Dunlop tyres
- Peter Mac
- Expert
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:58 pm
- Location: chichester, west sussex
Dunlop tyres
Does anybody know were i can buy a set of gold seal tyres for my 70 h1 ... Z power dont list them anymore 
-
BIG H
- Expert
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:52 pm
- Location: SITTINGBOURNE,KENT.
- Peter Mac
- Expert
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:58 pm
- Location: chichester, west sussex
-
BIG H
- Expert
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:52 pm
- Location: SITTINGBOURNE,KENT.
`g6mow` is showing some classic style tyres on his site made by `KINGS`.
http://www.kawasakitripleparts.com/inde ... =55&page=1
.
http://www.kawasakitripleparts.com/inde ... =55&page=1
.
-
BIG H
- Expert
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:52 pm
- Location: SITTINGBOURNE,KENT.
Some vintage style tyres here.
http://www.heidenautires.com/vintage-motorcycle-tires
http://www.reifenwerk-heidenau.de/?lang=en
.
http://www.heidenautires.com/vintage-motorcycle-tires
http://www.reifenwerk-heidenau.de/?lang=en
.
Last edited by BIG H on Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
robh1f
- Expert
- Posts: 3030
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Essex Coast
I've looked mate and came up with Cheng Shin aka Maxxis who do a period looking back tyre 4.00x18 @ £44.00 but not 3.25x19 for front ........they do a ribbed one for that............I want K87s for the 69
. Let us know what you go with ,the k70s look good and its not as if its gonna get ridden at 100mph + everywhere..............or is it 
-
Clive
- Expert
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:04 pm
- Location: Colchester, Essex
I'm sure Z Power sell a new K87 for the rear and here's a link for a good used front K77.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kawasaki-H1-Use ... 4607d6531a
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kawasaki-H1-Use ... 4607d6531a
- BrynP
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:13 am
- Location: Aberystwyth, Cymru
Dunlop tyres
Dunlop Europe, and therefore Dunlop UK doesn't import the OE-spec F11 and K87 in classic sizes. Any you see for sale in the UK are as a result of dealers importing them independently.
When I was at Dunlop I made enquiries about several sizes that dealers had requested, only to be told by Dunlop Japan that they were not E-marked so not available to us. (Tyres have to be E-marked to be legal for sale for road use over here). I'm not saying this is the case with these two sizes but it would always be worth asking the supplying dealer.
Dunlop would also argue that the demand for these sizes is limited and they already have the K81 TT100 and K70 in their range for the classic market.
By the way, the K70 range carries different speed ratings dependent on size. The 3.25-19 and 3.50-19 are P speed rated, i.e. up to 93mph. The 4.00-18 rear is S rated, which is 112mph.
Sorry to drone on but it's also worth pointing out that the 19 inch K70s are actually intended for rear wheel use only (common Brit bike sizes) but many people also fit them on front wheels and even Dunlop supplied them to Triumph in the 1970s for front wheel fitment on T120s and T140s.
K81 TT100s are H speed rated for speeds up to 130mph so are a better bet for the 500 and 750. They also qualify as being "period" because they were launched in 1969.
The only thing that confuses people with the K81 TT100 are the sizes. This is because they are 90% aspect ratio imperial-sized tyres; a form of sizing that was fairly short-lived. The equivalents of 3.25-19 and 4.00-18 are 3.60-19 and 4.25/85-18 respectively.
I won't go into how this came about because I'm sure you all have better things to do with your lives!
When I was at Dunlop I made enquiries about several sizes that dealers had requested, only to be told by Dunlop Japan that they were not E-marked so not available to us. (Tyres have to be E-marked to be legal for sale for road use over here). I'm not saying this is the case with these two sizes but it would always be worth asking the supplying dealer.
Dunlop would also argue that the demand for these sizes is limited and they already have the K81 TT100 and K70 in their range for the classic market.
By the way, the K70 range carries different speed ratings dependent on size. The 3.25-19 and 3.50-19 are P speed rated, i.e. up to 93mph. The 4.00-18 rear is S rated, which is 112mph.
Sorry to drone on but it's also worth pointing out that the 19 inch K70s are actually intended for rear wheel use only (common Brit bike sizes) but many people also fit them on front wheels and even Dunlop supplied them to Triumph in the 1970s for front wheel fitment on T120s and T140s.
K81 TT100s are H speed rated for speeds up to 130mph so are a better bet for the 500 and 750. They also qualify as being "period" because they were launched in 1969.
The only thing that confuses people with the K81 TT100 are the sizes. This is because they are 90% aspect ratio imperial-sized tyres; a form of sizing that was fairly short-lived. The equivalents of 3.25-19 and 4.00-18 are 3.60-19 and 4.25/85-18 respectively.
I won't go into how this came about because I'm sure you all have better things to do with your lives!
Rebel without a clue
-
Neil the Don
- Expert
- Posts: 2804
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:52 pm
- Location: West Yorkshire
- BrynP
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:13 am
- Location: Aberystwyth, Cymru
Crikey, you guys must live sheltered lives. I thought I was the only one who found tyres gripping. Sorry
, I had to get that one in.
Okay, but don?t blame me if you get bored!
During the '60s the tyre manufacturers were searching for ways to improve grip levels without sacrificing mileage. Nothing changes, huh?
The obvious way is to increase a tyre's width in order to increase contact patch size, after all, without changing the compound a bigger contact patch will give more grip.
The problem was that at the time all motorcycle tyres were imperial sized, e.g. 4.00-18, and tyres of this type are just as tall (from base of bead to top of crown) as they are wide.
So if you then make a 4.50-18 tyre it's going to be 4.50 inches tall. This has obvious implications for tyre clearance on full suspension compression. Sure, bike manufacturers can design bikes around ever taller tyres but there comes a point when a bike's performance would be compromised.
The other problem is that a 4.50-18 tyre would consist of a larger amount of material, which would increase cost and weight, adversely affecting handling and suspension response.
So the solution that Dunlop came up with was to design a tyre that was 90% as high as it was wide. This allowed them to increase a tyre?s width, and hence contact patch size, without increasing the tyre?s height. It also meant they could keep the cost and weight of extra materials down to a minimum.
To illustrate this let?s look at the common 3.50-18 size: the new-for-the-late-?60s ?90% Imperial? equivalent of 3.50-18 became 4.10-18, i.e. 4.10 inches wide with a height that is 90% of this width, or in other words 3.69 inches high. Okay, so a tyre that?s 3.69 inches tall isn?t exactly 3.50 inches but it?s so close that no one would notice.
These new sizes became what was commonly called ?low profile?. Although the word ?profile? actually refers to the curvature of the tread surface. The term ?lower aspect ratio? would be more correct. (More on aspect ratios in a moment).
So in the case of the 4.10-18 they now had a tyre that had roughly the same contact patch size as a 4.00-18 but the ride height of a 3.50-18. S2/S3 and KH250/400 riders in the 1970s rejoiced!
Other common sizes at the time were 3.10 (roughly the same as 2.75 inches), 3.60 (roughly 3.25) and 4.60 (roughly 4.00). So H1/H2 riders had cause for celebration as well.
The 4.25/85-18 Dunlop TT100 is a bit of a size anomaly in that it doesn?t really fit into traditional Imperial sizes or 90% Imperial sizes. It?s equivalent to a 4.00-18 and it?s in a size category of its own.
At this point I need to explain what an aspect ratio is. For those that already know, please excuse me but it?s worth explaining what it means for those that have never really been interested in tyres.
A tyre?s aspect ratio is the tyre?s height (from bead to crown) expressed as a percentage of its width. This is not something that we need to worry about with the ?90% Imperial? sizes talked about above. In those cases we just have to accept that they have a 90% aspect ratio. But aspect ratios play an important role in the way tyres sizes started to be expressed in the late ?70s.
What happened as the ?70s came to and end was the arrival in motorcycling of the Metric system of tyre sizing.
Let?s use 120/90-18 as an example. Expressing a tyre?s width inches became sooo last year.
120 referred to the tyre?s width being 120mm. And the tyre?s height was now included in the size; the number 90 meaning that the tyre was 90% as high as it was wide, or in this tyre?s case 108mm.
Of course, the metric take-over only went so far. Because imperial rim diameters were so well established they?re still expressed in inches.
This sexy new metric size system stopped the fledgling ?90% Imperial? system before it really got started and these days only one of the sizes, 4.10-18 is still in use on new small trail bikes and even that?s dying off slowly.
Sure, you can still buy tyres in these sizes, but they?re mostly tyres aimed at the classic bike and trail bike markets.
I?ve never managed to get to the bottom of why the tyre?s lower aspect ratio wasn?t included in the tyre?s size, even after research with some of the original designers of the TT100. I guess that at the time they were playing with something so new and didn?t think about where things would go next. You also have to wonder how they would have expressed the sizes of the lower aspect ratio tyres that came along in the early ?80s. It?s a good job that metric sizing arrived on the scene when it did.
During the '60s the tyre manufacturers were searching for ways to improve grip levels without sacrificing mileage. Nothing changes, huh?
The obvious way is to increase a tyre's width in order to increase contact patch size, after all, without changing the compound a bigger contact patch will give more grip.
The problem was that at the time all motorcycle tyres were imperial sized, e.g. 4.00-18, and tyres of this type are just as tall (from base of bead to top of crown) as they are wide.
So if you then make a 4.50-18 tyre it's going to be 4.50 inches tall. This has obvious implications for tyre clearance on full suspension compression. Sure, bike manufacturers can design bikes around ever taller tyres but there comes a point when a bike's performance would be compromised.
The other problem is that a 4.50-18 tyre would consist of a larger amount of material, which would increase cost and weight, adversely affecting handling and suspension response.
So the solution that Dunlop came up with was to design a tyre that was 90% as high as it was wide. This allowed them to increase a tyre?s width, and hence contact patch size, without increasing the tyre?s height. It also meant they could keep the cost and weight of extra materials down to a minimum.
To illustrate this let?s look at the common 3.50-18 size: the new-for-the-late-?60s ?90% Imperial? equivalent of 3.50-18 became 4.10-18, i.e. 4.10 inches wide with a height that is 90% of this width, or in other words 3.69 inches high. Okay, so a tyre that?s 3.69 inches tall isn?t exactly 3.50 inches but it?s so close that no one would notice.
These new sizes became what was commonly called ?low profile?. Although the word ?profile? actually refers to the curvature of the tread surface. The term ?lower aspect ratio? would be more correct. (More on aspect ratios in a moment).
So in the case of the 4.10-18 they now had a tyre that had roughly the same contact patch size as a 4.00-18 but the ride height of a 3.50-18. S2/S3 and KH250/400 riders in the 1970s rejoiced!
Other common sizes at the time were 3.10 (roughly the same as 2.75 inches), 3.60 (roughly 3.25) and 4.60 (roughly 4.00). So H1/H2 riders had cause for celebration as well.
The 4.25/85-18 Dunlop TT100 is a bit of a size anomaly in that it doesn?t really fit into traditional Imperial sizes or 90% Imperial sizes. It?s equivalent to a 4.00-18 and it?s in a size category of its own.
At this point I need to explain what an aspect ratio is. For those that already know, please excuse me but it?s worth explaining what it means for those that have never really been interested in tyres.
A tyre?s aspect ratio is the tyre?s height (from bead to crown) expressed as a percentage of its width. This is not something that we need to worry about with the ?90% Imperial? sizes talked about above. In those cases we just have to accept that they have a 90% aspect ratio. But aspect ratios play an important role in the way tyres sizes started to be expressed in the late ?70s.
What happened as the ?70s came to and end was the arrival in motorcycling of the Metric system of tyre sizing.
Let?s use 120/90-18 as an example. Expressing a tyre?s width inches became sooo last year.
Of course, the metric take-over only went so far. Because imperial rim diameters were so well established they?re still expressed in inches.
This sexy new metric size system stopped the fledgling ?90% Imperial? system before it really got started and these days only one of the sizes, 4.10-18 is still in use on new small trail bikes and even that?s dying off slowly.
Sure, you can still buy tyres in these sizes, but they?re mostly tyres aimed at the classic bike and trail bike markets.
I?ve never managed to get to the bottom of why the tyre?s lower aspect ratio wasn?t included in the tyre?s size, even after research with some of the original designers of the TT100. I guess that at the time they were playing with something so new and didn?t think about where things would go next. You also have to wonder how they would have expressed the sizes of the lower aspect ratio tyres that came along in the early ?80s. It?s a good job that metric sizing arrived on the scene when it did.
Rebel without a clue
- Peter Mac
- Expert
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:58 pm
- Location: chichester, west sussex
-
robh1f
- Expert
- Posts: 3030
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Essex Coast
After reading Bryns "very"
informative reply I did a bit of sniffin and reckon 69 bikes had k77s both ends and 70-72 (h1b) had k87s both ends . H1d and up had 87 on back and the ribbed f6? on the front............Bryn $64000 question , do you know of a dealer stocking k87s over here?? Johnny Bova in the US has rear ones at around £170
each plus shipping
If not I'll go the TT 100 route 
-
BIG H
- Expert
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:52 pm
- Location: SITTINGBOURNE,KENT.
I see DOREMI in japan do the tyres you want.
I estimate a pair will cost about £370 including shipping & import tax.
http://server44.joeswebhosting.net/~do2 ... ts_id=1046
http://server44.joeswebhosting.net/~do2 ... ts_id=1049
On ebay usa.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dunlop-Gold-Sea ... 4f&vxp=mtr
I estimate a pair will cost about £370 including shipping & import tax.
http://server44.joeswebhosting.net/~do2 ... ts_id=1046
http://server44.joeswebhosting.net/~do2 ... ts_id=1049
On ebay usa.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dunlop-Gold-Sea ... 4f&vxp=mtr
Last edited by BIG H on Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.