OH MAN! Thanks for all the info guys. I was getting set to go have the same stock tires put on my '06 Ultra. After reading all the info you have here, I went right out and ordered a set of E-3's. I ride over 15,000 miles a year so with only 10,000 miles or so out of a rear tire, I felt like I was replacing tires all the time. I shoped around and got the set of two for $221.00 shipped! The local metric dealer wanted $201.00 just for the rear. I will keep you all informed on how they do.

 

I am amazed at the mileage you guys get out of the stockers; I have yet to get 8,000 miles out of one.I am nearing my "no-comfort" zone on my third rear. I have 20,700 miles on my bike. BTW, my original front is still at 4/32+ tread depth. I will definitely be trying the Elite 3's next. Dennis Kirk, of course, since they're only 12 miles from my house.... I probably will give the 160 a shot on the rear....

 

i don't know how they get the 160 to fit, as the mu90b16 was an eighth inch clearance between the rear fender and tire on the right side of my 08 streetglide. perfect fit, and of course the mt 90 16 on the front. great combo and you will not be getting that butt wiggle on rain grooves anymore. made my bike track so much better through curves too. a great improvemt. best price at dennis kirk thogh. rear 112 bux+5 bux shipping. front 94 bux. best prices i've found.

 

Based on Dunlop's specs and my measurements of the MU90 installed on my '07 the 160 won't fit, but two or three have installed them and say they have enough clearance. I won't change from the MU90 since the 160 costs $40 more and I'm frugal (i.e., cheap bastard). If I thought it would last longer I might consider it, but I don't think it will with its slightly shallower tread depth.

 

Went on a 2 day 650 mile ride with the wifey and new E3's. MT90B16 front and MU90B16 rear. They seem to be great tires in both wet and dry conditions. Rode part of the WET Blue Ridge Parkway and on the twisty RT 43 going up hill to the Parkway from Buchanan, VA, and then down the hill on RT 43, they stuck to the road nicely.

Only drawback I can mention is it sounds like the front tire makes a very slight noise (kinda like a truck tire roar) when the bike is vertical but goes away with a slight lean angle (like changing lanes). Not bothersome but noticeable. So far so good!

 

I have a set ordered from D Kirk, really looking foward to getting them on, heading out on a 5000 mile tri mid June, so I'll know if I like them by the time I get back, heck I must have a terrible riding style since my rears would be pretty slick at 8000 miles, fronts ablout 15k, sounds like the E3 will up those numbers by quite a bit and everyone says they handle great, win-win, can't beat that.

 

So is the mu90b16 E3 bigger than the stock rear tire on a 08 SG? I am going to order just don't know if I want the mu or the 160?

 

Slightly taller, not sure about the width.
The E3 actually made my odometer read correctly.

 

i try not to fix things until they are broken (doesn't always work though) so i think i will stay with the mu vs the 160. plus, like iclick, i'm a cheap bastage as well.

i know lp showed pics of the different sizes, but i feel that unless the tire is actually mounted on a rim, then pics only tell half the story. and since i never ride 2 up, the increased load rating on the 160 is not necessary for me.

either way, i think we can all agree the e3 is a great tire.

olde skool-not sure about the noise that you are getting from your front tire. mine is whisper quiet...

 

It's .06" wider, .01" taller.