1st attempt at double darkside came up short

[Fudd]

Came up short in a couple of ways.

1st thing was the tire was too short.  A 150/70/17 is about 1 1/2" shorter than the 150/80/17 it replaced.  It gave me a 10 mph speedometer error at 80 indicated, according to my GPS.  Also, having a shorter tire put my footpegs a good 5/8ths inch closer to the ground, decreasing my bank angle before scraping something. (Next rear tire I put on the front will be a 130/90/17 rear, which is the same height as the stock front tire.)

But the big kicker was I only got 15,000 miles out of it before it was ruined with an egg and a cut in the middle of the tread.  My friend noticed it while I was backing out of Cycle Gear and stopped me.  I never felt a out of balance vibration or anything.  I guess I was lucky in a way.  I could of had a blow out, which I've never had on a front tire and never want to have.  And, Cycle Gear had my size on the shelf in a Dunny E-3 stock front tire.  The funny (sad) thing was; the bad tire I took off the bike had the same tread thickness left on it as the new tire had that I was replacing it with.  Something around 6/32" for both.

[Hook#3287]

Do you think the cut caused the egg?

[Chrisj CMA]

Came up short in a couple of ways.

1st thing was the tire was too short.  A 150/70/17 is about 1 1/2" shorter than the 150/80/17 it replaced.  It gave me a 10 mph speedometer error at 80 indicated, according to my GPS.  Also, having a shorter tire put my footpegs a good 5/8ths inch closer to the ground, decreasing my bank angle before scraping something. (Next rear tire I put on the front will be a 130/90/17 rear, which is the same height as the stock front tire.)

But the big kicker was I only got 15,000 miles out of it before it was ruined with an egg and a cut in the middle of the tread.  My friend noticed it while I was backing out of Cycle Gear and stopped me.  I never felt a out of balance vibration or anything.  I guess I was lucky in a way.  I could of had a blow out, which I've never had on a front tire and never want to have.  And, Cycle Gear had my size on the shelf in a Dunny E-3 stock front tire.  The funny (sad) thing was; the bad tire I took off the bike had the same tread thickness left on it as the new tire had that I was replacing it with.  Something around 6/32" for both.

If you are mounting the rear tires backwards (which is what Ive heard when people do this) you have to make sure the tire is capabale of service in either direction.  If the the belts are butt jointed you can rotate them either direction, if they are lap jointed then going the wrong way can cause seperations which is what could be what happened to the tire in the picture

[Fudd]

Do you think the cut caused the egg?

I think it was vica-versa.  I don't remember seeing a cut on it until I limped it home the 12 or so miles to change it.  The rubber was real soft at that spot.  You could mash it in with your thumb.  It felt like the belts underneath had screwed up.  I don't recall hitting any chuck holes or anything recently.

[Fudd]

If you are mounting the rear tires backwards (which is what Ive heard when people do this) you have to make sure the tire is capabale of service in either direction.  If the the belts are butt jointed you can rotate them either direction, if they are lap jointed then going the wrong way can cause seperations which is what could be what happened to the tire in the picture
[/quote]
Yes, I was running that tire in reverse rotation.  I'm not sure even where to search, as to whether this tire was "butt jointed" or "lap jointed."  I used that tire because others had done so...with better results.

[Chrisj CMA]

If you are mounting the rear tires backwards (which is what Ive heard when people do this) you have to make sure the tire is capabale of service in either direction.  If the the belts are butt jointed you can rotate them either direction, if they are lap jointed then going the wrong way can cause seperations which is what could be what happened to the tire in the picture

Yes, I was running that tire in reverse rotation.  I'm not sure even where to search, as to whether this tire was "butt jointed" or "lap jointed."  I used that tire because others had done so...with better results.
[/quote]

If I were going to run a tire in reverse.......I think I would contact the manufacturer and find out if its ok for reverse rotation.  Some are and some arent.  Thats just me

[Ricky-D]

I doubt that any manufacturer will allow itself to be quoted regarding running a tire in a reverse direction as opposed to that which is indicated on the sidewall. It's a liability issue for them.

However if a tire has no direction of rotation imprinted on the sidewall you can run that tire any direction you want with the manufacturers blessing.

***

[Fudd]

I doubt that any manufacturer will allow itself to be quoted regarding running a tire in a reverse direction as opposed to that which is indicated on the sidewall. It's a liability issue for them.

However if a tire has no direction of rotation imprinted on the sidewall you can run that tire any direction you want with the manufacturers blessing.

***

Oh, this tire definatly had a directional arrow.  That's how I knew which way to go to mount it backwards.  I might try another one (when this E-3 wears out, which won't take long).  I may mount it in correct rotation, like some have suggested.  I'll need to research this a little more.

[98valk]

http://www.metzelermoto.com/web/products/technology/faq/default.page   #3

http://www.beehivebeemers.org/Tires.pdf    #5 direction of travel

[Gryphon Rider]

From Metzeler's web page pointed out by CA (http://www.metzelermoto.com/web/products/technology/faq/default.page).  I think this is worth directly quoting:

Rear tyres can be mounted at front wheels?
When producing tires, the top cap is heated with an angle bump on the carcass. To prevent the detachment of the assembled edges the tire has to be mounted (concerning the main stress: acceleration force at the rear wheel or brake force at the front wheel) corresponding to the respective declaration.
Therefore the declaration of the driving direction at the tire's sidewall is a very important safety regard and has to be noticed absolute. It is not allowed to mount front tires at rear wheels.
In case you intend to mount a rear tire on a front wheel it has to be assembled contrary to the driving direction declaration (direction of the arrow at the tire's sidewall). Please observe the standards in your country. In any doubts we kindly ask you to consult your dealer.

Irrelevant P.S.:  I think it's funny they can't decide whether to spell "tyre/tire" the English or North American way.

[Fudd]

I doubt that any manufacturer will allow itself to be quoted regarding running a tire in a reverse direction as opposed to that which is indicated on the sidewall. It's a liability issue for them.

Quote from "Metzlermoto.com:  In case you intend to mount a rear tire on a front wheel it has to be assembled contrary to the driving direction declaration (direction of the arrow at the tire's sidewall).

Sorta blows that theory.

[fubar606]

I am currently double dark on my 1800 vtx and will be double dark on my IS as soon as i run the rubber off it. the only trouble i had was the first rear tire i mounted on the front running in reverse like the consensus said was the exact thing you have run in to. i had  4 big bubbles in that tire about the size of small eggs . i think because i run dynabeads i didn't feel it it first. i have started running the tire the correctly and haven't had a lick of trouble since.
               thought it might have a blow out so be for i let the air out of it i stuck a knife in it
           and all it did was to let the pressure out of that bubble not the tire . after a wile it probably would drain the whole tire but it didn't at once. don't know if that would be true if i was in a turn or doing 80 mph at the time (don't want to find that out)

[Rio Wil]

the only trouble i had was the first rear tire i mounted on the front running in reverse like the consensus said was the exact thing you have run in to.

========

I think your experience goes a long way in discounting the lap joint as a failure point in mounting the tire  straight or reverse rotation.  I ran one rear tire (Bridgestone) on front for 27K miles including about 500 miles on gravel roads in Alaska and chose to run it according to the rotation arrow because I wanted the water grooves to be correctly oriented. Also, I am not sure I believe that  a rear tire on front is subjected to any significantly greater stresses than when mounted on the rear. Consider when rear mounted, that when  in two up riding the tire is probably subjected to loads that is likely exceeding it's rated weight (700 pounds or so), it it subjected to heavy acceleration forces, it sees heavy deceleration forces as likely seen when front mounted. Seems to me, such a rear tire mounted for front service would think its on vacation. Point being, my rear/front mounted tire  resulted in 27K miles on the tire and on the rear that same tire would have lasted no more than 10K miles.   Agreed the shorter life on the rear is likely due to acceleration forces,  but conversely the the extended mileage while on the front was not adversely affected by severe deceleration forces. Also agreed is the tire sees much less time involved in severe deceleration than if mounted on the rear and is responsible for accelerating the bike. I do wonder though if the cornering stresses are significantly higher on the front and might lead to de-laminating the tread more quickly.....
 

[JaysGone]

Ive also been using a Kenda Challenger rear on the front on both my bikes.

I dont have 15K yet on my R* but pretty close 12K and my tire still looks new and I run them reversed inflated at 30-32 psi max on both bikes.
When on the front it has no where near the load it would have as when on the rear.
In your post you havent mentioned the psi you have been using. Or I just missed it.
If you say 38-40 cold thats 42-44 hot.
Not good at that high a pressure with no real load.
It may very well have caused a belt to pop from overinflation.


No manufactuer is going to give you the info you might require.
Id go to any local tire shop and ask there what type of failure this is.
Without saying its a rear on the front.
If a decient tire shop cant tell you what caused that.
They shouldnt have their doors open to the public.

[X Ring]

I ran one rear tire (Bridgestone) on front for 27K miles including about 500 miles on gravel roads in Alaska and chose to run it according to the rotation arrow because I wanted the water grooves to be correctly oriented.

Rio explain this

Metzler 880 front tire



Notice the grooves point forward

Metzler 880 rear tire



The grooves point to the rear

Imagine that the grooves on front and rear tires point opposite directions on tires rotating the same direction.

Marty

[Fudd]

I could calculate this force, but it is too damn early.  Just remember (unlike me) boarhogs are active early in the morning.

So, let me get this straight.  Are you suggesting that I find a boarhog to do this computation, being that it's too early in the morning? 

[Fudd]

Metzler 880 front tire

Notice the grooves point forward



Metzler 880 rear tire

The grooves point to the rear

Imagine that the grooves on front and rear tires point opposite directions on tires rotating the same direction.

Marty

[/quote]

No, Marty.  These tires are grooved the same way.  It is only your "perspective" that has changed.  You can't shoot the front's pix from "in front" and the rear's pix from "in back" without you facing your camera 180 degs different in the second shot.  If you get down low in front of your front tire, but off to the side enough to see the back tire, you'll see that they are grooved the same direction.

[MacDragon]

Metzler 880 front tire

Notice the grooves point forward



Metzler 880 rear tire

The grooves point to the rear

Imagine that the grooves on front and rear tires point opposite directions on tires rotating the same direction.

Marty

No, Marty.  These tires are grooved the same way.  It is only your "perspective" that has changed.  You can't shoot the front's pix from "in front" and the rear's pix from "in back" without you facing your camera 180 degs different in the second shot.  If you get down low in front of your front tire, but off to the side enough to see the back tire, you'll see that they are grooved the same direction.

[/quote]


I agree... right away I saw that the pics are apple and oranges so to speak.  One from the front one from the rear.  The "front" of both those tires are grooved the same as they roll down the road..

[custom1]

Me thinks that both of those pics are from in front of the tires. But that second pic doesn't appear to be a Valk?? Drive shaft is on the wrong side.

[X Ring]

No, Marty.  These tires are grooved the same way.  It is only your "perspective" that has changed.  You can't shoot the front's pix from "in front" and the rear's pix from "in back" without you facing your camera 180 degs different in the second shot.  If you get down low in front of your front tire, but off to the side enough to see the back tire, you'll see that they are grooved the same direction.

How wrong you are Fudd, you can't even recognize a picture taken from under a motorcycle.  I know for a fact the picture was taken from under a motorcycle because I took both pictures.  If you use your powers of observation as Custom 1 has done you will see an exhaust crossing from the right side of the motorcycle to the left side.  You will also see as Custom 1 remarked the drive shaft is on the left side.  Custom 1 is also very correct when he observes this motorcycle is not a Valkyrie.  It is in fact a Honda VT1100T, a Honda 1100 Shadow Ace Tourer.  I took these pictures for a previous thread concerning assertions about orienting the tread for water removal not for the belt joint.  If you orient the rear tire so it's tread points the correct direction for a front tire, you are in fact orienting it to counter rotate in compliance with the manufacturer's instructions on using a rear tire on the front.

Marty

[X Ring]

I agree... right away I saw that the pics are apple and oranges so to speak.  One from the front one from the rear.  The "front" of both those tires are grooved the same as they roll down the road..

Macdragon, you too, have failed in using your powers of observation.

Marty

[Fudd]

Me thinks that both of those pics are from in front of the tires. But that second pic doesn't appear to be a Valk?? Drive shaft is on the wrong side.

My appologies Marty.

I hastely jumped to a conclusion, without carefully examining the picture.  I'll try to be more carefull before declaring someone to be wrong.

[X Ring]

Watching the jumping Fudd.  You could land wrong and twist an ankle.     As I tell the kids in my college classes that are scared to open their mouths because they may be wrong, "If there is one thing I've learned in my 48 years on this earth, I am wrong as least once a day."  I also tell people that point out when I'm wrong, "It's not the first time and it sure as hell won't be the last!"  We all make mistakes.  We just have to make sure we learn from them.

Marty

[Rio Wil]

At the risk of being presumptive, I  am thinking that if a manufacturer  designs a tread pattern for the rear it would have the grooves oriented so to as to push the water away from the center in an effort to reduce the possibility of hydroplaning. I would think the grooves on the  front are designed with the same intent as well as provide optimum grip in cornering. Maybe that is incorrect, since the rear tire usually rides in the track of the front tire, the water shedding grooves have different requirements/attributes.  Or, perhaps the water shedding ability is simply a figment of our imagination....perhaps the manufacturer never intends us to drive in the rain  and the rear groove orientation is irrelevant....

[98valk]

replaced the front metzler with a conti-go rear 130/90-17.

installed the conti in reverse, doing this put the thread grooves in the exact same direction as the metzler has. both tires have very similar thread patterns.