moron race

[Louklr@aol.com]

I believe some of you on the list have tried the Kenda K270 tires. What kind of riding do you do and would you recommend them? Thanks in advance. Louie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Tengai650]

At 6:04 PM -0500 11/12/01, Louklr@... wrote:

>I believe some of you on the list have tried the Kenda K270 tires. What kind >of riding do you do and would you recommend them? Thanks in advance. >Louie

Although I've like some other tires, the K270 is still my preferred tire for true 50/50 riding and the best value in my opinion. Mark B2 A2 A3

[RM]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 Louklr@... wrote:

>I believe some of you on the list have tried the Kenda K270 tires. >What kind of riding do you do and would you recommend them?

I think that these tires are about as aggressive as you can get and still maintain decent treadlife. Tires like the D606 and the MT21 are probably better in the dirt but they won't last as long and they cost quite a bit more. As for the type of riding I do, most of it is running down the freeway at 75-85mph going to work, the rest is riding to/from rocky hard-condition trails, and (of course) the trails themselves. I wouldn't hesitate to cross the country on these tires. RM

[Bill]

I couldn't agree more. I have 6,000 miles on my current set and they look like they'd go a few thousand miles further. I put them on before a 3,000 mile trip into Mexico. Initially they felt heavier and took some adjustment but they preformed flawlessly when I hit the rough stuff. I know we crossed most of the Chihuahuan Desert at 80-85 mph without any problems. They're cheap...easy to mount...durable...and they felt stable on wet road. I'll be buying them again. They were shipped to my front door for less than $90 a set. I've paid more for mountain bike tires.

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., RM wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 Louklr@a... wrote: > > >I believe some of you on the list have tried the Kenda K270 tires. > >What kind of riding do you do and would you recommend them? > > I think that these tires are about as aggressive as you can get and still > maintain decent treadlife. Tires like the D606 and the MT21 are probably > better in the dirt but they won't last as long and they cost quite a bit > more. > > As for the type of riding I do, most of it is running down the freeway at > 75-85mph going to work, the rest is riding to/from rocky hard- condition > trails, and (of course) the trails themselves. I wouldn't hesitate to > cross the country on these tires. > > RM

[roja_dude@yahoo.com]

Great input- I think I might try these tires as well. If the MT-21 or D606 is a 90/10 (dirt) tire, how would you rate the Kenda? 50/50? If these get more than twice the life of an MT-21 and provide almost (?) as good grip on the road (at half the price), then I'm sold! Thanks, Roja 90 dr350s

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., "Bill " wrote: > I couldn't agree more. I have 6,000 miles on my current set and > they look like they'd go a few thousand miles further. I put them > on before a 3,000 mile trip into Mexico. Initially they felt > heavier and took some adjustment but they preformed flawlessly when I > hit the rough stuff. I know we crossed most of the Chihuahuan > Desert at 80-85 mph without any problems. They're cheap...easy to > mount...durable...and they felt stable on wet road. I'll be buying > them again. They were shipped to my front door for less than $90 a > set. I've paid more for mountain bike tires. > > > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., RM wrote: > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 Louklr@a... wrote: > > > > >I believe some of you on the list have tried the Kenda K270 tires. > > >What kind of riding do you do and would you recommend them? > > > > I think that these tires are about as aggressive as you can get and > still > > maintain decent treadlife. Tires like the D606 and the MT21 are > probably > > better in the dirt but they won't last as long and they cost quite > a bit > > more. > > > > As for the type of riding I do, most of it is running down the > freeway at > > 75-85mph going to work, the rest is riding to/from rocky hard- > condition > > trails, and (of course) the trails themselves. I wouldn't hesitate > to > > cross the country on these tires. > > > > RM

[John Irvine]

I feel lucky to get 4000 out of a Kenda, still worthwhile, I'd call it a 50/50 I guess. --- roja_dude@... wrote:

> Great input- I think I might try these tires as > well. If the MT-21 > or D606 is a 90/10 (dirt) tire, how would you rate > the Kenda? 50/50? > If these get more than twice the life of an MT-21 > and provide almost > (?) as good grip on the road (at half the price), > then I'm sold! > > Thanks, > Roja > 90 dr350s > > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., "Bill " > wrote: > > I couldn't agree more. I have 6,000 miles on my > current set and > > they look like they'd go a few thousand miles > further. I put them > > on before a 3,000 mile trip into Mexico. > Initially they felt > > heavier and took some adjustment but they > preformed flawlessly when > I > > hit the rough stuff. I know we crossed most of > the Chihuahuan > > Desert at 80-85 mph without any problems. > They're cheap...easy to > > mount...durable...and they felt stable on wet > road. I'll be buying > > them again. They were shipped to my front door > for less than $90 > a > > set. I've paid more for mountain bike tires. > > > > > > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., RM wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 Louklr@a... wrote: > > > > > > >I believe some of you on the list have tried > the Kenda K270 > tires. > > > >What kind of riding do you do and would you > recommend them? > > > > > > I think that these tires are about as aggressive > as you can get > and > > still > > > maintain decent treadlife. Tires like the D606 > and the MT21 are > > probably > > > better in the dirt but they won't last as long > and they cost > quite > > a bit > > > more. > > > > > > As for the type of riding I do, most of it is > running down the > > freeway at > > > 75-85mph going to work, the rest is riding > to/from rocky hard- > > condition > > > trails, and (of course) the trails themselves. > I wouldn't > hesitate > > to > > > cross the country on these tires. > > > > > > RM > > > Checkout Dual Sport News at > http://www.dualsportnews.com > Be part of the Adventure! > > Visit the KLR650 archives at > http://www.listquest.com/lq/search.html?ln=klr650 > > Post message: DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com > Subscribe: DSN_klr650-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > Unsubscribe: DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > List owner: DSN_klr650-owner@yahoogroups.com > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.yahoo.com

[Harvy Mushman]

Which size fits the KLR front and rear. Is the correct size for the front the 3.25x21, and the rear 5.10x17? I'm currently using Continental TKC-80's, but am interested in these Kenda's since everyone seems to have good things to say about them. Thanks, Harv *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Message: 1 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 11:52:02 -0000 From: "Bill " Subject: Re: Kenda K270's? I couldn't agree more. I have 6,000 miles on my current set and they look like they'd go a few thousand miles further. I put them on before a 3,000 mile trip into Mexico. Initially they felt heavier and took some adjustment but they preformed flawlessly when I hit the rough stuff. I know we crossed most of the Chihuahuan Desert at 80-85 mph without any problems. They're cheap...easy to mount...durable...and they felt stable on wet road. I'll be buying them again. They were shipped to my front door for less than $90 a set. I've paid more for mountain bike tires.

[Stu]

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., Harvy Mushman wrote:

> Which size fits the KLR front and rear. Is the correct size for

the front

> the 3.25x21, and the rear 5.10x17?

Yup, or 3.00 x 21 for the front. I run the 3.25 X 21 myself. A fine tire at a great price. I can't believe it. CA Stu

[Tengai650]

At 5:31 PM -0600 11/13/01, Harvy Mushman wrote:

>Which size fits the KLR front and rear. Is the correct size for the front >the 3.25x21, and the rear 5.10x17? I'm currently using Continental >TKC-80's, but am interested in these Kenda's since everyone seems to have >good things to say about them.

On the front, 3.00x21 or 3.25x21 .... I've tried them both, and apart from the higher price tag, I don't see any advantage with the 3.25, so I'm going to save myself $6 and stick with the 3.00. I use a 5.10 on the back. Which make me wonder, can I run a 4.60 on the rear? I just scored a new one real cheap. If not, I'll slap it on my wife's XT. Mark B2 A2 A3

[RM]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Tengai650 wrote:

>On the front, 3.00x21 or 3.25x21 .... I've tried them both, and apart >from the higher price tag, I don't see any advantage with the 3.25, so >I'm going to save myself $6 and stick with the 3.00.

Do you ride over rocks? The 3.25 provides extra floatation over the rough stuff. If I still lived on the east coast or in the midwest I'd probably stay with the 3.00.