Originally Posted by offthewall View Post
"I've been reading this thread for a couple of days now and thinking the same thing. Why wouldn't the MoCo put CT's on if they were better and cheaper? " Money. think about it. If they built a bike that didn't need service as often, would they loose customers? no they would loose money. If they used and recommended tires that lasted 2 or 3 times longer then what they use now, would they loose customers? No again, they would loose money. You have to remember the main purpose of Harley's existence is to make money. I've never heard of a properly run company that went out of business because they had too many customers. Just like car mfgrs don't build cars to last forever Harley is no different. When either type vehicle needs alot of work as it ages, most think of buying a new one. Again they will be making money. The more they can improve the bells and whistles with minimal extensions of service intervals, it ensures customers keep coming back and paying for service work. Harley is in the money making business, not the friend making business, or the let me sell you a part that will last forever business.,,

 

Missed the 'wink'? Then again a lot of fat hog riders too...

The REAL reason CTs are not used on motorcycles is they are not DESIGNED for it. The mounting, sidewalls, etc. This is painfully obvious.

Then, they are sure as hell not going to have a CT production line in extremely limited volume for cruisers and another MT for sport touring and sport bikes.

 

If they did, they would cost so much everyone would just stay with the CT's that were working so well to begin with.

 

My original comment was a bit of playing Devil's Advocate. Reported handing and ride improvements can't negate the fact that a CT's bead doesn't match up to a motorcycle wheel.

I stumbled upon this concept of using a CT on a motorcycle quite randomly. I've been reading these threads and forums for days now trying to understand the logic of doing something that on the surface seems so illogical in my mind.

I went in with an open mind but I'm still unconvinced. The mis-matched bead issue is enough to stop me in my tracks from even trying such a thing. I'm still reading to more understand how running up on the sidewall/edge of the relatively flat CT tread can be good for cornering handling or life of the tire.

The admitted adjustment to counter steer input is something I'm also curious about.

 

[QUOTE=offthewall;12194157] . Reported handing and ride improvements can't negate the fact that a CT's bead doesn't match up to a motorcycle wheel.


Mine does. Dimpled VW rim done back in the 70's.

 

Curious, what does that mean exactly? You have a modified VW car rim on your motorcycle?

I really am trying to understand the "dark side" considering so many are so passionate about it.

 

I don't understand what you mean by the statement the bead doesn't match up.

My car tire (General G-Max) installed smoothly with no issues or problems. The bead lined up just fine. It has held so far for about 4000 miles of worry free riding at speeds of up to 105 (just for tire testing purposes!) I have never, never read a thread or seen a news article about a car tire coming off of a motorcycle rim. Period, end of sentence. If you have, please provide a link. I am always interested in learning new things.

The countersteer is no big deal, after a few hundred miles riding with a CT becomes second nature.

Next where did you read that CT climbs up on the sidewall during a turn? It doesn't, simple as that. There are several videos out there showing large bikes with CTs doing twisties at speed and they never climb onto the sidewalls.

Here are a couple of the videos...



Any other questions?

 

That's exactly what it means. It was a common practice back then. You took the center out of a VW rim and took it in and had it "dimpled" to accept spokes. Worked great.

 

Thanks, learn something new every day.

 

The canyon carvers don't use CTs because they lean over quite a ways in the turns. Compare that to a bagger. Can a bagger lean as far as a crotch rocket? Nooooooo. Do I need the tread on the sidewalls of my MT? Nooooooooo, because I don't lean my RG that far because the saddle bags would drag.
So why would I need to worry about the sidewalls on a CT if I don't lean far enough to use them. A low profile CT would work fine on my RG as I'm already using a 55 sidewall on my Avon, then Perelli and now Donlop. I have an FBI 200mm fat tire kit on my bike and if I could find a 195 CT I would buy it for my next tire change.