GL1800Riders Forums banner

1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,164 Posts
Yeah, I don't understand why people would do that!:eek:4:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,393 Posts
I will never understand why someone would continue to use a tire that can put them down...... at any time. Especially when they have special cargo on board. :shrug:

Bridgestones, Metzelers, Avons, whatever, they are all inferior. I'll never understand why an average Winger cannot grasp the RF CT's far superior abilities, even if it were the same price, which it isn't. It's cheaper for crying out loud.

While I'm at it, I open myself up to some flames from my brother Darksiders. I will never understand using a CT that, with no air, will not support the weight of the bike, especially with 2 people.:shrug:

I know, it does handle slightly more like a bike tire. SO FRIGGIN WHAT"

I dare anyone to prove that a RF cannot do everything a NRF can. I also dare anyone to prove that a NRF can do what a RF can....namely be ridden safely with the valve core out.

Obviously, it's your choice guys and I respect that.....I just cannot understand why that slight difference in handling is worth taking the risk.

You can roll those dice....I will not. Easy on me, I'm old. :oops:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,610 Posts
I will never understand why someone would continue to use a tire that can put them down...... at any time. Especially when they have special cargo on board. :shrug:

Bridgestones, Metzelers, Avons, whatever, they are all inferior. I'll never understand why an average Winger cannot grasp the RF CT's far superior abilities, even if it were the same price, which it isn't. It's cheaper for crying out loud.

While I'm at it, I open myself up to some flames from my brother Darksiders. I will never understand using a CT that, with no air, will not support the weight of the bike, especially with 2 people.:shrug:

I know, it does handle slightly more like a bike tire. SO FRIGGIN WHAT"

I dare anyone to prove that a RF cannot do everything a NRF can. I also dare anyone to prove that a NRF can do what a RF can....namely be ridden safely with the valve core out.

Obviously, it's your choice guys and I respect that.....I just cannot understand why that slight difference in handling is worth taking the risk.

You can roll those dice....I will not. Easy on me, I'm old. :oops:

I now have a Kumho run flat because I had a slow leak flat tire just East of Missoula, Montana last September while cruising 5 over on the x-way. I was able to make it to an exit and plug it but it took quite a while and then the Dunlop 250 started to delaminate on the way to Billings, MT.

That is when I decided to go with a Kumho run flat. Not because of sefety, but because of the ability to get to a safe place.

Now I agree that the run flat IS MUCH MUCH safer, smoother at 32 psi, and will probably get 3 times the mileage or more.


:thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
I am a relatively new Dark Sider.....but made the same decision. I am running a CT for safety so I chose a RF.......so far after about 1500 miles don't think I would ever use a non RF CT. What is the point......?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,624 Posts
I will never understand why someone would continue to use a tire that can put them down...... at any time. Especially when they have special cargo on board. :shrug:

Bridgestones, Metzelers, Avons, whatever, they are all inferior. I'll never understand why an average Winger cannot grasp the RF CT's far superior abilities, even if it were the same price, which it isn't. It's cheaper for crying out loud.

While I'm at it, I open myself up to some flames from my brother Darksiders. I will never understand using a CT that, with no air, will not support the weight of the bike, especially with 2 people.:shrug:

I know, it does handle slightly more like a bike tire. SO FRIGGIN WHAT"

I dare anyone to prove that a RF cannot do everything a NRF can. I also dare anyone to prove that a NRF can do what a RF can....namely be ridden safely with the valve core out.

Obviously, it's your choice guys and I respect that.....I just cannot understand why that slight difference in handling is worth taking the risk.

You can roll those dice....I will not. Easy on me, I'm old. :oops:
Hi ya ole fart...........Lol!

I agree with you just got tired of the fight. The horse goes to the water trough and will not drink. So I sent them back to the barn. :lol: I think it time to quit playing around myself and become the total Darksider I am. Simply not worth the worry or the discussion. These heavy bikes need a good strong tire. There is only one made by man, and that is a ROF.

Kit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,923 Posts
I had a rear MC tire come apart at 75mph on a lighter bike about 20 or so years ago. NOT a fun ride but made it through it unhurt. When I bought the GW I always had that in the back of my mind. A rear blowout or delam would be much harder to control on a 1000# behemoth traveling at 75mph.
When I heard about the RF CT being used on the back, it was a no brainer for me. 73k later I will put on the 4th Kumho soon and never entertain the idea for another MC tire.
 

·
IronMan
Joined
·
17,463 Posts
WHEN DO YOIU DO 75 MPH :wrong: LOL :agree:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
393 Posts
Obviously, it's your choice guys and I respect that.....I just cannot understand why that slight difference in handling is worth taking the risk.

You can roll those dice....I will not. Easy on me, I'm old. :oops:
There is more than a slight difference in handling (the non-ROF tire is 5 lbs lighter and less un-sprung weight is good), there is also way less input from edge bumps at slow speeds with a non runflat. There is also easily twice as much tread on the ground in a turn with the non runflat I have now, compared to the Kuhmo runflat that was my previous tire (based on comments from people that I ride with regularly). It looks like I will get about 30% more miles on this tire before it wears out too, and my gas mileage went back up about 4%.
I was sold on the runflat tire idea until I tried my current tire and for now I prefer a non-runflat.

Just my opinion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
Shouldn't a good TPMS either built in or aftermarket give you ample warning of the type of failure being discussed here? Would not matter if it was a ROF or non-ROF.
I am still trying to decide the ROF/Non-ROF question for myself. Please keep up the discussion!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,624 Posts
Shouldn't a good TPMS either built in or aftermarket give you ample warning of the type of failure being discussed here? Would not matter if it was a ROF or non-ROF.
I am still trying to decide the ROF/Non-ROF question for myself. Please keep up the discussion!
No Sir. It will not.

It will tell you the tire is low on air, provided it works and does not fail itself.
It is much better to be in tune with the bike and know how it feels and handles and not rely on a gadget.

If and when and if it did happen to you in real life, we are not talking about a leak or a flat, but sudden and instant air loss. Rapid deflation. If and were that to occur and when it does occur if the tire you have has wimpy sidewalls, the bike sits the rim right on the tire and road surface. Now you have a wobbly squirmy rubber snake under you, with no control.

There will be no warning of that, it will catch you by surprise, and the safe thing is to simply slack off the throttle and let the bike roll to a stop.

Just one touch of the rear brake will put the bike into an extreme wobble, it will throw you down.

So in the overall game of life, and with the knowledge we have all gained over the years, it just makes sense for safety to use a ROF.

But, But, But, this Western Auto tire is on sale for 39.95 and Uncle Charlie uses one, he has never had a problem..........yet

But, But this other tire performs better.....really?? Adjustments in air pressure for each bike and tire do magic things , each can be tuned to bike and rider.

Well nuff of that, tis just common sense, and No Sir, those gadgets are good, nothing against them ,they have their place and will warn of a low air condition.

But they will not warn of rapid deflation were it to occur.

And hey, there is not worry with a ROF anyway. Honest, not telling any tales, you can drill holes in a ROF and run it to the store for a new one. It will be a little mushy with no or little air, and up over 50 mph it is actually hard to tell it is flat. So there ya go, the gadgets are good for that, to warn of low air. But will not warn of rapid deflation, it is up to the rider to use given information and make a good decision based on what the gadget says.

And even with a ROF any corner will tell you you have low air pressure. If it is bad enough to be a concern. About ten psi low will warn you. Then you stop and look at the tire.........gee what is this bolt doing in the tire....and proceed to the nearest help and deal with it.

No need to live and or ride in fear, just make wise decisions with the knowledge known, and tire problems become a non issue. If a rare circumstance does occur, it is just a thing, but for sure not a life or injury situation.

A ROF is the cure for life/injury situations.

So now you decide.

Kit
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,981 Posts
There is more than a slight difference in handling (the non-ROF tire is 5 lbs lighter and less un-sprung weight is good), there is also way less input from edge bumps at slow speeds with a non runflat. There is also easily twice as much tread on the ground in a turn with the non runflat I have now, compared to the Kuhmo runflat that was my previous tire (based on comments from people that I ride with regularly). It looks like I will get about 30% more miles on this tire before it wears out too, and my gas mileage went back up about 4%.
I was sold on the runflat tire idea until I tried my current tire and for now I prefer a non-runflat.

Just my opinion
:thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
My only question here is with all these delams that have happened and some very serious injuries why hasn't there been a huge lawsuit payout?
Afterall Goodyear paid out for people running there tires beyound what most would consider usable life span on there SUV's and crashing and burning. I tried a CT and I am sorry I just don't like the difference in the handling, for now it is going to be hoping that my number does not come up in the rear tire issues on the fat girl.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,624 Posts
My only question here is with all these delams that have happened and some very serious injuries why hasn't there been a huge lawsuit payout?
Afterall Goodyear paid out for people running there tires beyound what most would consider usable life span on there SUV's and crashing and burning. I tried a CT and I am sorry I just don't like the difference in the handling, for now it is going to be hoping that my number does not come up in the rear tire issues on the fat girl.
The most honest and intelligent answer to that question is because quite simply no plaintiff has ever been able to prove it was the fault of the tire.

There are so many variables in the whole situation, it is impossible to prove beyond doubt that it is the tire.

Just as you state people are people and did run their tires beyond usable life, and then sued the tire company. It took them a bit of time to get enough stupid people all in a group lawsuit. Lol!

Any tire damaged upon installation is subject to failure. That does happen a lot. Some tires are simply defective from the process of manufacture, but proving that is the whole game. Very difficult to prove with a used tire and a tire with one mile on it is used............so the lawyer says........is it possible you hit something in the road? Could this be a possiblity?? Well yes it could be .........and so it goes.

Generally 99 percent of the time, a tire does become compromised by damage, a nail, leak, bad stem, or leaks at the rim, the rider may or man not notice this, all the time the tire is heating up and it gets hot and blows out. Heat is the killer.

Just like the recent information we have been told, a couple is riding along and they feel the tire start to act funny, they are aware, but unfortunately it was a bit late, in the next few seconds the tire blew. What caused it may never be known, the tire will be torn up, cords and belts frayed, and a smart lawyer can pick it to shreds. So it is a hard one to fight.

Messing around, the post about unsprung weight and tires.........hey do ya all know your shock and spring is connected to yure tire........take a peek under there, you will see a sprung...........

I am not sprung sometimes.........but yure tires are. :lol::lol::lol::lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,393 Posts
There is more than a slight difference in handling (the non-ROF tire is 5 lbs lighter and less un-sprung weight is good), there is also way less input from edge bumps at slow speeds with a non runflat. There is also easily twice as much tread on the ground in a turn with the non runflat I have now, compared to the Kuhmo runflat that was my previous tire (based on comments from people that I ride with regularly). It looks like I will get about 30% more miles on this tire before it wears out too, and my gas mileage went back up about 4%.
I was sold on the runflat tire idea until I tried my current tire and for now I prefer a non-runflat.

Just my opinion
I respect your choice. But we will agree to disagree on a few points.

Less input from the road with a RF is because a NRF has to have a lot more air in it to work well. IE: the sidewalls have to be stiffer.

The only way there is more tread on the ground with a NRF is if it is really low on air, IMO.

More miles from a NRF doesn't compute at all. I did not find that to be the case in the two I have worn out.:shrug:

4% better mileage. Can't wrap my head around that one either. :shrug:

Again, using a NRF is still a better decision than a MT, but no one has taken me up on my challenge: To prove that a NRF is safer than and can do everything a RF can.

I'll bet that you guys who like the NRF "for it's handling" have more than enough skill to compensate for the "VERY MINOR" handling differences offered by a RF. After a few thousand miles of not over-thinking it, you'd be perfectly happy with a RF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,610 Posts
Picking a run flat vs a non run flat is easy for me.

THERE IS NO WAY IN H..... THAT I EVER WANT TO BE STRANDED AGAIN WITH A FLAT TIRE.

CASE CLOSED!!!


Archie


:thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
879 Posts
I just ordered my third RF. I went back to the Kumho. I really liked the Pirelli but for some strange reason I have yet to figure out the ride just seemed to be smoother on the Kumho. Only time will tell, but I love my BMT's:22yikes:
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Top