Darkside/downside

[mexican]

[QUOTE="CanberraR3, post: 332284, member: 2354", rob power and scrub out your front tyre, ."[/QUOTE]
Is that the reason my rocket is running like crap?

 

[Wrecka]

How does it rob power ?

 

[IMFASTTOO]

How does it rob power ?

Weight and rolling resistance running low 28 psi air pressure to make it flex when turning Drop the tire pressure in your MC tire to 28 psi and youll get twice the contact area but then it will not handle as well and will have more rolling resistance and takes more HP to turn and then it will feel like a CT

 

[IMFASTTOO]

[QUOTE="CanberraR3, post: 332284, member: 2354", rob power and scrub out your front tyre, ."

Is that the reason my rocket is running like crap?[/QUOTE]
That's why your bikes slower BUT you know that

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Is that the reason my rocket is running like crap?

That's why your bikes slower BUT you know that[/QUOTE]
WE try all types of tires to try and find an advantage so using different tires designed for other vehicles isn't anything new for us and you would be surprised that we have seen as much as a 20 hp loss on the DYNO and slower 1/4 mile times and speeds

 

[idk]

I'm not quite sure where people get the idea that the front tyre gets scrubbed out quicker when running DS. I got 7,500 miles on the OEM front tyre, the last 2,000 of those had a DS on the back. Since using the DS I get at a minimum 7,500 miles on the front, usually over 10,000, and as much as 17,000. How many miles do those with MC rear tyres get out of your front tyres?

A DS tyre is legal, as it is a Passenger Vehicle tyre fitted to a passenger vehicle. Many motorcycles come with them as OEM. "Motorcycles" legally include bikes & trikes - the law does not differentiate. If the tyre does not change the width more than is allowed by law then it is legal. In the USA the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act means that you can use non OEM parts without voiding the warranty. So how can Triumph refuse warranty because of the use of a legal tyre?

I would suggest that a Carpenter exhaust system would be a much greater concern to warranty. It, according to IFT, allows for much more power. Without altering the ECU it would make the engine run very lean (if it is as efficient as claimed by IFT) and therefore cause many problems which Triumph would have the right to refuse under warranty. If the ECU has been tampered with to correct this, then Triumph could also void the warranty. If the engine is producing a lot more power and parts fail then Triumph could also void warranty. If I were to spend money at IFT's place (and there is no way in the wide world of sport that he will ever get a penny of my money), I would like to think that Carpenter Racing would put their money where IFT's mouth is and warrant what he calls "modifications for a daily rider" for the same two years that Triumph does.

 

[mully95]

How does it rob power ?

I had a CT on my motorcycle when I took it to Wayne Tripp's dyno. He is retired now but one of the best tuners in my area at the time. He was going to get a base line off my stock Roadster. Except the CT it was stock. He didn't like it one bit and couldn't use my Roadster for base line. I didn't know that a CT would give him a false base line or I wouldn't have driven all those miles to his place but it does. He told me a CT is a power robbing monster. Now a guy that does this kind of stuff all of the time I think I should believe him.

 

[IMFASTTOO]

I'm not quite sure where people get the idea that the front tyre gets scrubbed out quicker when running DS. I got 7,500 miles on the OEM front tyre, the last 2,000 of those had a DS on the back. Since using the DS I get at a minimum 7,500 miles on the front, usually over 10,000, and as much as 17,000. How many miles do those with MC rear tyres get out of your front tyres?

A DS tyre is legal, as it is a Passenger Vehicle tyre fitted to a passenger vehicle. Many motorcycles come with them as OEM. "Motorcycles" legally include bikes & trikes - the law does not differentiate. If the tyre does not change the width more than is allowed by law then it is legal. In the USA the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act means that you can use non OEM parts without voiding the warranty. So how can Triumph refuse warranty because of the use of a legal tyre?

I would suggest that a Carpenter exhaust system would be a much greater concern to warranty. It, according to IFT, allows for much more power. Without altering the ECU it would make the engine run very lean (if it is as efficient as claimed by IFT) and therefore cause many problems which Triumph would have the right to refuse under warranty. If the ECU has been tampered with to correct this, then Triumph could also void the warranty. If the engine is producing a lot more power and parts fail then Triumph could also void warranty. If I were to spend money at IFT's place (and there is no way in the wide world of sport that he will ever get a penny of my money), I would like to think that Carpenter Racing would put their money where IFT's mouth is and warrant what he calls "modifications for a daily rider" for the same two years that Triumph does.[/Q

GUESS you should argue with TRIUMPH

 

[IMFASTTOO]

I had a CT on my motorcycle when I took it to Wayne Tripp's dyno. He is retired now but one of the best tuners in my area at the time. He was going to get a base line off my stock Roadster. Except the CT it was stock. He didn't like it one bit and couldn't use my Roadster for base line. I didn't know that a CT would give him a false base line or I wouldn't have driven all those miles to his place but it does. He told me a CT is a power robbing monster. Now a guy that does this kind of stuff all of the time I think I should believe him.

TRUE WAYNE TRIPP IS CORRECT

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Without wanting to get in the middle of this discussion (I learned my lesson the hard way), unless you have that assurance from your agent in writing its worthless. What will be covered and what won't be covered is up to the adjuster, not the agent.

With the practice of running car tires on motorcycles getting more and more exposure it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see insurance companies deny coverage at some point. After all, they make money denying claims, not approving them.

YES gives them an excuse to deny a claim