They are a little wider once mounted. If you look at the 160 and the MU90 side by side, the 160 is noticibly larger. I won't be going back to the MU90.

 

tough to get a good shot with the bike leaning over on the side stand.

When I get home tonight, I'll get a pic of a MU90 alongside the rear of my bike.

 

The E3 MU90-16 rear is .06" wider and .01" taller than a stock D402 MU85-16. The front E3 MT90-16 is .04" wider and .3" shorter than a D402 of the same size. You can compare the dimensions here.

 

I got 10k each out of my first two D402 rears, and 20k out of my first E3 rear. My first and only D402 front lasted 25k and could've gone a bit further, but my first E3 front only lasted 18k. This perplexes me, but most get better mileage out of their fronts, so I think my increased emphasis on front braking for routine stops is taking its toll on the front. I've been doing this to take the stress off the rear, which in my experience lasts about half as long as the front. Imagine my total suprise when I got more miles out of my first rear E3 than the front.

Handling is better wet and dry compared to the D402 and groove-tracking is much reduced. So, in my experience this tire has no downside compared to the stockers. Be advised that groove-tracking increases as the E3 wears, but they are always better in this regard than the D402, IMO.

The photo on the left is the E3 rear after 20k miles (about 1/32" in the center), the right photo the present E3 when it had 8500 (about 6/32" in center, new being 10/32"). It is wearing about the same as the previous E3. Dunlop claims 11/32" on a new rear E3, but my gauge says 10/32". I can say unequivocally that I'm very pleased with the wear of the rear E3, and that's an understatement. In reality, I'm downright giddy over it.

 

Having my MT90-16 mounted today, am anxious to see how much better the wet handling is. Was tempted to go with the MU90-16, but given the 130mm was stock on my bike, i was nervous of rubbing.

Also i am only doing the rear at this time, as the front is new due to unfortunate road debris end of last year. Wasn't thinking at the time, and just had the put the stock 402 back. next time the front is due, it will get a matching E3 assuming no issues with the rear between now and then.

 

i am 100 percent sold on the handling and improved mileage of the e3 over stock
front i change at 20k no matter what but the rear gets 50 percent better mileage than oEM tire
mazz

 

10k on mine and the front looks new. Tire pressure?

 

Thanks everyone, great feedback - I'm sold, I'm having a set installed next week!

 

i have used a Dunlop E3 before on my 02 Softail and loved it.. i got more miles out of it then any other tire i ran on it.. i have since sold the Softail and have an 07 Electra Glide now and switched wheels to 21 front and 18 rear. i am running the Michelin Pilot2 on the rear and using a Metzeler me880 on front . the Michelin i have on the Back is Comparible to the Dunlop E3 . i have over 7000 miles on the rear and its still like 1/2 tread on it ... any tire i have ran on the rear i have not gotten more then 6500 miles out of them and i ride very hard for what my bike is.. i have yet to find a Michelin that will fit the front wheel im using .. i personally like the Michelin better then the Dunlop E3 . and Michelin Just came out with a Pilot3 THIS YEAR which is suppose to be updated version of the Pilot2 .. i would consider giving that tire a try as well. i will NOT use anything other then a Pilot2 or 3 now except for the front, i am forced to run the Dunlop E3 since i run a 120-7-21 front tire and Michelin hasnt came out with one that size yet ... soon as my Metzeler wears out i will be running an E3 up front

 

I ran 40 psi rear, 37 front (cold) previously. After my experience with the first front E3 I'm now running 40/40 and am going to use the rear more in routine braking.