Tire Mix

Hi Folks, Has anybody had experience with an Avon RR 19 on the front and a Battlax BT46 18 on the rear? Do they play well together? Thanks

Jack15T said:

Hi Folks, Has anybody had experience with an Avon RR 19 on the front and a Battlax BT46 18 on the rear? Do they play well together? Thanks

Click to expand...

I had those fitted, but the rear was a 19" BT46.
No problem, except the 19" was a front, so, fast wear

Jack15T said:

Hi Folks, Has anybody had experience with an Avon RR 19 on the front and a Battlax BT46 18 on the rear? Do they play well together? Thanks

Click to expand...

I have that exact pairing mounted on my rims right now. Just like concours, I had a RR on the back previously and it wore out fast because it was a universal (front or back) tire, so the tread depth is less than a dedicated rear tire would be...

The pair of RR's front and back had a more confidence inspiring grip. When I replaced the rear RR tire with the battlax it was narrower slightly so I could have gone with a 120 width battlax to replace the 110 wide RR. The battlax is not as soft as the RR and I noticed it right away. After a few weeks of riding around I felt it was good enough but certainly not better than the RR in terms of grip performance.

I got 5 - 6000 miles on the RR rear tire before it was bald down the center. It was a great tire. I had to try the battlax just because I hoped it would be just as good and last 10,000 miles. I think I have only 2000 on it so far and it seems to be wearing OK. I will probably go back to the RR's if they are available. They have the best feel of any tire I've ever used and I think a sport bike in particular should be fitted with the best gripping tire possible...

I prefer to have the grip over anything, my Norton is built for handling and throwing it into the corners you need good rubber contact on the road the Avons are the best out of them all for our Nortons, I had tried a lot of different brands over the 49 years of ownership including the old K81s and so far the Avon RR has never let me down, the harder the rubber the longer the life but you lose in grip, I rather pay for my own safety whether less mileage and better road grip over long life to not being able to push my bike right over.

I had an 18 BT45 on the back - good and got nearly 6400 miles to of it, Now have a RR2 and it's better (grip inspires confidence) - due for a change soon at over 7600 miles.
I did start using Counteract beads with the RR2, so it's probably been in better balance.
Cheers

ashman said:

I prefer to have the grip over anything, my Norton is built for handling and throwing it into the corners you need good rubber contact on the road the Avons are the best out of them all for our Nortons, I had tried a lot of different brands over the 49 years of ownership including the old K81s and so far the Avon RR has never let me down, the harder the rubber the longer the life but you lose in grip, I rather pay for my own safety whether less mileage and better road grip over long life to not being able to push my bike right over.

Click to expand...

Back in the 70s I thought the K70 or K81 were great. They held the paved roads fine, did great on dirt roads, and were usable in snow. Today, dirt roads are gone and I'm too damned old to ride in snow. I use RoadRiders front and rear as I feel like they have much better grip in cornering.

I have never believed it a good idea to mix treads front and rear, but I have no experience with Battlax and I have no experience with an 18" rear wheel on a Norton.

In the 70s when the 850 Commando's were fitter with K81 410 front and back from the factory and they were good gripping tyres back then but depended on where they were made also, if made in England they were soft and gripped better, but after a few tyre changes I went for a slimmer tyre on the front from 410 to 350 I think and the Commando steered into the corners a bit better, then the K81s started to be made elsewhere, France, Spain, Japan and they were a bit more harder in the rubber and found they like to follow cracks in the tar/road and wore funny, don't get that with the Avon RR, Avon tyres were also good handling tyre in the early days but wore out quicker on the rear.
Modern tryes are so much better these days but best to run them a bit higher in the pressure, in days gone by the fronts were 28 PSI and 30 PSI for the rear but with the Avons I run 38 psi in the rear and 34 psi in the front found those pressures are the sweet pressure for my riding and best grip.
I still have my original books for my Norton when I brought it new and one book was on tyres, but the recommendations from way back then to these days are so much different now.
I have run with mix tyre pattens and have never had any problems doing so, sometimes you have no choice if the tyre you want is hard to get and I usually go through 2 rear tyres to the front tyre, but with cube tyres I always check the pressure weekly or before a big ride with the boys where you know you be getting into it and I always at home use my own pressure gauge and I always have a good gauge in my kit when out, never rely on service station gauges, they get knocked about, thrown on the ground and just missed used.


Ashley

Ashman,
I have always ran the lower pressures but my question is how much you weigh figure into what pressure you run. I never get the mileage out of the rear (19”front and rear) that you guys are getting.They are both balanced and get even wear but if I get 3500 miles out of the rear, I have to replace it.
Thanks,
Mike

I usually run RRs on my Commandos but often use BT45 and then BT46 on mid size Japanese bikes and really like them. I would expect the mileage to be comparable between real rear tires of both brands. I run slightly less pressure on the commando, say 33 and 36 and similar pressures on BT46s on comparably sized Japanese bikes. I just don't think modern tires are happy at the original low pressures and don't need them to stick well.

The best vintage bike tire I have used is the Continental Classic Attack, a real radial. The smallest applicable sizes are a little large for commandos so I have never tried them. The smallest front needs a WM3 rim in my opinion. However, I will try them on a Vincent I just started building. I am using Takasago rims, WM3-18r and WM3-19 front on this build and they should fit fine.

Since I really like the way commandos handle with the stock 19in rear tire and a 90/90 on the front, I will continue using RRs on Commandos. until there is a new size or model to tempt me. This may be unlikely since vintage tire selection appears to be declining and not increasing. Best.

YING said:

Ashman,
I have always ran the lower pressures but my question is how much you weigh figure into what pressure you run. I never get the mileage out of the rear (19”front and rear) that you guys are getting.They are both balanced and get even wear but if I get 3500 miles out of the rear, I have to replace it.
Thanks,
Mike

Click to expand...

In the case of old school tires, inflation gives a balance between contact patch area and sidewall flex. If you lower the tire pressure to get a bigger contact patch area, at some point you get noticeable sidewall flex which feels like a wiggle and upsets the stability of the bike. When I was dialing the handling of my own bike, the last little bit of wiggle was removed by 5lbs of air in the tires. So you can go as low as you want, but be mindful of what you feel regarding grip, but also wiggle due to sidewall flex. Maybe experiment with more or less air and ride a given route to compare the differences.... that's what I do. I have a test route.

Thanks for all the replies Folks, big help. It's a shame you can't get the RR in a 18.

I learned to race on T1 compound Dunlops. The Battleaxe tyres on my Seeley 850 are pure bliss. the last time I raced they were about 20 years old. I am probably different from other riders - if it rains, I am usually in with a better chance of winning. My project bike has 17 inch wheels from an RG250 Suzuki. In the year the bikes the wheels came from the rake in the steering head of the Suzuki changed by half of a degree. In the previous year, the bike had an 18 inch on the back, and a 17 inch on the front. The next year had 17 inch front and back.
An inch bigger tyre on the back of a Commando will probably steepen the rake by half a degree, and make the bike understeer a bit more. It might tend to run wide in corners and need more counter-steer to tip in, so you might need to soften the rear shocks. Do you carry a pillion passenger ? The height of the back changes the steering.
When I was a kid, I did not know any of this stuff. I always blamed myself for losing and never the bike.

YING said:

Ashman,
I have always ran the lower pressures but my question is how much you weigh figure into what pressure you run. I never get the mileage out of the rear (19”front and rear) that you guys are getting.They are both balanced and get even wear but if I get 3500 miles out of the rear, I have to replace it.
Thanks,
Mike

Click to expand...

Mike I just run what is best for my bike so 38 R and 34 F works the best with the Avons on my Norton, on my 2016 Thruxton I run 42 R and 38 F, I get over 6K miles on my rear tyres (12K km) and double that on the front tyres on both my bikes no matter what brand of tyre I run, on the Thruxton but I run dual compound tyre on the rear Thruxton and a lot more torque with the big 1200 motor I also run alloy rims on both bikes, as for my weight around 90kg or less, but my Norton 850 is a lot lighter than a Commando in the Featherbed frame, a lot lighter.

o0norton0o said:

In the case of old school tires, inflation gives a balance between contact patch area and sidewall flex. If you lower the tire pressure to get a bigger contact patch area, at some point you get noticeable sidewall flex which feels like a wiggle and upsets the stability of the bike. When I was dialing the handling of my own bike, the last little bit of wiggle was removed by 5lbs of air in the tires. So you can go as low as you want, but be mindful of what you feel regarding grip, but also wiggle due to sidewall flex. Maybe experiment with more or less air and ride a given route to compare the differences.... that's what I do. I have a test route.

Click to expand...

If I run lower tyre pressure I get a lot more flex in the tyre on the rear and the bike feels a lot less stable in the corners, I just experiment and put pressure in my tyres that work best for my bikes, I ride my bikes hard up in the ranges and tight twisties and need the best grip I can out of my tyres, I have no problems with running right to the outer edge of my tyres when in the ranges, too low of pressure and your tyres won't last as long, well in my case anyway.
After 49+ years with my Norton and over 44 years with the Commando/Featherbed set up/build I think I have got it sorted on my Norton and as I have said before modern tyres run a bit more pressure, a few more lbs makes a big difference in handling and life of the tyre,
Ashley

Jack15T said:

Thanks for all the replies Folks, big help. It's a shame you can't get the RR in a 18.

Click to expand...

last time I bought them 4 years ago, I bought a 110/90/18 RR for my rear 2.15 x 18 rim. I don't know if they discontinued those since I switched to the battlax to try something else... since the RR wore out so quickly as I said previously. You should look around, I bet you find them somewhere....

YING said:

Ashman,
I have always ran the lower pressures but my question is how much you weigh figure into what pressure you run. I never get the mileage out of the rear (19”front and rear) that you guys are getting.They are both balanced and get even wear but if I get 3500 miles out of the rear, I have to replace it.
Thanks,
Mike

Click to expand...

That's because you enjoy using the throttle.

Jack15T said:

Thanks for all the replies Folks, big help. It's a shame you can't get the RR in a 18.

Click to expand...

RR 100/90 x 18 are available: https://a.co/d/dkuckT8 but only 6 are in stock right now.

Also https://www.motorsport.com has both 110/90 x 18 and 120/90 x 18 in stock.

What size are you looking for?

Jack15T said:

Thanks for all the replies Folks, big help. It's a shame you can't get the RR in a 18.

Click to expand...

You can - AM26 4.00 - 18 - 64V

o0norton0o said:

I have that exact pairing mounted on my rims right now. Just like concours, I had a RR on the back previously and it wore out fast because it was a universal (front or back) tire, so the tread depth is less than a dedicated rear tire would be...

The pair of RR's front and back had a more confidence inspiring grip. When I replaced the rear RR tire with the battlax it was narrower slightly so I could have gone with a 120 width battlax to replace the 110 wide RR. The battlax is not as soft as the RR and I noticed it right away. After a few weeks of riding around I felt it was good enough but certainly not better than the RR in terms of grip performance.

I got 5 - 6000 miles on the RR rear tire before it was bald down the center. It was a great tire. I had to try the battlax just because I hoped it would be just as good and last 10,000 miles. I think I have only 2000 on it so far and it seems to be wearing OK. I will probably go back to the RR's if they are available. They have the best feel of any tire I've ever used and I think a sport bike in particular should be fitted with the best gripping tire possible...

Click to expand...

I have an 18" x 4.00 RR on the back and it has the deep tread depth as employed on a rear only application.
The diameter matches perfectly with my 19-in RR on the front.

I've often wondered how one tyre knows what type of tyre is on the other end?
I'm not dismissing it it's happened to me just wondering