Tires

[rpeterson]

I'm in the mood for new tires. The bike now has 9,000 mile and the Bridgestone tires must be replaced. The front tire has a lot of "cupping" and the rear has preformed very well but the tread is down to the wear bars.

I see that Michelin tires are listed as a choice in the owners manual and would like some info on the performance of these tires. I use the bike exclusively on the roads of Florida with some out of state travel. I try to stay out of the rain, but it does happen on occasion. Any info on the Michelons would be appreciated.

 

Randy

2002 V11 LeMans

 

The Michelins listed in the owners manual are frt. 120/70ZR 17" C Michelin Pilot Sport

and the rear is a 180/55ZR 17" L Michelin Pilot Sport. They are slightly higher priced than the Bridgestones, but not a big deal.

 

Randy

[antonio carroccio]

Which Michelin are you talking about?

Road? Sport? Race? Macadam?

[Baldini]

Dunno re Pilot "Sport"? I have Pilot Power 2CT's. They have huge amount of grip, handle great & wear v quick.

 

All Michelins I've had (bike & car) have been grippy tyres. My guess is the Michelins you're lookin at (which I don't know) will grip & handle better than 020's but I'd be amazed if you got anything like 9k miles outa them. They will also likely (if they are designated a "sport" tyre) have a sharper profile than 020's which will speed up steering & isn't to everbody's taste.

 

Have you considered Pirelli Diablos which suit V11 very well? Others like Metzelers. Try a search - should dig up stuff on this.

 

KB

[v50man]

In my experience, the round Michelins deliver the most satisfactory ride...

[Guest ratchethack]

The Michelins listed in the owners manual are frt. 120/70ZR 17" C Michelin Pilot Sport

and the rear is a 180/55ZR 17" L Michelin Pilot Sport.

Randy, FWIW, if you do a search you'll see that tire SIZE comes up semi-regularly.

 

The usual confusion and small controversy is over rear tire width. Guzzi both listed in their manuals, and shipped wider tires than is "correct" on both the 4.5" and 5.5" rims in an apparent sales play for "bling" factor on showroom floors. Many riders here, including myself, have found far superior, more predictable and stable handling with one-size narrower, which are the properly spec'd width by tire mfgr's for these rims.

 

The 5.5" rim is properly shod with a 170 width tire, and the 4.5" rim should get a 160.

[pille]

i am propably the only guy who has SHINKO tyres on his v11.

I know, i should be hung up high on a rope, but they were a lot cheaper and as far as I can tell pretty good.

But I must say, my name is pille, not Kevin Schwantz!!

[Baldini]

...The 5.5" rim is properly shod with a 170 width tire...

 

170 & 180 are both spec'd fitment for 5.5" rim.

 

Tho 170 steers better, I went back to 180 because I figured, being stretched to a flatter profile, 170 would run off tread earlier at furthest angles of lean. I have never heard a definitive answer on this.

 

Steering with a 180 Diablo/Mich is much better than with 180 020 anyhow cos of diff profiles.

 

KB

[Guest ratchethack]

170 & 180 are both spec'd fitment for 5.5" rim.

 

Tho 170 steers better, I went back to 180 because I figured, being stretched to a flatter profile, 170 would run off tread earlier at furthest angles of lean. I have never heard a definitive answer on this.

By rim width only, it may be true that either tire may be called out by mfgr., but I've only heard one story from riders who've tried both the 180 and 170 on the Guzzi LM ans Sport with 5.5" rim -- Not only does the 170 steer better, but it's more planted, among other non-dubious niceties. Theoretically, I'd expect the 170 to "run out of tread" earlier - but who's gonna be able do that? I don't know how it'd be possible to do that before grounding lots of stuff hard enough to unweight the tire?

 

I had the same positive experience going from a 170 to 160 on the 4.5" rim. I tried both tires with the suspension raised up on properly matched springs and sags and the side-stand stop cut down by 50%. But now with the 160, it takes a lot more effort to drag the stand, and now it feels like I'm able to get over a bit farther than with the 170, and at the same time it's definitely lots more controllable, predictable, and confidence-inspiring - Metzeler Z6's.

 

BAA, TJM & YMMV

[Baldini]

....don't know how it'd be possible to do that before grounding lots of stuff hard enough to unweight the tire?...

 

Dunno either! Got everything out of way so (with sidestand removed) pegs are first to ground & that comes a long way past scrubbing edge of tyre (Scura has longer shock & is much higher at back than others). Diablo was struggling with grip before touching pegs esp when hot. Power 2CT's have loads more grip & will drag peg but it feels a hell of a long way over for this bike....& again way past scrubbing edge of tread. I'm sure it's just theoretical worry but I just don't know how far it'll stick past that point, have no gauge.

 

Another theory I have is cos 180 is wider it moves hard bits further from road at lean...tho 170 is larger diameter so dunno ....

 

170 more "planted" ? maybe it's just the feel of tyres with closer matched widths balancing bike better?

 

I agree 170 feels better all round, & will probably try one again in stickier rubber.

 

KB

[Guest ratchethack]

...(with sidestand removed) pegs are first to ground...

Keith, I'm curious. Did you install a center stand then?

 

Enquiring minds just gotta know.....

[Baldini]

Keith, I'm curious.  Did you install a center stand then?...

 

no.... i put the sidestand back on...

 

KB