Michelin Pilot Road 3

[JT Pedersen]

Yeah decisions,decisions! Like I said pretty flat in Indiana! Now if someone could give me some hits to whats causing the cupping issue that would be great. Hate when stuff wears funny. I've made no changes to bike since I got it 2 years ago.

Greetings,

My experience with cupping on a lot of tires is that higher tire pressures can help mitigate the problem. With my PR3, I kept the front at 40psi consistently and, combined with smaller tread blocks, found it developed a mild hum after ~2K miles, but never got any worse.

What I noticed with PR3s is, unlike any other tire I've ever had, they tend to loose pressure. Mine seemed to loose 1-1.5PSI/week. So if I went 3 weeks w/o checking tire pressure, there were times I might find the front down ~4 psi, the rear as much as 7 psi. Dumbfounded.

Talking with other PR3 riders, on non-FJR machines, I have found they noticed similar behavior. If you've not been more attentive to your pressures than with most tires, I could see that contributing to cupping.

 

[JT Pedersen]

I had PR2's on my Gen1, lasted about 6500 miles and it was toast with some belts showing on last ride. The PR3's on my Gen2 lasted much longer than any of the PR2s. It is still on my bike with decent tread on it and I believe I have 8k miles on it already. I think the longer gears on the Gen2 help on tire wear, bike isn't as snappy or harsh on the tires.
I noticed the PR3 prices are up about $20 from last year so I am looking other options to include the PR2 and 023GT, but may go back to the PR3 as well. It has done very well.

Hi,

My PR3s were indeed up $20 this year. Right now, for $20, I'm not interested in 'experimenting' with another tire. I'm not unknown to change brands, just don't see the value doing so right now. Though, in the future, I could see another Metz Z'something. Whenever I've been dissatisfied with a tire, Metzler's always been my standby...ultimately (after enough falling-back-to's) I simply 'stayed' on Metz.

Right now though, with my first, and now second, set of Michelins, I'm feeling like I've found an equal to the Metz. Nice tire all'round. Coincidentally, a couple years ago I put my first set of Michelins on a car. Was impressed a lot (quality, handling, noise...). I can see Michelin spending a lot of time on my vehicles if they keep it up.

 

[sliderule]

It's been awhile since I chimed in on anything... I'm ordering another set of the PR3's. I'm not an aggressive rider and, accept for the poor PR2's that I had installed and broke in on my way to the Total Control classes then ran down to the cords (rear) at 4K after completing the extreme confidence instilling classes, I usually get around 10K and then change them when the cords show at 11-12K. This set of 3's still had tread at 11K by 12.5K they should have been changed and now at 14K I see cords (rear). They have seen mostly slab

time, more that I want to admit. When the new ones arrive I will have to go find some harsh twisties to at least scuff the sides really good before I allow anyone to change these. My fronts usually are at the wear marks when the cords show on the rear. It's all in the rider as to how long they last and I know that I ride somewhat wimpy but after the chewing out I got for the 4K, I try to make them last as long as possible.

 

[Top_Speed1]

Different wear has to do w the type of driving, roads and abrasives in the surface and last but not least... air pressure.

Coming from the Michelin booth last fall at the OC Maryland bike show, the two (guy) reps were all over the differences between the PR2's & 3's. In a nutshell, the PR3 is made with a slightly different compound that is a 'millionth' softer. Also having the additional groves (sipes) it does feature less rubber to wear out on road contact.

Bottom line straight from Michelin. PR3's are better grip tires especially in wet weather. The softer compound and siping to achieve this is sacrificial and will wear slightly faster than the PR2 compound and less siping design. The 2 tires are made for two slightly different riders and conditions.

So STOP the BS that PR3's last longer than PR2's!. The PR3's def have their pro's but longevity over their harder compound brother is not one of them.. Look at other reasons why you wore out your 2's before you did your 3's. 'nuff said, right Don?

 

[Dunk43]

B-spec is said to have an extra belt in the SIDE wall. They say it supports more weight, and does NOT have any extra belt or rubber in the tread, so wear is planned to be about the same. (I hear they are a bitch to mount manually) YMMV

I mounted my B rear manually with no problem : )

 

[RadioHowie]

B-spec is said to have an extra belt in the SIDE wall. They say it supports more weight, and does NOT have any extra belt or rubber in the tread, so wear is planned to be about the same. (I hear they are a bitch to mount manually) YMMV

I mounted my B rear manually with no problem : )

Can I have some of your spare money before you go spending it unnecessarily next time???

 

[Jim in Phoenix]

My experience with tires seems to jibe with Top_Speed1's info. With the Bridgestone 023, I got 10 K miles, with the Michelin PR2 14 K miles, and with the PR3, 11 K miles. My local shop charges the same +- for each of these tires and I did not notice any performance degradation with the PR2s. So all other things being equal, it will be PR2 for me in the future. Note that wet weather riding is normally not an issue here in Arizona. YMMV

 

[Auron]

I once wore a tire that just slightly started to show a wire sticking out. I freaked out and replaced it on the road. Could I have made it the 500 miles home? How long can you ride once you reach that point?

 

[Bruce McCrary]

Interesting thread, good read.

FWIW, I've had three sets of PR2's back to back over the last 3 years, I take them off before they are worn completely out but the least I got out of the three sets was 10K, which I'm fine with. Just for giggles I decided to try the PR3's this time around, primarily because of the claimed wet weather grip. See, I think some voodoo witch put a curse on my a$$ because it never, ever fails; I'm going to get rained on several times a year. Heck, two years ago we rode the first half of a BBG in the rain... Anyway, it seemed like a good idea to at least try the PR3's, even though in my mind they'll have to be doing something to be better in the wet than the PR2's because to me, those were great in the rain.

I've only put 700 miles or so on the 3's thus far, but my initial impressions are: They seem to be a little "squirrely" until warmed up for lack of better words. I get some wandering at highway speeds, almost like the winds blowing me around, for about 50 miles and then it goes away. The grip and turn in is fantanstic! But I always wonder if I'm fooling myself with new tires, they are going to be better than the old worn out ones were for sure, and it's been several months between rides, you know? But they sure do seem to work well. I guess now I'll have to wait for the enevatable rain storm and see what happens then, and compare that with the overall mileage at the end of the year/tire's life and see how I feel then about them.

They're going to have to do something to beat the PR2's though...

 

[Top_Speed1]

My experience with tires seems to jibe with Top_Speed1's info. With the Bridgestone 023, I got 10 K miles, with the Michelin PR2 14 K miles, and with the PR3, 11 K miles. My local shop charges the same +- for each of these tires and I did not notice any performance degradation with the PR2s. So all other things being equal, it will be PR2 for me in the future. Note that wet weather riding is normally not an issue here in Arizona. YMMV

My info came straight from Michelin, but it all makes sense much like F1 racing; rain tires grip super well in the wet but the normal tires with more rubber n harder compound have longer wear.

It's a small trade-off but maybe well worth it especially to the more than normal 'wet-weather' riders.

 

[willboe]

Howdy,
Riding season's already started slowing for me a bit

. Since my last post in this thread, I've logged 2,000 more miles. Had some opportunities to find more curves than usual during a bit of touring.

At this point I have 10,000 miles on the tires, both installed same time. Most of my riding is solo, commuting. Most of my mileage is logged on the highway commuting ~40 miles/leg. Tire pressures are 40F/42R.

As you can see from the images (high res version: https://bit.ly/TealH9), the tires are showing signs of wear. The front's center strip is noticeably proud relative to the shoulders which are visibly showing wear now. The rear is doing good. I had thought the rear would be toast by 10,500, but looks to be good for at least another 1,500.

For me, the ride quality--wet and dry--has been good. Comparing the cost of the tires (I paid $317 to my door) and the mileage I'm getting relative to other brands, they are certainly proving to be very cost effective.

This is the first set of tires (rear in particular) to give me more than 6-8K on a litre class bike--ever. Normally I've toasted the rear in 6-8K miles. So I just keep on adding up miles wondering when 'this' set will give out. Definitely another set in my future.

Given the front's wear now starting to show, and it 'starting' to get a bit thin in the center, I expect to replace both tires at the same time next year.

There's a lot of ambiguity involved (right-grip aggressiveness, environment, road pavement compositions, two-up, etc.) when comparing performance between riders. Even so, I will admit I find it interesting how a number of us can reach/exceed 10K on a set, while others are complaining they're toast at 5-6K. Doesn't seem to be a lot of mid-ground. Of course, I've seen similar discussions for other tires/brands in other machine forums too. So...who knows.

How much do you weigh?

 

[willboe]

The B spec tires won't give longer tire wear, it's just an increase in load capacity... YMMV

Since the "B" Spec has an Additional Ply... the actual Tread Depth is Shallower than the Normal Spec Tire.

So you can't fairly Compare a Regular PR tire to the "B" Spec tire for mileage.

Wow. The 'B' version tire is 'Load Range B' just like the regular version < This is marked on the tires, as is a larger B in a circle on the B version. The 'speed rating'/load capability of both tires is the same at: 73W < 805 pounds at 167+ miles per hour. The 'B' version does have an extra SIDE ply, and it is less squirrelly in sporting turns than the regular version (with my suspensions settings, and my weight). With PR2s I get about the same mileage from the rear on regular & B (I am 230 pounds & heading down), and I do ride 25% two up, and baggage. I currently have PR3s front and rear. I like the PR3 in front for its sure-er feel in sporty turns, wet or dry. In fact, living in Norther California, if I want to try wet road handling, I have to stop, piss on the road, and then back-track. Not worth the trouble . . . My Rear PR3 is new, and is regular version. I thought I would save the $35 difference, and just run 2 to 4 more psi. The PR3 rear feels 'new tire great', but I think I already feel the extra flexing. Next time I am probably back to 'B' version, or MAYBE 190/55. Do you guys running the 190/55 feel like you are riding downhill all the time ? ? ?

 

[Chiefblueman]

The B spec tires won't give longer tire wear, it's just an increase in load capacity... YMMV

Since the "B" Spec has an Additional Ply... the actual Tread Depth is Shallower than the Normal Spec Tire.

So you can't fairly Compare a Regular PR tire to the "B" Spec tire for mileage.

Wow. The 'B' version tire is 'Load Range B' just like the regular version < This is marked on the tires, as is a larger B in a circle on the B version. The 'speed rating'/load capability of both tires is the same at: 73W < 805 pounds at 167+ miles per hour. The 'B' version does have an extra SIDE ply, and it is less squirrelly in sporting turns than the regular version (with my suspensions settings, and my weight). With PR2s I get about the same mileage from the rear on regular & B (I am 230 pounds & heading down), and I do ride 25% two up, and baggage. I currently have PR3s front and rear. I like the PR3 in front for its sure-er feel in sporty turns, wet or dry. In fact, living in Norther California, if I want to try wet road handling, I have to stop, piss on the road, and then back-track. Not worth the trouble . . . My Rear PR3 is new, and is regular version. I thought I would save the $35 difference, and just run 2 to 4 more psi. The PR3 rear feels 'new tire great', but I think I already feel the extra flexing. Next time I am probably back to 'B' version, or MAYBE 190/55. Do you guys running the 190/55 feel like you are riding downhill all the time ? ? ?

No. Other than cost, I don't see any downsides to the 190/55. Mine, a PR3, is rock solid 1 or 2 up. I weigh 235 in gear, pass about 160. Penske helps here. Sharper turn in, quicker steering, a slight decrease in rpm, about 120 rpm @70mph, more accurate speedo. Plus when I'm doing 167mph she handles all the weight I can throw at 'er just fine

 

[Blidevind]

I have 5000 miles on my PR3's and I am a happy customer. I ride all year in the northwest and they do well in the wet stuff.