Kenda Tire: Important Recall Information

[WackyDan]

Perhaps not, but we will not be hydroplaning, skidding and a lot safer on softer compound M/C tires.

Just a thought: If you have and accident with car tires will your insurance bulk because you did not have

the recommended M/C tires installed and skidded or hydroplaned into someone or off the road? I will

opt for safety over mileage any day. JMO

Jack

Perhaps I am mis-reading that. News flash... My car tires are a softer compound and last at least as long (actually longer as they wear evenly). They are stickier in the dry and wet than the Kendas will ever be, and they hydroplane far less then the Kendas.

If you think the Kendas out perform car tires on a SPyder you are mistaken. They are crap.

 

[Bob Denman]

Dan (Or "Wacky": if I can call you by your first name! )
I will respectfully disagree with you... only because I'm not sure which tires you are using.
I have tried two automotive rear tires: a Falken, and a pair of Kumhos, on my bikes.
The falken handled great.... right up until it got worn down almost to the point of replacing it. :shocked:
Once it reached that point: it'd lose traction on a damp road without any warning, and it would hydroplane like one of those turbine powered monsters that they race at about 200 mph! :yikes:
VERY scary! nojoke
The Kumhos don't seem to let go quite as quickly, but they do get to a point where there is little predictability in what they're going to do next...
The Kendas... for ALL of their perceived faults: always handled predictably. :thumbup:

And that just may have been what BRP was looking for!

 

[WackyDan]

Dan (Or "Wacky": if I can call you by your first name! )
I will respectfully disagree with you... only because I'm not sure which tires you are using.
I have tried two automotive rear tires: a Falken, and a pair of Kumhos, on my bikes.
The falken handled great.... right up until it got worn down almost to the point of replacing it. :shocked:
Once it reached that point: it'd lose traction on a damp road without any warning, and it would hydroplane like one of those turbine powered monsters that they race at about 200 mph! :yikes:
VERY scary! nojoke
The Kumhos don't seem to let go quite as quickly, but they do get to a point where there is little predictability in what they're going to do next...
The Kendas... for ALL of their perceived faults: always handled predictably. :thumbup:

And that just may have been what BRP was looking for!

I bolded and changed color where I want to make my point. When it gets that worn Bob, you are supposed to replace them. THey will not perform as well as they did and certainly not channel water like they used to. That's what you do with your car or truck right? How is that any different here?

What you are saying essentially is " When they are worn out they don't perform well". Well, no duh. Right?

The Kenda rears wear unevenly and across the center... They will hydro plane well earlier than the car tires.

On my GS I ran Bridgestone RE-92's on the front and Toyo Proxes 4 on the rear. Was amazing.

On my F3 I run Federal Evo's on the front and a Toyo Proxes on the rear... Still Amazing. Far more grip on all corners dry, wet and in the rain.

I ran a Kumho EST once...and never again. That tire was far worse in the rain and just wet roads than even the Kenda. I'm glad you are happy with the Kenda... Many of us though are not and I stand by my choice as car tires are a far better choice for the spyder and specifically the way I ride.

 

[jaherbst]

That does not change the fact that the tires that come fitted on the Spyer are not motorcycle tires. They are passenger car profile tires with a derating label. I prefer fully rated tires to de-rated ones.

I must disagree jc. Kendas are not derated car tires. They are softer compound to make it safer because of the lighter weight on the tire itself. Same as motorcycles.

The average car is approximately 4000#. That equates to 1000# per tire.

The average Spyder is approximately 1150#. That equates to less than 400# per tire.

Bottom line and common sense: less weight on tire requires softer compound for Hydroplaning and heavy breaking without tire breaking loose. This also applies to aggressive riding and over coming centripetal force by centrifugal force. Very simple physics.

Now if you are not an aggressive rider and do not take curves to fast (and don't care about seeing your Grandkids again ) ride in heavy rain and your main concern is get the most mileage out of your tires, then by all means put car tires on your Spyder.

​The choice is certainly yours and yours alone.

​Jack

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

TIRE THEORY

I must disagree jc. Kendas are not derated car tires. They are softer compound to make it safer because of the lighter weight on the tire itself. Same as motorcycles.

The average car is approximately 4000#. That equates to 1000# per tire.

The average Spyder is approximately 1150#. That equates to less than 400# per tire.

Bottom line and common sense: less weight on tire requires softer compound for Hydroplaning and heavy breaking without tire breaking loose. This also applies to aggressive riding and over coming centripetal force by centrifugal force. Very simple physics.

Now if you are not an aggressive rider and do not take curves to fast (and don't care about seeing your Grandkids again ) ride in heavy rain and your main concern is get the most mileage out of your tires, then by all means put car tires on your Spyder.

​The choice is certainly yours and yours alone.

​Jack

Jack - this is just plain " Hooey " :lecturef_smilie: shame on you for spreading non-sense .... here's an analogy " Politicians will say anything to get elected " ..... and Kenda tires ( rear ) are not made to LAST for a reason ...... Mike :thumbup:

 

[WackyDan]

Jack - this is just plain " Hooey " :lecturef_smilie: shame on you for spreading non-sense .... here's an analogy " Politicians will say anything to get elected " ..... and Kenda tires ( rear ) are not made to LAST for a reason ...... Mike :thumbup:

Damn right. Thousands of miles on car tires and I'd wager a healthy amount that my spyder on car tires can out corner, out stop, out accelerate, and not hydroplane when compared to the Kendas. The additional benefit is that they wear evenly so they perform well for the life of the tire.

 

[jaherbst]

It is what it is. I have no dog in this fight. Think it through and apply a little common sense and reasoning. Then make whatever choice you want.

Jack

 

[Bob Denman]

Aren't these threads fun???




It'd be a boring World if we all thought alike... :thumbup:


And I'd be kept busy shooting all the guys who are chasing after my Missus!

 

[jcthorne]

I must disagree jc. Kendas are not derated car tires. They are softer compound to make it safer because of the lighter weight on the tire itself. Same as motorcycles.

The average car is approximately 4000#. That equates to 1000# per tire.

The average Spyder is approximately 1150#. That equates to less than 400# per tire.

Bottom line and common sense: less weight on tire requires softer compound for Hydroplaning and heavy breaking without tire breaking loose. This also applies to aggressive riding and over coming centripetal force by centrifugal force. Very simple physics.

Now if you are not an aggressive rider and do not take curves to fast (and don't care about seeing your Grandkids again ) ride in heavy rain and your main concern is get the most mileage out of your tires, then by all means put car tires on your Spyder.

​The choice is certainly yours and yours alone.

​Jack

Lets just say I disagree with your oversimplified view of tires. There is FAR more to traction than durometer of the tread compound.

Not the least of which is contact patch. The Kendas, due to their weak construction balloon at speed and reduce the contact patch to a thin line down the center. Good tires use the full width of the tire in contact with the road significantly increasing traction....even with a slightly harder compound. Or not. There are also car profile tires with significantly softer compounds as well. One simply cannot compare durometer of the compound and infer traction limits.

In the specific, the Yokohama tires we install have significantly MORE traction than the Kenda rear and still manage to last a bit longer. Although they are not the longest lived tire in that size.

 

[Bruiser37]

Kenda tire life

Thanks for the information. Of course, I have already gotten rid of my crap OEM tire.

Yeah Kenda tires are crap... my 2016 F3 T had 23,000 mile on original OEM Kenda tires. Tread wear indicated they would safely go at least another 2K before replacement. They shudda lasted at least 30K... what crap. BTW I ride southern Arizona mountain twisties hard and need a better tire than Kenda.

 

[jaherbst]

Yeah Kenda tires are crap... my 2016 F3 T had 23,000 mile on original OEM Kenda tires. Tread wear indicated they would safely go at least another 2K before replacement. They shudda lasted at least 30K... what crap. BTW I ride southern Arizona mountain twisties hard and need a better tire than Kenda.

You get 23,000 miles on your Kenda's and you are complaining? For a motorcycle designed tire on a motorcycle like vehicle, I would say your doing great!

Jack

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Yeah Kenda tires are crap... my 2016 F3 T had 23,000 mile on original OEM Kenda tires. Tread wear indicated they would safely go at least another 2K before replacement. They shudda lasted at least 30K... what crap. BTW I ride southern Arizona mountain twisties hard and need a better tire than Kenda.

23,000 miles is about average for Kenda's used on the front ( only the front ) and only if you have very good alignment ( ie Lazer )…. I have changed to Auto tires on Every Spyder I have owned ( 3 so far ) …. Mike hyea:

 

[Deanna777]

I replaced the rear tire ( Kenda) at 5,824 miles in 2014.

The Kenda tire was bald, and not safe to drive the spyder.

Deanna