F6B To The Dark Side

I've run darkside CT in the past, on my Victory Vision. I see a couple of concerns with doing so on the F6B. First off it has a single side swing-arm which means there are TWO major factors that do NOT appear to have been considered; Wheel and Tire weight which do place load on the bearings, which in turn will lead to Final Drive failure. Now please do not take this as throwing stones but you can't just order a tire online because you like the pattern, and cast wheels are heavier, which leads me to the impression that WEIGHT was not considered.
Second, you may not ride on the sidewall, BUT when you lean the bike does in fact roll up over what I refer to as the hump. That's the last inch or two of the tire tread that wraps to the sidewall. Obviously it is more noticeable on a new tire than on one that's been ridden 10k. Nobody mentioned tire pressure that I saw?? What pressure are you running??
And finally for those considering this option.... Besides the aforementioned items to consider, consider riding habits. If you ride in all weather you are going to hydroplane a CT. Contact patch is MUCH wider than a bike tire and as such will ride ON the water rather than pushing it out thru grooves. Simple physics, weight versus contact area.
So while there are some very good reasons one might want to go with a CT, mainly longer mileage, there are other things to consider than just mileage.

Bob, I'd weight both my stock wheel and rim, and the CT w/rim to see how close you are. My guess is your setup is WAY heavier than Honda's. If so I'd consider revising to get as close or lower than the stock weight. Getting a flat is scary enough, tossing the FD bearing would be terrible (and expensive). Enjoy the ride!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

I've run darkside CT in the past, on my Victory Vision. I see a couple of concerns with doing so on the F6B. First off it has a single side swing-arm which means there are TWO major factors that do NOT appear to have been considered; Wheel and Tire weight which do place load on the bearings, which in turn will lead to Final Drive failure. Now please do not take this as throwing stones but you can't just order a tire online because you like the pattern, and cast wheels are heavier, which leads me to the impression that WEIGHT was not considered.
Second, you may not ride on the sidewall, BUT when you lean the bike does in fact roll up over what I refer to as the hump. That's the last inch or two of the tire tread that wraps to the sidewall. Obviously it is more noticeable on a new tire than on one that's been ridden 10k. Nobody mentioned tire pressure that I saw?? What pressure are you running??
And finally for those considering this option.... Besides the aforementioned items to consider, consider riding habits. If you ride in all weather you are going to hydroplane a CT. Contact patch is MUCH wider than a bike tire and as such will ride ON the water rather than pushing it out thru grooves. Simple physics, weight versus contact area.
So while there are some very good reasons one might want to go with a CT, mainly longer mileage, there are other things to consider than just mileage.

Bob, I'd weight both my stock wheel and rim, and the CT w/rim to see how close you are. My guess is your setup is WAY heavier than Honda's. If so I'd consider revising to get as close or lower than the stock weight. Getting a flat is scary enough, tossing the FD bearing would be terrible (and expensive). Enjoy the ride!

---

Those issues/concerns you raise have been addressed by the numerous GL 1800 Goldwing Riders whose bikes share the identical frame, tires, wheel bearings and suspension components as our F6B's and weigh 62 lbs more. To my knowledge I can't recall anyone mentioning the failure of "swing arm bearings" or "final drives". I have however seen numerous entire swing arm assemblies with OEM wheel/tire for sale on e-bay which were removed for trike installation.

Regarding the stock OEM Stone/Wheel wight that would be 34 lbs. I didn't weigh my G-MAX/OEM Wheel prior to installation so I'm relying on, "Tire Rack", info that the G-MAX weighs 18 lbs. If the OEM wheel is 16 lbs. or a tad heavier I doubt there is any concern for swing arm or final drive bearings.

I choose to run a CT not solely based on mileage. Although it's a consideration, I'm more concerned with the overall better handling, braking, smooth ride and wet traction that the CT provides. I've had the opportunity to ride on some 150 to 250 wide MT's which were better suited for surfing when it came to wet roads:shock:

When I select a CT for my bike it's after considerable research from various Dark Side Rider and Tire Manufacturer sites. I don't "shoot from the hip" when my personal safety is on the line.

Here's some pics which compare the tire contact surfaces/sipes of the OEM Stone and the G-MAX. Not splitting hairs, the Stone has 6 each major sipes for 12" while the MAX has 12 for the same 12". Side sipes for the Stone are 7 while the MAX has 11. That fact seems to contradict your statement that a CT will hydro-plane because of a wider contact patch. There are substantially more sipes on the CT to channel water which reduces the risk to hydro-plane.

Attachment 573Attachment 574Attachment 575Attachment 576

Bob how many miles do u have on it now ?
I am get the General Altimax HP 195/55-16 V-rated
Grand Touring All-Season
$108.00 to my door
pic from Daniel Meyer !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mustangjake

Bob how many miles do u have on it now ?
I am get the General Altimax HP 195/55-16 V-rated
Grand Touring All-Season
$108.00 to my door
pic from Daniel Meyer !

---

Jake:

I'm just shy of 1900 miles. Sitting here typing this and drying out! Just returned from a ride and got caught in a good downpour. The G-MAX handled perfectly, just as I expected. After hosing down the bike I'm leaving it sit in the rain. No water spots that way:icon_wink:

Attachment 585Attachment 586Attachment 587

Your selection of the General Altimax HP is a good choice. Directional with lots of good sipes and heavy lugs along the edges. That tire is extremely popular with Yamaha Stratoliner Owners and is also used by numerous Goldwing GL1800 Owners. If you visit either the "Riding Dark Side Forum" or the "Goldwing Darkside Riders Forum" you'll find info on the mounting pressure and the most common "Sweet Spot Tire Pressure". You may have to tweek your tire pressure to your riding style and rider/cycle weight combination. Usually that pressure is within 1 to 2 pounds of what everyone else is using:biggthumpup:

I'll do a quick check of the databases and see what info I can find.

Bob

I love this idea. Since this is my first GW I have never heard of using a car tire on a bike before, except for the old Boss Hoss I rode back in the 90's. That was a large tire. It was still maneuverable although a little slow in the turns. No worse than a 250-300mm bike tire. How do you decide the car tire size and will anyone install them? I guess I'll check out the dark side forums too.

bob, you are going to run what you want so there is little to debate. However you cannot get around science, even though the folks on the DS forums seem to think so. Physics states the more contact, the greater the likelihood of hydroplaning, it is SCIENCE, not opinion.
I'll go one step further in pointing out that ALL of the tire manufacturers who produce tires that are routinely used by DS riders, have gone on record in stating it is NOT SAFE.
You might want to have a look at the FD parts breakdown to see how the lateral force applied by running a CT is going to affect your FD, along with the additional 4lbs minimum your setup has over stock. You ARE loading the bearings in a way they were not designed to be loaded.
Will you get away with running a DS setup? Sure, maybe, probably, not..... I sure wouldn't want to be that one fella who's FD goes, that is for sure.

I have NO desire to fight with you about this topic, BUT I also don't want to see some newb reading this, think its a great idea, and then getting him/herself killed. You went shopping on the DS forums for reinforcement for what you wanted to do, and you found it. I can point out a dozen sites that claim the Holocaust never happened, back it up with all kinds of info, BUT we both know the reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

bob, you are going to run what you want so there is little to debate. However you cannot get around science, even though the folks on the DS forums seem to think so. Physics states the more contact, the greater the likelihood of hydroplaning, it is SCIENCE, not opinion.
I'll go one step further in pointing out that ALL of the tire manufacturers who produce tires that are routinely used by DS riders, have gone on record in stating it is NOT SAFE.
You might want to have a look at the FD parts breakdown to see how the lateral force applied by running a CT is going to affect your FD, along with the additional 4lbs minimum your setup has over stock. You ARE loading the bearings in a way they were not designed to be loaded.
Will you get away with running a DS setup? Sure, maybe, probably, not..... I sure wouldn't want to be that one fella who's FD goes, that is for sure.

I have NO desire to fight with you about this topic, BUT I also don't want to see some newb reading this, think its a great idea, and then getting him/herself killed. You went shopping on the DS forums for reinforcement for what you wanted to do, and you found it. I can point out a dozen sites that claim the Holocaust never happened, back it up with all kinds of info, BUT we both know the reality.

---

Thanks for sharing that with me!

I "personally" do not endorse the use of a CT's on anyone's motorcycle other than my own, however I like to exercise my "freedom of choice" when it comes to my motorcycle, tires, oil, filter, paint color, options, grades of gas, tire pressure etc. etc. etc.

I promise, you will be the first one I notify should I have a FD failure or other catastrophic event which resulted from my use of a CT. As this will be the my third "heavy cruiser" to wear a CT, I'm confident that my selection is "right for me".

With you sincere concerns on this matter, I do hope that you take them to the Goldwing Darksiders Forum where hundreds of riders are routinely "throwing caution to the wind" and running CT's without failures of any sort, be it a tire or mechanical in nature.

In closing I'd like to express my utmost confidence in "Mother Honda" to "overbuild" the F6B like every other machine they manufacture. I'm especially confident that the FD which is shared with the regular Wing are "bullet proof".

In the interest of "Personal Safety" I admit that the owners manual clearly states not to use a "car tire" on the F6B. That info is amongst a host of other warnings to include not towing a trailer, overloading, speeding etc.:shock:

Cordially

Bob

P.S. In regards to your statement of "loading the bearings" because of the of the additional 4lb. tire weight! Suggest you read and understand "unsprung/sprung weight".
http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7...r/sprung-c.htm

Just for gee-whiz I searched the net for motorcycle failures with car tires........................could not find a one, but I sure found lots of failures with motorcycle tires, I mean serious failures with fatal injuries, totaled bikes and multiple law suits. Kinda scary reading about all those failures, many low mileage tires, many with experienced riders who check tire pressure all the time and even the morning of the day of the failure. I'm not for or against any kind of tire, I believe we are all free to do what we want with our bikes, it's your call.

I called a local bike tire shop today. All they do is install bike tires. You bring it in, on the bike or not, and they install it. I asked if they would install a car tire on a bike rim. "No we will not, it's not safe!" Well, alrighty then. Thanks for your OPINION. I know for a fact that it's only "unsafe" because if someone did get hurt, whether the fault of the tire or not, somebody is gonna get sued. I guess I'll have to invest in a tire mounting machine if I really want to do it.

If hydroplaning was even an issue, then why would Harley, or anyone else, put wide car tires on a TRIKE? :think:

You might want to have a look at the FD parts breakdown to see how the lateral force applied by running a CT is going to affect your FD, along with the additional 4lbs minimum your setup has over stock. You ARE loading the bearings in a way they were not designed to be loaded.
[/QUOTE]

I simply had to return to this post and address your comment regarding "Lateral Force" and the "loading of bearings" because of the additional "4lbs minimum over the stock wheel/tire.

After some research I was able to glean some great info on actual motorcycle tire weights from E-Tires Unlimited. I have to laugh because according to your assumption my FD bearings are in jeopardy of failure due to the increased weight of the 18lb G-MAX. Your assumption also suggest that any tire which weighs more than 15.5lbs (actual weight of the stock Bridgestone G704) is "overloading the bearings.

As a refresher the stock F6B tire/wheel weight is 34lbs. The Bridgestone 180/60-R16 G704 weighs 15.5lbs. Quick math, 34lbs minus 15.5lbs gives a wheel weight of 18.5 lbs.

Now the best part:icon_wink: Your suggestion, that any wheel/tire combination exceeding 34 pounds total weight should not be used, has eliminated five of the six tire manufactures who have "recommended tires" for the Goldwing/F6B:shock:

Bridgestone G704 180/60 R-16.......15.5lbs

Metzeler ME880 180/60 R-16..........18lbs (same weight as G-MAX CT)

Pirelli Night Dragon 180/65-16........20lbs
180/70-16.......22lbs

Shinko SE890 180/60-R16..............20lbs

Michelin Commander II 180/65-16...21lbs

Dunlop Elite 3 180/60-HR16............22lbs

Wow! Guess Wing/F6B riders really have only one choice in a cycle tire, that being the 15.5lb Bridgestone G704:icon_rolleyes:

In ending, I'll leave "Lateral Force" to "front steering tires":icon_biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

bob, you are going to run what you want so there is little to debate.

I have NO desire to fight with you about this topic.

---

Then why would you even open this thread let alone post a giant tirade?


That was a rhetorical question. Please don't write another ten paragraph post of nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghostrider

Put me on second :icon_biggrin:

Btw for some more interesting reading, Neil Peart the drummer for "Rush" also has a series of interesting books about his motorcycle adventures. He rides his BMW in between shows as he travels around the world.

---

Any connection to your screen name?

I'm a huge Peart/Rush fan. Have seen their shows several times -always great!

Bob, and there in lies the problem. You read what you wanted to read and NOT what I posted. The weight or additional weight in and of itself is NOT a huge issue. What you didn't get was lateral force applied to the FD's bearings. So maybe before revisiting you should look into it some more.
As I stated I have no interest in fighting over this with you. I am pretty sure some fella's with a whole lot more engineering experience than I have a better knowledge of what should not be done with the parts they designed. I'll leave it there.
May your journeys all be safe......

Gumby, why would I not open this thread? I find it of some interest to see what folks are doing with their bikes. Why so defensive over opposing views?
Obviously I am not going to change Bob's mind, nor was that my intention, but I did point out a few flaws in the DS argument. Won't make any difference to those who want to run DS, might for someone on the fence.

As for the "can't find any" DS failures? Didn't look too hard because there is one posted to youtube, and it was a wing.

Ride safe fella's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

Bob, and there in lies the problem. You read what you wanted to read and NOT what I posted. The weight or additional weight in and of itself is NOT a huge issue. What you didn't get was lateral force applied to the FD's bearings. So maybe before revisiting you should look into it some more.
As I stated I have no interest in fighting over this with you. I am pretty sure some fella's with a whole lot more engineering experience than I have a better knowledge of what should not be done with the parts they designed. I'll leave it there.
May your journeys all be safe......

Gumby, why would I not open this thread? I find it of some interest to see what folks are doing with their bikes. Why so defensive over opposing views?
Obviously I am not going to change Bob's mind, nor was that my intention, but I did point out a few flaws in the DS argument. Won't make any difference to those who want to run DS, might for someone on the fence.

As for the "can't find any" DS failures? Didn't look too hard because there is one posted to youtube, and it was a wing.

Ride safe fella's.

---

Once again "Thanks" for sharing that with me:icon_biggrin:

As (your quote) "I didn't get what was"lateral force applied to the FD bearings", I'm giving you the podium so you can share your knowledge on this subject. Please explain it in layman terms so "I get it" along with all the other folks who are following this thread. I know you will clearly articulate the difference between the MT/CT lateral forces so there's no mistake on anyones part on this subject, which you raised as a issue. Thanking you, "Teach", from all of your inquisitive students. Were listening!

You Ride Safe Also:icon_wink:

I couldn't find it on YouTube can u post a link ?
I still putting it on my bike ! Just would like to see the video.
I Have been riding the same roads Keeping track of my speeds
So I can do a fair comparison When I change the tire.

Found this intense article on the web about CT vs MT.

http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/...-rim-tire.html

:stirthepot: :077:

No matter how wrong I think a car tire on a motorcycle is engineering wise, there are just too many successful darksiders, Honda, HD, and otherwise for me to say it's wrong. So I stand on the sideline for these discussions. :beer3:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Knight

Found this intense article on the web about CT vs MT.

http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/...-rim-tire.html

:stirthepot: :077:

---

That is a remarkable article and worth reading by all cycle riders!

Thanks for bringing it to this post.

Bob

I saw a CT on a Victory Cross Country Tour today. I talked to the guy for a while cuz I'm really interested in the topic. He's been doing it for years. Loves it. Puts a ton of miles on bikes. He told me of a place locally that will install them so I'll be looking into it in the future. I only have 1200 miles on the new Stone right now. :icon_biggrin:

Attachment 682

If you're not already confused:shock:
http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7...el/Tires.shtml

The stock wheel on a F6B has a designation of "J 16M/CXMT5.00 DOT 13W" which is clearly on the back of the rim. The J designation is used for identifying most automotive rims. Something to remember when comparing MT/CT rims:icon_wink:

I would pull my hair out if I had any:icon_doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by av8rdave

Any connection to your screen name?

I'm a huge Peart/Rush fan. Have seen their shows several times -always great!

---

Yes, as a matter of fact it is. :clap2: I'm a big fan too, really enjoyed reading his books and seeing RUSH in concert. I originally saw them at the swing auditorium in San Bernadino when they played backup to another band during their 2112 album concert. Just blew away the audience.

http://neilpeart.net/index2.html

This is the link to his web site if anyone is interested. (hoping it's a link)

Bob, sure I can, but it would be much better if I just quote a fella I know who knows more about DS conversions than anyone else.

"If the centerline of the wheel stays in the same place, then static loading on the final drive bearings remains the same, regardless of how you get there.
All that the bearings 'see' is how far away from me is the load applied (centerline) and how much (total mass being supported at that wheel).

If you offset the wheel farther away from the final drive, then the output shaft will see a larger moment load which will result in addition loading on the bearings.

Imagine a bar held horizontally in your hand, as a weight gets moved farther out away from your hand it has a greater torque load that your hand/wrist much resist in order to keep the bar from sagging.

-----

Now, imagine adding extra weight at the same spot on the bar you are holding, and you will agree that it also takes more work to hold the bar level, right?
That is analogous to what would happen if you go with a heavier wheel/tire.
OR..... if you add extra mass.

Except, our wheel assembly is not hanging out in space, it is resting on the ground and holding up the final drive (and rest of the bike/rig).
So when stopped the extra weight of the heavier wheel has no effect on the load seen by the final drive bearings.

BUT....
You didn't buy the bike/rig just to have it parked and looking pretty, so you drive down the road. And while driving down the road you will hit bumps, causing the suspension to move.
NOW that added wheel/tire mass does have some effect. The wheel/tire/final drive/swingarm is all mounted "below" the spring/shock unit and is refered to as the 'Unsprung Mass'.
Greater unsprung mass affects how quickly/well the suspension can react to being bumped. Basically, it takes more energy to both get it moving, and stop that movement when you have more mass.
Which means that with a heavier wheel/tire your suspension is going to feel harsher, and in some cases may not stay in contact with the road/trail as well.

And, there is then an inertial force that is transmitted to the bearings of the final drive as the wheel bounces around on the end of the output shaft. The larger the mass that the final drive bearings are trying to control, the more load the bearings see.
The heavier the wheel/adapter, the more force transmitted. And, the rougher the road/trail, the more inertial force transmitted through the output bearings due to larger/faster/more frequent movements of the unsprung mass.

Yes, inertial loading is probably a smaller component to the final drive bearing loads than static loading, but NOT insignificant."

Hope this helps.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

Bob, sure I can, but it would be much better if I just quote a fella I know who knows more about DS conversions than anyone else.

"If the centerline of the wheel stays in the same place, then static loading on the final drive bearings remains the same, regardless of how you get there.
All that the bearings 'see' is how far away from me is the load applied (centerline) and how much (total mass being supported at that wheel).

If you offset the wheel farther away from the final drive, then the output shaft will see a larger moment load which will result in addition loading on the bearings.

Imagine a bar held horizontally in your hand, as a weight gets moved farther out away from your hand it has a greater torque load that your hand/wrist much resist in order to keep the bar from sagging.

-----

Now, imagine adding extra weight at the same spot on the bar you are holding, and you will agree that it also takes more work to hold the bar level, right?
That is analogous to what would happen if you go with a heavier wheel/tire.
OR..... if you add extra mass.

Except, our wheel assembly is not hanging out in space, it is resting on the ground and holding up the final drive (and rest of the bike/rig).
So when stopped the extra weight of the heavier wheel has no effect on the load seen by the final drive bearings.

BUT....
You didn't buy the bike/rig just to have it parked and looking pretty, so you drive down the road. And while driving down the road you will hit bumps, causing the suspension to move.
NOW that added wheel/tire mass does have some effect. The wheel/tire/final drive/swingarm is all mounted "below" the spring/shock unit and is refered to as the 'Unsprung Mass'.
Greater unsprung mass affects how quickly/well the suspension can react to being bumped. Basically, it takes more energy to both get it moving, and stop that movement when you have more mass.
Which means that with a heavier wheel/tire your suspension is going to feel harsher, and in some cases may not stay in contact with the road/trail as well.

And, there is then an inertial force that is transmitted to the bearings of the final drive as the wheel bounces around on the end of the output shaft. The larger the mass that the final drive bearings are trying to control, the more load the bearings see.
The heavier the wheel/adapter, the more force transmitted. And, the rougher the road/trail, the more inertial force transmitted through the output bearings due to larger/faster/more frequent movements of the unsprung mass.

Yes, inertial loading is probably a smaller component to the final drive bearing loads than static loading, but NOT insignificant."

Hope this helps.......

---

I deeply appreciate your informed response :icon_wink: Your time at the podium was well spent:clap2:

Cordially

Bob

The first law is easy to believe:*The friction between two surfaces is proportional to the force pressing one to the other.*This force could be the weight of a motorcycle pressing the tire into the pavement, or the clamping force pressing two pieces of wood together. "Proportional" just means that if you double the pressing force you double the friction.*The second law is where all the trouble starts. To understand it, suppose you set up an experiment. You put a brick on a table and investigate how much force it takes to start the brick sliding. You screw an eyebolt into the brick, run a line from the eyebolt to a pulley on the edge of the table, and then attach weights to the end of the line. You add weight until the brick starts to slide.Now here's the interesting part, and the surprising part. You would notice that the orientation of the brick doesn't make any difference. That is, the friction is the same whether the brick is on its large face, the smaller side, or the small end.

I never compared a brick to a tire!

As far as the brick goes....You are measuring the drag coefficient of the table or surface the brick is on….drag coefficient means little in this discussion…other than the power needed to move the brick/tire or the stopping ability on the surface…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mustangjake

The first law is easy to believe:*The friction between two surfaces is proportional to the force pressing one to the other.*This force could be the weight of a motorcycle pressing the tire into the pavement, or the clamping force pressing two pieces of wood together. "Proportional" just means that if you double the pressing force you double the friction.*The second law is where all the trouble starts. To understand it, suppose you set up an experiment. You put a brick on a table and investigate how much force it takes to start the brick sliding. You screw an eyebolt into the brick, run a line from the eyebolt to a pulley on the edge of the table, and then attach weights to the end of the line. You add weight until the brick starts to slide.Now here's the interesting part, and the surprising part. You would notice that the orientation of the brick doesn't make any difference. That is, the friction is the same whether the brick is on its large face, the smaller side, or the small end.

I never compared a brick to a tire!

---

If that was relevant in tires a dragster would have skinny tires for the least rolling resistance.

They, of course, do not.

We had a physics teacher that told his students otherwise using the brick example. his insistence that the bumblebee could not possibly fly despite observational proof turned dozens of kids off of physics. His successor showed where he was wrong. I forget how she did it.

The reason I don't welcome Teach's input is because there are hundreds of threads debating the merits of ct. I don't want to hear from any more people who have never and will never try it. 100,000s of thousands of miles have been very successfully been put on CTs. Probably millions of miles. The question I'd like to explore, and what this thread was about, is what kind of CT is the best for the F6B. The endless debate just detracts from that with no benefit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gumby

The reason I don't welcome Teach's input is because there are hundreds of threads debating the merits of ct. I don't want to hear from any more people who have never and will never try it. 100,000s of thousands of miles have been very successfully been put on CTs. Probably millions of miles. The question I'd like to explore, and what this thread was about, is what kind of CT is the best for the F6B. The endless debate just detracts from that with no benefit.

---

Well said, Gumby...well said.

Gumby,

You see there in lies your problem, you did not read and you ASSUMED wrong. I posted right up front that I have in fact ridden with a Darkside setup, in fact I have THOUSANDS of miles riding on that setup. I still have a brand new Potenza sitting in my barn that didn't get used.
That mistake aside, you cannot make an INFORMED decision as to the merits and/or pitfalls of running a CT, without considering ALL the variables (hence my discourse with Bob). IMO there is a SIGNIFICANT down side to running a DS rig on a single sided swingarm, aka FD as opposed to a traditional 2 sided swingarm. Far more variables to consider in setup. There is also the hydroplaning argument which cannot be gotten around. There are SURELY benefits to running DS like more rubber on the road, longer tire life, less tippy when stationary.... but you cannot discount the negatives.
You can run whatever setup you want, your bike, your money and your life in the saddle. All I'm saying is be INFORMED. That means when someone tells you a CT won't hydroplane any more than a bike tire, know it for the BS it is. That doesn't mean don't run the CT, it means know it WILL hydroplane much easier than a bike tire so you don't put yourself in a BAD situation. It means know that an alum wheel will NOT in all instances be the best choice of wheel, factor in weight. Cool looks could get you dead or damage your bike badly. It means with a final drive like the GW has, being on center is very important as is the total weight of your setup, for safety and to prevent damage to the bike.
I am sorry you felt we were debating the merit of running a DS setup, rather than discussing things of importance, things that NEED to be considered when pondering a DS setup.

ps... I run a DS rig on my BMW when towing my trailer (FD, single sided swingarm) and I am as informed as one could get on the merits and pitfalls. Bet you didn't see that coming either:icon_wink:

The hydroplaning argument is BS. If that was an issue then the trikes would be slip sliding all over the place, they run two CT's.

The guy I met last weekend was running a winter tire. Softer compound (better grip), more sipes (better wet traction) and long wear. And what MT has center water channels like a CT?

Attachment 736

FYI, I haven't put a CT on my bike YET, but I have ridden bikes with them and had no issue with it. When the only argument is "you can't do that cuz it isn't safe" then I can't wait to do it, especially when tons of other people are doing it with great results. I don't understand the passion against it. Doing wheelies isn't safe, but I bet alot more people have been hurt or damaged their bikes from doing wheelies then from running a CT.

Attachment 737

:icon_deadhorse:

....I call B.S. on a CT hydroplaning ...I have ridden in an absolute monsoon and the bike never even squirmed....my definition of a monsoon...raining in buckets with a minimum of one inch of water on the road... I would not say it is impossible, but I would think less than a MC tire..... whole different story if you have 40K miles on it and it is worn out...

First and foremost things are beginning to spin out of control on this Post/Threads. This in not what I had in mind when I made the decision to share my experience with a CT on my F6B. Unfortunately in my "terse way" I've managed to offend several people and I humbly apologize for that. We have extremely dedicated riders/cyclists who have shared valid concerns and they are being "trashed" for doing so. This topic of a CT on a motorcycle deserves the "entire picture", "pros and cons" etc. Only then can individuals make a rational choice on what is right for them. All the elements that have been mentioned to date are valid, bar none. We can disagree but lets do it in a fashion which doesn't offend, attack or otherwise show contempt for each other. We have enough of that inside Washington's Belt Way.
Knowing every possible scenario on this highly charged topic requires debate. We can do that like the gentleman we all are!

Respectfully

Bob

I meant no disrespect nor felt any. Just throwing in my two pennies.

+1............

I getting the one I post the picture Of earlier my Daughter is buying it for me for my birthday!
Otherwise I would already had it. As i get older she says it hard to find me something.
I her though college + she's a RN now :) I did some good in my life!

Bob, probably a good bit of the blame goes my way. I could have been more clear with my intensions and I should know how folks would read some of it. So actually the apology should be mine.

Bobbyf6b and Steve, sorry fella's but just because you have some "thought" of what hydroplaning should feel like, or because trikes use CT's, does not void the reality. Hydroplaning simply means the tire contact with the road surface is interfered with by the liquid, in most traditional arguments, rain water. The larger the contact patch the greater the interference. MC tires as a rule do NOT HP because of the very limited contact patch.
Yes a CT has MANY sipes to channel water out, but it can't get it all out and particularly when you have a fraction of the weight applied. Obviously the NARROWER the CT you go with, the better to reduce the affect.
So Steve you wouldn't KNOW or FEEL your bike hydroplaning necessarily. You might if you had to maneuver quickly or brake abruptly. Think of it like this: You hydroplane your car routinely, don't know it, but it is in common on both rain and snow. Lets use snow because it is an easier visual. You drive along on snow covered roads no problem but you need to make a left turn and you didn't adjust speed. What's the car do? Obviously it slides sideways as it tries to maintain a forward line even though you are trying to turn left. Can be a slight slide or severe depending upon speed, temps, tread design, tire width.
Ideally with a CT on a bike you'd run pressure near the 32-35 psi which would have you ROLL from side to side on the tire like on a bike tire. Most folks running DS run MUCH lower pressures thus keeping the tire relatively flat on the road and allowing the sidewall flex to roll. Down sides to both and pro's to both. The point here is that ALL of these factors come into play, so know they do and account for them. I don't want you fellas feeling defensive about this discussion. It is from my position just discussion, stuff that should be known by anyone running DS. Ride safe fellas

And again MY apology if something I said offended you all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teach

Lets use snow because it is an easier visual. You drive along on snow covered roads no problem but you need to make a left turn and you didn't adjust speed. What's the car do? Obviously it slides sideways as it tries to maintain a forward line even though you are trying to turn left. Can be a slight slide or severe depending upon speed, temps, tread design, tire width.

---

Ah....I drive an AWD Subaru Forester, with serious snow tires on snow wheels in the Winter time, so...I have no idea what this slipping and sliding is all about:icon_rolleyes:

Teach:

Your observation on tire traction is "dead on". It correctly articulates what dynamics are coming into play when a "wider thread" replaces that of a "narrower thread" irregardless it be a CT or MT. A dear old friend, who never rode a cycle, had a simple tire observation. "Wide Walks On"/"Narrow Cuts Through", and that applied to snow or water. These is inherent risk involved with "Dark Side Riding" which you are personally aware of. When selecting a CT for a cycle application, that tire dimensionally, should mirror that of the M/T it replaces and that includes tire weight. Knowing all the facts before pulling the trigger on a C/T will not eliminate risk but will reduce it. Your input on tire weight was also correct and brought light to it's importance. It is another important factor which needs to be taken into account especially when folks are selecting "heavier run flat tires".

I thank you for your important and valued input:clap2:

Bob

I was at the Honda dealer last weekend. And i started talking to the salesman about my F6 and was telling him I was I was putting a General car tire on my F6B. He said no you don't want to do that Insurance companies will not cover you It's a loophole out for them!
I was back up there today, Talking to the guys about Different bikes we have owned. I went wandering through the sales floor ran into the salesman again, Started talking about windshield and how the F6B Hondaline windshield tappered too much. Then we started talking about tires again Out of the blue he says (I hope everybody with a car tire on the bike crashes and dies). I was like WTF Thank you very much, I bought three Bikes from this shop. What an attitude !