The Tire Thread

I'm thinkin' that with all the riders out there, there's going to be a good array of tires being used. With that in mind, I figured it would be a good place to put up a thread where people who are in the market for rubber can go to for a one-stop look and maybe find what they're looking for without having to go on a scavenger hunt.

Please post what you are currently running on your bike, the pros and the cons if you have any, and possibly other tires you've tried and your personal experience with them. This isn't meant to be an area of what tire is better, just somewhere where the riders can come and peruse when looking for a tire they are interested in, that someone/people might already have/had and their thoughts on them to help in making a decision. Please keep in mind these are personal opinions of the tires being used, and opinions may vary from rider to rider.

On with the tires!




What I'm currently running:

Dunlop D606, both front and rear.

Pros: Great traction off road. Incredible cleaning capability in muddy conditions. Loose gravel, dirt and hardpack the tire connects very well and the knobs don't chunk off. Adheres to rocks well. Good traction on pavement. Corner extremely well, very stable at high speeds and no vibrations from the knobs. No louder than the stock Trailwings. Good traction on wet pavement, no 'squishiness' when cornering. Excellent wear (5000+ miles and still going) both front and rear. Very aggressive DOT rated.

Cons: Tires are a bit heavier than the stock Trailwings. Front tire is directional (but I reversed mine and there doesn't seem to be a problem).


What I've run in the past:

Kenda Trackmaster II

Pros: Good traction off road, on loose gravel, dirt and hard pack. Bit in really well in loose dirt on the track and stuck well on hardpack. Good traction on dry pavement. Good price and availability. DOT rated.

Cons: Terrible traction in mud. Tread pattern isn't spaced enough for proper cleaning. Knobs chunk off easily. Slippery on rocks. Noisy on pavement, and the wear is horrible. They melt off fast (1200 mi) Experienced vibration and some wobble at higher speeds. Cornering was sketchy, and anything wet was downright scary.

**These tires were run on another DS bike I owned that was comparable in size but somewhat lighter in the weight dept.

IRC TR-8

Pros: Good traction off road. Hard pack, loose dirt and sand. Good traction on rocks. Great traction on dry pavement, sticks like glue. Cornering is reliable and stable, high speeds no wobble or vibration. Very quiet tire. Minimal chunking. Excellent wear (4500 mi). Good price and availability. DOT rated.

Cons: Traction in mud was sketchy. Tread pattern not quite wide enough to clean out. Loose gravel the tires wanted to wander....a lot. Slick on wet pavement.

**These tires were run on another DS bike I owned that was comparable in size but somewhat lighter in the weight dept.

I have run full MX tires, but not on this bike so it would be unfair to place them here at this point. Anyone who has run an MX tire on this bike, please feel free to report on them.

I have run motocross knobbies on my WR-250R (for practically all of it's 2,300-or-so miles), so, you wannit'?
You got it. :)

Bridgestone M23 Front and M22 Rear

These tires have been around for a looooong time, having made their debut in 1981 on Japanese motocross bikes.
They are specifically intended for hard terrain like very hard dirt where it's often difficult to actually sink a knob into it.
In these conditions, they're pure magic.
I have been using these tires on all of my off-road and dual-purpose bikes for at least 20 years, and continue to do so to this very day.

Pros: On any kind of terrain that's not soft and mushy, I've never used a better tire.
On hard dirt, rocks, and even pavement, they grip very well, feeling like they're velcroed to the ground.
They allow you to feel very well what each wheel is doing, and they keep their characteristics surprisingly well as they wear.
They are not expensive to buy, either.
The front M23 80/100-21 and rear M22 100/100-18 are the perfect sizes for a WR-250R.

Cons: They don't like soft stuff like sand, mud, swamps, etc.
They're a hard terrain specific tire, and this is evident while riding the bike.
In the soft stuff, they still work better than a lost cause like the stock Trail Wings, but compared to how well they work on hard terrain, the difference is dramatic.
They also don't last a long time on pavement, as you would expect from a non-DOT tire, even though they grip the pavement surprisingly well.

I have the 606s on now.I put about 5400 miles on the stock trailwings.I've only put on a few hundred miles on the 606s(mostly off road) ,,but so far I like them alot..I didn't realize how bad the trailwings were until I switched to 606s...........so..Dunlop 606...PROS>>> excellent off road, ..so far so good on road,,I can't go as fast in the corners,,but the way it handles in the dirt it's worth the sacrifice..price is pretty good,I paid $75 a piece.............CONS>>>>> they are heavier and taller than the stock trailwings so I am going to have to put on a larger rear sprocket $$$ not as good as stock trailwings on the road but they are way better offroad..

Jay you can save a few $$ by getting the 12t front sprocket and you can still use your stock chain.

Yup, the wolfmama is testing out a new set of skins. I have a chance to try these puppies out and see just how they fare against an all around great performer and my personal favorite, the Dunlop D606. I guess we'll see just what kind of performance, shit and abuse these buggars can dish out and take. That being said, I'll toss out a few photos of these nasty looking chewers before I start running them through the paces.

The Shootout:

Dunlop D606 vs Mitas C16/17 StoneEaters

D606 Front: 90/90/21 C17 Front: 90/90/21

I took a side by side comparison just to see what I was dealing with. It's not a fair one at this point for the front tires because the 606 is over 1/2 gone...I was looking more at strategic knob placement and the overall aggressiveness. I knew what the 606 was like new, so I had a good idea how they compared.


The tires are exactly the same height and all that, but there are two major differences. One is the carcass stiffness and the other is the tread. When I got the 606 new, the carcass wasn't as stiff as the C17. The 606 has a fairly robust carcass, but this C17 is a fair deal more rigid. The knobs, well. I would have to say that the tread on the C17 is way more aggressive than the 606, and deeper. This tread is definitely more MX based. It will be interesting to see how it responds to the stuff I plan on throwing at it.



D606 Rear: 120/90/18 C16 Rear: 130/80/18

Again a side by side comparison of both tires. This one will be bang on, because the 606 is brand new as is the C16.


Tire height is pretty damned close to each other. The C16 is a hair taller, but really not by much. The 606 is a hair wider, again, not by much. The knobs are so big on the C16 that they seem to be pretty close to the same width as the 606. The knobs on the C16 are a lot deeper; the 606's are bigger area wise but don't go down as far. The placement of the knobs on the C16's are also further apart, which one can assume that it should be incredible with cleaning capacity. Ah yes, my dears, soon, very very soon... *coughs* Ok...uh yeah... Again it appears the C16's are a race bred MX tire. The C16 is also substantially lighter than the 606 rear.


What's nice about these rippers are they are a DOT tire, and they are pretty cheap compared to the 606. The compound makeup between the two seem pretty close; the Mitas seems to be just a hair harder, which would lend itself well to pavement runs. The claim is they are an 80/20 rated tire....pro offroad. I guess we will see how they stand up to the test, and if they get as good a return as the trusty 606 does. I will continue to update on this tire as time progresses.

How much cheaper are they than the 606's ? Curious how they work in the sand, esspecially the front. A lot of the woods trails around here are pretty sandy and the 606's don't work real well IMHO.

$40-50 cheaper. I'm wondering that myself Chris, so it'll be one of the first places I'll head to. There's a pit not far from here that has all kinds of stuff along with a small MX track. I let some air out of the 606 front and it did seem to help a fair bit in the fine stuff but once back on pavement I pumped it back up cause it was a bit squishy.

Wow is that Mitas ever mean looking... Shoot makes my Kendas look like road slicks XD

FTR:

Kenda K270 Dual Sport

Front and back.

Pros: Very true to form as a 50/50 tire, good traction on road, dependable off road. Long wear, 5000+ km on rear before replace and 6000 now on the front, still perfectly good. Comfortable up to 110 kph.

Cons: Wet pavement control is questionable at times. Braking is wet weather or loose gravel requires skill and timing. squirrely at 120... "Interesting" past 130. Cornering is iffy at times.. I mean I've scrapped my pegs but I "felt" out of control.

All I can say is wow... Dunlop's got a fierce competitor with this tire! StoneEaters are mounted on the bike, and I'm trying something new called DynaBeads. They're tiny ceramic bead that go inside the tube or tire instead of using rim weights and are more friendly.
I took the bike out for a rip up to the local MX track to see how these new meats fare against the 606's. Both tires I've got 18 psi, to make a fair comparison on both sets of tires from new, both on and offroad with the same pressure. On the pavement there, the tires are very stable and amazingly quieter than the 606 considering the ginormous knobbies on them. Cornering was tight and smooth, no squirminess and a decent side rail. I managed to wear off the tits on the outside knobs on both tires. Off pavement I was immediately impressed with the hookup; not just with the rear but the front. Cornering on loose gravel they bit right in and held true, where the 606 seemed to like to wander a bit. Once at the track, I started to play around with them a bit. First I hit the sand because that was the first thing I came to. DAYUM! No comparison in traction, the StoneEater front connected hard and stuck all the way thru the carve. I would have been eating sand had I done that with the 606 up front, even with less air. The rear was flinging stuff over my head. On to the loose loam. Again, the front cut in hard and held the cornering with no feel of washout. I hit a few wet roots and rocks but they bit in and over. There was a decent sized mud hole at the far end so I attacked that like a rabid dog. Incredible cleaning capability! I had mud chunks raining all over me and those big knobs pulled me right thru to the other side. I didn't have to fight the steering at all. 6 more runs thru it and I decided that it now needs to rain more. Across the road to the other side where there are some decent granite rock faces that terrace up in a few spots, which was a nice test to go up, stop, continue up and then onto a tight needle, bark and rock littered trail to the top. They stuck. Like glue. No slippage anywhere thru the whole ascent to the top. I'm thinking those little depressions in the tread are like suction cups because they sure weren't trying to let loose. I had the 606 break loose a few times going up rock faces but they did grab after a bit and keep going.
So I guess all that I have left to compare after this is wear life, and wet pavement. The 606 will be hard to beat, but I guess we'll see in another 5000 miles or so. If someone has anything they would like for me to test with this tire, feel free to shoot.

So, the comparison so far on a scale of 1 - 10, with 10 being excellent):

Sand:
606 rear: 8
606 front: 5
C16 rear: 9
C17 front: 8

Loose gravel:
606 rear: 10
606 front: 6
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 9

Loam:
606 rear: 10
606 front: 7
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 9

Rock:
606 rear: 8
606 front: 7
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 9

Mud:
606 rear: 8
606 front: 7
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 9

Roots:
606 rear: 7
606 front: 6
C16 rear: 9
C17 front: 8

Pavement (dry):
606 rear: 10
606 front: 10
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 10

Cornering (dry):
606 rear: 10
606 front: 10
C16 rear: 10
C17 front: 10

So far me likey. Now I have to go wash off my lid and my face from all the mud.

Excellent review she wolf, I have a long ways to go before I wear out my 606s but I would definitly consider the stoaneaters for a replacment. I am not familiar with MITAS tires,,where are they made??? can you buy them online?? .........................a few more weeks and I should be riding................... This has nothing to do with tires but I've got to ask ..........Who are you going to be rooting for in todays hockey game???? Canada or USA...I read somewhere on here that you came from California but you now live in B.C. I think you can figure out who I'm going for ...

Mitas is made in the Czech republic. You can get them thru anyone that deals with Tucker-Rocky, who are out of the US. Tonight's game should be really good. I'm rootin' for the Caunckleaheads. I've been on this side for a long time, so I've been waving the ol' maple leaf.

Thanks for the tire info!

I can't seem to locate any way to buy them on the web. Do you have a source/URL?

Thanks

Tucker-Rocky Dealer Locator

Hopefully you can find one with this. I got my tires thru a TR dealer here in Canada.

Quick question: I'm looking at purchasing a Kenda Trackmaster II K760 rear tire and I just want to verify that the equivalent to the stock rear tire size would be 100/100-18, because bikebandit.com doesn't have a Kenda Trackmaster II in 120/80-18. Thanks in advance :)

Dealers tell me Tucker Rocky in US doesn't cary Mitas

After MUCH searching I found the Mitas USA site from which you can order the tires BUT no way to contact them to ask questions like - how long to get them? except to fill out a contact form which says they will get back to you in 24 hours. I filled out the form mid day Friday and have no response Monday night! So I ordered 606s.

http://www.mitasmx.com/shop/index.php?l=page_view&p=contact_us

aaronhall555 wrote:

Quick question: I'm looking at purchasing a Kenda Trackmaster II K760 rear tire and I just want to verify that the equivalent to the stock rear tire size would be 100/100-18, because bikebandit.com doesn't have a Kenda Trackmaster II in 120/80-18. Thanks in advance :)

Were you in vancouver I'd send ya to modern... Can anyone help him?

SheWolf wrote:

What I've run in the past:

Kenda Trackmaster II

Pros: Good traction off road, on loose gravel, dirt and hard pack. Bit in really well in loose dirt on the track and stuck well on hardpack. Good traction on dry pavement. Good price and availability. DOT rated.

Cons: Terrible traction in mud. Tread pattern isn't spaced enough for proper cleaning. Knobs chunk off easily. Slippery on rocks. Noisy on pavement, and the wear is horrible. They melt off fast (1200 mi) Experienced vibration and some wobble at higher speeds. Cornering was sketchy, and anything wet was downright scary.

**These tires were run on another DS bike I owned that was comparable in size but somewhat lighter in the weight dept.

Are you sure these were the Kenda TRAK MASTER II (K760, essentially a DOT DIRT tire), and not the more street-oriented Kenda 270 (kind of a 50/50 tire)?

Reason I ask is that I've run 3 rear Trak Masters on the WRR and they absolutely own tires like the D606 (& MT21, FWIW) off road, and are almost as good on road (in my experience). Especially in mud: 606 packs up while the Trak Master tractors through, due to the much wider lug separation on the Trak Master (this is where I'm really scratching my head on the post above)???

On the WRR, I've been able to squeeze more that 2K miles out of the rear Trak Master (don't bother with the front, I run a D952 up there). Not bad for a $50 rear tire with really aggressive knobs.

Trak Master:


D606

Yep, those were them. I know of the 270's, I have one on my old 77 250. I ran the II's on my old 200, and I rode it through a whack of stuff.

BPG wrote:

SheWolf wrote:

What I've run in the past:

Kenda Trackmaster II

Pros: Good traction off road, on loose gravel, dirt and hard pack. Bit in really well in loose dirt on the track and stuck well on hardpack. Good traction on dry pavement. Good price and availability. DOT rated.

Cons: Terrible traction in mud. Tread pattern isn't spaced enough for proper cleaning. Knobs chunk off easily. Slippery on rocks. Noisy on pavement, and the wear is horrible. They melt off fast (1200 mi) Experienced vibration and some wobble at higher speeds. Cornering was sketchy, and anything wet was downright scary.

**These tires were run on another DS bike I owned that was comparable in size but somewhat lighter in the weight dept.

Are you sure these were the Kenda TRAK MASTER II (K760, essentially a DOT DIRT tire), and not the more street-oriented Kenda 270 (kind of a 50/50 tire)?

Reason I ask is that I've run 3 rear Trak Masters on the WRR and they absolutely own tires like the D606 (& MT21, FWIW) off road, and are almost as good on road (in my experience). Especially in mud: 606 packs up while the Trak Master tractors through, due to the much wider lug separation on the Trak Master (this is where I'm really scratching my head on the post above)???

On the WRR, I've been able to squeeze more that 2K miles out of the rear Trak Master (don't bother with the front, I run a D952 up there). Not bad for a $50 rear tire with really aggressive knobs.

Trak Master:


D606

BPG, I'm assuming your rear tire size for the TRACK MASTER II K760 is 100/100-18?

SheWolf, just by the look of the tread pattern on the K760's looks like they would be exceptional in the mud. I'm still going to give this tire a try considering I'm off-road about 90% of the time and it's starting to dry up over here; I can't really pass up the price of $45 and a more off-road tire.

Mita C16 link

I can't even find the size of rear tire Shewolf used on the Mita ordering link

I only see two 18's 100/100-18 and 110/100-18

She wolf C16 Rear: 130/80/18

Mine is the latter. I was wondering WTF is with the oddball number, I asked a guy at the tire shop if there was a crossover for such an application. The 130/80/18 is what was on his chart that crossed over from the 110/100/18.

FOLLOW UP on my earlier Post about searching for Mitas tires in the USA

FISRT POST

BigBird wrote:

Dealers tell me Tucker Rocky in US doesn't cary Mitas

After MUCH searching I found the Mitas USA site from which you can order the tires BUT no way to contact them to ask questions like - how long to get them? except to fill out a contact form which says they will get back to you in 24 hours. I filled out the form mid day Friday and have no response Monday night! So I ordered 606s.

[url=http://www.mitasmx.com/shop/index.php?l=page_view&p=contact_us

http://www.mitasmx.com/shop/index.php?l=page_view&p=contact_us[/quote[/url]]

EVENTUAL REPLY
From: "Joel Rayson"
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 1:55 PM
To: BigBird
Subject: RE: New Contact Request: Availability
> Sam,
> I'm sorry to say we do not carry the 130/80-18 here in the states
> right now. As for the other tires you asked about, you will get free
> ground shipping and you may pay extra to have it express. With the free
> shipping you should see your tires arrive in 3 - 5 business days.
>
> Thanks
>
> Joel Rayson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: samgailjones@verizon.net [mailto:samgailjones@verizon.net]
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 12:43 PM
> To: Contactus
> Subject: New Contact Request: Availability
>
> Name: Sam Jones
> Email Address: samgailjones@verizon.net
> Subject: Availability
> Message: Do you have a Mitas C16 Rear: 130/80/18?
> Someone got one from Tucker Rocky but I don't see it on your websited.
> If so how much and how soon will it get to me if I order today?
>
> Also how soon will I get a Mitas C17 Front: 90/90/21 and/or a C16
> 100/100/18 if I order today?
>
> I live in Maryland Zip 21703
>
> Phone is 301-788-8848
>
> Time Stamp: 03/12/2010 09:42am

You can get them here.

Next Time I get tires I will try this size as I think they are plenty big enough and will be lighter and lower and will lower the gearing slightly.


100/100-18 M/C 59M C-16 TT MI
SKU: 2000026452101

SheWolf wrote:

Yep, those were them. I know of the 270's, I have one on my old 77 250. I ran the II's on my old 200, and I rode it through a whack of stuff.

Well was the II YOU had an old/bald tire?!?!?

All I can say is that, when it gets muddy the 606 guys get left behind - and really wishing they had the Trak Master II's... Somethin' just ain't addin' up - the only explanation that remotely makes sense is that the K760/Trak Master II isn't the same in Canada vs the US of A??

Not trying to bust your chops, mind you. Just trying to make sense of it all!