I've run countless sets of Shinko 244s, they are great bang for the buck but I got tired of how quickly they wear out. For comparison they last 2,500 miles or so...which is about half of what I got from the stock D605s. I just got back from my local shop and ordered IRC GP110s for the front and rear, they'll be here on Tuesday. I plan on running those for my street/dirt exploring tire. If I plan on running a ton of dirt/single track I might just spoon on some knobies. To be honest the Shinko 244 seems to be buzzy on the highway compared to the 605, which doesn't make sense but my experience says other wise.

 

Kenda TrakMaster II K760 front and rear.

 

I put the Duros on the 250 going to a 4.10-18, narrow for a purpose, the 4.60 or 120/80 (pretty much identical in specs) would replace OEM.

How much narrow or wider can you go on a KLX250 wheel?

How do you do the conversion from stock to other tire sizes?

I know some about automotive wheels, but would like you to tell me more about tires for the KLX.

also did you replace the tubes in the tire when you changed tires?

 

Key question is for performance or looks?

Seems some people have fitted 130s on them, Kawsaki does OEM at 120 or 4.60. Fatter may look good, but remember a 250 is only around 20 hip versus my 650, which runs a 130, at around 39 hp. The Honda XR650L came with a 120, so that tells you something about tire size on a dual sport too.

True to the things I learned back when off roading and again on road bikes when I went too wide on tires, I went to the narrower dual sport tire, because it takes less power to run and is less unsprung weight and rotating mass - less power draw. On the KLX it has a lighter MX look too, so that works for me. I'm not riding a chopper, I'm riding a dual sport. The smaller tires will handle a bit quicker too, but not really noticeably when on the rear. I found in deep sand I didn't have to slip the clutch much, engage and spin the tire a bit to get rolling. No bogging. I'm figuring the same will be true when I get in mud this summer.

With the bias ply tires used the KLX rim is wide enough to use any of them from 110-130mm wide, about 3.5"-5.00". The metric width is usually truer than the inch, because that part after the decimal may or may not represent the additional width. Sometimes it represents the profile percentage. A 4.50 may be 4-1/2", but a 4.60 may be a 4" wide 60% profile. It's pretty stupid, thus the metrics. a 120/90 is about 120mm wide with a 90% profile, a 120/80 would be the same roughly 120 with an 80% profile. If you look up tire manufacturer web sites they often will list tire width on given rim sizes as well as diameter and such. Makes for an educated choice.

If it was radial tires, the rim width becomes far more critical due to the low wall profiles and carcass construction.

The front usually is a 90/90, which is about 3.25. It would be interesting to go to an 80/90 or 80/100 if they made them, but since I like the Duros best I run the one they have.

One last note. for a given rim width and bias ply tires, a narrower tire will open out more giving a wider contact patch where a wider tire will pinch in narrowing the contact patch. We found that when mounting 5.10-18 tires on bikes back in the 70s. A 5.10 would wear out faster than the OEM 4.00 due to being pinched by the relatively narrow rim. With the right wider rim the 5.10 would have been far better.


When I switched tires (sold a near new set of Kenda 761 take offs - not to be confused with the knobby 760) I used the tubes that were in the tires, looked near new. I also bought a set of tubes just to have them in the garage though. Nothing worse than a flat when everything is closed.

 

[QUOTE=klx678;520742]Key question is for performance or looks?

Seems some people have fitted 130s on them, Kawsaki does OEM at 120 or 4.60. Fatter may look good, but remember a 250 is only around 20 hip versus my 650, which runs a 130, at around 39 hp. The Honda XR650L came with a 120, so that tells you something about tire size on a dual sport too.



so say I wanted to run mefo explorer tires from REvZilla:

Mefo Explorer Dual Sport Tires - RevZilla

which tire from the list for front and rear fit? that would equate to the stock tire for example.

 

I used to run the Kenda K270, 50 / 50 tire, Cheap and seemed to last forever. Did equally well on pave and hard pack/gravel. Not great but pretty good. Now I'm trying to up my challenge a bit (I'm still a ****ty rider offroad ) . I'm using MotoZ tractionators. Love'em for off road. I still tour quite a lot. I do more touring with full camping gear than I ride offroad to be honest and I was pleasantly surprised and how long they lasted for a knobby tire. A little bit wobbly on pavement at higher speeds but you get used to it. The front wore down in an odd pattern but lasted a full season.

Just put on a new set this weekend.

 

[QUOTE=KLX25O;520751]
If I was choosing I'd be doing a 4.10-18 since I want a slightly smaller tire, but if you want OEM do the 120/90-18 which will be slightly taller, but can be compensated with 1 tooth lower on the front or three bigger on the back. For the front here in the eastern US I'd be tempted with the 80/100-21, which is likely close to OEM, but a 90/90-21 does it all without being too big.

Summary - 120/90-18 back, 90/90-21 front for close to OEM. More woods, not much rocks and an adventuresome spirit 4.10-18 and 80/100-21. I'd think it would work good in the woods, maybe not so good in deep sand or rocky terrain.

Sidenote - sure look a lot like the Duros except for the dimpling in the tread blocks. Chevron tread is a lot like them. Oddly enough Heidenau is doing a similar tread design on some of their tires. Duro has done them for over 15 years now. It works.

 

Haven't tried Motoz terrapactors yet but I know someone who does on his bike and loves them. They seem to wear well as they have real rubber in them...but...

This is my second set of Kenda K270s. The front I use is a 3.25 21 and is a little bit taller. Not sure I like the height.
The rear. Well here's my difference of opinion.
I put on a 4.5 -18 thinking it would be smaller than the stock 4.6. I learned a lot last year! The tire is actually wider and taller than stock. But I like it a lot! Grabs really well in the sand and it's MUCH easier to walk out of mud if I get stuck. Never needed a push last year at all AND that rear tire now has 12 000kms and is not even half worn with 85% of my riding on paved roads.
The tire I REALLY want to try is the Heidenau K60 only because I'm not an agressive off road rider.
Hope my 2 cents helps.

 

[QUOTE=klx678;520758][QUOTE=KLX25O;520751]


If I was choosing I'd be doing a 4.10-18 since I want a slightly smaller tire, but if you want OEM do the 120/90-18 which will be slightly taller, but can be compensated with 1 tooth lower on the front or three bigger on the back.



again I'm new to this, thanks for all the information.

What do you mean by compensated, are you talking about a different sprocket?

What would a taller tire effect? speed/handling,or just being too tall of a tire?

 

Taller tires take more energy to spin so u may feel a slightly slower acceleration. I also find that because of its width, the bike tends to wander a bit in gravel.
Weight of a tire is also an issue and the 'bigger' tire weighs more
But I like the traction it has and the ride on pavement.