Tire opinion???
 

I will be putting at least a front tire on my KPX, but possibly both. The ones I am concidering are the Dunlop D605, the Kenda K270, and the new offering from Tusk the Waypoint, which is a little more road friendly than the Tusk DSport. The only tire that I have personal experience with is the Dunlop D605. My goal is to have a little better mud tire than stock on these bikes, which is terrible. They are good on the pavement, and fine in gravel, but as soon as they hit fairly greasy mud, the bike tries to slide out from under itself. I also want safe 55-65 mph on pavement, some of which is curvy. The Waypoint looks great, but is evidently a 70/30, or 30/70 , but it is evidently 70 percent dirt, and 30 percent road, and they only have one front, and one rear available. They have the proper front size 90/90-21, but the only rear they have is a 130/90-18, and the stock is a 120/90-18. I looked at the tire conversion charts, and there's about 3/4 inch difference in diameter. There's not much difference in the price of the front tires, the Waypoint, and K270 are both in the high $50s, and the Dunlop 605 is mid $60s. I'm thinking about just get a front for now and run with the stock rear that has plenty of life. How would the bike act/ handle with a more aggressive tread design on the front, and less aggressive rear. Any input on any of the tires mentioned is appreciated.https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0D34...4JJB9KPU&psc=1

I may not necessarily get agreement with the greater number of opinions regarding tires, but after having ridden motorcycles for most of my life, and having owned plenty of different dual sport bikes, my take is this: A tire designed more for dirt works a lot better on pavement than a tire designed more for pavement works on dirt. I make my trade-off towards a better dirt tire and then recognize that tire's limitations in road performance and ride accordingly. Just my two cents.

Personally, I've got a set of dusty but still new DOT approved Michelin T63s (fairly dirt oriented) that my brother-in-law recently gave me after he acquired them in one of his many bike selling and buying transactions. He doesn't have a bike he'd use them on, so I'm not going to complain about free new tires. Those will be the next set of shoes going on my TT250. I'll see how I like them and go from there. I've also got a set of Kenda K257D tires that I'm amazed are DOT rated. They're definitely more of an old school full-on knobby. If I don't care for the Michelins, then I'll swap on the Kendas and see how they do. Otherwise, if I like the Michelins then I'll at least run them until they're close to in need of replacement.

Oh, and since I didn't mention it in my post above, the tires that came on my CSC TT250 are plenty darn decent on road, but despite having at least the appearance that they might be somewhat serviceable for dirt roads and easy trails, I find them to be an absolute hazard on anything other than pavement. Even when airing them down about as low as I'd dare without rim locks, which is about 25 psi, they're still just absolutely awful on dirt/gravel/rocks and slipperier than snot on a glass doorknob if there's even a hint of mud. I'll be putting rim locks on when I install the new tires and then balancing the wheels accordingly. I like to run about 13 psi off road under most circumstances.
Even lower would be better, but I don't want to have to try to dodge every sharp rock to keep from getting a pinch flat or denting a wheel. With these handy new small hand-held air compressors it's not a big deal to air down for the dirt and then back up when you've got long stretches of paved road.

My 2 cents when it comes to thick mud, you need a 10/90 tire (10 on road, 90 off road) like the Kenda Trakmaster 2. Most 30/70 to 60/40 style tires are just not up to the task of thick heavy mud.

100% agree. The only tire that works in mud is a knobby. There's just no getting around it. Unfortunately knobbys suck on pavement, but you can't have both.

I don't really go looking for terrible mud, but I do occasionally have to run through a muddy section. I've had a Brozz, and TBR7 that both came with 50/50 tires, but the were a different design, and narrower, especially in the back as compared to the KPX, and the KPX tires are far worse in mud. I have taken my Hawk with the 605s through sections of mud , and never put a foot down, were the KPX would have tried to slide out from under me. I have taken every dual sport I've had to Twin Rocks, and the only one that tried to go down was the KPX. I'm long legged, and have always been able to catch it in mud, but it's very unforgiving. Were the Hawk might get a little squirrelly the KPX tries to go down. I would buy both front and rear Tusk Waypoint, if it weren't for the fact that the rear is a little larger than what stock is on the KPX

The Waypoint looks good. Looks similar to Trakmaster but with slightly stiffer carcass. I like the slightly closer lugs in the center. I'd bet it does better in sand, and mud, especially at lowered pressure

I did put a DSport on the Temp X. It's good. It sticks surprisingly well on pavement, and not too bumpy since the lugs are moderately spaced. Excellent on single track. Excellent. :tup:

I'd get a Waypoint for the KTM, but no 19" rear available. Not in DSport either.

I saw a couple of videos of a guy(SwankyCat), that I could tell us kinda sponsored by Tusk products. They sent him a set to review . He mentioned something to the effect that the Waypoint is meant to be used with a rim lock. He put them on a Honda XL650 without rim locks, and they do seem good, but the only available rear size is a little bigger than what my bike calls for. I may try to contact Rocky Mountain ATV, and see if they really are designed to be used with a rim lock.

I emailed Rocky Mountain ATV, to see if they are going to soon be getting the rear Waypoint in my size, but I went ahead and ordered a front one from Amazon. It's about the cheapest tire available, and at $61.47 after tax, I may just run it with my stock rear, till it wears out. If I could get a Dunlop D605 rear in my size, I would just run it with the Waypoint, but the closest they have is the 4.60x18, which I put on my Hawk, and it's a little small, and a 120/80x18, which is also smaller diameter.

On my Templar x, I just added Kendra k270s and on the street it runs 100 times better than the stock 10/90 or whatever it’s called. That being said the k270s are a 60/40 tire or whatever with the dominance being the dirt, I do think for mud it wouldn’t do as well but I can’t fathom so Rocky Mountain trails these tires would do well.

Kenda Trakmaster is a good choice, but keep in mind that it has a soft carcasss. This isn't a problem but just don't deflate too much.

The Tusk Dsport has more rigid carcass/sidewalls but maybe not as wide as advertised (first number in the size). Harder rubber compound as well. Trakmaster sticks better in sand or mud. It is a softer tire, so keep it inflated :)

Was your stock tire a 110/100-18? If yes, how did the 4.60x18 compare in width? My Titan rear tire is REALLY close to the chain, and when I change it, I want something a little narrower, but not too much shorter.

I had the 110/100-18 stock knobby on my Hawk, and replaced it with a Dunlop D605 in 4.60x18, and while I didn't measure, the width seems about the same width wise, but there was noticable difference in the diameter of the tire, and it reduced my gearing probably about 3 percent or so. I run the same rpm now at about 67 or 68 as I did at 70 with the 110/100-18 knobby.

A 110/100-18 tire is technically narrower than a 4.6 x 18 at 4.33 inches wide, but they are measuring from the carcass, not the knobs on the tire. A 4.6 x 18 tire is smaller in diameter, which does gear down the bike about the equivalent of approximately 2 teeth on the rear sprocket. That is why I have to run a 33 rear sprocket instead of a 35 with my Shinko 700 4.6 x 18 rear.

Dan , . Would you happen to know if a 120/80-18 is larger, or smaller diameter than a 4.60x18. They have Dunlop D605 in both sizes.