anakee 3 VS Tourance Next VS pilot road 3 trail

[jp7rgv]

it's time to change tires (2005 Tiger 955i)
and i am between these three options.
whats your opinion? has anyone tried them?
i need tires that warm up fast and have as good grip as possible on the road.

what about speed range? H or V?
Someone told me that H warms up faster.
is that true?

Regards,
John

[Dutch]

you forgot to mention what you expect in wet conditions  :icon_wink:

[jp7rgv]

i expect grip, but on the other hand i don't push the bike when roads are wet.
greek roads are allready extremely slippery dry.

[Dutch]

You have a cast wheel Tiger isn't it? All three are very modern tires for road use. Even if you're decision is purely based on the profile you think looks best on the Tiger IMHO you can't make a wrong choise.

All are better than the tires the Tiger came out of the factory and I wonder if most riders would notice the difference it they didn't know what tire was on the bike.

I would go for the V version. I never heared an H tire would heat up faster (doesn't mean it's bs or not, I just never heared about it) and with a V tire the insurance can't point at you in a worst case scenario.

[blacktiger]

Just to throw another spanner in the works. I've just ordered a set of Dunlop Roadsmart 2. Good ratings all round and cheaper here than most of those others.

I have to add that you'll get all sorts of opinions about tyres but the only way to see if they work for you is to fit a set and try them.  Out of the current crop there isn't a bad tyre and you and I will never get near their capabilities.

[metalguru]

Got Pilot Road 3s on mine and cannot fault them for anything and they are more brave than me in the wet. Little bit more money but seem to last too. BTW mine stays on-road nowadays.

[Sin_Tiger]

  PR3s see haggard to beat in the wet for a road tyre.

[Stitch]

How about since we are talking tires:(?)

I received a recommendation from a friend  for the Bridgestone Exedra tires since I mainly do street riding and would save about $100 US over Michelin Pilot 3 Trails. I thought the sizing would be an issue but I could place 120/70r19 on the front and 170/60r17 on the back. Overall height would drop about 1/4 of an inch so that's minimal. Appears I would have enough clearance to the chain with a little more width on the rear.  I have been happy with Michelin tires and would buy them again. Reviews for the Bridgestone's have been positive. A little more "meat" in the back would hurt since I weigh about 250lbs, occasionally ride 2 up, and plus full panniers.

Any opinions on the size change or the tire?

[Dutch]

A 170 is made for a 5" rim, Tiger has 4.25. Imho: case closed  :icon_wink:

Apart from that: the modern type tires are an amazing blend of grip in both dry and wet, longevity and a fairly reasonable price. You could buy a tire that is cheaper to purchase, but when it gets less miles is the same or more expensive to run. You could accept that it doesn't have the performance standard of the modern tire, but isn't that what's biking is about? Just the knowledge it will stick will make your ride much more relaxed. And last but not least: if there ever is an occassion where the modern tire makes the difference between "whoops" and "oh sh!t" a few tenners difference in price have paid themselves tenfold 

[blacktiger]

How about since we are talking tires:(?)

I received a recommendation from a friend  for the Bridgestone Exedra tires since I mainly do street riding and would save about $100 US over Michelin Pilot 3 Trails. I thought the sizing would be an issue but I could place 120/70r19 on the front and 170/60r17 on the back. Overall height would drop about 1/4 of an inch so that's minimal. Appears I would have enough clearance to the chain with a little more width on the rear.  I have been happy with Michelin tires and would buy them again. Reviews for the Bridgestone's have been positive. A little more "meat" in the back would hurt since I weigh about 250lbs, occasionally ride 2 up, and plus full panniers.

Any opinions on the size change or the tire?

I wouldn't mess with tyre sizes like that. I did once, a long time ago, thinking that bigger was better, but the bike felt like shit so I've kept to stock sizes ever since. And, after all, what's wrong with the stock sizes? They're good enough to scrape the pegs and widely available and, I'll wager, better than you'll ever be.

[Stitch]

I wouldn't mess with tyre sizes like that. I did once, a long time ago, thinking that bigger was better, but the bike felt like shit so I've kept to stock sizes ever since. And, after all, what's wrong with the stock sizes? They're good enough to scrape the pegs and widely available and, I'll wager, better than you'll ever be.

There is nothing wrong with the stock size and nothing wrong with putting another set of Michelins on. Barring placing a new set of rims,  thought it would be worthwhile to investigate the possibility if it "should" be done (we all know it can but could doesn't mean I should). The reasons why I considered is for aesthetics (think it would look a bit better IMO); performance (belt package is more reinforced on the rear for 2 up and luggage); and a little bit of economics ($100 US less expensive than a set of Michelins and am not prepared to spend for dymag rims at this point).

Why not to do it for handling reasons is great advice and appreciate the opinions. I suspect Dutch is spot on for since I don't have the rim width, the wider tire will behave differently (since the tire's belt package will be affected since the tire is sucked in 3/4 of an inch) and like you said blacktiger "but the bike felt like shit".