215/ 55r 16

What good examples of vitriol. So curious.

Indeed! Cruel criticism of someone's riding ability because they choose to use an integral piece of safety equipment actually designed for machine they're using - that's what vitriol is isn't it?

I think sarcasm might have been a better choice
 
Actually - when I was still a Darkside Virgin - I did find evidence (on Metzlers US web site) that whilst legislation does exist in the USA to prohibit the use of tyres labelled M/C on a car rim there was no legislation disallowing the use of a non - M/C labelled tyre on a Motorcycle rim.

There is a reason - NOT ALL M/C tyres are labelled M/C (yet!) - especially older "vintage type" tyres. Most M/C rims have VERY aggressive bead retention lips and M/C specific tyres depend (to some extent) on them being there. This may explain why some guys have had to cut CT's of M/C rims.

In the UK iirc the use of a PV tyre on an M/C is perfectly legal (still?).

Here - The traffic police have never even mentioned it at check stops - and they have mentioned other things - like smoked indicator lenses for example.
 
Same here in Auss in fact I have even had a chat to some Highway patrol officers at a servo whilst I was have a rest break, they had absolutely no problem with it
 
What good examples of vitriol. So curious.

No vitriol in my post mate. Just amazement you picked up how hopeless I am when it comes to operating a motorcycle? You must have ESP or something you worked that out from the other side of the earth and all you know about me is I don't use car tyre's for something they weren't designed for. Amazing.
 
Bruce, apparently some Policemen, sorry, random Highway Patrol officers at a servo (presumably representing the entire Police force across all jurisdictions) reckon car tyres are OK on motorbikes. This is BIG and overrides all the evidence and research and expert findings of tyre manufacturers and road safety experts and proves once and for all that the laws of physics don't apply. So there you have it. Conclusive proof. And who said these guys werte just trying to save a few bucks.
 
When I made my very first post it was about what I saw .i was seriously looking for a tyre that wore better as I used to be a little hard on tyres .i was only getting about 4500 to 5000km,s maximum out of my rear tyre .the expense was pissing me off .i met this guy with a car tyre on his r3 and after a discussion .he was two up as I followed him down this very steep mountain at considerable speed .he was riding hard through the twisties and along the straights .i had no doubt he knew what he was doing . I was sticking to the rear of his bike like glue observing every twist and turn .what I observed scared the crap out of me .the tyre may have been under inflated I don't know ,but wallowing and the movement of the tyre riding on the sidewall stays locked in my mind.im gratefull that the bridge stone exedra max came along . But saying this ,the ride down the mountain was very aggressive and I'm sure under normal riding situations they are most probably okay . I really don't mean to offend anybody but if you take the bait well some times I just like to play
 
The one that says under inflation results in excessive heat build up.
ime - a pumped up V rated M/C tyre gets WAY hotter than a marginally underinflated Z rated CT.

A Z rated MC tyre also stays cooler than a V rated. Problem is - SO FAR - I cant find a Z rated MC tyre that fits the rear rim.

The R3 torque plus weight and (maybe) excessive hubris in corners results in rubber shaving off ME880's and Cobras. On Metz's it actually peels off in little balls.

The lack in autonomy is a PITA. It's NOT the cost - it's the time lost waiting for a bleeding tyre. Which can be weeks.

It's why I'm looking to have a 17" rear rim made - to run Z rated 200 width tyres. Would probably move to a 120 front too. Probably will wear fastish - but are off the shelf sizes.