Tires - How old is too old?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Dec 21, 2012 | 05:01 AM

#11

stilup

Road Warrior

Joined: Dec 2010

Posts: 1,629

Likes: 46

From: East Hartford, CT

When I traded in my last bike the stealer complained that the tires as written on the code were two years old and that was unacceptable to them.
Funny thing the same mechanic installed them that year!
Anyway, my friend was bragging about how long he was running the same tires this year.
Sad part is he is no longer with us.
Enough said.

Dec 21, 2012 | 09:20 AM

#12

rhoderider

Cruiser

Joined: Jun 2007

Posts: 147

Likes: 0

Safest advice is to change them. There are plenty of riders who would run them. Let someone else have them. A friend of mine takes every old rear tire he can get his hands on. He has several bikes and has a habit of doing burnouts. Works out well for everyone.

Dec 21, 2012 | 10:35 AM

#13

Imold

Seasoned HDF Member

Joined: Jul 2011

Posts: 27,097

Likes: 4,676

From: Frozelandia, Minnysota

Stock tires would be Dunlops, and their rubber gets hard and loses traction pretty quick; eventually any brand will. Even replacement tires could be older than the bike; I've seen 10 year old "new" tires - with fine checking on the sidewalls just from age. I like to get tires from high volume sellers like motorcyclesuperstore.com or DennisKirk.com; they have good prices, too. I had a rear blowout at about 60 once, and even though I didn't go down and it was road damage, not tire failure, the experience left me very cautious with tires. Dealer tire changes are so expensive I felt the cost of a used Cycle Hill tire changer (No-Mar) was justified - and that way I know no metal touches my cast rims. And the grandson thinks it's fun...

Dec 21, 2012 | 01:29 PM

#14

Hero

Tourer

Joined: Mar 2012

Posts: 282

Likes: 2

From: Dubai, UAE

Rubber older than 3 years on any vehicle won't pass inspection & is deemed illegal over here. I'd vote on changing them. Pretty much unanimous advice from all comments so far.

Dec 21, 2012 | 02:44 PM

#15

Hogpro

Former Sponsor

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 10,968

Likes: 54

i never said, but I vote for changing them to Michelin Commander II's.

Dec 21, 2012 | 04:06 PM

#16

Mid-Night-Rider

Tourer

Joined: May 2012

Posts: 335

Likes: 89

From: Reno, NV

I put on Metz tires this last summer (first time trying them), and I think they are by far a better handling tire vs the Dunlops. They won't last nearly as long as the stock Duns, and are a bit more expensive. I'll probably try another brand next tire change, don't know what, but it will be hard for me to go back to the Dunlops.

Dec 21, 2012 | 06:02 PM

#17

Hogpro

Former Sponsor

Joined: Aug 2005

Posts: 10,968

Likes: 54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mid-Night-Rider

You sound like me. Stock tires suck in my opinion. I don't care what they are there are always better tires out there. Yes, they usually cost a little more but it is worth it in my book any day of the week.

How long a tire lasts is relative to me. I prefer the shape of a Metzeler and how sticky it is. If mileage is the only consideration than a stock tire will usually do a bit better.

Also keep in mind that different brands of tires have different PSI ratings. Metzelers need to be run at a higher pressure than the stock tires. Many people run the PSI that is in the manual and wonder why the mileage that they get is so poor. That is why. Every tire has a max PSI on the sidewall. I run Metzelers at 40 front and 44 rear or somewhere in between. On a light bike like the Dyna I see no problem getting 8000-10000 on a rear Metzeler and two to one for front tires.

Dec 22, 2012 | 10:30 AM

#18

Puglia10

Thread Starter

Road Warrior

Joined: Sep 2012

Posts: 1,253

Likes: 482

From: MA

looks like I need some new tires! Thanks guys.
heard very conflicting things on the Metz....from best tire ever to worst tire ever. Damn internet! haha