www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Technical => Wheels/Tires/Suspension/Brakes => Topic started by: longlast on September 20, 2018, 07:10:33 PM
-
I've got rubber replacement coming up. I've always run with the manual recommended Dunlop tyres D402F MT90B 16 and rear D402 MU85B 16.
I'm considering going with Michelin Commandos ll. I've never really liked the Dunlop's on wet roads and it's my understanding the Michelin Commandos ll tyres are by far a better tyre on wet roads
Would any one know what the Michelin Commandos ll tyre numbers are that replace the Dunlop.
Thanks for any info.
-
Michelin Commander II
Front: 130/90 B16 73H
Rear: 140/90 B16 77H
Jerry
-
Much appreciated :2vrolijk_21: :2vrolijk_21:
Any one that's using these tyres or has used them what's your views on them?
I had at one time put Continental's on "big mistake" I'll leave it there.
-
Much appreciated :2vrolijk_21: :2vrolijk_21:
Any one that's using these tyres or has used them what's your views on them?
I had at one time put Continental's on "big mistake" I'll leave it there.
I love them. Take a little longer to warm up but very sticky once you do. Also getting about 25% more wear out of them
-
I heard they don't have the proper load rating for a touring bike?
BigLew
-
Where did you get that information? Cause it's wrong.
I agree, they are excellent tires.
FYI, no need to get the metric equivalent as Michelin makes the MT90B-16 and MU85B-16 sizes.
-
Michelin does offer both the metric and the alpha-numeric versions as mentioned above. If you want to see the complete listing of available sizes, follow this link and scroll down to the list of sizes.
https://motorcycle.michelin.co.jp/US/en/tires/products/commander-ii.html#
Jerry
-
I really like the Commander IIs on the '05 SEEG, not so much on the '09 SERG...
-
Thanks for your input guy's
Michelin does offer both the metric and the alpha-numeric versions as mentioned above. If you want to see the complete listing of available sizes, follow this link and scroll down to the list of sizes.
https://motorcycle.michelin.co.jp/US/en/tires/products/commander-ii.html#
Jerry
Cheers Jerry,
I had found that link in my research looking for the numbers cross reference from Dunlop too Michelin.
The numbers were staring me in the face but didn't know it. I contacted Michelin for the cross reference size but before they got back to me you had already posted them "spot on mate" they of course came back with the same.
I see in the list the 130/90 and the 140/90 I assume go hand in hand as a mach pair . Don't know anything about tyre numbers only that the 77H stands for the load rating and 16 being wheel size, the rest is all Dubbel Dutch to me.
Where did you get that information? Cause it's wrong.
I agree, they are excellent tires.
FYI, no need to get the metric equivalent as Michelin makes the MT90B-16 and MU85B-16 sizes.
Cheers,
I think I'm going to give these Michelins a try. Now those numbers MT90B-16 and MU85B-16 sizes just throws a spanner (known as a wrench) in the works I wouldn't have a clue there're the same tyres, assuming they are the same. Only know what the 16 stands for the rest it's Dubbel Dutch. What part gives the load rating? That's where I went wrong with Continental tyres l had on at one time I didn't know about the load rating, the ride was like driving a bus down a bumpy road with no steering wheel just a pair of visegrips on the steering shaft. I put up with it for 4k then went back to Dunlop. The Dunlop's I don't mind when it's dry don't like them when it's wet.
These Michelin Commanders ll say there a good wet weather tyre and on this side of the pond we are definitely in the wet time of year it'll drop on you at any given time.
With our roundabouts and being wet with Dunlop's it's a bit unnerving I've felt them slip a few times.
-
I really like the Commander IIs on the '05 SEEG, not so much on the '09 SERG...
Why's that ? What's the difference between them on the 05 and the 09? Just curious
-
Why's that ? What's the difference between them on the 05 and the 09? Just curious
The '05 (old frame) has 16s, the CIIs give sportier handling and much better wear than the OE 402s...
The '09 (new frame) has 18s, Not any handling improvement (that I can tell??) do not seem to be wearing as well (especially the front) as the last set of OE Dunlops...
On the '05 I will stay with the CIIs,,, On the '09 I'll probably try the American Elites next time...
-
The '05 (old frame) has 16s, the CIIs give sportier handling and much better wear than the OE 402s...
The '09 (new frame) has 18s, Not any handling improvement (that I can tell??) do not seem to be wearing as well (especially the front) as the last set of OE Dunlops...
On the '05 I will stay with the CIIs,,, On the '09 I'll probably try the American Elites next time...
That's interesting, strange the front on the 09 you find doesn't wear so well "possibly due too being 18s"
My front also wears off quicker especially the right side of the tyre more then the lift. It's due to all the frigging roundabouts having to lean to the right all the time. There's a place not far from me that has a roundabout every 1/4 mile for 10 miles.
I try not to be too aggressive going into the roundabouts.
I'm looking forward to see how these Michelins hold up and the comparison of the ride and handling.
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/MIC_Tire_Guide_2012V1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiL2ITf0s7dAhVs4oMKHUxHB7wQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3q7vQwzewtDV0qEqXFllFT (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/MIC_Tire_Guide_2012V1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiL2ITf0s7dAhVs4oMKHUxHB7wQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3q7vQwzewtDV0qEqXFllFT)
-
Those alphanumeric sizes are a pretty much obsolete system for designating tire sizes these days, as everyone has migrated to the metric system. You can still find them for the older Harley's, but there is no advantage to using them instead of the equivalent metric sizes.
Example tire size: 140/90 B 16 77H
140 = tire width in mm at the widest point.
90 = aspect ratio, how tall the tire is relative to the width expressed as a percentage, ie. 90%
B = bias ply construction, versus R = radial construction
16 = rim diameter in inches
77 = load rating (908 lbs)
H = speed rating (130mph)
Jerry
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/MIC_Tire_Guide_2012V1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiL2ITf0s7dAhVs4oMKHUxHB7wQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3q7vQwzewtDV0qEqXFllFT (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.msf-usa.org/downloads/MIC_Tire_Guide_2012V1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiL2ITf0s7dAhVs4oMKHUxHB7wQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw3q7vQwzewtDV0qEqXFllFT)
:2vrolijk_21: :2vrolijk_21:
Those alphanumeric sizes are a pretty much obsolete system for designating tire sizes these days, as everyone has migrated to the metric system. You can still find them for the older Harley's, but there is no advantage to using them instead of the equivalent metric sizes.
Example tire size: 140/90 B 16 77H
140 = tire width in mm at the widest point.
90 = aspect ratio, how tall the tire is relative to the width expressed as a percentage, ie. 90%
B = bias ply construction, versus R = radial construction
16 = rim diameter in inches
77 = load rating (908 lbs)
H = speed rating (130mph)
Jerry
:2vrolijk_21: :2vrolijk_21:
;D ;D It's like a a light bulb had just been turned on.
Thanks guys, :2vrolijk_21:
-
That's interesting, strange the front on the 09 you find doesn't wear so well "possibly due too being 18s"
My front also wears off quicker especially the right side of the tyre more then the lift. It's due to all the frigging roundabouts having to lean to the right all the time. There's a place not far from me that has a roundabout every 1/4 mile for 10 miles.
I try not to be too aggressive going into the roundabouts.
I'm looking forward to see how these Michelins hold up and the comparison of the ride and handling.
HD/Dunlop had a Recall on the '09 SERG Front Tire (amounted to reversing the tread), and a Recall on some of the 18" Front "Blade" Wheels... The 18" "Blade" Wheels are now "obsolete" from HD...
The last set of OE HD/Dunlops on the '09 wore (close to) evenly with 18k miles on the Rear and the Front having approx another 1-2k left,,, Replaced F&R with CIIs when the 18 CII became available for the Front, the CII front is wearing much faster than the Rear...
Some say that they don't like the CIIs in the wet,,, I've not noticed any ill traits in that regard on either the '05 or the '09,,, Ride & Handling are fine, sure-footed, predictable, no ill traits in any situation, just the the 18s don't have the sporty feel of the smaller 16s (different cross sections??? compounds???),,, I have >70k miles on each Bike... Both Bikes have Glide-Pro Bushings and Sorted Suspensions...
On the '05 ( OE 402s) consistently 11-12k to a Rear, 2 Rears to a Front, the CIIs seem to be wearing perfectly even at around 14k with plenty of Tread remaining...
Go figure :nixweiss:
-
HD/Dunlop had a Recall on the '09 SERG Front Tire (amounted to reversing the tread), and a Recall on some of the 18" Front "Blade" Wheels... The 18" "Blade" Wheels are now "obsolete" from HD...
The last set of OE HD/Dunlops on the '09 wore (close to) evenly with 18k miles on the Rear and the Front having approx another 1-2k left,,, Replaced F&R with CIIs when the 18 CII became available for the Front, the CII front is wearing much faster than the Rear...
Some say that they don't like the CIIs in the wet,,, I've not noticed any ill traits in that regard on either the '05 or the '09,,, Ride & Handling are fine, sure-footed, predictable, no ill traits in any situation, just the the 18s don't have the sporty feel of the smaller 16s (different cross sections??? compounds???),,, I have >70k miles on each Bike... Both Bikes have Glide-Pro Bushings and Sorted Suspensions...
On the '05 ( OE 402s) consistently 11-12k to a Rear, 2 Rears to a Front, the CIIs seem to be wearing perfectly even at around 14k with plenty of Tread remaining...
Go figure :nixweiss:
From what I've read the Comander ll tyres are getting as much as 25k .
A Quote from Michelin;
Various independent tests carried out in the US and Europe have come to the conclusion that the rear Michelin Commander II motorcycle tyre is capable of covering up to 25,000 miles!! Comparing that with Michelin's direct competition, thats nearly twice the distance. What does that mean for the front then? Well the longevity of the front tyre is even greater. The Michelin Commander 2 creates a new standard when it comes to durability.
-
(https://goo.gl/images/NQnvMY)