www.boxertrix.com

Anyone care to offer their wisdom on the reasons to spend more on a Radial Tyre.
How much more mileage (typically) would a radial cover?
Cheers
Bailey.

- Lighter due to less components (=less rotating mass = better handling)
- Less internal friction (=lower temperatures at higher speeds; softer compounds can be used for similar mileage = more grip)
- More flexible carcass (=better damping and road compliance)

Not sure H ondas' are designed to use radials - it may invalidate your insurance if you fit inappropriate rubber

bigblackfalco wrote:Anyone care to offer their wisdom on the reasons to spend more on a Radial Tyre.
How much more mileage (typically) would a radial cover?
Cheers
Bailey.

I have a CB500. when I was using it full time I was getting 4.5k miles out of a rear arrowmax (D103 dunlop cross ply).
I put a couple of sets of metz mez1 fr
mez2 rear on it at one stage and the rear lasted approx 50% longer but.........they seemed great when new but once half worn the handling went , the only way to describe it is "odd". The front got really heavy and would shimmy as if the wheel was badly unbalanced, and the rear would spin up with very little effort in wet . (Admittedly the tyres were not recommended for the bike) Overall what is a sweet handling little bike became unpredictable. There was a tech article in mcn at the time and kevin ash had the reasons for not fitting radials to steel framed bikes (for which they were not designed) . However just looked at the tyre on my cb (d103 dunlop) , it's due for replacement and it's covered 6kmiles .
Presumably i'm getting smoother and the miles have been covered over a longer period (2yrs rather than months) . At the time the cost benefit ratio didn't add up.
Nigel B

Try BT45s - best cross-ply I ever used.