I have a 2006 Wideglide. It has 8000 miles on it. The tires are original and are in excellent condition. No cracking and they aren't worn enough to replace. Looks like they can last one more season. I spoke to a few Harley dealers and without even looking at the bike they all agree that 8 year old tires should be replaced regardless of condition because the rubber gets hard over time. Is this true or is the dealership just trying to sell me tires?

 

Dunlop recommends replacing tires older than 6 years. Some dealers just go by the appearance of tire.

I would rather play it safe on a bike.

 

if it makes you feel any better, don't buy them from the dealer.. But I too would replace them. Having a tire problem is not something you want to find out at 11:30PM, 31° outside, and on a dark back road with your wife on the back.

 

Whether they develop a problem with age is one concern. The other is that the rubber compounds harden with age and lose their flexibility. This is needed to hold the road in cornering, swipe away water, and absorb small debris. I definitely would not go 8 years...and 6 would be my max.

JMO...your opinion and mileage may vary. Void where taxed or otherwise prohibited by law. No warranty provided or implied. No cash value.

 

For me if the date on the tyre sidewall makes it 3 yrs old is getting changed.

The fact that you are asking, suggests you are not happy, trust your instincts and change them.

Tyres that old will have greatly reduced grip, and I suspect once you get a few heat cycles through them they will start to degrade rapidly.

 

considering that small patch of aged rubber is the only thing in contact with the pavement ..... replace them !

 

For a period of 10 years in my life I owned 3 bikes so my yearly mileage on any single one was not high. I would change out my tires at the 4 year point even if they did not show max wear.

regards,

 

When your riding down the road at 60+ mph do you really want to thing about the condition of your tires? If in doubt replace.