Hi everyone. I am riding 2003 Ultra Classic for 3 months and its time to change the tires now.

I was confused while trying to make a choice which was between Avon and Michelin Commander II.

After reading dozens of comments from here, I have chosen Michelin Commander II. (please let me know if you have any strong opposite opinions)

My question is; to choose 130-front 140-rear is better than stock (130-front 130-rear) or not ??

Waiting for your advices ??

Thanks in advance
Burak

 

if you go to the Dunlop site... and check out the D-402 spec.... do the math....there isn't a large difference between the OEM tires measuremets, and the others.

Do you want/need white walls? Some folks do... this will narrow your choice.
Avon is made in England
Dunlop is made in the US
Michelin is made in Thailand (haven't seen it stamped on my tires, but have read that here)
Metzler is made in Germany, or Brazil

MY experience... with a 2005 FLTRi... in the hot NC weather, over the "rough as corn cob" NC roads.

OEM Dunlop D-402 rear wore out @ 8.5k
Metzler M-880 rear wore out @ 8Km front wore out @ 20k
Dunlop Elite-3 rears lasted 12-14k, while the fronts lasted 20k
currently on Michelin Commander II. with just over 9k on the pair... rear looks like it's got a LOT of life yet, front looks like new.

I like the "rounded" profile of the Avons, Metzlers, and Michelins.... I find this bike really turns in well, and gobbles up the twistys. I used the Elite-3s for 3.5 years, and about 60k... great tires.. I'd buy them again.... except they have been surpassed by the C II.

I'm running 130 front, and the 140 rear... 41 PSI, and think they are the answer to my prayers.... I even had a Commander II installed on my wife's bike...

 

The benefit of using the 140 rear is the increased load rating, which is worth having if you ride 2-up a lot or are very heavy. I prefer Avon myself, but my priority is quality of ride not mileage and I choose them for riding my Harley on British roads!

 

I went up to the Commander II 140/90/16 on my 99 from the 130, no issues, great tire even though it is made in Thailand

 

my priority is quality, too. thats why I need the riders' advices...
I could not learn from anyone about the michelin which is better; the miles you ride more or the quality of the ride... to be honest; I am not a guy wants to ride 10k km or more with a pair... the most important thing is the quality of my ride and the quality of the tire when it rains... I know Avon tires are good in dry while I dont know which is better in (michelin or avon both in dry and wet)...
If anyone tested both; please share your comments.

 

says it all

 

The Dunlops usually last longer but I find all of the other brands mentioned to be sticker and handle better. You have to ask yourself what it is that you are seeking out of a tire. I prefer to have a sticker tire than handles better any day of the week but many people only care about the mileage. I guess we need to know which you are. The Michelin Com II's are the best of both worlds in my opinion as they are constructed similar to the newer Harley bagger tires with a harder rubber in the center and a softer rubber on the sides so they handle well and last. I have a set of them on my Dyna and really like them although there is no way I am going to get the claimed 25K miles out of them.

 

I used to ride all year round and now travel widely in Europe and have ridden over there in some of the worst weather in my many years in the saddle - on Avons. I haven't tried current Michelins, but you won't be disappointed with Avons IMHO.

 

thank you very much for the response...
I am still trying to read more comments on both Commander II and AVONs.
Hope, I will find a solution asap. : )

 

I've just replaced the OEM Dunlops on my Ultra with....another set of Dunlops.I'm not worried about mileage either,I want the best performing tire on my bike and after looking at the various options I think I made the right choice.If you read the comparisons on the Dunlop site it might help you make the right choice.