Author Topic: CHENG SHIN Tires (Read 27482 times)

Geeto67 · « **Reply #50 on:** March 20, 2008, 03:58:47 pm »

forgetting the "expert status" for a second terry....what are the standards? do you know? Do you know how they are enforced?

I am pretty sure that they test only the design of the tire and test it infrequently. They are not testing every tire that is imported, they are basically testing it once and then that is it. If there is an inordinante number of incidents regarding the tire they will test them again. If the issue with Cheng Shin is not a design flaw but a quality control issue a crap product could very well be sold in that country despite their design laws.

And as far as your "expert" comments, I am not an expert, not professiong to be an expert, but I do work with government regulations for a living (and when you started to make your comments I pulled the Federal Safety Standards off the Firm's shelf and leafed through it). I can tell you having blind faith that the government oversight is really preciesly tailored to your interests is misleading. The large part of government regulation involves information. They can sell you an absolute turd as long as they give you enough information that a reasonable person could tell it is an absolute turd. I can't speak for europe but I imagine it isn't that different.

As for whether I recoomend them or not, I strongly do not recommend them based on my personal experence. I had a lousy tire which I am fairly sure was defective. I have made it a point to tell everyone I know not to buy these compost heap tires, based on personal expirence. Because it is what I know. You have chosen to tell people they are ok based on your personal experence, because it is what you know. when you start talking about governmnet standards however, maybe you should...you know...actually know what they are before bringing them into the conversation.

The reason I posted the case in the first place was 1) to illustrate a documented example of when one actually failed, and 2) show you how something not tested and not intended for a specific market can end up there anyway. Maybe posting it was a bad Idea because it is kind of a distracting thing.

As far as I am concerned this issue is dead. I am not interested in fighting about this forever and I hold no grudges about anything said. I think the focus should be on helping find they guy the right tires for his 350F and not endless "my opinion" v. "your opinion"

Terry in Australia · « **Reply #51 on:** March 20, 2008, 04:08:10 pm »

Well that's mighty white of you Geety, but like you, I work with all sorts of government documents as a defence contractor, but that doesn't make me any more (or less) of an "expert" than you, and I know that you know no more about your governments tire standards than I do, so what it comes down to is you apparently having a bad experience and saying you don't like them, and me saying that I haven't. Yes, I guess it has become a pissing contest, but only because you turned it into one. Cheers, Terry.

kghost · « **Reply #52 on:** March 20, 2008, 05:46:09 pm »

Gotta love the tire threads....they always degenerate and go at least 4 pages......

Gordon · « **Reply #53 on:** March 20, 2008, 05:48:17 pm »

Quote from: kghost on March 20, 2008, 05:46:09 pm

Gotta love the tire threads....they always degenerate and go at least 4 pages......

Who's up for an OIL THREAD!??

ofreen · « **Reply #54 on:** March 20, 2008, 07:23:48 pm »

I used Cheng Shin tires on the back of my CR500. I always figured if the knobs were going to be ripped off a brand new tire, better a Cheng Shin than a Metzeler.

333 · « **Reply #55 on:** March 20, 2008, 08:49:51 pm »

One angle that might have been overlooked is riding style. And by that I mean how hard someone rides. Some have reported good experiences with C/S, and some bad. What if the good experiences haven't been ridden as hard as the riders think? We've all heard the saying (even in this thread): you get what you pay for. Do you want to test how good the C/S really is when you need to panic stop? Or swerve around some idiot?

Someone mentioned a possible connection between C/S and Metzeler. I don't know about that. I do know Metzeler doesn't test one in ten tires, or one in 20. They mount,inflate and spin for balance every tire that comes off the assembly line. I bought Avons last time I needed tires. Metzeler stopped making the ME33 and ME99 and hadn't come out with the Lasertecs at the time. The next time I need tires, I'll look into whether Metzeler makes them in my sizes.

I guess what I'm saying is you can't go wrong with a quality tire. Why skimp? When you have a tire fail on your car,in a worst case scenario you have a cage around you and airbags to protect you. There is considerably less on your bike.

Terry in Australia · « **Reply #56 on:** March 21, 2008, 04:35:14 pm »

Good point mate, and another question is, "how long have the tires been sitting on the dealers shelf"? There's a little bike shop not far from here and the guy was selling Michelin tires cheap, it turns out that they sat in a shipping container for nearly a year in the hot Aussie sun due to some dispute between the supplier and Australian distributor, and they were as hard as a rock when I tried to poke my thumbnail into the tread.

I can just imagine some poor bugger buying them and then dropping his bike, then saying that all Michelin tires are craaap. Cheers, Terry.

Klark Kent · « **Reply #57 on:** March 22, 2008, 10:13:12 am »

yeah, a lot of these CS horror stories begin with "I bought my bike with a set of CSs," thne go on to the horror part. so the PO told you they where only one season old. what else did the PO tell you? was it about the easter bunny? Rotten old rubber is rotten and old nomatter what company/country made it. that court case was about the tube wasn't it? Made me think of all the trouble i went through to make sure i wasnt getting tires that had been sitting for years on a shelf rotting and the blind aceptance of whatever tubes they had to go along with it.

so what brand of tube do you guys use?
-KK

goon 1492 · « **Reply #58 on:** March 22, 2008, 10:30:35 am »

this is a good thread even though there is some good, some bad and some flaming, it is still good to talk about and learn, and to add to Terrys coment on age of tires i would like to add also that this should be thought of when buying tires please read:
How old are the tires on your vehicle? The date of manufacture is indicated by the last group of digits in the DOT manufacture code on the sidewall of the tire. The number is often stamped in a recessed rectangle. The DOT code tells who manufactured the tire, where it was made and when. The last group of digits in the code is the date code that tells when the tire was made.

Before 2000, the date code had three digits. Since 2000, it has had four. The first two digits are the week of the year (01 = the first week of January). The third digit (for tires made before 2000) is the year (1 = 1991). For most tires made after 2000, the third and fourth digits are the year (04 = 2004).

the date code is 8PY806. The 8PY is a manufacturing shift code, and the date the tire was actually made was 0806, which is the 8th week (08)in the year 2006 (06).

The date of manufacture is essential information for car owners and tire buyers because tires deteriorate even if they are not used. European automobile manufacturers recommend replacing ANY tire that is more than six (6) years old, including the spare tire. No such recommendations have yet been made by domestic vehicle manufacturers.

Here is more info if you want to read more about it. good food for thought.

http://www.aa1car.com/library/tire_expire.htm

TwoTired · « **Reply #59 on:** March 22, 2008, 11:49:03 am »

Lots of talk about tire traction. But, have you considered that the tire is only part of the traction equation?
Apart from a major consideration of a CLEAN road surface, not all road surfaces are cement. Even if it is, the surface finish on cement can vary with age and wear. Cement can become glossy, and slick.
Then there are composite roads where an aggregate is combined with a binder, and then rolled flat.

There are variations in the binder formula, Asphalt, oil, etc., which all change properties as they age and weather. And then there is the aggregate to consider. Often, it is whatever is cheaply available in the local market place. Areas of the south US, use crushed coral, another crushed stone. It could be a filler of many types, including sand, gravel, crushed stone, slag, or recycled crushed concrete. These filler materials have different friction coefficients, as well as the binder.

When people say their (insert hated tire brand here) lost traction, could it be that the brand they had, used a rubber compound that didn't work well with the road surface composition deployed in the area in which they ride?

I specuate that at some point in time Cheng Shin tires were manufactured for the Chinese market place. Further, these tires were intended for under developed roads, perhaps gravel instead of hard surface roadways. Gravel roads will cut up soft rubber tires rather quickly. I suspect Cheng Shin used a hard compound with added silica for durability in such marketplaces. When the export market became an option, these hard compound tires made it to countries which had many more hard surface roadways where traction is far greater than what can be had on a gravel road. Softer rubber compounds could survive longer, AND provide more traction than a hard compound made to survive gravel or unimproved roadways.

So, rather than brand bashing in general, might it be a better question of what rubber compound works best for the roads you intend to ride upon? What are YOUR roads made of?

Cheers,

Gordon · « **Reply #60 on:** March 22, 2008, 12:35:46 pm »

I simply stated my opinion of Cheng Shin tires and the experience that my opinion is based on. If someone has a problem with my opinion, that's great, but it's your problem, not mine.

333 · « **Reply #61 on:** March 22, 2008, 03:02:22 pm »

Quote from: Mattydiah on March 21, 2008, 02:53:05 pm

Quote from: 333 on March 20, 2008, 08:49:51 pm
One angle that might have been overlooked is riding style. And by that I mean how hard someone rides. Some have reported good experiences with C/S, and some bad. What if the good experiences haven't been ridden as hard as the riders think? We've all heard the saying (even in this thread): you get what you pay for. Do you want to test how good the C/S really is when you need to panic stop? Or swerve around some idiot?

What about me? I've had a Dunlop D208 go out on me on my 2004 GSXR-600?? I've never had trouble with my Maxxis tires on my F11, or my RD350, both of which get the absolute balls ridden off them. Are Maxxis tires better than D208's? Who knows. What this does prove is just because you had a tire do something you didnt like doesnt make them #$%*. Nor does it make something else awesome by comparison.

What failed? The tire? Traction? Traction more than once? The reason I don't like cheap tires is I have had consistent traction issues with a single tire. Tried a different one, had the same issues.

Terry in Australia · « **Reply #62 on:** March 22, 2008, 05:02:06 pm »

Quote from: TwoTired on March 22, 2008, 11:49:03 am

Lots of talk about tire traction. But, have you considered that the tire is only part of the traction equation?
Apart from a major consideration of a CLEAN road surface, not all road surfaces are cement. Even if it is, the surface finish on cement can vary with age and wear. Cement can become glossy, and slick.
Then there are composite roads where an aggregate is combined with a binder, and then rolled flat.

There are variations in the binder formula, Asphalt, oil, etc., which all change properties as they age and weather. And then there is the aggregate to consider. Often, it is whatever is cheaply available in the local market place. Areas of the south US, use crushed coral, another crushed stone. It could be a filler of many types, including sand, gravel, crushed stone, slag, or recycled crushed concrete. These filler materials have different friction coefficients, as well as the binder.

When people say their (insert hated tire brand here) lost traction, could it be that the brand they had, used a rubber compound that didn't work well with the road surface composition deployed in the area in which they ride?

I specuate that at some point in time Cheng Shin tires were manufactured for the Chinese market place. Further, these tires were intended for under developed roads, perhaps gravel instead of hard surface roadways. Gravel roads will cut up soft rubber tires rather quickly. I suspect Cheng Shin used a hard compound with added silica for durability in such marketplaces. When the export market became an option, these hard compound tires made it to countries which had many more hard surface roadways where traction is far greater than what can be had on a gravel road. Softer rubber compounds could survive longer, AND provide more traction than a hard compound made to survive gravel or unimproved roadways.

So, rather than brand bashing in general, might it be a better question of what rubber compound works best for the roads you intend to ride upon? What are YOUR roads made of?

Cheers,

Good post TT, road surface/condition was gonna be my next point, (but I hadn't thought about country specific compounds, that makes a lot of sense) but I couldn't have put it more eloquently.

Good to see that the "nay-sayers" are starting to turn around a little, too. Cheers, Terry.

fixahonda · « **Reply #63 on:** March 22, 2008, 05:20:01 pm »

Quote from: Mattydiah on March 22, 2008, 03:17:08 pm

For me it was traction, washed out. Both the front and the rear, on separate occasions.

I had the 207s on my F4i for a little while and noticed if they were anything but fully warmed up they were chalky as hell. It was kinda neat to crack the throttle a bit and pull a nice quick powerslide around a turn from a red light. I do still like Dunlop tires though, just not that particular model. The front also chopped all to hell with only 3,500 miles on it too. Maybe it was too much aggressive cornering?

I think a lot of the arguing back and forth isn't taking into account the fact that CS makes a pretty wide array of tires now. Maybe back in '78 they only made the rock hard ribbed ones, but now they have a lineup of choices especially if you include Maxxis.
Overall though are they better than other name brands? That's up to the buyer really.

To me they are fine for the bike they are on and the riding that I plan to do.

Gregorymoto · « **Reply #64 on:** March 22, 2008, 06:39:57 pm »

Traction suxs

333 · « **Reply #65 on:** March 22, 2008, 07:46:19 pm »

Quote from: Gregorymoto on March 22, 2008, 06:39:57 pm

Traction suxs

If that were true, we wouldn't be having this discussion!

Terry in Australia · « **Reply #66 on:** March 23, 2008, 03:49:54 pm »

I don't know mate, I've been in traction, and I tend to agree with Greg, it does suck!

ChippK8 · « **Reply #67 on:** March 23, 2008, 04:24:27 pm »

I have them on front and back of my k8. No problems with them here. They are 4 or 5 years old and have not gone flat once. I certainly wouldn't want them on a sport bike, but normal riding they are a good value. I don't ride as much as I did when I had a GSXR so I can't really comment on how fast they wear down.

Jay B · « **Reply #68 on:** March 23, 2008, 08:21:37 pm »

The roads I ride on around here are all "chip sealed" in my case that means they were sprayed with tar and razor sharp shards of red granite chips were stuck on. Anythnig would grip on it, but man I'd hate to go down, would be like falling on a cheese grater. Haven't followed this thread very close, but aren't tire threads fun??

750wardog · « **Reply #69 on:** March 24, 2008, 01:31:13 am »

here's my 2 cents. i spent more time than i would like supervising a factory that fabricated small wheels and mounted tires on them. stuff for wheelbarrows and mopeds and scooters and go-carts and boat trailors and lawn tractors....you get the idea. the company was originally american owned, and imported tires from cheng shin. eventually they were bought out by a foreign company, as is the trend for corporate swine seeking the please shareholders. anyway, Kenda Rubber Company bought the company out so they could mount their tires on our wheels. from what i've seen working with them over the years, cheng shin is absolute crap. i've never rode on their motorcycle tires because i saw how often their lawnmower tires failed, and that was at 1/2 a mile an hour. anyway along with the ruthless efficiency that communist china exports ad-nauseum, we also recieved employee discounts on kenda tires. i said what the hell and bought a set of kenda challengers for my '73 750k. i must say that they are a good buy. for about $50 a pop (maybe pop isn't a good word here...) for about $50 a piece they perform extremely well. i beat my bike like a red-headed step-child. i corner as fast and tight as newtonian physics will allow me to, and challengers have stuck every time. i've rode them in the rain and have yet to be fitted for a body cast. they stick, end of story. you need a new rear every 4k miles or so, but they stick. if you're going to buy an inexpensive tire, i reccomend the challengers. they are comprable in price to cheng-shi+ and they are h-rated (up to 150mph) and i've never had a problem with them. just dont forget to clean off the mold release with acetone or you will have serious issues keeping the rubber side down.

moham · « **Reply #70 on:** March 24, 2008, 05:24:01 am »

Quote from: 750wardog on March 24, 2008, 01:31:13 am

they are comprable in price to cheng-shi+ and they are h-rated (up to 150mph) and i've never had a problem with them.

h is rated to 150mph?

Gordon · « **Reply #71 on:** March 24, 2008, 08:42:30 am »

"H" is rated for 130 mph. If you put a tube in that then consider it "S" rated, or 112 mph. Still probably adequate for these bikes, though.

dpen · « **Reply #72 on:** March 31, 2008, 02:10:44 am »

Well, I'll put this to rest in a week or so

I need a new front tyre & BT45s are a bit thin on the ground

I can get a Cheng Shin for $125 fitted & balanced against $185 for a Bridgestone.

I've got a few weeks off work so I'll see how the "cheap sh*t" tyres go on a trip

Terry in Australia · « **Reply #73 on:** March 31, 2008, 03:15:19 am »

Well as much as I've talked up Cheng Shing tyres Dave, I prefer BT45's to anything else I've used, so if I was you, I'd rather spend the extra 60 bucks and know that I'm gonna get 10,000 (plus) klicks out of them. Cheers, Terry.

dpen · « **Reply #74 on:** March 31, 2008, 03:51:37 am »

Ah, what the hell Terry, I'm up for something different.
I'll be doing a fair distance on my hols, freeway, back roads - the lot.
I'll just pick up a Battleaxe on the road if the other is r/s.
Be interesting to know though

News:

Author Topic: CHENG SHIN Tires (Read 27482 times)

fixahonda

750wardog