Kawasaki Vulcan Forum banner

Tell Me About Your Commander II Tires.

4K views 16 replies 9 participants last post by  btom 
#1 ·
I just ordered a set of Commander II's for my Classic. I went with the oversize rear 170/80/15 and the stock size in the front. I was looking for a tire that would last longer than 8,000 miles which seems to be all I can get out of the rear Pirelli MT66's. I have been running them for the last 16,000 miles and I'm ok with their handling but not impressed with their longevity. Please tell me I will do better with the Michelin Commander II's. They are reasonably priced at $347 installed and mounted up with tax. If you have run these tires please let me know what you think of them.
 
#3 ·
Commander II Tires

I can't say what I will get only a few K. I have a 900 LT changed from a Metzler to Commander II same size as stock. What I noticed was the handling difference, WOW! It turned my bike into a cornering ride. With the Dunflop it always wanted to stand up in a hard corner. Now the corners are really crisp, lines are easy to hold overall handling response is quicker.
 
#4 ·
Ok answer me this. You said you went with an oversize rear 170/80/15. What I have on mine is a180/70/15. So which one is the bigger tire?
 
#5 · (Edited)
The 170/80/15 is slightly taller so helps change the gearing a little. It will add 2.2 mph at the same RPM in 5th gear also helping to correct the speedometer which reads about 6 mph faster than it is actually going. You will notice a nice difference when cruising on the highway. With stock tire and pulley you will only be going 64 mph when your speedo reads 70 mph. With this tire your speedo will still read 70 but you will be going 66.2 mph. You will notice a little less vibration per actual mph. With an oversized front pulley and oversized tire your speedo reads 70 and you are actually going 70.
 
#7 ·
...Please tell me I will do better with the Michelin Commander II's....If you have run these tires please let me know what you think of them.
I replaced a set of Pirelli MT66's with a pair of COMMANDER II's.

The rear MT66 had almost 12,000 miles and were nearly shot (better than the OEM Bridgestone EXEDRA G702, but not much). The COMMANDER II on the rear now has 10,300 miles, still has plenty of tread, still rides beautifully and still looks new.

I won't buy anything else. It's too bad they don't make it in more sizes - perhaps they will.
 
#9 ·
My local Kawasaki dealer quoted me on the Commander II's $129 for the 170/80/15 rear and $109 for the stock size front for my Classic. So $238 for the tires plus $109 to remove the wheels from the bike and mount and balance the tires and reinstall. Ride off for $347 tax and all. Not too bad really considering the price on the tires alone is lower than I can find on the internet. I have run the Perelli's for the last 16K miles and they are not great or even close to great. Gotta try the Commander II's at this point especially with these reviews about them. I ride in a lot of summer heat (98 to 108 degrees) in Southern Utah like you do in Texas....the Perelli's seem to wear poorly in the heat in my opinion. Plus when it gets really hot the sidewalls on the front tire get really soft and flex and wobble. Time for me to make a change due to my riding conditions.
 
#11 ·
WELL MY LOCAL KAWASAKI DEALER wanted me to bend over and take it like a man. Just for labor and balance.... 149.00 for the back and 125.00 for the front. Did I mention that DID NOT INCLUDE THE COST OF THE TIRES. Got to go find the little guy.
 
#12 ·
I know....the dealer here is really priced right. When I consider tax I think its about $40 to remove the wheel, remove the old tire and mount and balance the new one and reinstall the wheel. Plus I get better than internet pricing on the tire...I can't afford to screw with it for that. When I lived in the Seattle area if I removed the wheel it was $45 per wheel just to mount and balance a tire....if I bought the tire there it was the same price to mount and balance but they clobbered me for about $40 more for each tire. This is the first dealership I have had do anything to my bike in 50 years of riding other than just mount the tire on a wheel I carried in to them....its kind of nice.
 
#14 ·
I'm currently running a set of commander II's on my bike. Put the rear (170/80 15) on at 13,500 and am currently at 28,800 miles (15,300 miles). I have never gotten that kind of mileage out of a tire before and the tread looks like I will get another 2 or 3 thousand out of the rear tire. The front was put on at 10,000. I used the stock size for the front. I love the way they handle and corner. I will be putting commander II's on again!
 
#15 ·
I am on my second set of MCIIs VN 900 Custom. I got 8,000 miles out of the front tire and 11,000 out of the rear of my first set of MCIIs. The original rear Dunlop was bald at just over 5,000 miles. I ride a lot of paved mountain roads where the pavement is pretty rough i.e. a lot of exposed aggregate so between that and a lot of tight curves the tires are under a fair amount of stress.

I have been happy with the grip of the MCII however some folks complain they are not great on wet roads. I am a fair weather rider and do my best to avoid rain so I can not comment on wet road conditions.

I run with the taller 170/80 tire and according to my GPS the speedo is now within 2 mph of actual speed. My first MCII 170/80 measured 177mm and my second recently installed measured at 176mm wide (6-7 mm wider than the 170 rating). I don't know the actual width of the original Dunlop but to be honest I don't notice the MCII being any narrower than the stock Dunlop was.

P.S. I also use balancing beads and find the ride very smooth over the life of the tire, almost no mirror vibration at 75 mph. Much improved over original Dunlop tire and lead weight.

WB
 

Attachments

#17 ·
i think the Dunlop is a softer compound tire, for grip, MCII is harder compound tire that lasts longer
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top