On 18 Nov, 13:29, âÍÁ Á³Õ »Ñ·àÁ ËØÁ <macmi...@g=
mail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 11:19 pm, totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk (The Older
> Gentleman) wrote:
> > You can just about hobble home on a flat modern tyre - I managed to
> > hobble home more than once on a flat antique tyre - but the tyres aren't
> > run-flat in the accepted sense of the term.
> However, the entire world has not accepted Neil Murray's personal
> point of view
> which uneasonably requires "run flat" motorcycle tires to meet the
> same standards as car tires.
Yes, it has. It just hasn't accepted *yours*.
Here's a challenge for you, if you think otherwise. Show me a tyre
manufacturer advertising "run flat" tyres for motorcycles. Off you go.
There are loads of companies offering run-flat tyres for cars. But
bikes?
> There are other riders who are reasonably satisfied with current
> motorcycle tire technology, which allows one to safely reach the side
> of the road, stop, and apply
> a temporary repair that gets them home or to a repair facility.
That is not what a tyre claimed to be "run-flat" is accepted by the
entire tyre industry, and consumers worldwide, as providing.
You lose.
XML Sitemap
> Gentleman) wrote:
> > You can just about hobble home on a flat modern tyre - I managed to
> > hobble home more than once on a flat antique tyre - but the tyres aren't
> > run-flat in the accepted sense of the term.
> However, the entire world has not accepted Neil Murray's personal
> point of view
> which uneasonably requires "run flat" motorcycle tires to meet the
> same standards as car tires.