Does my rear tire need replacing?

[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)
View attachment 165435 find the triangle for the wear bar location


View attachment 165436 This

is at the wear bar...

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

Jack

 

[MikeT]

Why Is Nobody Talking About Tread Depth

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]

OK, I'll add this to the discussion

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: hyea: 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]

MY GUESS

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]

everyone has a choice

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]

Clarification

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]

Sorry about your problems

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::roflblack: Have a good weekend :thumbup:

 

[teninospyder]

Just checked my Kenda tires

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]

CRAPENDA'S

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::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:……..

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

WELLLLLLL NOW THAT YOU MENTION IT

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]

THER REASON IS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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.

​$ $ $ $ $ $ …...