Posted by Bruce Richmond on December 11, 2006, 7:58 pm
lubecki@hotmail.com wrote:
> Bob Myers wrote:
> > Ditto; the rear's good for maybe 4-5,000, the front about twice
> > that. Don't know why anyone would expect the relative "stopping
> > power" to have anything to do with it - my tires, at least, spend a
> > hell of a lot more time simply rolling down the road than they
> > do locked up and skidding, which is the only way I could see
> > that brakes would enter into the picture much. (Oh, I guess
> > you ARE putting more weight on the front during braking, but
> > come on...)
> >
> > Bob M.
> It's not an issue of weight. When you accelerate or brake your tire's
> contact patch stretches and shears off rubber. You don't have to skid
> to wear out your tires while braking.
My front tires usually wear at about half the rate of the rears. I use
just the front brake unless traction is poor. The rear tire has to put
power to the ground just to maintain a constant speed. The shear force
is considerable when traveling at high speeds and may last for extended
periods. By comparison brakes are used much less of the time.
> Weight does increase tire wear but it affects both tires equally, since
> most bikes (especially sportbikes) are pretty evenly balanced, about
> 50/50 front/back.
> -Gniewko
Added weight can reduce slippage resulting in less wear. The rear tire
on my bike actually lasts longer with the added weight of my wife on
the back. Of course there are other factors at work there as well :-)
Bruce
Posted by Turby on December 12, 2006, 3:23 am
wrote:
>Added weight can reduce slippage resulting in less wear. The rear tire
>on my bike actually lasts longer with the added weight of my wife on
>the back. Of course there are other factors at work there as well :-)
I'm a bit surprised no one has mentioned inflation. Improper inflation
is a major factor in tire wear.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
Posted by lubecki on December 11, 2006, 2:15 pm
Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 02:22:38 -0800, in rec.motorcycles, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
> >Then it's worn out. Motorcycle tires all wear that way, unless you were to
> >ride in a constant circle that is. The front tires always wear faster since
> >your front brake has more stopping power.
> Always? I wear out two rear tires for every front tire, and wear out the
> front brake pads about twice as fast as the rear. FWIW.
> -Scott
How your front and rear tires wear will depend a lot on what you do
with brakes and throttle and on how powerful your bike is. On my bikes
I've always worn out the front faster than the rear. I rarely get the
chance to accelerate at full-throttle, but I practice maximum braking
every chance I get. And this is on reasonably powerful bikes - a
couple Honda VFRs and a Daytona 955i. I often end up with a torn up
front tire, while the rear still looks fresh.
So there are no rules about it. Though yes, most people on powerful
bikes wear out the rear tire first, because hard acceleration is easier
than hard braking.
-Gniewko
Posted by Beav on December 11, 2006, 6:35 pm
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 02:22:38 -0800, in rec.motorcycles, "Ted Mittelstaedt"
>>Then it's worn out. Motorcycle tires all wear that way, unless you were
>>to
>>ride in a constant circle that is. The front tires always wear faster
>>since
>>your front brake has more stopping power.
> Always? I wear out two rear tires for every front tire, and wear out the
> front brake pads about twice as fast as the rear. FWIW.
*ding*
--
Beav
VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19
Posted by P.Roehling on December 11, 2006, 2:16 pm
> The front tires always wear faster since
> your front brake has more stopping power.
Uh-huh. But your rear tire is connected to the engine, meaning it bears 100%
of the acceleration loads. Therefore, rear tires commonly wear out more
quickly than front tires, unless you accelerate like a little old lady and
panic stop quite frequently.
> > Ditto; the rear's good for maybe 4-5,000, the front about twice
> > that. Don't know why anyone would expect the relative "stopping
> > power" to have anything to do with it - my tires, at least, spend a
> > hell of a lot more time simply rolling down the road than they
> > do locked up and skidding, which is the only way I could see
> > that brakes would enter into the picture much. (Oh, I guess
> > you ARE putting more weight on the front during braking, but
> > come on...)
> >
> > Bob M.
> It's not an issue of weight. When you accelerate or brake your tire's
> contact patch stretches and shears off rubber. You don't have to skid
> to wear out your tires while braking.