Dark side questoin also posted on General

[MITCH]

I was out doing some work that required a trip to town with my small utility trailer, it dawned on me that the trailer tires are a domed shape tire. So my question is to all the Dark Siders  why wouldn't that type of tire work and wouldn't have the best of both worlds? Traction, longer tread life, and handling like a MC tire? Has any one tried this if so what were the results?

[asfltdncr]

The results with the tires the "Darksiders" have recommended are very good so don't worry about the shape of the tire that much.If you've seen the videos of the contactact patch when using a car tire,you will see that you are not giving up anything.
I went to the dark side a few months ago and put a rear tire up front as some of the members of this forum have also done.I don't think I'll be shopping for new tires for quite a while now.

[Chrisj CMA]

I have been saying the same thing for a long time.  The problem with making a good M/C tire in a round shape with car tire tread and rubber is that it would work too good and last too long and the M/C tire manufactureres would lose $$ big time

[DFragn]

I have been saying the same thing for a long time.  The problem with making a good M/C tire in a round shape with car tire tread and rubber is that it would work too good and last too long and the M/C tire manufactureres would lose $$ big time

I agree to a point with you. The issue as I see it would be a harder compound [like car tire] combined with an MC tires much smaller contact patch would make for a potentially dangerous tendency to slip/slide much easier. Also a CT like tread pattern would have an incredible tendency to cup horrifically, well beyond what we sometimes see with MC tires.

Some CT users prefer a soft compound [around a 300 tread wear rating] CT, but only get 7-8k miles from them.
I prefer the GoodYear Triple Tread [35-6#'s] with a 720 tread wear rating and an 80k mile tire and hope to get 30k+ from it on the bike.
It also sticks like a son-bitch whilst dragging pegs. Mine is matched with an E3 front and I've experienced no front or rear slippage at 25-50 mph over posted curve speeds.
Frankly, I don't understand going to a soft CT that needs to be changed out as often as an MC tire. Other then lifting the bike ever so slightly when healed over there seems to be no advantage otherwise and the "bumpsteer" trade-off, IMO, isn't worth it. OK, well maybe the menacing appearance of it is.

On the lighter side:
A few months ago I came out of a 50 mph sweeper [with the GoodYear] look'n like an 07/04 sparkler at 95 mph, with a cigarette and a beer , into the lap of an oncoming sheriff. Thankfully, he only waved his forefinger at me (maybe he was a rider too). If he hadn't, I would of just pulled over and waited for him to get turned around.  

[f6john]

I have been saying the same thing for a long time.  The problem with making a good M/C tire in a round shape with car tire tread and rubber is that it would work too good and last too long and the M/C tire manufactureres would lose $$ big time

I agree to a point with you. The issue as I see it would be a harder compound [like car tire] combined with an MC tires much smaller contact patch would make for a potentially dangerous tendency to slip/slide much easier. Also a CT like tread pattern would have an incredible tendency to cup horrifically, well beyond what we sometimes see with MC tires.

Some CT users prefer a soft compound [around a 300 tread wear rating] CT, but only get 7-8k miles from them.
I prefer the GoodYear Triple Tread [35-6#'s] with a 720 tread wear rating and an 80k mile tire and hope to get 30k+ from it on the bike.
It also sticks like a son-bitch whilst dragging pegs. Mine is matched with an E3 front and I've experienced no front or rear slippage at 25-50 mph over posted curve speeds.
Frankly, I don't understand going to a soft CT that needs to be changed out as often as an MC tire. Other then lifting the bike ever so slightly when healed over there seems to be no advantage otherwise and the "bumpsteer" trade-off, IMO, isn't worth it. OK, well maybe the menacing appearance of it is.

On the lighter side:
A few months ago I came out of a 50 mph sweeper [with the GoodYear] look'n like an 07/04 sparkler at 95 mph, with a cigarette and a beer , into the lap of an oncoming sheriff. Thankfully, he only waved his forefinger at me (maybe he was a rider too). If he hadn't, I would of just pulled over and waited for him to get turned around.  

Do you use dyna beads in your car tire and if so how many ounces?

[DFragn]

Do you use dyna beads in your car tire and if so how many ounces?

No, sorry. That's one little ditty I'll probably never try. I'm happy to static balance my tires. Most often I never require any sort of balance system. At least about 4 out 5 times. Since I know where the true heavy spot on my rims are I can find the light spot of the tires and spin them as necessary, generally never requiring any counterweight and they're good at the 45-55 mph, typically the vibration window, as well as triple digit speeds. When I do need to weight the rim I'm doing it with just a few grams [usually] instead of ounces. It takes me longer then others, but somehow it makes me happy to waste time in the garage.

I'd probably try the dynabeads. But, if I don't like 'em I don't want to have to break down the tire just to remove them. I understand they're selfadjusting which can be important with tire wear. But I've never had to re-balance prior to replacement. Unless of course I change out tires on a whim for grins.

[asfltdncr]

I also use the static balance.I guess I never thought through the "what if I don't like the dynabeads" scenario.Good point.