cheap vs. expensive tires, is there a difference??

[Pagman]

Other than showing off a name brand, is there really a big difference between inexpensive tires and costly ones? For example, Cheng Shin/ Shinko vs. Metzeler/ Avon, etc. Other than the notion of possible quick tread wear (always depending on how someone rides), what other problems could arise? I have some people telling me to spend money on the most expensive tires and others telling me to just get what I could afford. I would figure that once tires are manufactured, they must pass factory regulations and strict inspections. I highly doubt any tire will dangerously blow out unless there is improper installation or a factory recall (hence, Firetstone). Personally, I am not a fan of waisting money on name brands and look for the lower brand tire. Whatever the tire, I make sure my tires do not go bald, are rated correctly for speed, and are properly inflated. So before I regret spending more or less money, here I ask again... is there really a big difference??

Thanks,
Pagman~

[CRASH]

Generalized statement ... you can ask this question about anything .. a lot of people say "you get what you pay for" and a lot of times they are right ... but sometimes you pay for a pile of steaming poo.  There are differences between tires in the same price ranges as well.   While I have heard good things about Cheng Shin lately,I have heard horror stories as well. Same with Kenda ... up and coming companies ... I point at HJC ... once a budget helmet maker and now one of the more respected helmet producers out there.  While all most all of my friends love Michelin PR3s, I think they are terrible. Cheaper tires usually are made of rubber compounds less advanced and less back up testing ... less traction, less wear, less water transfer, lower speed ratings and so on.  Some are so hard they last for ever but slide around on dry pavement.  Some so soft they last no time at all ... and still slide around.

It is not a question with a yes or no answer ... and tire threads are like oil threads (is synthetic really better than dino oil?)  A lot of it is subjective. Even if you pick a few brands and models to compare, you can get all sorts of conflicting answers. Personally, I would not buy a budget tire because tires are pretty damn important on a motorcycle and I prefer some solid research and development under me (even tho I have bought the most expensive tires on the market and hated them).  My life is worth the extra $100 bucks or so in my opinion.

As an example .. I bought some Tomahawk Manufactured motorcycle tires on a recommendation ... half the price of what I usually get, lasted half as long and handled like crap. Terrible experience and even tho I even know IBA riders that use these things, I won't touch them.

[frankenduck]

I put a Cheng Shin on my K75RT once. (I was in Butte, MT and it was the only tire in stock that was the right size without having to wait a day or two for another tire.)

It rode fine but didn't last 3,000 miles.  It was something like $60 plus another $25-30 to mount/balance it.

Compare that to buying a quality tire for $120 and I would've gotten 8-10k out of it and the cost per mile would've been less.

If you're looking for a good "bang for your buck" tire then take a look at Bridgestone S11 Spitfires.

[DRxBMW]

Generalized statement ... you can ask this question about anything .. a lot of people say "you get what you pay for" and a lot of times they are right ... but sometimes you pay for a pile of steaming poo.  There are differences between tires in the same price ranges as well.   While I have heard good things about Cheng Shin lately,I have heard horror stories as well. Same with Kenda ... up and coming companies ... I point at HJC ... once a budget helmet maker and now one of the more respected helmet producers out there.  While all most all of my friends love Michelin PR3s, I think they are terrible. Cheaper tires usually are made of rubber compounds less advanced and less back up testing ... less traction, less wear, less water transfer, lower speed ratings and so on.  Some are so hard they last for ever but slide around on dry pavement.  Some so soft they last no time at all ... and still slide around.

* longevity as Drake noted. However, nothing lasts forever, trade off between mileage factor & handling. I aim for the middle.

* performance, simply stated they feel funky pushing them to the limit

For the record, I've spooned on just about every brand of tire ever made for the K bike weird sizing. 

Fav's are the Michelin Macadam and Bridgestone BT 45.

Worst were the Cheng Shit and Dunlop.

[Pagman]

I asked my initial question "is there a difference" because I'm constantly hearing about people saying to me (or reading) that their lives are at risk so they don't buy cheaper tires. NO company will sell you a tire that will put your life at risk. With that being said, let's just go on assuming that the tire will not murder you! The only way I will be hesitant about buying a tire is if the company is not reputable. For example, if a new Hashi Tashi tire (made up name) has been in business for one year, then I might pass on buying it because they haven't experienced a wider range of complaints and problems to be tested or fixed. I'm sure a company like firestone will ensure they never have blow outs again as they did in the '90s (although ford recommended dangerously underinflating their tires). With that kind of experience, a tire company can test for themselves as well as for the market that will use its product.

Any brand tire might have a manufacturers issue where a step was overlooked and danger might lurk around the corner for the user. However, I don't know of any storys nor have I ever heard on the news that a tire was at fault for rider deaths. If anyone knows of such an article, please post a link for all of us to read.

The type of bike needs to be considered as well when choosing a tire. When I first bought my kawasaki vulcan a few years ago, I wanted to save money on buying tires since I just bought a new (used) motorcycle. I chose a tire I never heard of before called "Maxxis" for the front. I then put a kenda challenger on the back. These tires together lasted me 15,000 miles with occasional passengers. I now have dunlops that are going bald after 7 or 8 thousand miles, and I only ride with my girlfriend.  Regarding the Maxxis, I eventually found out it is made by Cheng Shin. Perhaps a Cheng Shin will last on a cruiser, but not on a sport bike. I'm just assuming.

I have a Metzeler Perfect on my k, and it went from new to bald in almost no time. I'm still confident in buying cheaper tires, but I'm still interested in what others have to say and if there is anything i might not know.

[Snowy]

It's all down to personal choice and a compromise from what you want from a tyre.  For me, I choose grip over longevity. I do about 12K miles a year on two bikes, a K1100RS and R1200GS Adventure. Both are "fun" bikes, by this I mean that I don't use them for commuting. So, usually warmer evening blasts and weekend longer distance riding. No motorways if they can be avoided. At this moment in time, both bikes are shod with Dunlop Roadsmarts, a sports touring tyre which has excellent handling characteristics for my style of riding and fantastic grip. On both bikes, the front outlasts the rear 2:1. The rears lasts about 5K miles but I know that they would last much longer if I could control my throttle hand! But the mileage is not as important as grip for me as I do like to push the limits a bit on the lean angles.

[HCorn]

While I agree that a cheap tire probably won't kill you, I do think there is generally a difference. 

As a general rule:  I think the quality control on cheaper tires is not the same.  You would be more likely to suffer a defective sidewall, chunked knobbies, early cracking, etc.  But that's a general rule.

I would ride a cheap tire with lots of good reviews before I would ride an expensive tire with poor reviews. 

Some things that make a tire expensive don't really apply to all bikes/riders:  higher speed rating, uber soft race compounds, etc. Paying for that is wasted money and has nothing to do with quality.

But, since my tires will likely last 3-4 years, I have no problem spending $40-50 more if I think it will provide better quality, even minor performance improvements, or just peace of mind.  There are definitely some good, relatively inexpensive tires out there.  But I think you need to research.  Buying cheapos just to save $10 a year doesn't make sense to me. 

[CRASH]

I understand what you are asking, but it is really hard to answer without a lot of data on the tires.

As I read the thread again and the responses, the one thing that kept coming to mind was the big companies that charge a lot for their tires have done a lot of research in the proper rubber compound and carcass design for motorcycle use. Rubber formulas are top secret in the tire world.  The Cheng Shin handling poorly could be a lot of things, rubber compound being a major player.  Number of plys, material used in the plys, how the plys are arranged ... while not the sole reason, a lot of the reason the more expensive tires cost more is to recover the costs of figuring all of that stuff out (and the giant glossy advertising).  I know some of the cheap tires feel so hard that it would not surprise me if they are using car tire rubber compounds.

The bottom line is, if you use a cheaper tire and it handles good for you and lasts good for you, since there are regulations governing DOT approved tires, your call.  But remember, even the big companies with refined and proven over time manufacturing processes have quality issues and tires unraveling on riders ...  the risk is just not worth it to me.

[billday]

Can't let this thread go by without grumbling about the TWO expensive Metzeler Marathon rears that I bought in the past year -- both developed cracks after less than 3,000 miles.

I do believe that buying a more expensive tire buys R&D, quality control, and general know how. But I also have reason to suspect that there's something wrong at the Metzeler factory in Brazil these days.

[Pagman]

While I agree that a cheap tire probably won't kill you, I do think there is generally a difference. 

As a general rule:  I think the quality control on cheaper tires is not the same.  You would be more likely to suffer a defective sidewall, chunked knobbies, early cracking, etc.  But that's a general rule.

I would ride a cheap tire with lots of good reviews before I would ride an expensive tire with poor reviews. 

Some things that make a tire expensive don't really apply to all bikes/riders:  higher speed rating, uber soft race compounds, etc. Paying for that is wasted money and has nothing to do with quality.

But, since my tires will likely last 3-4 years, I have no problem spending $40-50 more if I think it will provide better quality, even minor performance improvements, or just peace of mind.  There are definitely some good, relatively inexpensive tires out there.  But I think you need to research.  Buying cheapos just to save $10 a year doesn't make sense to me.

Cheaper tires might be stigmatized that way, but I doubt that's a general rule. However, I agree with you on reviewing tires. Nothing wrong with taking some time out to review what could be the best bang for your buck.

What you're saying about expensive tires sounds about right. You might pay more for a tire based on characteristics that are not really needed for your useage. Seriously, why would the average rider need to spend so much on a tire like avon? God forbid the avon rider gets a lump in his tire. That's money well wasted. That happened to a continental tire on one of my other bikes which still had an entire life left to it and I had to replace it.

If you're going to spend up to $50 extra for mental satisfaction, remember that is a lot out of your pocket simply for reassurance. Regarding cheapos, I don't mind saving that extra 10 bucks on tires because either way, that is not much of a price difference between two brands. The tire that is $10 more cannot be that much more superior than the one that is $10 less. Just my two cents.

[detbmw]

My experience over two years riding an '88 K75S (in miles). The Shinkos are about half the price of the Metlers, and maybe 60% the price of the Bridestones (as I recall). I'm no expert, but I couldn't tell any difference in riding.

Bridgestone Battleax
Rear: 4,944
Front: 5,844

Metler Lazertec
Rear: 3,695
Front: 4184

Shinko Tour Master 220
Rear: 5,117
Front: 3,827 and climbing and still looking good

[Motorhobo]

I have Shinkos on front and rear, rear has probably over 8k on it by now and still has tread. Front...I have no idea how many miles ... It's probably at least 2 Shinko rears old by now...stopped counting.

Having said that, I am a utility rider who does  +10k annually, 95% of it on slab, so I probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference from a performance perspective between a $90 Shinko and a $150 Metzeler. All I know is the Shinkos gt me from A to B and back and when I need new ones, I can afford it.

[Chaos]

+1 on Bridgestone Spitfires.  Got mine 2 years ago, $60 front & $80 rear, always had Metzlers before and these are as good or better.  And I feel better with a brand name when things get dicey.

[pdg]

When I bought my 75 it came shod with Cheng Shin CS HI-MAX tyres. Both were in good condition with plenty of tread (rear was maybe 40% worn, front 60%) - by all accounts they had over 4,000miles on them.

I would have continued using them after swapping the rear wheel if it was the same size. But it wasn't, so I got a part-worn Pirelli MT90 for the rear, and a part-worn Bridgestone BT020f for the front.

Comparing these to the CS is like comparing apples and giraffes...... The mismatched radials totally transformed the ride and handling in a positive way.

While there was nothing fundamentally 'wrong' with the CS, there was nothing astoundingly more than 'right' about them either.

[gladstone]

More grip vs longer life tend to be mutually exclusive so tyres that manage to improve on both tend to be more complex (e.g. multi-compound or just smarter compound) and hence cost more.

I've put RS wheels on my LT and have settled on Michelin Pilot Road 3. Can't recall the last slide, even in the wet, so they're either great tyres or I'm slowing down!

Cheers

[K75rt]

I replaced a set of Bridgestones with Shinko 230s on my K75RT, about half the price of the unfortunately NLA-for-the-K75 BT-45s.  The front took 10g and the rear a whopping 60g to balance so I was a bit apprehensive.  That said, the last 6k or so I have been incredibly impressed.  They roll into corners like the old Macadams(with no cupping), handle great in rain and dry alike, and are just quiet, predictable performers.  Wear has been minimal to say the least.

I'm sold on them - when I do replace it will be with another set.

[F14CRAZY]

If it helps, the cheapest name brand tire I could find for my rear was a Dunlop D404 for $93 (installation not included). It's pretty much bald now and with around 5k miles.

Unfortunately I put up with a bad shock for much of the season and it would bottom out when two up and the tire would contact the one thing that holds the fender liner in, which I've suspected helped to wear out the tire. I'm going to have my shock rebuilt and another D404 put on this spring and see how things go again. From its reviews I was hoping it would last 8-10k

[Green Monster]

I like the discussion going on here.

Would be curious to hear feedback on whether the tire selection would change based on whether you ride a K75 vs. K100/1100 as I am due new ones this year.  My riding style is non-aggressive tarmac based touring.

[Motorhobo]

I think the first thing to do to make it really useful would be to determine some kind of standard for when a tire needs to be replaced and what constitutes 'bald'. Otherwise, the number of miles a rider gets out of a tire is arbitrary since everyone has a different definition of in 'need of replacing'.

I can still see tread on my rear tire, but I'm sure some people would have replaced already.

[diversity48]

I have over 10k on the front and rear spitfires. not crazy about them...good wearing but we have lots of rain grooves on the freeways here in Nevada and they have a tendency to wiggle. they are fine on smooth highway. will be replacing them in the next few days with metzler laser tec front and rear. rear is just about worn out now...almost bald in the center but front is ridable for a while. just like the idea of replacing both at once. mine is an 85 k100rs with about 62k on now.

[TimTyler]

Tires I've used in the last three years:

Michelin Pilot Activ (R) - Like it quite a bit. On bike now.
Metzler Lasertec (F) - No problems. On bike now.
Avon Roadrider (R) - Good tire, good mileage
Shinko Tourmaster (F+R) - Rear wore quickly. Unremarkable handling but not bad.
Bridgestone SII (R) - Long lasting.

[pdg]

I think the first thing to do to make it really useful would be to determine some kind of standard for when a tire needs to be replaced and what constitutes 'bald'.

We have a legal definition of 'bald' here...

Basically, for a bike you need a tread depth of at least 1 mm across three-quarters of the breadth of the tread and in a continuous band around the entire circumference. (1.6mm for a car).

Personally, it would depend on the type of tyre as to how close to that 1mm I would go - the Mitas I have fitted at the moment I would probably chuck before it got anywhere near, but a pure 'street' tyre I would happily run a lot closer. For me, it would also depend on the profile of what's left - if it's gone very squared off then I'd be looking for an excuse to replace it.

New tread depth varies a lot though - the Mitas had something like 14 or 15mm compared to the 4 or 5mm of some others...

[zilla]

I just came across this post.  Good stuff.

On my VFR and my Tiger 1050 I went with Continentals. Had really good ride and decent life out of them.

I'm on a more restricted budget now and am looking at the Duro HF918 for my K100.
144 for the set from American Moto Tire.

Anyone tried these?

[The Mighty Gryphon]

Something you get with more expensive tires...

...more, bigger ads in magazines, lots of banners, tech reps, and free tires at races, more margin at the stealership...

[Scott_]

On both of my LT's I'm running a mixed set.
Michelin PR2's front and Avon AV46 rear.  I get good mileage(almost equal) between both before changing, close to 10K or a little more.
I've been running this combo for 4-5 years now.