The New And Improved Unofficial R65 Forum V2
Technical Discussion => BMW Technical Q&A, Primarily R65 => Topic started by: dogshome on September 01, 2022, 01:31:38 PM
-
Pretty much self explanatory title :uhoh2:
I have Conti classic attack radials which can run tubless. Standard alloy R65 wheels. The front has ozone damage (rubber cracks around the tread blocks) and the rear is too damned big at 120/90 x18. I also have two new tyres of the same type, exept the rear is a 110/90 18. I have new tubes.
Before I replace like for like, how do i convert to tubeless - there are multiple advantages. Which valves do I need etc??
:) :) :)
-
With the standard snowflake wheels, I wouldn't go tube less .
I tried this on the 'composite' wheels on the LS models and got excessive leakage after about 2 months, 5-8 psi per week .
Had to have tubes installed .
-
Thanks Bob :dankk2:
-
Technically snowflakes do not have the correct profile to run tubeless tyres, but having a said that a lot of people do run them tubeless a d I am not aware of any resulting fatalities.
As some may recall I run an K100 front wheel on what used to be an R65. I did try running the front wheel tubeless. It the leaks defeated me. I will try again once I have my recently acquired LS rear wheel ready to go.
I will use "Stan's No Tubes" to seal the rims on the theory that if it can seal a bicycle wheel it will work just fine in a cast wheel.
-
I think there are tyres and tyres.
Michelin tyres are tubeless and can take a tube on tube type rims. Some, like Bridgestone make two versions of their tyre, one tube type the other tubeless (more common).
So I bet the beading are not the same also. Maybe Michelin use a profile able to seal and stay put on either rims.
But nobody will say a definite yes or no so you are left on your own.
I would not run a tubeless only tyre with a tube inside.
I would not run a tubeless tyre without a tube on a tube type wheel. Be it tubeless only or like the Michelin.
But that's just me.
I just add that putting a tube when mounting a tyre is not that much of a hassle.... Especially if it is done by a dedicated tyre specialist in his shop....
It is your life , you do as you want. You're a big boy now.
-
Conti classic attack are tubeless or tubed.
- Tubeless valves? Check!
- Tubes? Check!
- Big mahoonas? Hang on, checking......
-
.... still checking.... :uhoh2:
-
BMW fit tubeless Metzeler tyres with tubes on the R Nine T Racer so I cannot see why there is a problem doing so . I have had various makes of tubeless tyres with tubes on bikes over the years ( some fitted by professional tyre shops ) and never had an issue .
-
Hello,
Some tubeless tires have a very smooth inside surface. This cause the tube to stick and overheat in place leading to failure.
Some, like the Michelin have dots or ribs or.. covering the inner surface allowing the tube not to stick badly to one place.
Actually, the possibility (endorsed by the manufacturer) to install a tube in a tubeless tire is written on the walls of the tube.
(some have "TL/TT" markings, some have "On a tube type rim, fit a tube" ) It is a long time since I fitted or used Metzeler tires so I can't tell but I bet that the mechanic installing a tube on a tubeless tire had the proper tire and assurance to do so, for legal reasons .... Check the markings on the R Nine T....
Just my 2¢ ™
-
As already suggested above, a tube will make a tubeless tyre run hotter so it is usually recommended to reduce the speed rating of the tyre by one grade. Not likely to be an issue given the top speed of an R65.
Given the choice I'd rather have a proper tube type tyre as it will be less stiff and easier to fit.
-
"Check the markings on the R Nine T.... "
The tyres fitted to my R Nine T Racer are the original BMW fitted tyres and have the marking as shown in picture . Quote from the Metzeler web page :
"Metzeler-tubeless-tyres may be fitted to tube-type rims, if the following restrictions are kept: Use only Metzeler-tubes. Tubeless tyres fitted with a tube have a max. permitted speed of 230 km/h "
Without wanting to get up anyones nose I do think a lot of information ( not only about tyres ) is either urban legend or very old advice . Even manufacturers advice can be out of date . Avon still says this about fitting rear tyre to the front and vice versa :
Avon would not normally recommend this fitment. If you do this however, due to the way tyres are manufactured, you should reverse the tyre’s direction of rotation if you fit a front tyre on the rear or a rear tyre on the front of your bike.
This is an MOT failure ( copied from .Gov web site ) ;
Examples of an unsuitable tyre are:
a tyre specifically designed for front wheel use fitted to the rear wheel
If a tyre has only one direction arrow it must be fitted that way . Some tyres have no arrows or arrows in both directions showing universal fitment .
As I have said I have never specifically purchased a tube type tyre to fit on a tubed rim and i have never had a problem - apart from nails screws etc ;)
-
Hello,
Could you post all the markings on your Metzeller tires ?
Because, if I'm not mistaken, it should say on the tire that you can use it on a tube type rim.
Next, the possibility of a tire to use or not a tube is based on the interior finish of the inside of the tire. So only the maker and the mechanic fitting it can say if it is or not.
Add to this that rubber compound have evolved a lot in the 20 last years. As does tire manufacture. This is the reason why Michelin says that you can put a tube into their tubeless tires. IT was not like that 20 years ago where they explicitly forbid so ! So "something changed".... Obviously.
This is why I would be delighted to read everything written on your Metzeller tires.
P.S. : Moto Guzzi delivered me a bike in September 2020. It was fitted with V rated tire on the front and not the size indicated on the technical sheet of the bike. The bike has a maximal speed (theoretical) of 150 km/h.... So I bet they fitted whatever tire they could put their hands on.... But YMMV ;D
-
There is no mention anywhere on the tyre about tube / tubed . Pictures 1-6 are the entire left side of the front tyre , 7 and 8 are the only differences on the right side of the tyre apart from VERY small writing about checking tyre pressures / do not repair tyre / have new tyre fitted by professional etc but too small and awkward to photo but definitely no mention of tube .
-
Ah ! That's funny !
Thank you ! I've learned something new today.
I thought the marking was mandatory. Apparently something changed.
-
There is a clue in the MT 3.5 designation in picture 2 which suggests the tyre should be mounted on a 3.5" MT rim. MT rims are for tubeless tyres.
-
There is a clue in the MT 3.5 designation in picture 2 which suggests the tyre should be mounted on a 3.5" MT rim. MT rims are for tubeless tyres.
So I guess that even though BMW are fitting wheels that require a tube to be fitted they are specifying tubeless rims as a safety measure ? So in theory if I get a puncture the tyre is more likely to stay on the rim rather than peel off . Why BMW are continuing down this route escapes me . I would have been happier with alloy wheels although there are now lots of options for spoked wheels that will take tubeless tyres .
-
I have noticed these modernish Classic Attack are very much like car tyres. Rigid. Also a lot of rubber forming a thick crown and are no longer a simple round shape.
Once I've got them off, if the rims look clean and shiney I will consider running tubeless. I'll get some proper lubricant / sealant, although my experience with car wheels is that the surface finish is far more important. 2 minutes with a wire wheel solves any leaks. Tubeless are safer whatever rim shape. An inner tube will definitely deflate suddenly, whereas a tubeless will generally not.
I have to put air in every 2 weeks with tubes due to their nature. Maybe 3 or 4PSI loss. Pushbike tubes do the same except faster. So a little rim loss won't concern me too much. Only issue now is going against Bobs advice :-\
-
Tubeless are safer whatever rim shape. An inner tube will definitely deflate suddenly, whereas a tubeless will generally not.
May I respectfully disagree with you ?
I had a flat with my CBF600SA6 Honda which ran tubeless and the tire deflated in less than 50 meters. (I actually saw the nail but couldn't avoid it). And I was unable to reach the repair station at around 1km from the puncture point. The tire dismounted itself from the rim.
And a few days after this, I ran on quite the same predicament with the BMW R65 and the tube allowed me to return home at near 1 km from the puncture point.
So your mileage actually vary ;-)
On the other hand, my front wheel fitted with Michelin Pilot Activ and a Michelin tube deflated in less than 5 meters when I tried to ride the bike after having put the tire on. The tube was badly pinched and died when I put weight on it....
So definitely, YMMV !
-
Hey, if there were no disgreement, life would be pretty boring :P On the other hand serious disagreements that last for eons and encompass whole countries is something else :'(
I am on the fence (still looking for big kahoonas) and the fence isn't helping with finding them ;D
Once I get the old ones off and have a look I will report back. If not Kahoonas found, then the tubes are going back in ::)
-
When I bought my R65 in 1985, tubeless tyres were not available to all new motos that were on the market when compared to today. Quite obviously tyre technology along with rims has improved. Mine came with tubes so next tyre change I will ask the the tyre bloke what he recommends. :idea2:
-
Been in Spain for a week :) Dropped in at Iguana Custom shop and Only Scooter and Bikes on the way to the Sagrada Familia.
So back to blighty and tyres. Pic of 110/90 vs original 120/90. The 120 is a complete cowbag to remove from a short swingarm R65 with Krauser panner frames :cowsleep: Taking the FD of makes it easy, but I wasn't going there!
Also the tyre is dated 2011 which ties up with my thoughts that it has been on there 10 years. Breaking the beads was hugely difficult. My last resort was jacking the car up and lowering it onto the tyre. I should have done that. Much twatting about with G clamps and finally my trusty vice did it. I won't bother for the front, just get the 2300kG Saab up in the air and lower her onto a bit of wood to completly squash the tyre.
Getting tyre off the rim was quite easy 8)
The 120 has about 2~3mm left, but has worn in a weird way like the front. I don't do much straight line riding, always on the curves. So the hard middle blocks stand proud and the soft shoulders are scuffed and worn. I've wire brushed the considerable corrosion and rubber gunk off the inside of the rim. I will be fitting tubes again as is is a bit grotty. The Saab wheels are in similar condition and suffer occasional slow rim leaks. Brutal wire wheeling usualy sorts them out, until the next time.
-
Also the tyre is dated 2011 which ties up with my thoughts that it has been on there 10 years. Breaking the beads was hugely difficult. My last resort was jacking the car up and lowering it onto the tyre. I should have done that. Much twatting about with G clamps and finally my trusty vice did it. I won't bother for the front, just get the 2300kG Saab up in the air and lower her onto a bit of wood to completly squash the tyre.
Worked a treat when I tried it on a 26 year old tyre.
-
:tekst-toppie:
-
I have read this thread , and others like it elsewhere , with great interest . One of my big concerns , in the UK at least , would be the insurance implications of running a tyre tubeless on a rim that the manufacturer specifically states is to be used tubed . In the event of an accident I think the investigator would raise major concerns about safety and use this as an excuse to not pay out :(
-
While the concern of voiding the insurance is legitimate, unless wheel/tyre combination was clearly the cause of the accident, it would take an awfully clued up insurance investigator to spot the issue otherwise.
After all Snowflakes are something of an exception, it's uncommon for alloy wheels to be designed for only tube type tyres.
I haven't yet tried to run tubeless simply because I've always bought tube type tyres but my view of the safety aspect is influenced by the difficulty of breaking the bead. Tyres don't come off a snowflake that easily do they even when fully deflated. Due to their stiffness I've no doubt that tubless tyres are even more difficult to break the bead. That would make me tend to worry less about snowflakes lacking the correct profile designed to retain the tyre in the event of deflation.
-
I can confirm these are a very tight fit on the bead. The bead had not budged despit being pushed 500M and then powered to get on the ramp of the truck, dead flat.
The new one is on and is a much better fit than the 120 in the swing arm. However, the last part of the bead won't rise up. Its been bounced, deflated, lubed etc. Putting 45 PSI didn't do it and I won't try higher. I've put it on the bike to see if a bit of bouncing and rolling will do it (hasn't yet) and have ordered some proper bead lube. Plan is to deflate, hose out any remaining dish soap, brush some stuff in and re-inflate.
The front one is looking like it will also be a SOAB. I have two 18" levers, plus three in the toolkit. All were needed to get both beads on. Combined with some plastic cut from a 5L can and some care, no rims were butchered today. I've learned things again and hopefully 'buy proper lube' is going to be one of them. The other is 'don't think of changing a modern tyre at the side of the road'. I don't remember having this much aggro back in the 80's, Trail tyres almost threw themselves off once deflated and road ones were just a bit tougher than pushbikes.
-
" Putting 45 PSI didn't do it and I won't try higher."
I have gone to 75-80 on some tires before the bead would POP.
-
Someone mentioned safety and insurance on the thread above? ;D
75-80 PSI :uhoh2:
Any feedback from others on this? (I'm still looking for Kahoonas) :laugh:
-
I've had to use 60 psi and that with a relatively easy to mount tyre.
-
It's on. 60PSI, a gollop of blue KY jelly and a ride up a bumpy road :2vrolijk_08:
Metzeler site says DO NOT go over 45PSI. My mate (who was a lorry tyre fitter) says +50% on 42 which is 60-65 ish. He also said soapy water won't do it and he is right.
The old front tyre is laughing at me I swear >:( Do you feel lucky, punk? Do ya? :uhoh2:
-
Metzeler site says DO NOT go over 45PSI. Your just talking to lawyers at Metzler Think about it, you ride around on the road at that pressure hit'n pot hole and such, they wouldn't suggest you do that at the ragged edge of blowing off the rim!
My mate (who was a lorry tyre fitter) says +50% on 42 which is 60-65 ish. I think that is reasonable and anything higher a cage or be standing on the other side of the wall.
The old front tyre is laughing at me I swear >:( Do you feel lucky, punk? Do ya? :uhoh2:
-
:beerchug:
-
An update - the front one...... :uhoh2:
The front one is skinner that the back and is consequently even stiffer. Rim has been thoroughly cleaned and polished internally.
1. 60 PSI, jell and bumpy road. This did the back tyre. Nope.
2. 80 PSI and more jell. Then bounced. Nope. This was done by remotely operating the pump before I was satisfied it wasn't going to go pop!
3. Local bike shop, big compressor and air tank - 95PSI and some really slippery tyre soap he keeps for such occasions. FOC, because he knows i'll be back for MOT again.
"Let's be careful out there" :2vrolijk_08: