Yamaha Star Stryker banner

Shinko vs michelin

503 Views 4 Replies 4 Participants Last post by  plisken
Just got back from my mechanic shop. Basically all is good with the michelin commander 2 tire . I was worried about the tight fit and the deflection of the belt (tightness) . We added a couple washers to extend the distance between the plastic belt guard and the tire so there's no chance of friction. I was assured that the belt was tight and the tire was aligned. No need to go back to stock size so now I have a 210 40 18 Bridgestone exedra as a backup. Might just sell it but we'll see.
Something I found out though on my own. All tires are not created equal. The shinko tires 240 x 40x 18 was on my bike when I bought it. That was replaced by the michelin. Same size but what ???? . I had the convenience of comparing. The shinko is a full 3/4 inch skinnier at the top from edge to edge. The michelin measured 11 and 3/8 inches across and the shinko was only 10 and 5/8 . Wow . And that's why the shinko wasn't anywhere near rubbing against the belt guard like this michelin. Pretty crazy
Handwriting Blackboard Font Rectangle Chalk
See less See more
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Interesting. I just replaced my Avon Cobra 240/40r18 with a Shinko 240/40r18 and I had to add a washer behind the belt guard because the Shinko was just barely rubbing. It also seems that the Shinko is taller than the Avon was...or maybe I had just worn the old tire so badly it just feels that way. ;)
I don't doubt that you are correct. We had to add a washer to each bolt holding the guard down. And what's more , when I stood the new Bridgestone exedra( 210 ) up against the old shinko (240) that just came off , it was looking to be about 2 inches shorter in height. Now I know that tread wear of 1/4 inch would total to about 1/2 inch height difference but this was way more. One would think that 240/40r/18 is always the same regardless of manufacturer but not true as we see and compare. I'm happy with the commander 2 for now and I've got the exedra as backup . 😎

A 240 isnt always simply 240mm across. The shape of the tyre, the height and the way it sits on the rim will determine, especially when its mounted how wide it is.

Just remember as well, if youre comparing a mounted 240 on our rim, vs the standard 210 unmounted, depending on brand, it may not look all that different. In theory its only 30mm wider but when you take into account you've had to really cram it onto the rim, it can be less.

The way the sidewall sits and the shape of the tyre will also impact how it rubs / doesn't rub. Its just one of those things that when you're mounting a tyre that in reality, is too big for the wheel, it tends to highlight all the variations far more.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Ok!, 40 height is a % of the first number, a 240 -cross section without tread wear- mounted is narrowly out of 7'5" rim's range and the fact that the manufacturing differs, tolerances, and :rolleyes:..., would explain.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts