Shinko 705

[TacomaJD]

Price may have a lot to do with it. Prices at Americanmototire:

Conti TKC 70 160/60-17 $194.04
Shinko 705 150/70-17 $83.37

That's a significant difference in price. Being sort of a parsimonious (look up that word!) kind of person, I know which one I would probably buy.

Whoa, big difference! Sure is a sweet looking tire though.

One can't be parsimonious while owning a Goldwing as well as other motorcycles. You are just a wise consumer. Lol

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[rippin209]

Whoa, big difference! Sure is a sweet looking tire though.

One can't be parsimonious while owning a Goldwing as well as other motorcycles. You are just a wise consumer. Lol

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

If your not as concerned about price check out the Avon Trail Riders, the on road capabilities are better and they handle off road better then you'd think by looking at them

 

[Rapturee]

True'dat Ripp. There's a guy on another forum (adv) tht runs them and really likes them a lot. Claims he gets better traction on we and or cold pavement with them, but they are expensive compared to the 705's. Both the TKC, 705 and the Avons have all made trips to Alaska and all seem to wear quite well.

I know for me, i wanted the best(wear/handling) 75/25 tire i could get for the lowest price and the 705's won in my book. I have a pair of them on my NC now and an so far quite happy with them. Now, let's see what kind of wear i am going to get out of them. If all goes well i will run a new pair of them for my ride to Alaska next year. If not, then i'll try a different rear tire. :{)

 

[Afan]

According to Honda NC manual, the front tire size is 120/70-17 - but can't see anybody's using this size for Shinko 705?
Why? What am I missing?
Partzilla
Amazon
American Moto Tire

 

[TacomaJD]

According to Honda NC manual, the front tire size is 120/70-17 - but can't see anybody's using this size for Shinko 705?
Why? What am I missing?
Partzilla
Amazon
American Moto Tire

Rapturee is running 120/70/17. Maybe that size hasn't been out long so others were forced to choose a different size? Or think a wider, taller tire works better offroad, which I believe would perform worse. Well maybe not taller, but wider would perform worse.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[670cc]

According to Honda NC manual, the front tire size is 120/70-17 - but can't see anybody's using this size for Shinko 705?
Why? What am I missing?
Partzilla
Amazon
American Moto Tire

The Shinko 705 front I bought and ran is/was a 120/70-17. It fit just fine. As long as the stock size was available, I saw no need to run a different size. I bought it two years ago at americanmototire.

 

[Jt105]

I recently bought the 120/70. It is readily available.
I believe when the NC700X was introduced in 2012 the 130 size was all that was available and people made due with it. Now that the 120 size is here, most everyone is using the 120.

JT

 

[Junkie]

So the Shinko 705 140/80-17 tube type tire works OK mounted tubeless? No air leaks? Would it break loose from the rim easier if the pressure gets low? I wasn’t sure how that would work.

on my supermotos I run a tubeless tire on a tube-type rim that I've converted to tubeless and haven't had any issues. I've done so for a few years with no issues. Of course, tube rim + tubeless tire is opposite of tubeless rim + tube tire.

I can’t answer your question as to whether that particular rear tire will function as a front, but on some tires there are specific reasons why a tire is a front vs rear. The tread splice direction (for strength) and tread pattern direction (for water dispersal) come in to play. The tire is generally loaded most heavily in the opposite direction when it’s on front vs rear. Would you reverse the mount direction arrow or leave it the same? I would look to the tire manufacturer for answers to those questions, not just assume the rear can be a front.

My recollection is that the 130/80 705 is intended to be run in opposite directions on front vs rear.

I notice that with the tube-type 705 sometimes says a given size is front or rear compatible.

the 130/80 is rated for tubeless and front/rear.

 

[Rapturee]

120/70-17" on the front and i am very happy with it so far. :{)

 

[Afan]

This morning my first commute to work on Shinkos (about 40 miles on I-80, 15 miles on US-6, and 5 miles city streets) - scary. They do kinda "dive in" as somebody described (Dave?) Need some time to get used to it.

Although, felt couple times the handlebar was slightly wobbling ?!?

View attachment 38890

 

[670cc]

This morning my first commute to work on Shinkos (about 40 miles on I-80, 15 miles on US-6, and 5 miles city streets) - scary. They do kinda "dive in" as somebody described (Dave?) Need some time to get used to it.

Although, felt couple times the handlebar was slightly wobbling ?!?

Maybe the quick turn-in is a Shinko brand characteristic. I found that a new Shinko Raven street tire does the same thing and takes 500 miles of riding to get accustomed to or for the tire to return to “normal”. The only handling quirk I noticed with the 705 is that they squirm around on tar snakes, sort of like the feeling of riding a metal grate bridge.

 

[Rapturee]

Oh yes, they do not like Tar Snakes and neither did my Conti-Motions. I nearly dumped the NC wearing Conti's on a section of Tar Snakes coming down the Lewiston grade and almost took the scenic route haha! :{)

 

[D_SC]

I think both those are too tall. The front is +1.57" and the rear +0.71" As you know, fitting larger diameter tires make the speedo read slow.

Right, lets break it down further.
I measured the sidewall height on my slightly squared Pilot road 4's 160/60's, unsure of mileage, looks like they could last another 1.5k. From the apex of the tread with a square, caliper, and my eye I measure the total height from bead as 90mm. The tires brand new spec is 96mm. 90mm is 93% of original. Does this mean the speedo would show 7% faster speed...

View attachment 38945

60mph x .07 = 4.2mph add difference 64.2/60 = 107% speedo reading
​

A 150/70 brand new is 105mm tall that's 9% taller than a 160/60

60mph x .09 = 5.4mph subtract difference 54.6/60 = 91% of actual speedo reading​

How many miles or milimeters till a 150/70 will read true speed? also speedos are not very accurate anyways

 

[Randy99CL]

How many miles or milimeters till a 150/70 will read true speed? also speedos are not very accurate anyways

The problem is that the math is exact but the tires are not. I've learned only use the numbers for a rough estimate.
The actual size of tires varies according to manufacturer and style/profile. And mileage, inflation, weight of bike etc.

At some point I mount my Garmin to the bike/car and compare my speedo (at different speeds) to that.

 

[Rapturee]

I use the gearing commander for tire/sprocket changes, It it pretty accurate. Like you mentioned, i never really cared anyway as i always use my Garmin Montana or GPS on my phone for accurate speed measurement. With my 17T/39T and 140/80-17", my speedo is running almost exactly 19.5% slow. SO, with that in mind, now you know. :{P

 

[TacomaJD]

Ran across this in my research for cruiser tires for my Nomad. Dang Shinkos! No way, Jose!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[670cc]

A Shinko 777 looks like the picture below, according to the Shinko web site.


A little credibility is being lost in that message, because a 777 tire is not what I’m seeing in that photo in post#37. It looks more like a 705. Plus, there’s a lot of info missing surrounding the incident, like proper sizing, application, tire pressures, etc. Having used three different Shinko tire models myself in various applications with no trouble whatsoever, I’m not scared.

 

[TacomaJD]

A Shinko 777 looks like the picture below, according to the Shinko web site.
View attachment 39146

A little credibility is being lost in that message, because a 777 tire is not what I’m seeing in that photo in post#37. It looks more like a 705. Plus, there’s a lot of info missing surrounding the incident, like proper sizing, application, tire pressures, etc. Having used three different Shinko tire models myself in various applications with no trouble whatsoever, I’m not scared.

I should have clarified. Shinko 777 was what the thread topic was initially based around, as the OP was complaining of very poor tire wear out of a supposed long lasting model (777) on his Harley. Like half shot rear tire in a matter of a few months. Then another guy posted the pic of the 705 as a reference to Shinko's quality, or lack thereof. Which is why I posted it in the 705 thread here. Figured as hot of a tire as the 705 is here, there would be some interest in a pic of one with tread lugs blown off of it. Bet that made for a bumpy/scary ride from 70mph to a stop. Lol

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Dellaster]

I had a Continental Vanco2 tire detread off my motorhome at speed. Scary. I went and got new Continental Vanco2 tires. Stuff happens; a singular incident is meaningless when the internet isn’t full of such reports—as it would be if Continental tires sucked.

I’m not at all deterred from buying Shinko tires by that anecdote & photo.

 

[TacomaJD]

I'd wager the issue rate among Shinko tires is statistically higher than most other brands, but I don't have the time or resources to perform such broad analysis, so at this point it's barely anything more than an semi-educated opinion.

If a company sells 100,000 tires and have a 10% problem rate, that's 10,000 customers that will probably never buy another Shinko, but 90,000 that will likely swear by them. Whereas a company like Michelin or Dunlop might only have a 2% or less problem rate. (Fabricated numbers to illustrate my point)

I did not post that to try to dissuade any from buying them, simply sharing info, as its always better to be informed. My personal opinion is and has always been that I won't buy anything Shinko just based off what I've seen/read over the years. But obviously every tire they make doesn't suck or they wouldn't still be in business. However, if Shinko thought they were producing high quality tires, they'd have them priced up closer to the rest of the market. The main thing Shinko has going for them is the significantly low price. If price wasn't involved and side by side comparisons were done with other brands across the board, nothing Shinko makes would be toward the top of the list. To a certain degree, the phrase "you get what you pay for" will forever ring true because no for-profit company is going to sell a product at dirt cheap prices out of the goodness of their hearts. Price is determined by what the company thinks the customer will pay for their product as compared to other products on the market.

No harm meant, just my opinion, nobody has to agree with it.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk