Michelin Pilot Road and Trail 4's

[Koinz]

Just ordered a pair of pilot road 4's as a replacement to the Bridgestones.
I went with the standard "road" tire for the rear because it has a slightly harder compound in the center and the Trail tire for the front mostly because the others don't come in the 19" size.

All the reviews I've read on the Pilot Tires in general have been good, so I figured I'd go through a set to judge for myself. Total cost 317.97 that includes 3oz of dyna beads.

 

[avc8130]

You'll enjoy them on the pavement...especially if you get caught in the rain.

ac

 

[jaeger22]

Interesting that you got the standard and not the trail on the rear. I have been thinking of doing the same. I can not understand why they made the trail softer. :question: This is a 600 LB bike with right at 100 HP and it is supposed to be a road only tire. So why does it need a softer tire than the equivalent size sport touring bike? I want this tire for long, pure road trips and my main concern is mileage. I don't want to have to change tires on the road and I expect to hit 8 to 10K miles on my next Orlando/Portland/Orlando run. Last year I did it on a Road Pilot 3 and it worked great so I was think the RP 4 this year but have been holding off buying because of the whole soft center trail thing.
Anyone have any good theories?
So let us know how the standard works out for you. I think you are going to like it.
John

 

[Koinz]

Interesting that you got the standard and not the trail on the rear. I have been thinking of doing the same. I can not understand why they made the trail softer. :question: This is a 600 LB bike with right at 100 HP and it is supposed to be a road only tire. So why does it need a softer tire than the equivalent size sport touring bike? I want this tire for long, pure road trips and my main concern is mileage. I don't want to have to change tires on the road and I expect to hit 8 to 10K miles on my next Orlando/Portland/Orlando run. Last year I did it on a Road Pilot 3 and it worked great so I was think the RP 4 this year but have been holding off buying because of the whole soft center trail thing.
Anyone have any good theories?
So let us know how the standard works out for you. I think you are going to like it.
John

They say the Trail is for Adventure bikes and the Road is for touring bikes. I don't think the tire will know the difference? ;D In other words, I don't know why either.

 

[frez]

There might be a load assumed. There are GT, Trail and standard versions of the PR4. Our rear tyre is only available in standard and trail, but the trail version "may" be designed for higher loads (like the GT) than the standard version. Clutching at straws for a reason really.

 

[jaeger22]

Posted by: frez
« on: Today at 01:10:15 pm »


There might be a load assumed. There are GT, Trail and standard versions of the PR4. Our rear tyre is only available in standard and trail, but the trail version "may" be designed for higher loads (like the GT) than the standard version. Clutching at straws for a reason really.

Good point but I don't see how that relates to the softer compound. If anything I would think the sport touring guys would need the softer compound for the "sport" aspect.

 

[Koinz]

From what I read, the GT is the one with the Stiffer Sidewalls for heavier bikes and it's the Standard Tire now for the BMW RT. My only thought is they assume that the rear is not as loaded down on an adventure bike, so a stickier compound is needed for traction while the 2-up Touring bikes need more support. I'm almost always loaded up on trips, but usually only 1-up. I really like the dual compound idea though. you want it to stick in the twisties and wet roads.

 

[jaeger22]

Yep, I agree with the softer on the sides for more traction in the turns. But I really want hard rubber in the middle because on these long road trips with lots of boring highway miles, I end up with a squared off tire that is 90% worn in the center but fresh on the sides. I expect the standard will last much longer than the Trail version but I keep thinking there must be a reason they went with the softer mid section on the Trail. I am no tire expert so there may be something I just don't know about it but it just makes no sense to me.

 

[Nimbus]

I have a PR3 Trail on the front and a PR3 (not trail) on the rear. It has been an exceptional tire. I've got right at 10K on the set and am basically now at the wear bar in the rear. The tires have more stick than the bike has ground clearance. I'll buy another set for sure (as soon as I wear out the TKCs I bought to play with).

 

[jimbob]

Yep, I agree with the softer on the sides for more traction in the turns. But I really want hard rubber in the middle because on these long road trips with lots of boring highway miles, I end up with a squared off tire that is 90% worn in the center but fresh on the sides. I expect the standard will last much longer than the Trail version but I keep thinking there must be a reason they went with the softer mid section on the Trail. I am no tire expert so there may be something I just don't know about it but it just makes no sense to me.

I'm the opposite. I've always been impressed with PR's 2's and 3's on my other bikes (especially in the wet) but it's rare I do any interstate so I always ended up wearing the sides off with plenty of meat left in the center. I went with the PR3 Trail on the rear for the S10 hoping for more even wear. I'm less concerned with longevity and more concerned with grip/handling. Not enough miles on my Trail 3 rear for a verdict in the wear department but once again, the PR's have impressed me as an exceptional handling road tire. Anxious to hear how the 4's work out for you guys...

 

[Koinz]

I have a PR3 Trail on the front and a PR3 (not trail) on the rear. It has been an exceptional tire. I've got right at 10K on the set and am basically now at the wear bar in the rear. The tires have more stick than the bike has ground clearance. I'll buy another set for sure (as soon as I wear out the TKCs I bought to play with).

So this is the setup I'll have for the pr4's. How does the rear tire look. Can you post a picture of both with that mileage.

 

[Rasher]

I rarely find a rear tyre I don't like, fronts are an altogether different matter.

I would imagine a "touring" style tyre would be more than adequate for 99% of riders, but I like the maximum grip I can get up front as this is what will almost certainly go first when I make a mistake. With modern dual compound technology I really cannot see why tyres with decent grip and a long life cannot be made - except the manufacturers would end up selling less and it is not in their interest to do this and they would rather soften the edges than harden the middle.

 

[krussell]

I've got about 2k miles on a set of P4s. I bought the trail version front and rear. I had TKC-80s on before these, so quite a change. I've got a bunch of road miles in the next month or so I decided to pull the TKC-80s, they only had 1k, mount these up, then go back to TKC-80s when I'm done with all the road stuff. All but about 20 miles has been dry pavement. On the gravel, they felt, umm, like road tires on gravel. I love 'em on pavement, I'll likely run these Nov - Feb. We'll how they square off. I ran PR3s on an BMW RT right after they came out, and one set on my K1600. The front cupped on the RT, but I think that it was the bike. They were great on the K1600, the only downside was the rear was done at 5k. So far the P4s look to be a worthy successor.

 

[justbob]

I finished off a pair of PR3's last week with a trip to the Ozarks. I am very pleased with everything about the front tire. The wear pattern on this tire was perfect thru 12000 miles, at that time the feathering started and now at 15600 miles there is still tread remaining but the feathering is to the point that the handling is gone. This kind of mileage is unheard of for me.
The PR3 rear handles great but the mileage is not what I had hoped for. Yesterday on the 400 mile ride home from the Ozarks I kept a close eye on the tire, watching for cord to show as the rubber had been wearing away fast while enjoying the rolling hills and curves of the Ozarks. Now at 5400 miles the rear is bald across the middle 3" of the tread.
I have another front PR3 waiting on the shelf and a PR4 rear ready to mount.

 

[Torque6988]

I have been thru 2 sets of RP3. They stick and handle very well but only got 5,000 miles out of each rear tire.

 

[jimmy z]

My pr3 rear also bald thru center at 6k replaced it today.I also thought it would last longer.Loved the tire while it lasted.Onto metzler marathon 880 reinforced.Jim

 

[twinrider]

I've got 12000 miles on my Anakee 3 rear, probably will last a little more before it's finished. Still cornering nicely. Got 8700 miles out of the front.

Am a bit interested in the PR4s but am waiting to see what kind of mileage folks get out of them.

 

[Kiwi Graham]

I'll be replacing the standard rubber with the Michelin PR4 trails.
Ive had the PR series of tyres on several bikes now and really have confidence in them.
The only bike they didnt agree with was a Kawasaki Concourse 1400, plety of grip but they were muntered in 3000K. I think the bike was too heavy and the power to much for them to cope.

 

[Maxified]

I used the PR2 on my ST1300 and got 5000-6000 miles on the rear tire. Getting only 3000K would make my wallet cry out in anguish. I am going to be running a lot of road miles this summer so I believe I might try the PR4s. The K60's currently mounted with 14K miles just won't die...

 

[twinrider]

My Anakee 3s outlasted my K60s by a long margin, no comparison in onroad grip and handling either.