Dunlop K70 Tires

[Ducati Scotty]

If you went cafe and took the fender off entirely it would probably be fine.  We thought about grinding away that part of the fender but figured that would make it really floppy.  Oh, and in typical RE fashion the clearance was fine on one side and tight on the other.  It might be fine all around on some bikes but you wouldn't know until you mounted it.  Symmetry is overrated

Scott

[jartist]

Im running a 3.5 inch k70 on the front on my G5 and there's plenty of room so I'd say a 100/90 19 should fit on the front as well. I don't notice any adverse effects of having matching sizes front and rear. Maybe insignificant harder steering but the steering is still perfectly balanced.

[Arizoni]

I got my new K70 installed at a local motorcycle shop and after 40 miles at speeds up to (an indicated) 77 mph it's working great.

I think the tire will work much better in the rain than my old Avon Speedmaster II (see photo).
At 7600 miles (12,260km) it was down to a tread depth of 1/32" (0,81mm) in the center groove.

[Craig McClure]

Listening to the talk about fatter tires. I realize this is "fashionable" in some quarters, but need to point out (because apparently many don't know) that NARROW TIRES CORNER BETTER on the light Enfield type bikes. Lets be clear, there all are kinds of pictures of just about everything to be seen, but that doesn't mean they work any better. Like a certain V-twin motorcycle I won't name, that is more about theater than performance.  Yes, the racers use some fatties on small wheels, but they also have the horsepower to make use of the bigger foot print. On a light bike a bigger footprint will aquaplane easier than a small footprint in the wet. It will not bite enough to improve performance-only make handling sluggish. I would not put anything bigger than a 3.25 on the front, or a 3.50 on the rear of a Royal Enfield. I also prefer the 19" wheels on the G5 series, as they allow better ground clearance during sporty cornering.  Guess you need to decide wether you want a chopper, a cruiser, or a nimble motorcycle with classic ancestry. You should always question the wisdom of what the other Primates are doing, before before you follow their example.
             Craig McClure, Jasper Ga. 2010 G5 Deluxe

[Ducati Scotty]

+1, +2, and +3 to that!  If you're not breaking the rear end loose stay with a narrower tire for better handling.

The Ducati Monster I had comes with a 160 and it does look a bit anemic on that rather brutish bike.  Still, it's plenty wide enough for good traction.  People go through all kinds of hassles to shoehorn a 180 on there.  Now you've got a tire that's a hair's breadth away from the swingarm on both sides and the profile is all screwed up because it's squeezed on to a rim that's too tight.  But it looks fast!    Please.

Scott

[LarsBloodbeard]

I like the "wagon wheel" look of old fashioned off road tires on the old bikes an jeeps.  And from my experience, they perform better, crawl over bad terrain better.  The big balloon tires give you a comfortable ride though, like driving on a cloud!

That being said, 3.25 vs 3.5 is probably not enough of a difference to matter terribly much.

[gremlin]

...... 3.25 vs 3.5 is probably not enough of a difference to matter terribly much.

+1

[barenekd]

Guys put 200s on bikes that should have 190s and generally the steering and handling have been impared. The steering is slower and the "stick" isn't any better.
These bikes are designed with a purpose and the tires are fitted to match that purpose. If they had intended for bigger tires to be put on, they would have done it.
Not that I have anything against a guy putting larger tires on, but you may or may not like the consequences.
Bare

[jartist]

Tire sizes aren't tire sizes anyway.  Some manufactures have posted actual dimensions and there are some surprises. K70 3.25 have very close to the same outside diameter as the 3.5 and you're talkin' less than a cm width difference. The Avon AM26 3.25-19 are really close to the 100/90-19 in width but the 3.25 have a much greater o.d. than the 100/90. Go figure!

[Jack Leis]

+1 Jartist ! When I was running a K70 3.25 on the front of my G5 , my favorite ride was exactly 160 miles. I mounted an Avon AM26 sized at 100/90 and my trip has been extended to 166 miles now . Go figure. Smaller O.D. for sure but it sticks like glue so I am not complaining.

[GlennF]

Tire sizes aren't tire sizes anyway.  Some manufactures have posted actual dimensions and there are some surprises. K70 3.25 have very close to the same outside diameter as the 3.5 and you're talkin' less than a cm width difference. The Avon AM26 3.25-19 are really close to the 100/90-19 in width but the 3.25 have a much greater o.d. than the 100/90. Go figure!

Technically The 3.25 should be a "square" profile (3.25" wide by 3.25" high) and the 100/90 is a low (wide) profile tire which is nominally 100 mm  (3.93") wide by 90 mm  (3.54" high). In the end though its like shoe sizes, no two brands are guaranteed to be the same.

I suppose in the end its "fit and see".

[mattsz]

This has been asleep for awhile, but...

I'm thinking about changing to K70's, but I'm not sure about sizing and specs.  I see some listed for sale as front or rear tires; does it make a difference?

I still have the OEM Avons - the manual says 3.25x19 in front and 3.5x19 on the rear.  Should I be trying to get the same sizes?  I kind of like the look of a chunkier tire, but it looks like the only 19 inch tires K70's are 3.25 and 3.5 sizes.  Should I stick with one of each, like my owners manual says?

[Jack Leis]

Mattsz, those sizes front and rear would be perfect.

[mattsz]

Thanks Jack - it's fun to shop around for them and find reviews written by you and Bare...

[Jack Leis]

Mattsz my friend, motorcyclesuperstore.com has them cheap and you cant beat their delivery times. Just saying . . .