I'm looking for opinions and or advice from the Norton sages.....but I have to be honest and admit this is not a Norton query but thought tyres and rims are pretty universal.
bike in question has a 300 x 19 front tyre on a WM2 rim ....rear has a 350 x 18 on a WM3 although a WM2 would be more normal...but this is the spec...
the following year with NO changes to frame, swing arm etc etc....the rear became a 400 x 18 on the WM3
So simple question...as I have to replace tyres.....is there a real benefit in fitting the 400 rear ?
thanks for reading..
Depends if the tyre is a…
- Log in to post comments
Availability?
A quick look shows up more choice for 4.00x18 tyres than it does for rear fitment 3.50x18's.
For what its worth, most older bikes upto the mid 1960's usually had the difference in width of a 1/4" front to back, ie front would be a 3.25", rear a 3.5". This gradually increased during the 1970's as low profile tyres became the norm then and later chassis geometry was able to allow vastly different front - rear sizes.
Generally the wider the tyre, the greater load it can carry, so this might also be a factor for you also it may well last longer too.
Me? If it will fit onto your bike without fouling anything , I'd go with the wider one.
Regards,
George
- Log in to post comments
Peter, George, thank you…
Peter, George, thank you both for reply.
I was fancying the wider tyre...so that’s the to go.
john
- Log in to post comments
Tyres and rims
John
I have just fitted a 4.00-18 to the rear of my 750cc Commando on a WM3 rim. This is a dedicated rear rather than the universal 110/90-18 it replaces. All Avon Roadriders.
The 4.00-18 has a tread depth of 7.5mm versus the 5.6mm of the universal. It weighs in at 6.8kg versus the 5.1kg of the universal. Width is the same at 116mm for both tyres.
On the front is a partly worn 90/90-19, also a Roadrider, on a WM2 rim.
Having just ridden about 50 miles with the new rear, there is to my mind a loss of nimbleness in the handling. The bike feels too firmly planted on the road. It's slower to chuck into the bends.
Of course my perception may change as I get used to it and the tyre wears.
In fact I had considered replacing the 110/90-18 with a 100/90-18 but Roadriders in these sizes are out of production until January 2016 which pushed me to buy the (available) 4.00-18.
Perhaps your decision should be influenced by your riding preference; chunky and wide for straight line stability, load bearing, longevity versus a slimmer, lighter universal if sharpness of handling matters more.
Robin
- Log in to post comments
Rear 4.00 - 18 tyre
Robin - as I must replace the rim I too have been contemplating fitting a rear 4.00 x 18 Avon onto a WM3 rim on my Commando for precisely those same considerations:
Greater Load Capacity (I'm 6ft 4" tall and solidly built)
Good tread depth
Ongoing reduced availability of 19" rear tyre sizes compared to 18"
Current non-availability of some Avon tyre sizes while production is moved to France (or is it still?)
So your feedback is invaluable! Anyone else got long-term experience of the 4.00 x 18?
Another possibility is to fit WM3 x19" rims front and rear, both wearing Avon 100/90 x 19" shallower tread depth boots, and in due course move the front tyre to the back when the latter wears out. How that would compare to me currently running a 90/90 x 19 on a WM2 at the front (with a 4.10H19 Roadrunner on a WM2 rear) I know not.
Using a WM2 rear rim for any tyre wider than a 90x90 is too narrow according to Avon's Specifications, and may explain the odd wear patterns that I've previously experienced.
Incidently I ruled out fitting Avon Safety Mileage tyres, but maybe I'm being unfair? Ditto Bridgestones and Dunlop TT100s.
I'm all ears on this topic...
- Log in to post comments
Depends if the tyre is a dedicated rear tyre or a universal (front or rear fitting) A dedicated rear tyre usually has a greater tread depth and so gets more miles per tyre.