I had a Pirelli installed in the back in May. After 8,000 Kms the tire is gone. I have to admit that comfort with Pirelli was better, but come on I did make 17,000 Kms with the original Bridgestone. This is a no brainer going back to Bridgestone.SALUT.Jaype
I had the opposite experience. Got 5300 miles out of the rear Bridgestone, got 8300 miles out of my first rear Pirelli. Tire mileage has it's mysteries. One guy will get only 5000 miles out of a tire, another guy will get 12000 miles out of the same brand/model tire. We have examples of that documented in various forum threads. For me, the Bridgestones rode poorly and wore poorly, so I'll never go back to them.
I just ordered a Perelli rear for my 400. I have less than 6K miles and the original Bridgestone is wearing very thin in the center, only the side grooves remain. Maybe it's all my highway miles but I was hoping to get more out of my Bridgestone rear than 6K. Hopefully I'll fair better with the perelli GTS.
It was a while back but the same thing happened to me, perhaps it's my (our) style of riding, or whatever .
A lot of forum member have had different experiences and I can not explain why, but like you I liked the Perelli but will stick with the Hoops......At least until someone makes a radial for the 400.
Three set of tires in 23,000 miles, 10 on the OEM Hoop's, 7 on the Perelli and so far 6000 on the last set of Hoops and still looking good.
For wath it is worth, both the Brid. and the Pir. where use for the same road, same speed always one up, conditions were the same, the Pir. was done on the side. the Brid. was to the steel in the middle. less than half the Kms is not acceptable. SALUT.Jaype
I just replaced the original very-worn rear Bridgestone at 11,000 miles (I'll have 12k when the bike turns 1 year on Aug. 7). I put the Pirelli on the rear as a replacement, so it will be interesting to see how it fares.
My observations on the Pirelli after 500 miles: 1) A little bit more comfortable overall; 2) My perception is that it holds in cornering a bit better; and 3) it does, however, seem to give the bike a bit more susceptibility to lateral movement...i.e., to crosswinds or pavement irregularities. And of course there is always 4) I am imagining all of the above.
I'm seeing about the same mileage (5,200 miles) Pirelli vs. Bridgstone , on the rear. I will stay with Pirelli on the rear, the ride is better and it wears more even than the Bridgstone did. However, The front is different. The cross section appears to be a little less flat, in the middle of the tire, making it feel a bit lighter and quicker for manueverability, but I don't like the feeling of over steer on slow turns, this may explain some lateral stability issues. But at higher speeds (sport type riding), it is an advantage. I prefer the handeling of the Bridgstone on the front, over the Pirelli, mainly because I ride mostly 2-up, and don't do too much higher speed cornering. The ride does feel better, but not enough for me (at this time) to give up the slower cornering feel I once had.
Both are good tires that have different handling characteristics. For a lighter feel, that is quicker to manuver, the Pirelli is better up front. For a bit heavier, but more straight line stability, the Bridgstone is better, (with some ride characteristic tradeoffs)
A forum community dedicated to Suzuki Burgman motorcycle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more! Open to all 200, 400, and 650 models!