GL1800Riders Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,414 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can we please have reports from those who have used BOTH: Runflats and non-flats.
YOUR TAKE ON DIFFERENCE?
PREFERENCE?
PERFORMANCE DETAILS?

...much appreciate it

PS How about those who have used 195/60 (non-runflats) and other runflat models
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,918 Posts
GUESS YOU DON'T WANT MINE SINCE I'VE ONLY RUN THE 205'S.... :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,178 Posts
Can we please have reports from those who have used BOTH: Runflats and non-flats.
YOUR TAKE ON DIFFERENCE?
PREFERENCE?
PERFORMANCE DETAILS?

...much appreciate it

PS How about those who have used 195/60 (non-runflats) and other runflat models
I started out with a Continental RF 195/55/16. I really didn't like it to be perfectly honest. It drives the bike in my opinion, which forces me to always be correcting it. When I went to the 195/65/16 non RF, it was all the difference in the world. Unfortunately, it isn't easily found anymore, so I will be trying the 195/60/16 when it arrives later this week. I expect it to be somewhere in between the two. I had a flat on the non run flat and it wasn't a problem. I was pulling a trailer riding two up at the time. I'm sure you are going to get a million opinions on this subject, but really you just have to make up your own mind.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,396 Posts
YOUR TAKE ON DIFFERENCE? The Run Flat felt better to me.:thumbup:
PREFERENCE? I like the Run Flat over the non run flat. :doorag:
PERFORMANCE DETAILS? I saw people pointing and yelling "Look at that guy go" :bow::bow:
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I only use non-runflats as I see no practical reason to spend double the money. Kumho Solis 205x60 on the wing and the 205x65 on the valkyrie. I also run three non-runflats on my Rtrike. None of my cars or trucks have run flats. To tell the truth I have never evern thought about a RF tire on anything except skidloaders, and those we filled with foam.
I have not had a flat ever in over a million mc miles so I believe it's a safe gamble. Also I wonder if the RF tires really work. I don't think it's a very common test, planned or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
973 Posts
Having only had three flat tires on motorcycles in 40 years I agree that if you are betting the odds then a runflat doesn't make any sense. I've been paying for life insurance for 40 years as well and haven't had to use that either, just think of all the money I could have saved...

For me the Runflat vs non-runflat issue is one of handling and feel. The non-runflat I used had a funny little hitch in it's cornering manners that I never felt with the runflat tire I changed to when that non-runflat wore out. The non-runflat was vague in it's handling at higher speeds and at really high speeds it would definitely wander. Non of those things happened with the runflat tire. Currently I am using a non-runflat and am pretty happy with it but it has a load rating of 1900 lbs however so I'm thinking it is pretty much a runflat anyway.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,247 Posts
Sometimes I run mine flat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,556 Posts
Seems the original reasons for the RF on the bike at least on this forum was the stability at the lower pressures. If you go back through the threads time and again the issue was the wobbles of the regular tire as opposed to the stronger walls and stable ride of the run flat. The added cost of the RF wasn't a real issue considering the high mileages achieved and safety was talked about as an added benefit. Cheers...:doorag:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,396 Posts
Hazel.you just didn't run that thing far enough,it's sidewalls are still on it. :eek:4:


This is how you it's done on a Goldwing Dude! :thumbup:



That tire was in Three pieces when it was taken off the wheel..

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
I started with a non-RF Michelin. Great tire that sold me on CT for the Wing. The last 2 tires have been RF. The biggest difference (beyond being able to drive without air pressure) is the wiggle you feel while running the curves at speed. I will not go back to a non-RF for that reason alone. Having experienced a flat on the non-RF and not being able to get the bike on the center stand by myself is another good reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
I have used a 205 Non-RF and under normal conditions i.e. regular travel at less than 100 MPH on the highway it was as good as either of my RF tires. The only difference I felt was a wiggle or hi speed wobble at speeds over 100 and a squsihiness (is that a word?) in hard turns. If I were planning a long straight road trip I wouldnt hesitate to put the potenzia back on the bike. I loaned my 205-55-16 Potenzia to a fellow winger and he was amazed that it felt so good. He's now a darksider as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,393 Posts
I'd like to see side by side pictures of a non-RF on a Wing without air and a RF on a Wing without air. Anyone?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
I don't have a picture, but I can assure you that a non-RF without out air is just like if it were on a car. Very flat and the rim is all the way to the ground.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,414 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
trialsman,
I get the feeling you are prying the existential question: Are all non-runflat created equal. I fear they probably are. I am expecting, make that hoping I am wrong with the 195/60...but if I had to bet, I would bet against my hope.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top