Bridgestone S11 Spitfire Tires

bigrider · May 22, 2010

I wanted to get a couple of my airheads back on the road and thought replacing the old rubber would be a good idea. I normally by the 3.25x19 front and 4.00x18 rear but could only get the metric this go around with the Bridgestone S11s. I've read on this forum and other places that front tires go any where between 90/90x19 to 100/90x19 and the rears 110/90 x18 to 120/90 x18. We since I'm putting rubber on two bikes I bought a set of 90/90 front and 110/90 rear for one bike and the larger size for the other. The 120/90x18 rear really looked huge when I got it, and I think I might have a problem mounting it. Attached is a photo of the four together, L to R 90, 100, 110, 120. A casual measure of the tires at their widest profile is 3.85", 4.18", 4.57" and 5.04". Has anyone put (successfully) a 5.04" wide tire on a 84 R100 Airhead before?

Dave H
San Antonio, TX

AnnapolisAirhead · May 22, 2010

Dave, for whatever its worth, I have a Metzler Lasertec 120/90 on my '83 R100 and it just barely clears the swingarm. Its a bit of a wrestle to get the wheel back on, but deflating it helps. You can also (carefully) move the swingarm a tiny bit to help.

lmo1131 · May 23, 2010

But the bigger question, for me anyway, is, do they handle well? Mileage expectations would be second? They have gotten good reviews, if you can believe the "testimonials" found on the various .com tire store websites.

But the S11 is one of, if not the cheapest tires on the market right now and the old adage about getting what one pays for springs to mind.

I'll add that I haven't worked since November.... and "less expensive" is becoming an issue... but not over performance. I don't straighten out as many canyons as I did in former years, but I would describe my solo riding as "spirited".

Any first-hand BMWMOA performance testimonials out there?

20774 · May 23, 2010

Not first-hand nor MOA member but here's what Snowbum had to say:

"Bridgestone: S-11 Spitfires (110 rear, 90 or 100 front). My favorite tire these days, all things considered. Very predictable handling in all conditions, decent mileage, good grip. A dual-tread construction is part of how they get the performance. Use the 90-90 or 100-90 front if using 19 inch; and the 110/90-18 rear. There is also a 120/90-18 rear. This tire is available in sizes to fit the much later Airheads and also K bikes. Highly recommended by me for many years now. I recommend that pre-1981 Airheads NOT use the 100 front and 120 rear (I recommend the 90 front and 110 rear, although a 100 front is usable)."

About 7 years ago, I mounted an S-11 in the rear (110/90) and it slightly rubbed the swingarm on my /7. I was able to knock the edge off where the sidewall met the tread and that seemed to be enough. Changed to Dunlop K491 about 8K miles later. I don't have any negative comments on the S-11...worked out fine for me...I probably wore it out in the center, as I do all my rear tires...not enough curvy roads!!

lmo1131 · May 23, 2010

Thanks for that 20774.

I mounted an S-11 in the rear (110/90) and it slightly rubbed the swingarm on my /7. I was able to knock the edge off where the sidewall met the tread and that seemed to be enough.

That comment wasn't in "quotes", was that your experience 20774? If so what did yo use to "knock the edge off"? A die-grinder, etc.? Tire-cutting iron?

So, 100/90-19 front; 110/90-18 rear it is; new tubes and rim flaps ... and I'm good to go.

Too bad tomorrow's a Monday... it's always som'pin', i'n'it?

20774 · May 23, 2010

Lew -

I should have been clearer...yes, the non-quote stuff was my experience. As for deridging the sidewall, I just used a regular flat file. I kept at it until turning it by hand didn't rub anymore. I'm not sure what happens at speed, but it might stretch out radially, thus bringing the sidewalls in. Or it might heat up and everything expands. Maybe in the end, it stays the same size... :dunno

lmo1131 · May 23, 2010

Thanks for the clarification Kurt. Get I'll have to wait a few days to see if it rubs on my bike... I hate waiting.. . .

dduelin · May 23, 2010

I have 100/90 and 110/90 Spitfires F & R on my 1981 R100 and have run them for about 30,000 miles. I get about 10,000 miles out of a rear S11. Mine does not rub the swingarm rather has about 6 mm of clearance. I thought of trying other tires but these handle well wet or dry and no other tire reports this kind of mileage. I've other motorcycles and these tires handle comparatively well for a classic sport tour tire given the state of MC art airhead frame and suspensions have. When I bought it four years ago a 120/90 was on the back and it was a bear to get past the brake shoes. I replaced it with a 110.

lmo1131 · May 23, 2010

Get I'll have to wait a few days to see if it rubs on my bike.

Get I'll have to wait?!?!? gotta proof-read a little more carefully... GUESS 'll have to wait....

Thanks dduelin... . 10K is astounding... good enough for me anyway.... ;-)

lmo1131 · May 28, 2010

I just about ordered the Spitfires yesterday for my /5, but then ran across an old "tire thread" about front tire size for the front.

3.25-19" vs. 100/90, or 90/90-19.

Bridgestone doesn't make a 3.25-19 Spitfire so, the question is 90/90 or 100/90.

Has anyone encountered a problem getting a 100/90 tire past the brake shoes on an R75/5?

Ref.: the 90/90 is listed as between 2.75-3.00 inches in width. The 100/90 3.25-3.50" in width...

20774 · May 28, 2010

I don't know about the brake drums on the /5s, but I would think that the fender brace will be your biggest problem. I've heard people have tire rubs with the 100s. The 90/90 would be a better choice IMO. And the listed widths can vary all over the map, so the actual dimension will be known when installed.

bigrider · May 28, 2010

Just had the 90-/90 and 100/90s mounted today. The 100/90 looks right, the 90/90 is quite a bit shorter than the 3.25 and looks a little odd on the front. I'll take it out tomorrow for a drive to see how it feels. As for the rear, the 120/90 is so tall in addition to being a little over 5" wide, I don't even think I will mount it.

Dave H
San Antonio, TX

kentuvman · May 28, 2010

I put the BT45's on my R65LS (not finished with project yet).

Put them on K75S after having Metzelers (older tires).

LOVE the Bridgestone tires - very sticky and responsive.

Couldn't be happier and they're priced considerably less than Metzeler.

Have only heard good things from other riders about these tires.

bigrider · May 29, 2010

Here is the front tire (90/90) mounted. Took the bike for a short ride. Steering feels OK.

Dave H
San Antoni, TX

lmo1131 · May 29, 2010

The 100/90-19 fits okay as well?

Say yes... I ordered a 100/90-19, and a 110/90-18 yesterday... . .

jforgo · May 30, 2010

One bad thing about the 90/90 and 110/90 is then the bike sits too high on the sidestand. My RS has that, and got blown over parked at work on a windy day.

20774 · May 30, 2010

jforgo said:
One bad thing about the 90/90 and 110/90 is then the bike sits too high on the sidestand. My RS has that, and got blown over parked at work on a windy day.

I'm not sure what you mean by "too high". My experience is that the /7 sits lower to the ground when using the metric tires versus the inch-sized tires. Since it's lower to the ground, the sidestand makes the bike sit up nearly vertical and prone to falling over to the opposite side...DAMHIK. I recently replaced my 90/90 front with a 3.25 inch tire...the bike now leans over more when on the sidestand. I measured the tire radius for both tires when installed. The inch-sized tire was 0.5 inches taller in radius than the 90/90 tire. Remember that the second "90" means that the profile (or height) is 90% of the width which is the first "90". Inch-sized tires have a unstated "100" in their profile definition...the height is the same as the width...all things considering.

I will replace the metric rear tire with a 4.00 and finally get the geometry back that I've been missing all these years. And the handling!!

bigrider · May 30, 2010

The 100/90 looks like it has the same height profile as the 3.25 and the 110/90x18 in the rear looks to have the same height profile as the 4.00. A 120/90 is really tall, maybe should be replaced by a 120/80 if the width works. I just wish they had more options in the inch series. I would stay with 3.25x19 and 4.00x18 if more tires came that way. BTW, the tire I took off one of the bikes was a 120/90-X18 Metzler. Be careful, different manufacturers have different spec it seems. Anyone what to buy a brand new 120/90X18 Bridgestone Spitfire 11?

Dave H
San Antonio, TX

tvrla · May 30, 2010

I've used the S11s for fifteen years and am very happy with them. I go with the 100X90 19 front and the 110X90 18 rear and also tend to get 10K on the rears.

The 120 rear is too large and the handling will suffer - the steering will be heavy and more sluggish and take more effort to lean over.

And, like you say, the 90X90 front is pretty small. It seems to work ok, but looks kind of dinky - take a look at the gap between the tire and fender for instance.

jforgo · May 30, 2010

20774 said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "too high". My experience is that the /7 sits lower to the ground when using the metric tires versus the inch-sized tires. Since it's lower to the ground, the sidestand makes the bike sit up nearly vertical and prone to falling over to the opposite side...DAMHIK. QUOTE]

Yes, I already know. Tires lower = bike sits higher, meaning sidestand holds it closer to vertical. For once I search for hilly places to park that bike.
The 110 also makes the speedo lie even more about how fast you are going.

Bridgestone S11 Spitfire Tires

Living the Legend

Attachments

--Tony

New member

Liaison

New member

Liaison

New member

Unregistered User

New member

New member

Liaison

Living the Legend

New member

Living the Legend

Attachments

New member

New member

Liaison

Living the Legend

New member

New member

Similar threads