Video Link: Hankook CT on my ST1300

Why did you high light the C/t as the cause over the other possible causes in the combo ? what exactly did you see to give you the feeling it was the tire more than the one of the other parts of the combo did you see any hard parts contact the ground first before the tire let go ?

If a CT will grip until an ST touches a peg, I'm sure a Hardly will touch a pipe or running board before the CT loses grip.

is the hankook tyre the only one any of you CT guys have tried or heard about?
is there a narrower hankook? by one or two sizes...
will the hankook fit up into the swingarm/frame inflated or not?
having a flat may be an issue while on the road and / when it needs to be removed.
i agree w/ JZ about many in the LD Community having tried these on LD Rallys, with more thinking about the swap. look at any old articles about contact patch from DL Hough and he'll say about the same when any MT or CT is in a turn the contact patch is very minimal. even on MT's. roll your own tire on the ground or garage floor and measure for your self.

Gene said:

Why did you high light the C/t as the cause over the other possible causes in the combo ? what exactly did you see to give you the feeling it was the tire more than the one of the other parts of the combo did you see any hard parts contact the ground first before the tire let go ?

Click to expand...

Did the front wash or did the rear? Lots of questions, don't just point at the car tire.

I've got 1k now on a C/T and I'm CONVINCED it puts down a much bigger patch at full lean than a M/C tire. I've hit tar snakes and the front wiggles and the rear doesn't. I'm now more worried about sliding the front out.

Best part is I haven't even lost 1/32nd of tread yet. If it was a M/C tire I'd have lost 2 already.

I want a C/T for the front!

Pete in PA said:

I want a C/T for the front!

Click to expand...

Not a CT but the BT 045 Rear mounted on the front will give you a lot more tread depth to start with.

rapide said:

is the hankook tyre the only one any of you CT guys have tried or heard about?
is there a narrower hankook? by one or two sizes...
will the hankook fit up into the swingarm/frame inflated or not?
having a flat may be an issue while on the road and / when it needs to be removed.
i agree w/ JZ about many in the LD Community having tried these on LD Rallys, with more thinking about the swap. look at any old articles about contact patch from DL Hough and he'll say about the same when any MT or CT is in a turn the contact patch is very minimal. even on MT's. roll your own tire on the ground or garage floor and measure for your self.

Click to expand...

There are other tires that have been tried so the Hankook isn't the only option. If you go to tirerack you can punch in the tire size and get pretty much all the options. I would avoid tires that have a different tread patter on the left half vs right half. The Hankook is a mirror image which is what will be ideal. I also looked for another size that was a little narrower. Going from a 160 to a 205 is a big jump. I wasn't able to find anything that would fit. Not saying it doesn't exist but in a search I didn't find anything and someone else mentioned they couldn't find other options either.

You mentioned a concern about clearing the swingarm. I put mine on deflated. If I was on the road I doubt I would pull the wheel to fix it unless it was a major issue that couldn't be plugged. If that is the case the tire would be flat so it won't be an issue removing it. If it is holding air where it might be an issue taking it off, then I don't know why I would be trying to take it off. Just ride, it has air in it. If I was a major failure and I was concerned about installing the rim back on the bike while on the road just replace it with a MC tire and go back to a CT later. I carry an air compressor so I don't see an issue with reinflating the tire though.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

Just got back from a 6,000 mile ride thru AL, TN, MS, AR, OK, NM, UT, CO, NV, CA, AZ, NM, TX, OK, AR, MA, TN and AL

On a Hankook. 6,000 miles in 11 days. Last day was 1,002 miles.

Now the tire has just over 10,000 miles.

Before the left coast ride I did a week long ride through, TN, KY, W Va, VA, NC, SC

Lots of different roads, surface types including rough dirt, temperatures and speeds.

Only weird feeling is at low speeds 1 - 2 mph manouvering in parking lots, doing U turns etc.

Previously ran a Cooper Zeon on a Honda Valkyrie and absolutely hated it.

The Hankook on an ST works very well.

Me going uphill on Blood Mountain, Hwy 129 in north Georgia.

http://www.photoreflect.com/store/Orderpage.aspx?pi=1WK700AN030127&po=127&pc=195

WOW! My video has sure sparked a lively debate and for the most part a civil one!

I don't even think about there being a car tire back there any more. My conclusion is that I will not be going back to a MT on the ST FOR THE TYPE OF RIDING I MOSTLY DO and you can ask anyone that has riden with me, I am no slouch!

If I trailer my bike to the twisties then rode only around the area, then I maybe would go back to a MT. Maybe, cause I am liking the mileage on this CT.

There are risks involed in everything we do. I have accepted this level of risk but I will not debate whether it is more or less risk than using one type of tire or another because it is a moot point for me.


Ride safe!

I have looked all over and I can't seem to find an answer to my question. Does a CT on the ST raise or lower the bike? I know that it is not a problem for some folks but it makes a difference for me.

When upright, there seems to be no change in height of the tire. When parked on the sidestand, there seems to be a very slight extra lean to the bike, because the tire is touching on the corner only, which is further away from the center of the wheel than a rounded profile tire. Being that there is no weight to compress the corner, as it does when riding, it sits the rear up just slightly. I haven't noticed any problem with stability when on the sidestand, so I don't think its enough to cause a problem. I'm assuming that you are height challenged...I don't think there is any difference you will notice.

Jim

nhdiesel said:

When upright, there seems to be no change in height of the tire. When parked on the sidestand, there seems to be a very slight extra lean to the bike, because the tire is touching on the corner only, which is further away from the center of the wheel than a rounded profile tire. Being that there is no weight to compress the corner, as it does when riding, it sits the rear up just slightly. I haven't noticed any problem with stability when on the sidestand, so I don't think its enough to cause a problem. I'm assuming that you are height challenged...I don't think there is any difference you will notice.

Jim

Click to expand...

Ahh this makes sense. I too noticed the difference on the sidestand. It might be ever so slightly taller in the upright position as well (certainly not lower). I am vertically challenged and I will say I am extra cautious in slow speed parking lot situations, especially when two-up. I just seem to be more unstable on gravel etc. This is the only negative I have found to this tire.

travellingtenor said:

I have looked all over and I can't seem to find an answer to my question. Does a CT on the ST raise or lower the bike? I know that it is not a problem for some folks but it makes a difference for me.

Click to expand...

I am currently running the Hankook Ventus V4 rear tire which is a little different than the Hankook most people are running darkside here (Ventus V12). Both tires do have identical specs for outside diameter though.

The problem with trying to calculate the difference in height using the specs given out over the internet is that you do not know what size rim that the tire was mounted on when they made the measurements. For instance, the Hankook V4 is rated at 25.1 inches outer diameter while the Avon Storm 2 Ultra is rated at 25.0 inches, only a tenth of an inch difference. What I have found though after I mounted my V4 was that my STeed's odometer value closely matched the GPS value on my first long trip of about 2K miles whereas in the past I typically observed about a 2 percent difference between my odometer and the GPS on various long trips. Using that as a guide, you could calculate an axle height increase of about 0.25 inches when changing from the motorcycle to the darkside tire. The actual seat height change would be slightly less than that if the front wheel stays the same though. A quarter of an inch may sound like alot but it is less of a difference than if you were to change from a worn out rear motorcycle tire to a fresh one.

After I changed my front tire to the Dunlop BT-45 a couple of months after I initially changed to the darkside I noticed that the front end seemed significantly higher than it was before. The Dunlop is a larger tire, 130/70 R18 versus the standard 120/70 R18. I removed the tire from the bike and measured it and compared it to a worn out Avon Storm that I had mounted on a spare rim and found that there was a 19mm difference between them (a good part of that, ~7mm was due to the worn tire). I ended up dropping the forks down in their clamps by 5mm to compensate for this difference.

I have a 30" inseam and don't notice any difference in height except when parked on the side stand as mentioned above. Just have to throw my leg a little higher.

OK, throwing this in the mix. I am going Darkside, but for a potentially different reason. I have twice gotten unrepairable flats in my Avon Storm Ultra II's. Has anyone gotten a FLAT in a CT? I am betting on the fact that the same compound and profile will actually make a flat repair much more doable. I may actually go double dark when I pull the front tire off to replace the sensor on the TPMS.

PS> I get between 7k and 9k out of a MT...can't wait to see what I can get out of a CT.

I picked up a nail. I plugged it, then did back to back IBA rides 2 weekends in a row.

There is nothing about a CT that will keep you from picking up a nail or other damage, except maybe because the CT is slightly stronger (thicker) but not enough to really matter for much. But I think there is better chance of successfully (and safely) plugging a CT.

In fact, if anything, the odds of picking up a nail are a very slight bit higher with a CT because of the slight extra width. But picking up a nail over near the edge of a CT would be much more repairable than a nail at the edge of a MC tire (by edge, I mean near the edge of the tread, not the sidewall).

Britman said:

Now the tire has just over 10,000 miles.

Click to expand...

You posted this back in June - just wondering how many miles have you got on your Hankook? I've put just over 8000 on mine and it's about half-gone. Kinda disappointed, I thot it would go further than that. Just wondering what others are getting out of their's.

I don't regret going to the darkside, I'm definitely money ahead, as we Canucks pay just about double for a MT than you do. (The Hankook was $100 cheaper than a MT, and it'll still last twice as long as a MT.) And, like you said, the only time it's at all funky is at slow speeds. And there's just as often in other situations where I prefer it.

nhdiesel said:

I picked up a nail. I plugged it, then did back to back IBA rides 2 weekends in a row.

There is nothing about a CT that will keep you from picking up a nail or other damage, except maybe because the CT is slightly stronger (thicker) but not enough to really matter for much. But I think there is better chance of successfully (and safely) plugging a CT.

In fact, if anything, the odds of picking up a nail are a very slight bit higher with a CT because of the slight extra width. But picking up a nail over near the edge of a CT would be much more repairable than a nail at the edge of a MC tire (by edge, I mean near the edge of the tread, not the sidewall).

Click to expand...

well that is good to hear...not that you got a nail, but that you were able to repair it.

Art Franz said:

You posted this back in June - just wondering how many miles have you got on your Hankook? I've put just over 8000 on mine and it's about half-gone. Kinda disappointed, I thot it would go further than that. Just wondering what others are getting out of their's.

I don't regret going to the darkside, I'm definitely money ahead, as we Canucks pay just about double for a MT than you do. (The Hankook was $100 cheaper than a MT, and it'll still last twice as long as a MT.) And, like you said, the only time it's at all funky is at slow speeds. And there's just as often in other situations where I prefer it.

Click to expand...

I've been through 3 Hankooks, with mileage between 14k-17k miles out of each. I have around 55k miles on Hankooks total. I ride HARD, on rough roads. Dirt, potholes, frost heaves, broken pavement, hard cornering...you name it. I got around 5k out of my last MC rear tire, so I'm getting close to 3x as much out of a Hankook, for a lot less money each tire. And its not just the dollar per mile that I'm saving- because I do some long rides, there are lots of times when I would have to pull a half-worn MC tire off before the trip so I would have a fresh tire. That is a lot of wasted rubber...unless I go through the effort to swap back to the half-worn tire later. Even if my Hankook is 2/3 worn, I know I'm good for another 4-5k mile trip. I also only have to deal with replacing tires 1/3 as often. Since I don't have a lot of free time, that is valuable time saved that I could be riding rather than doing a tire change.

nhdiesel said:

I've been through 3 Hankooks, with mileage between 14k-17k miles out of each. I have around 55k miles on Hankooks total. I ride HARD, on rough roads. Dirt, potholes, frost heaves, broken pavement, hard cornering...you name it. I got around 5k out of my last MC rear tire, so I'm getting close to 3x as much out of a Hankook, for a lot less money each tire. And its not just the dollar per mile that I'm saving- because I do some long rides, there are lots of times when I would have to pull a half-worn MC tire off before the trip so I would have a fresh tire. That is a lot of wasted rubber...unless I go through the effort to swap back to the half-worn tire later. Even if my Hankook is 2/3 worn, I know I'm good for another 4-5k mile trip. I also only have to deal with replacing tires 1/3 as often. Since I don't have a lot of free time, that is valuable time saved that I could be riding rather than doing a tire change.

Click to expand...

nhdiesel, thanks for the reply. You're getting about the same kind of mileage that I'm getting. For both Hankook and MT. I totally agree with your reasoning/logic. I won't go back, either.

I just put my bike into it's winter hibernation yesterday, so my tires will last really well until about March. Which is when I plan to put on my heated suit and see if I can dodge the worst of the weather and head to AZ and southern CA.

BTW, what are you running on the front? I had an 020 that lasted about 12,000 miles. Seemed to work really well. 023 now that looks almost new with 4,000 on it.

Apologies for hijacking the thread.