cr0ft
Living Legend
The OEM tyre on my Royal Enfield has a square profile. It is essentially the same tyre they have been using since the model came out in 1938. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Indeed. Because as we all know, technological knowledge and motorcycle development reached its pinnacle in 1938.
CanberraR3
Living Legend
- Joined
- May 27, 2010
- Messages
- 11,337
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Ride
- Triumphs, but no Rocket just now.
To be honest I didn't pay any attention to what Forum it was posted in - I rarely do. I just read the title and assumed it was a question the OP actually wanted an answer to. I really don't understand why we have this growing number of people who think it's their role (or right) to dictate or offer advice about what other should be allowed to choose to comment on. I understand when insults start to fly, but it's a bit rich when people take issue with posts that are not only polite but respond directly to the question. Seems to be solely because some others might hold a contrary view.
WTF. Very tiresome. 
Frankly, I just wish all this negativity would go away and everyone would get on. I might have to go and find another site.
And Jim, I can't unread that you're naked. Thanks.
ksquared
"O Captain, My Captain"
I post this only as a caveat - and because I have considerable experience with this issue:
If you have an accident while running a car tire on a motorcycle, you will have a GREAT DEAL of trouble obtaining compensation for your injuries (if you are a plaintiff) or defending a claim for injuries brought against you (if you are a defendant). Expert testimony will establish that the vehicular dynamics of operating a motorcycle with a car tire as the driving wheel, is inherently dangerous, outside of the contemplation of virtually EVERY design engineer who designs motorcycles and outside the contemplation of EVERY designer who designs either motorcycle tires or car tires. You will not be able to find a tire industry engineer who will testify under oath that a car tire has the necessary directional stability and cornering characteristics to be SAFELY and PREDICTABLY used on a motorcycle under all operating conditions. They will, however, testify that both the profile and carcass design of a car tire are inherently antithetical to the physical environment and physical forces within which a motorcycle operates. The fact that you were operating a motorcycle with a car tire installed WILL become a central issue in your litigation - and it will not be to your benefit.
Take this for what it's worth, but I can tell you that in 40 years of legal practice - I have NEVER lost a motorcycle case I've tried to a jury, either for a plaintiff of a defendant.
*************************************************
STANDARD OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER:
The above does not constitute legal advice. It is posted for general informational purposes only. No attorney-client relationship is formed by the posting of this material and you have no right to rely on it. I am probably not licensed to practice as an attorney in the jurisdiction where you reside. If these issues affect you - you should seek competent legal counsel in the jurisdiction where you reside. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and what is stated here may or may not constitute the law in your jurisdiction.
So there!
If you have an accident while running a car tire on a motorcycle, you will have a GREAT DEAL of trouble obtaining compensation for your injuries (if you are a plaintiff) or defending a claim for injuries brought against you (if you are a defendant). Expert testimony will establish that the vehicular dynamics of operating a motorcycle with a car tire as the driving wheel, is inherently dangerous, outside of the contemplation of virtually EVERY design engineer who designs motorcycles and outside the contemplation of EVERY designer who designs either motorcycle tires or car tires. You will not be able to find a tire industry engineer who will testify under oath that a car tire has the necessary directional stability and cornering characteristics to be SAFELY and PREDICTABLY used on a motorcycle under all operating conditions. They will, however, testify that both the profile and carcass design of a car tire are inherently antithetical to the physical environment and physical forces within which a motorcycle operates. The fact that you were operating a motorcycle with a car tire installed WILL become a central issue in your litigation - and it will not be to your benefit.
Take this for what it's worth, but I can tell you that in 40 years of legal practice - I have NEVER lost a motorcycle case I've tried to a jury, either for a plaintiff of a defendant.
*************************************************
STANDARD OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER:
The above does not constitute legal advice. It is posted for general informational purposes only. No attorney-client relationship is formed by the posting of this material and you have no right to rely on it. I am probably not licensed to practice as an attorney in the jurisdiction where you reside. If these issues affect you - you should seek competent legal counsel in the jurisdiction where you reside. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and what is stated here may or may not constitute the law in your jurisdiction.
So there!
tdragger
Living Legend
I post this only as a caveat - and because I have considerable experience with this issue:
If you have an accident while running a car tire on a motorcycle, you will have a GREAT DEAL of trouble obtaining compensation for your injuries (if you are a plaintiff) or defending a claim for injuries brought against you (if you are a defendant). Expert testimony will establish that the vehicular dynamics of operating a motorcycle with a car tire as the driving wheel, is inherently dangerous, outside of the contemplation of virtually EVERY design engineer who designs motorcycles and outside the contemplation of EVERY designer who designs either motorcycle tires or car tires. You will not be able to find a tire industry engineer who will testify under oath that a car tire has the necessary directional stability and cornering characteristics to be SAFELY and PREDICTABLY used on a motorcycle under all operating conditions. They will, however, testify that both the profile and carcass design of a car tire are inherently antithetical to the physical environment and physical forces within which a motorcycle operates. The fact that you were operating a motorcycle with a car tire installed WILL become a central issue in your litigation - and it will not be to your benefit.
Take this for what it's worth, but I can tell you that in 40 years of legal practice - I have NEVER lost a motorcycle case I've tried to a jury, either for a plaintiff of a defendant.
*************************************************
STANDARD OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER:
The above does not constitute legal advice. It is posted for general informational purposes only. No attorney-client relationship is formed by the posting of this material and you have no right to rely on it. I am probably not licensed to practice as an attorney in the jurisdiction where you reside. If these issues affect you - you should seek competent legal counsel in the jurisdiction where you reside. The law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and what is stated here may or may not constitute the law in your jurisdiction.
So there!
Would you be so kind as to cite some cases where testimony involved car tires on motorcycles?
ksquared
"O Captain, My Captain"
I'd be glad to:
Horner v. Richards (1977, Cook County, IL)
Stein v. Marshall (same court)
Williams v. ********* Motor Corporation (LA County Superior court)
I'm trying to look up the case files on 1 or 2 others - I'll post them if I can locate them.
Horner v. Richards (1977, Cook County, IL)
Stein v. Marshall (same court)
Williams v. ********* Motor Corporation (LA County Superior court)
I'm trying to look up the case files on 1 or 2 others - I'll post them if I can locate them.
Last edited:
albertaduke
former airline pilot without the big bucks
never heard and never seen it for sale here in canada wonder why?
tdragger
Living Legend
In the appellent filing on Williams v ********, I can't find a reference to a car tire. http://statecasefiles.justia.com/documents/ohio/fifth-district-court-of-appeals/2008-ohio-3123.pdf
Last edited:
TriumPhil
Living Legend
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 11,444
- Location
- Long Valley, NJ
- Ride
- '07 Mulberry Red, Carpentered & Bruted R3 Standard
Confidentiality and/or Nondisclosure Agreements between insurance companies, their insureds and/or plaintiffs in liability cases often rule the day insofar as public knowledge is concerned.
My first motorcycle accident occurred after 42 years of riding and it was a doozie, having crashed with a full grown deer at 65 mph, rendering me critically injured, the deer cut in half and my bike totaled. That VTX 1800 had a car tire mounted on the rear, which I duly pointed out to the claims adjuster weeks later. Since the tire was not considered a proximate cause of the accident and given that my medical expenses were fully covered under my personal health insurance policy, the tire was a non-issue. Had there been damages incurred by a third party, I shudder to think of what very well may have been the consequence(s) with regard to insurance and/or other litigious matters.
My first motorcycle accident occurred after 42 years of riding and it was a doozie, having crashed with a full grown deer at 65 mph, rendering me critically injured, the deer cut in half and my bike totaled. That VTX 1800 had a car tire mounted on the rear, which I duly pointed out to the claims adjuster weeks later. Since the tire was not considered a proximate cause of the accident and given that my medical expenses were fully covered under my personal health insurance policy, the tire was a non-issue. Had there been damages incurred by a third party, I shudder to think of what very well may have been the consequence(s) with regard to insurance and/or other litigious matters.
ksquared
"O Captain, My Captain"
Understandable - It's not the same case. Mine was in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, CA in 1998. (By way of full disclosure - I have never been licensed to practice law in CA - I appeared and handled the case as outside counsel and was admitted to practice pro hac vice - "for the case".)The plaintiff's name, as I recall, was Walter Williams, but as it was over 15 years ago, I can't be certain of that. As it was a trial court case (as were all of the ones I handled), I don't believe there will be a written opinion on file, as those cases end with the entry of the jury's verdict. This case, however, did not go all the way to verdict. Mr. Williams claimed that the motorcycle was defective and unreasonably dangerous in that it had a pronounced tendency to become unstable over drainage ripples in the roadway and over bridge decks. He claimed this instability was inherent in the design of the motorcycle and caused him to lose control while going over a bridge deck in the rain, as a result of which he collided with one of the truss supports on the bridge, causing him fairly extensive injury. Unfortunately, he was running a car tire. After depositions of experts on both sides, the court entered summary judgment on behalf of the Defendant, as Williams could not establish that the bike was being used in a manner foreseeable to its designers due to the use of the CT. This modification was also held to have been a material alteration to the design of the motorcycle which proximately contributed to the lowering of directional stability. Thus the defective design could not be attributed to the defendant and judgment was entered for the Defendant.
I've moved a couple of times since that case was decided, but it's possible that I still have a copy of the final order of summary judgment. If I can find it, I'll scan it and post it here, since it would have been a matter of public record and thus neither privileged nor confidential. However, I purge my records in 7 year intervals, so it's possible that I no longer have it. Also, as I was working for others at the time and was not a partner in that particular firm, I didn't retain the original case file(s) - they remained with the firm when I left.
Last edited:
