and others] that what you're saying is right, enough to convince me to go that way. Now to find whats available in Oz. the OUDTRAC 5 does not seem to be available here.

Tell me what's readily available to you in the Auto tire category and I'll see what's best in that bunch ….. Mike hyea:

 

[Airborne]

Bosch, who designed & produce the VSS used on our Spyders & a fairly significant range of other vehicles once the working parameters are dialed in seem to be pretty sure that something as trivial changing the brand of tires you run won't upset the VSS at all! It isn't of any concern on any o ne of all those other vehicles either, is it?! Besides, the VSS is designed to handle all sorts of variables, including different tire pressures & therefore differing rolling diameters, traction, road surfaces, etc, so something like a better made tire is going to be absobloodylutely nothing to the VSS!! And then there's the millions of miles of 'free testing' that's been done by thousands of Spyder Ryders over the years, with not one reported concern with the traction/stability systems or the entire VSS reported (in fact, quite the opposite!) IMHO, it's nothing but manufacturer scare tactics & double-speak to make owners scared of using anything but their low quality high priced excuse for a tire! :shocked:

And here in Aust, all vehicles that are approved for sale &/or 'grey import' must be able to run any 'design approved tire' that is within the approved +/- legal size range and that meets or exceeds the load & speed ratings & the construction type. So basically, any Pasenger construction type tire that will fit on your Spyder without modding the swing arms or front suspension under the OE tupperware is almost certainly a legal fitting! :lecturef_smilie: But it is up to you to decide if you want to run any tire other than the Kendas. I know what choice I've made! :thumbup:

What are you running Peter.

 

[Airborne]

Tell me what's readily available to you in the Auto tire category and I'll see what's best in that bunch ….. Mike hyea:

Thanks Mike, waiting on Peter or will do some research, finally though do changing from Kendas make that much of a difference, especially to handling/stability.

 

[FalconAF]

I'm guessing that you missed my Thread about this subject …. Harley Davidson .. SELLS their Trikes with Auto tires mounted as OEM tires … HD lists their Trikes as Motorcycles …… There is ZERO incentive for a dealer NOT to require the tires be Kenda's.... they make a hugh profit for doing this …… JMHO …. Mike hyea:

That is true. But the key difference is HD "sells their trikes with auto tires mounted as OEM tires" to begin with. An attorney would have a hard time winning a lawsuit about an "aftermarket car tire" causing an accident or injury being the DEALER'S fault in the future if all they did was REPLACE an OEM-standard piece of equipment. HD made the "car tire" the "standard equipment of the product line" when it was originally bought by the customer. The lawyer would have to sue the TIRE MANUFACTURER instead of the DEALER or HD, and would have to prove the ENTIRE TIRE PRODUCT LINE was defective. That's not gonna happen. Plus, not many lawyers would WANT to sue an "American Icon" company like HD. They are the ONLY U.S. motorcycle manufacturer. And HD is struggling to even sell motorcycles nowadays. The media would have a field day with that. But sue a foreign manufacturer? Or their "dealer's representative"? Why not? The lawyers advertise, "You don't pay us unless we WIN!" is how most of these lawsuits work. If (when?) the lawyer wins the case, they keep one-third of the settlement as their "fee". It's a great way to make a living. And oh...if the lawyer isn't pretty sure they WILL win to begin with, they aren't even going to TRY to do the lawsuit to begin with. Sorry, but that's how it really works.

So a dealer replacing a motorcycle tire with a car tire is subject to getting screwed TWO ways if they do it. First, they could get sued by any attorney who thinks they could convince a jury it was the dealer's fault. And second, the motorcycle manufacture could always say, "We didn't condone that. In fact, we RECOMMENDED to our dealers NOT to do it. It's not OUR fault. Heck, we even state it might VOID THE WARRANTY if the owner did it."

Me? I'm gonna put car tires on my Spyder when the OEM's wear out. But it will be with the full knowledge that if I get in an accident after that, there won't be anyone I can reasonably try to blame for it "tire-wise". So if a dealer doesn't want to do it for me, I'm fine with that. If anyone else wants to do it for me, I'm willing to sign a "release of liability" for them in advance if they provide the service. Heck, in all honesty, I have a hard time believing anybody who agrees to MOUNT "car tires" on my motorcycle for me WOULDN'T want a "release of liability" form from me before they would do it. There's probably a lawyer out there somewhere who would chomp at the bit to sue the "installer" AND ME if I caused the accident. "Your Honor, and members of this distinguished jury (?), Rick knowingly put car tires on his motorcycle fully knowing the manufacturer recommended against doing that. When he lost control of the vehicle with THOSE tires and ran over Fluffy, the Plaintiff's loving family member poodle, he caused immense pain and suffering for the entire family. Make him pay! Make Him Pay!!!" :clap:

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

That is true. But the key difference is HD "sells their trikes with auto tires mounted as OEM tires" to begin with. An attorney would have a hard time winning a lawsuit about an "aftermarket car tire" causing an accident or injury being the DEALER'S fault in the future if all they did was REPLACE an OEM-standard piece of equipment. HD made the "car tire" the "standard equipment of the product line" when it was originally bought by the customer. The lawyer would have to sue the TIRE MANUFACTURER instead of the DEALER or HD, and would have to prove the ENTIRE TIRE PRODUCT LINE was defective. That's not gonna happen. Plus, not many lawyers would WANT to sue an "American Icon" company like HD. They are the ONLY U.S. motorcycle manufacturer. And HD is struggling to even sell motorcycles nowadays. The media would have a field day with that. But sue a foreign manufacturer? Or their "dealer's representative"? Why not? The lawyers advertise, "You don't pay us unless we WIN!" is how most of these lawsuits work. If (when?) the lawyer wins the case, they keep one-third of the settlement as their "fee". It's a great way to make a living. And oh...if the lawyer isn't pretty sure they WILL win to begin with, they aren't even going to TRY to do the lawsuit to begin with. Sorry, but that's how it really works.

So a dealer replacing a motorcycle tire with a car tire is subject to getting screwed TWO ways if they do it. First, they could get sued by any attorney who thinks they could convince a jury it was the dealer's fault. And second, the motorcycle manufacture could always say, "We didn't condone that. In fact, we RECOMMENDED to our dealers NOT to do it. It's not OUR fault. Heck, we even state it might VOID THE WARRANTY if the owner did it."

Me? I'm gonna put car tires on my Spyder when the OEM's wear out. But it will be with the full knowledge that if I get in an accident after that, there won't be anyone I can reasonably try to blame for it "tire-wise". So if a dealer doesn't want to do it for me, I'm fine with that. If anyone else wants to do it for me, I'm willing to sign a "release of liability" for them in advance if they provide the service.

It would be in your best interests to familiarize your self with the " Moss-Magnusson Act " …. and I am quite familiar with what goes on in Court with attorney's etc. ……. I was a certified accident investigator for many years and testified in court about tires more times than I can count …. … Are you aware that the wheels on your Spyder " MOTORCYLE ", are actually stamped " J " type rims ….. which are AUTOMBILE rims ( not motorcycle rims - which are quite different )….. go figure :gaah: ….. Mike hyea:

 

[FalconAF]

I'm not arguing with you about the rims and what kind of tires they can use.

The real question is, "Why don't motorcycle dealers want to put car tires on motorcycles?" WE can debate that all day long. But the only person who knows the real answer is the dealers. And THEIR LAWYERS.

I would love to see a motorcycle manufacturer's or dealer's lawyers reply to this thread about it. The LAST thing they are gonna say is because it isn't "profitable". They would all say (if you could get them to even say it), "From a litigation perspective, it's scary as h*ll".

The only people a lawyer has to convince is a JURY in most litigation lawsuits. And juries are notorious for ruling, "Let's screw the companies!!! They can afford it!!!!"

And I'm already familiar with "Moss-Magnusson" and what goes on in courts with attorneys. I was a First Sergeant in the Air Force for 6 of my years in the military. In that capacity, I dealt with both the Staff Judge Advocate's office (the plaintiff attorneys), and the Area Defense Council (the defense attorneys). It was a fascinating education. If you ever want to know how to NOT get selected for jury duty without facing a contempt of court charge, just ask. opcorn:

PS - I'm not arguing with you. Heck, I respect what you did as a law enforcement officer. Thank you for your service too.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I'm not arguing with you about the rims and what kind of tires they can use.

The real question is, "Why don't motorcycle dealers want to put car tires on motorcycles?" WE can debate that all day long. But the only person who knows the real answer is the dealers. And THEIR LAWYERS.

I would love to see a motorcycle manufacturer's or dealer's lawyers reply to this thread about it. The LAST thing they are gonna say is because it isn't "profitable". They would all say (if you could get them to even say it), "From a litigation perspective, it's scary as h*ll".

The only people a lawyer has to convince is a JURY in most litigation lawsuits. And juries are notorious for ruling, "Let's screw the companies!!! They can afford it!!!!"

And I'm already familiar with "Moss-Magnusson" and what goes on in courts with attorneys. I was a First Sergeant in the Air Force for 6 of my years in the military. In that capacity, I dealt with both the Staff Judge Advocate's office (the plaintiff attorneys), and the Area Defense Council (the defense attorneys). It was a fascinating education. If you ever want to know how to NOT get selected for jury duty without facing a contempt of court charge, just ask. opcorn:

PS - I'm not arguing with you. Heck, I respect what you did as a law enforcement officer. Thank you for your service too.

I wasn't " arguing " with you …. I was providing the best info I had to give you knowledge and perspective …. and the military court system and the US trial court system are vastly different.... Mike hyea:

 

[FalconAF]

I wasn't " arguing " with you …. I was providing the best info I had to give you knowledge and perspective …. and the military court system and the US trial court system are vastly different.... Mike hyea:

Of course they are. The UCMJ makes many misdemeanor civilian offenses a federal crime that can result in a felony conviction in a Courts Martial. I can tell my civilian employer to "Go To Hell" and the worst that can happen to me is I get fired. Do that to my military supervisor and I can become a convicted felon for the rest of my life. That's why it behooved me to learn BOTH the civilian and military legal systems. And I learned both of them while working with military lawyers, but many of whom were also CIVILIAN lawyers at the time just doing their 2 weeks of federal Reserve or state National Guard duties each year.

Plus, the civilian system is divided into two distinct parts. Criminal law (crimes against the state or government) and Civil law (committing a wrong against another person, like a personal injury, regardless of whether it was intentional or not), which a surprising number of people don't know, let alone understand the differences between them. Most dealers wouldn't be worried about violating the Criminal law system if they installed car tires on motorcycles. They (and their lawyers) would be more concerned about the Civil law repercussions, where they could be sued for millions of dollars for "personal injury" type of verdicts.

Neither one of us is "totally right" in our knowledge or perspectives or experiences. It's more that there ARE multiple perspectives to be considered in why a dealer or motorcycle manufacturer wouldn't be willing to put car tires on a motorcycle for a customer. The U.S. litigation rules ARE a primary reason for it, even if the bike is sold with car WHEELS with motorcycle tires on it at the time of purchase. But yes, I'll also recognize that some manufacturers and dealers may not want to do it so they could try to "force" a customer to purchase OEM products with a higher profit margin for them.

 

[Airborne]

Boys! Boys!

It goes to show, many opinions and different angles out there. I Believe both of you are correct in your opinions and can see where your coming from.

Thing is, are we being given the wrong information about the OEM tires and is it simply cost - the cost of the tire to the manufacturer -or simply a profit making exercise - i wonder!

Me, i'd rather listen and trust people with the time and experience over many years than believe someone that is simply profit driven.

My opinion - I put whatever i want on my vehicles so long as they are safe and improve performance and i believe someone would have a hard time prosecuting me in this particular
scenario.

Thanks to you both for your help and opinions, keep em coming, they count.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Of course they are. The UCMJ makes many misdemeanor civilian offenses a federal crime that can result in a felony conviction in a Courts Martial. I can tell my civilian employer to "Go To Hell" and the worst that can happen to me is I get fired. Do that to my military supervisor and I can become a convicted felon for the rest of my life. That's why it behooved me to learn BOTH the civilian and military legal systems. And I learned both of them while working with military lawyers, but many of whom were also CIVILIAN lawyers at the time just doing their 2 weeks of federal Reserve or state National Guard duties each year.

Plus, the civilian system is divided into two distinct parts. Criminal law (crimes against the state or government) and Civil law (committing a wrong against another person, like a personal injury, regardless of whether it was intentional or not), which a surprising number of people don't know, let alone understand the differences between them. Most dealers wouldn't be worried about violating the Criminal law system if they installed car tires on motorcycles. They (and their lawyers) would be more concerned about the Civil law repercussions, where they could be sued for millions of dollars for "personal injury" type of verdicts.

Neither one of us is "totally right" in our knowledge or perspectives or experiences. It's more that there ARE multiple perspectives to be considered in why a dealer or motorcycle manufacturer wouldn't be willing to put car tires on a motorcycle for a customer. The U.S. litigation rules ARE a primary reason for it, even if the bike is sold with car WHEELS with motorcycle tires on it at the time of purchase. But yes, I'll also recognize that some manufacturers and dealers may not want to do it so they could try to "force" a customer to purchase OEM products with a higher profit margin for them.

I think you want to " argue " so I'm done here …. bets of luck and good cheer …… Mike hyea: