Shinko 705's en route!

[turbodieseli4i6]

Thanks for the feedback. The style and price does look good, but I would hate changing the rear tire 2-3 times a year, since 99% of my time is on pavement with the NCX.

 

[Yamezz]

For the price, it might be worth trying one to see what sort of mileage you get with your conditions/riding style. I haven't been gentle with mine - fair bit of high speed dirt roads and drifting.

 

[turbodieseli4i6]

I might buy a set for a test run in the future. If they made them in a 120/70-17 and a 16/60-17 I would have a set already.

 

[Nortwestrider]

I might buy a set for a test run in the future. If they made them in a 120/70-17 and a 16/60-17 I would have a set already.

The 150 is hardly any smaller , 10 mm is not much.
They make a 120/17 but it is rated as a " tube type" but most guys on ADV run them tubeless,or you could run a tube.!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bamamate]

I have heard you can run some 'tube types' as tubeless but I have no experience doing that. I have thought about trying it. You wouldn't happen to have links to where that has been done would you?

 

[Nortwestrider]

I have heard you can run some 'tube types' as tubeless but I have no experience doing that. I have thought about trying it. You wouldn't happen to have links to where that has been done would you?

Just search on the web for it,always include at the end. "on ADVrider ".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yamezz]

I have heard you can run some 'tube types' as tubeless but I have no experience doing that. I have thought about trying it. You wouldn't happen to have links to where that has been done would you?

Got a link for you

http://nc700-forum.com/forum/tire-tech-talk/4531-shinko-705s-en-route-post70308.html#post70308

 

[turbodieseli4i6]

The 150 is hardly any smaller , 10 mm is not much.
They make a 120/17 but it is rated as a " tube type" but most guys on ADV run them tubeless,or you could run a tube.!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was more concerned with the height of the tire than the width.
The rear 705 looks like its only 0.710 inches taller than the stock tire so that's not that bad.
The front 705 120/90-17 is 25.51'' tall and the 705 130/80-17 is 25.20'' vs 23.62'' stock. So 1.89'' and 1.58'' difference.

150/70-R17 vs 160/60-R17 Tire Comparison - Tire Size Calculator
120/70-R17 vs 120/90-R17 Tire Comparison - Tire Size Calculator
130/70-R17 vs 120/80-R17 Tire Comparison - Tire Size Calculator

So I would be raising the rear .710'' and the front 1.58'' or 1 89''. That's where I'm having a issue.
I'm not a fan of running tubes.
Thanks for the info!

 

[Fuzzy]

You are looking at tire diameter so actual change in height of bike is half that.

 

[turbodieseli4i6]

Your right, I shouldn't have said raising the rear/front. I should have just said the difference in height between the tires.
The front will gain more than the rear. I'm concerned more with the handling vs the stock, than the bike being taller.

 

[Fuzzy]

So if you think changing half inch different between front and back then it is a problem.

 

[Dominican]

Any report on the mileage people are getting on these 705s?

 

[bamamate]

I don’t think anyone has worn a set out yet. I’m estimating 5-7k on the rear. For reference I got 7k out of the rear Z8 and that was running it until cords were showing. For the price of the tire I can live with a 5k life span.

 

[L.B.S.]

150/70-R17 vs 160/60-R17 Tire Comparison - Tire Size Calculator

That's a handy little tire size calculator, thanks

 

[Zippersdad]

and I've certainly noticed a slowing in steering action.

I put on 705's today, and I have been wondering about this. I haven't ridden on them yet, but after seeing how large the front is in person I'm thinking I may have gone too big.

 

[Yamezz]

For me, the traction benefit outweighs the slower handling.

 

[Zippersdad]

After riding on the 705's for a couple days I have noticed a few things:

1) Handling on pavement is way different than the Pirelli Scorpions I had. It's taking some getting used to. (as expected)

2) They work much better on the loose gravel I came across today. (as hoped for)

3) They look bad a$$!

4) They grip the road better than I expected. I can't wait to see how well they do off road.

5)They raised the seat height more than I thought.

 

[bamamate]

Agree on all of your observations.

They will get you through some mud but not like a knobby. I haven't ran into sand yet so I don't know how they will handle it. I figure like in mud they are better than a more street oriented tire but not as good as a knobby.

One thing I noticed and Bug Dr agreed is on gravel in a turn you can initially get a little slip but then they hook when you get more on the side of the tire. The sides are a more aggressive pattern than the middle of the tire. I found that to also be true in mud.

 

[Ruggybuggy]

A rear is designed the push the bike and a front is designed to have pressure applied in the opposite direction for braking.
Or something like that !!!.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what I always believed.

 

[Bug Dr.]

I will probably try a set on the Tenere. They are so darn cheap it would be hard not to try them. I liked them on the NC well enough I would've bought another set. I do wish they would have had a 120/17 sized front tire. I missed how the bike handled pavement when I switched to the larger front. I only got 3500 miles out of my original rear Z8. I had 3500 miles on the rear 705 when I sold the bike and it looked like they were about half gone. I tend to do more engine breaking than most on the curvy roads which tends to wear the rear faster. If you take it easy on smooth roads, a rider could probably get 10K out of a rear.......at $85 that ain't bad in my book.
Mike