Question(s) regarding motorcycle tires

[Canonb4me]

Being it seems like there are a lot of flats with the stock RAD Rover 6+ tires, have any of you moved to motorcycle tires?  Does RAD approve these for use or are there contraindications to using them?  Are they a lot harder to pedal?

[handlebar]

Being it seems like there are a lot of flats with the stock RAD Rover 6+ tires, have any of you moved to motorcycle tires?  Does RAD approve these for use or are there contraindications to using them?  Are they a lot harder to pedal?

Is the ISO size on the sidewall? If it's 100-559, that translates to 4.00 x 22". If you could find such a motorcycle tire, maybe it wouldn't mount properly, anyway. Rolling resistance could well be higher. A fraction of a horsepower could be a killer for a bicyclist but insignificant for a motorcyclist.

I have a Radrunner with 3.3 x 20" tires, and I'm disillusioned. I had imagined that modern tire construction would mean I could run fat tires at cushy pressures without much resistance. I was wrong. Fat tires were developed so that someone racing down a mountain would have better control on deep gravel. Their subsequent popularity seems to come down to fashion.

For a decade, I rode on 1-3/8 x 26" with little trouble except to replace worn-out tires. My brother raced. His tires had amazingly low rolling resistance, but he may have had to fix a hundred times more punctures. Kenda may have designed your tire light and thin to be a fat tire without discouragingly high resistance.

Your tires and mine have 30 threads per inch. One major manufacturer says 60 TPI is usually optimum for low rolling resistance (which means longer wear), puncture resistance, and durability against objects on the pavement. On the other hand, 120 TPI can mean two different things. It can mean finer threads for a racing tire, with low rolling resistance and low puncture resistance. It can also mean two 60 TPI layers, for more durability and puncture resistance.

That article said 30 TPI tires are budget tires, with high rolling resistance, short service lives, and poor puncture resistance. I don't know if these Kenda tires are somehow exceptions, but a 60 TPI tire might have fewer flats and low rolling resistance.

[NaturallyRC]

To quote the web: "Fat tires were developed so that bikes could become all-terrain compatible...allow the bikes to have more stability and traction on diverse (including flat) surfaces...snow, mud, sand..." Here in Canada, they have extended the riding season exponentially for thousands of riders. But I do agree that a lot of people pedaling fat tires have been sold a bill of goods, and would be better off with narrower rubber. Motorcycle tires have even more rolling resistance, and inertia to overcome that fat bicycle tires, making them essentially impossible to pedal without a lot of assistance. That said, a lot of ebike riders just crank the throttle and consider pedals footrests. If that's you (not judging) fat tires are fine.

Fat tires were developed so that someone racing down a mountain would have better control on deep gravel. Their subsequent popularity seems to come down to fashion.

[handlebar]

When you say they extended the riding season in Canada, are you talking about snow? As a teen in Vermont, I rode a bike with 1-3/8 x 26" tires year round. It handled okay but could be tiring in fresh snow more than 5" deep. Then for years I depended on BMW touring bikes, including a winter in Alaska, where I'd ride to town on packed snow, like a snowmobile. (The only problem I recall was that the air-cooled engine might not get hot enough to drive condensation from the crankcase.)

I expected such versatility when I bought a Radrunner. When winter came, I read on the web that it had been declared the best ebike on snow. Then it snowed and sleeted 5" here. My Radrunner was the worst thing I'd ever ridden on snow. With its round cross section, the front tire would ride up on the snow when I tried to steer, like hydroplaning. I had to reduce the pressure to 10 PSI so the cross section wouldn't be round. Rolling resistance was terrible, and I'm sure it was bad for the tire. A different tire might have made a big difference, but there's not much choice in 3.3 x 20".

In the 1880s, when modern bikes became available, people like Augustus Pope (Columbia) and George Hendee (Indian) would arrange races on soft tracks to prove high-wheelers were faster. On a soft surface, a wheel with a bigger diameter will generally ride higher, with less resistance and better traction. Some mountain bikes use 62-622. I'd love to try one.

To quote the web: "Fat tires were developed so that bikes could become all-terrain compatible...allow the bikes to have more stability and traction on diverse (including flat) surfaces...snow, mud, sand..." Here in Canada, they have extended the riding season exponentially for thousands of riders. But I do agree that a lot of people pedaling fat tires have been sold a bill of goods, and would be better off with narrower rubber. Motorcycle tires have even more rolling resistance, and inertia to overcome that fat bicycle tires, making them essentially impossible to pedal without a lot of assistance. That said, a lot of ebike riders just crank the throttle and consider pedals footrests. If that's you (not judging) fat tires are fine.

Fat tires were developed so that someone racing down a mountain would have better control on deep gravel. Their subsequent popularity seems to come down to fashion.

[Radio Runner]

Fat tires were developed (by Surly) for all those stated reasons however they were developed for pedal power only. At the time they had the same "look and fashion" as now but the customer being the engine felt the immediate energy sapping physics they have on pavement at low pressures.

Now the customer can have the look and the (battery) power with no cost to ego.

This unfortunately has become the great ebike sales pitch. Fat tires are very inefficient and it's a shame it's become the most popular design because it's affected availability of quality tire selection when trying to modify a given stock model.

Original Surly fat bikes also had NO suspension because once again, you were the motor. Also a 3.5 inch wide tire is a huge amount of suspension in the grand scheme of things. 

[NaturallyRC]

You said it. 👍

energy sapping physics they have on pavement at low pressures.

[Eric7]

I just urge everyone to consider sealants.

I added sealants as soon as I got my Rad Mini ST.  250 miles later, I've had no flats and I've never pumped up the tires.  I do quite a bit of trail riding and also ride on city streets on the side of the road where there are all sorts of debris.  Of course, I fully understand some people who have flat problems - but I am not one of them and maybe you are not one of them too. It is a problem that does not exist for me and I don't need motorcycle tires.

[santacruzpaul]

I just urge everyone to consider sealants.

I added sealants as soon as I got my Rad Mini ST.  250 miles later, I've had no flats and I've never pumped up the tires.  I do quite a bit of trail riding and also ride on city streets on the side of the road where there are all sorts of debris.  Of course, I fully understand some people who have flat problems - but I am not one of them and maybe you are not one of them too. It is a problem that does not exist for me and I don't need motorcycle tires.

Eric, What kind of sealant do you use?
Thanks, Paul