Time for a new rear tire, car tire or bike tire ?


WOAH NELLY!!!
Did you actually just ask for "some actual documentation?!?!?!?!?!?!"

As I live and breathe . . . . . THANK YOU FOR MAKING MY EXACT POINT!!!!!
Burma Shave!
 
The 2000 mile mark is just past the mid point - where I am starting to loose confidence in traction, especially in the rain. First two MC tires, less than 3500 miles to bare steel. With the CT I get traction like a brand new MCT, all the time.
I was a commuter rider before retirement, no long trips.
I get about 7000 on the front, Avon Cobra about the same as stock. Like you, twice the mileage from the front.
I am a hot-rodder. If I am behind someone going 10mph under the limit, I pass at first opportunity. With the Rocket, I do not need much distance. Acceleration takes care of business.
Top end does not burn rubber, acceleration does.
I do not do stop light burn outs or crazy stuff. No real "smoke".
I know I am not unusual. My guess is the ones who would be getting 3k miles are on the dark side.
I saw a R3 at my dealers that had plenty of tread on the rear at 5k miles. On the front tire, the chicken stripes on each side were wider than the wear strip.
Accelerate through the curves, punch it on the straightaways. That's how I ride.
Tach on 3k or higher most of the time. 2k around town.
Torque puts a smile on my face more than top end. Plus, no law against taking first gear to 50mph and second to 60 when the speed limit is 60. All in a few seconds.
Lots of ways to have fun riding the R3.
 

All good and happy to hear you are enjoying your 09 R3 Classic.
I just still cannot get my head around a rider wearing out a rear motorcycle tire in just 3000 miles; ESPECIALLY now that you have stated you do NOT do burn outs.
I hope you are coming to RAA X. We shall have to go riding together.
 
The scientific method has, in recent decades, allowed the use of computer models, with varying degrees of success.
The Scientific method requires actual, real world, experimentation, when it is possible.
Mathematics does not.
When physicists resort to mathematics, they are not doing science.
Do you understand the difference between science and mathematics?
There is no science in saying, "Well, I sat behind my desk here in my fancy air conditioned office, did some computations, and let me tell you about using a CT on a motorcycle."
We tell you millions of miles on CT, hundred and probably thousands of users, and your reply is 'Well, theoretically it can't be done.'
This is not 'my opinion'. This is the experience of hundreds of users and riders. Probably thousands. With never a failure reported.
The opinion is yours. Yours and the junk science that does no testing, only theorizing.
I call BS on you.
Show us the motorcycle and CT that failed on this light of day testing you did.

You do not think I can wear a MCT down to the steel threads????
Or that I can't do it in 3000 miles?
Or maybe that I do not feel safe?
What is it?
 
WOAH NELLY!!!
Did you actually just ask for "some actual documentation?!?!?!?!?!?!"

As I live and breathe . . . . . THANK YOU FOR MAKING MY EXACT POINT!!!!!
Burma Shave!
So, I have asked for this documentation many times, and many places.
It seems now you will be providing it.
I've waited a long time.
I hope the wait was worth it.
 
SWMBO and I help our son with three young boys under the age of 5.
When I sneak out for a 2 hour ride I am missed.
Hoping to do RAA, but just a dream at this point.
Me, I just can not understand 10k on a rear MT (not you, but others). I have the same disbelief as you do.
 
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but logic and reason are not Science.
Science uses logic and reason, it also uses imagination.
Logic and reason do not yield scientific results.
Experimentation yields scientific results.
If you need a lesson, I have the time.
Logic and reason are conjecture. You start with some premises, that may or may not be true, and go from there.
A 'fact' is an actual event.
It is a 'fact' that dark siders have ridden millions of miles with no tire failures.
 

Relax a little Amigo. This is NOT a personal attack. Hopefully it is an open minded discussion that may result in some understanding.
1) "The scientific method has, in recent decades, allowed the use of computer models, with varying degrees of success. The Scientific method requires actual, real world, experimentation, when it is possible."
Very true, except I would say always rather than if possible.
2) "When physicists resort to mathematics, they are not doing science.
This here is a preposterous and ridiculous comment worthy of no response! Physics IS mathematics.
3) "Do you understand the difference between science and mathematics?"
Since I use both to make a living, I would venture an educated guess that I know the difference exceedingly more than yourself.
4) "There is no science in saying, "Well, I sat behind my desk here in my fancy air conditioned office, did some computations, and let me tell you about using a CT on a motorcycle."
Don't you realize that science is BASED upon real world testing! Check out the SAE and the thousands upon thousands of papers regarding testing done regarding autos, motorcycles and tires.
5) "We tell you millions of miles on CT, hundred and probably thousands of users, and your reply is 'Well, theoretically it can't be done. This is not 'my opinion'. This is the experience of hundreds of users and riders. Probably thousands. With never a failure reported. The opinion is yours. Yours and the junk science that does no testing, only theorizing. I call BS on you.
Show us the motorcycle and CT that failed on this light of day testing you did."

How many miles have been driven by folks NOT wearing seatbelts who were not injured? Does this mean the use of seatbelts is not safer? Does this mean seatbelts are a conspiracy? Again you refuse to understand that your opinion and those of anyone else, including myself, are meaningless if not supported by factual data. Just point me to any testing that shows a CT on a motor is superior to its designed tire - in any way. BTW - I shall grant you the mileage benefit - only.
6) "You do not think I can wear a MCT down to the steel threads???? Or that I can't do it in 3000 miles?"
Correct!
7) "Or maybe that I do not feel safe? What is it?"
Once again, your opinion - your feeling.
This has been interesting. but I must move onto other things now.
Be well - have fun.
 
So, I have asked for this documentation many times, and many places.
It seems now you will be providing it.
I've waited a long time.
I hope the wait was worth it.

SHOW ME YOURS _ I'LL SHOW YOU MINE!