Mileage from new "HIGH MILEAGE" Dunlop compound??

[apopj]

Just turned 9600 miles on my '09 Ultra (gimme a break, it was a cold winter and got it in October). Took it in for the 10K service and was told I needed new tires front and rear. I kept the pressure at the recommended 36 pounds, most of the mileage was solo, highway, light load.
Is this normal? I used to get about 14K on rear, 16K on front of my '04 Electraglide. But then, that wasn't the HIGH MILEAGE compound. So, just what is this HIGH MILEAGE Dunlop compound supposed to do. I understand the dual compound concept, but HIGH MILEAGE??????
Email to Motor Company and waiting on response....

Jeff

[Wide]

thats normal wear

High millage tire, I go sticky and know it will melt fast

Like to here what they tell you

[xxxflhrci]

Doesn't sound "high mileage" to me.

I get 12k outta my regular rear 402's. My first front went 39k. The second had 25k on it when I took it off to replace it with a tire I had sitting around getting some age on it.

[Nitram_b4]

SOB I never got mor than 8500 out of a rear and 16,000 out of a front
I always used Avon Venom X ...right now I have a Met 880 on the rear....I really don't like it as much as a Venom.....We will see on milage

[dannytheman]

The rear I can buy, but the front?

I always get 20,000 on the front and 10,000 on the rear. I am on my first set of Metzlers, so I will post totals when they run there course.

[firestopper]

10,000 is normal for me on the rear with dunlops on my 04 heritage classic. Just changed the front at 27,000. There was a similar thread that the bottom line I think was the type and terrain, road conditions, etc. you ride.

[Wide]

Maybe the dealer was slow and had extra tires he needed to get rid of LOL

[Mungo]

I think apopj is speaking about the new Harley dual compound tires found on the 09's.

Sadly, I don't have that many miles on my 09 yet, but I am starting to see tread wear that I wouldn't have thought to be consistent with the new tire design. I was waiting to see what other people were observing.

However, with a "light" load as you described, I think you'll see more tire wear as opposed to two up or loaded driving. The lighter load allows for a loss of friction that keeps the tire hugging the road in a WOT situation. This results in more slippage of the tire against the pavement and thus more wear on the tread. Just my theory.

But the new design was intended to, theoretically at least, offer the best of both worlds. High mileage compound in the center and soft sticky compound on the sides for traction in the curves. The question here is what is the standard these tires are being compared against? Certainly they'll get you more mileage than an Avon Venom, perhaps less mileage than a Met Touring tire.

Quite honestly, I have to agree with Wide. I'd be weary of a tire that ran more than 10k on the rear. I'd be concerned of it's friction ratio in the curves.

I recently tried Michelin Pilot Road II tires -- which are dual compound. I bought them because the shoulders of the tires were supposed to be real sticky and the center no so much.

I like sticky tires -- cheap insurance when it really counts in the corners.

Given the added expense of these tires (the rear tire is about $250), and odd wear pattern, I'm likely to go with just a straight, sticky, single compound tire next time.

Hey, you've only got two tires. Make 'em sticky. Just my two cents.

[CoolMaker]

Avon Venom X's on my bike.. 6000-6500 on a rear tire (150b-16 77V), twice that on front. They are sticky and perform well in the rain. I will stay with them until something better comes out..