The member photo gallery is now integrated and live!!  All user albums and pictures have been ported from old gallery.


To register send an e-mail to admin@bmwr65.org and provide your location and desired user name.

Author Topic: TYRE SIZE DEBATE  (Read 6259 times)

EGRG

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2012, 01:50:39 PM »
I do not have a proper caliper for exact measurements.
But the front K34 is right at 90 mm. maximum width, with a mounted circumference of 203cm.
The K36 Rear is 116mm maximum width, with a mounted circumference of 219cm
Hope this helps.
I have only used them 350 miles so far, but I am very pleased how the bike handles with them.

Session101

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2012, 02:49:54 PM »
here is my 110/90/18 rear tire and clearance, happy with mine too, i wish it would be easier to fit bigger






tvrla

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2012, 10:35:58 PM »
Nice looking rear tire!

BTW, what sort of difference do you notice with the four holes in the mufflers?

Session101

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2012, 10:49:19 PM »
lol, you know i was wondering the same thing? it came like that when i bought the bike, i have no clue what it does or if it makes a difference, i was planning on putting some better mufflers on it anyway.

Lean_Angle

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2012, 07:55:30 AM »
My 1980 R65 is currently running tubeless without issues (fingers crossed) on Metzler Lasetecs 90 front and 120 rear.

wa1udg

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2012, 09:52:25 AM »
Quote
Nice looking rear tire!

BTW, what sort of difference do you notice with the four holes in the mufflers?
Looks like something out of JC Whitney.

Offline Barry

  • Mt. Olympus Resident
  • ****
  • Posts: 5143
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2012, 12:15:53 PM »
Quote
The K36 Rear is 116mm maximum width, with a mounted circumference of 219cm
Hope this helps.

Thanks.  I guess that fits easily enough with plenty of swinging arm clearance or at least as much as any twin shock airhead has.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2012, 12:17:07 PM by bhodgson »
Barry Cheshire, England 79 R45

EGRG

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2012, 05:55:55 PM »
Barry:
The tire fits well with just a bit of rubbing while passing under the rear plastic fender during installation once on, it spins freely.
Does require a bit of patience as several tries and some tire lubricant is required to seat the beads correctly on the rim.

Offline Semper Gumby

  • Mt. Olympus Resident
  • ****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Dances with cow!
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #23 on: August 11, 2012, 07:48:30 PM »
Cool HIdenaus!

I loved the Macadams.  They lasted forever and handled well wet of dry.  The Pilot Activs are handling well but the rear is not lasting as long.  I've got only 11,000 miles on the rear and it looks like I'm replacing soon: No grooves in the center.  I'm trying to run them till the cord shows but I may chicken out.


100/90 front and 4.00 rear.
Bill Gould ?1980/03 R65 When at first you don't succeed....Moo!

MarkMod

  • Guest
Re: TYRE SIZE DEBATE
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2012, 08:31:04 AM »
I have had my Avon Roadrider 110/90 on for about a month now and all is good. These tyres do have a centre groove to stop wandering on white lines. They work.

The 110 is the same width as the 4.00 but less than the 120 by quite a bit.

If you want original width look, modern compound rubber then these are good

For me I want the best rubber out there which I why I put Continental Zippys on my Lambrettas. Old block tread ones are lethal.

« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 08:33:22 AM by MarkMod »