Hitchcocks Forum

HELLO !! all you fellow Enfield chums}------ something to round-off the day with. During this riding season I'll be needing to change a set of tyres on one of my Bullet 500 Classics. What's the general consensus of opinion on makes, mix'n match, types etc ?? Any experiences of changing the rear to say an 18" rim and going wider (WM3 running a 4-00 x 18 )for example??

---------sorry, forgot to put--" Allowing for the narrow front of the standard swing arm"----

When the originals on my year 2000 Classic 500 wore out, I changed to TT100's and I'm still happy with them some years later.
Regards, Chris

---------- and they look the part as well, don't they CHRIS ?? Yes, I had those in mind also.

Couldn't get the 4.00 x 18 Conti Escape between the swing arms, had to fit a 4.10 x 18 instead.

Just a Vote For TT100's
"Good Trad Looks, Good Grip & Good Modern Compound"
And usable on light Rough terrain & Grass....

Hi Alan - My bike came with Avon Speedmaster Ribbed at the front and SM (Safety Mileage) at the back as original fitment, and I've always stuck with them. For this type of bike (2001 Classic 500) they seem to offer good grip and high mileage. One odd thing I find is that the front one always wears out BEFORE the back, and this is the only bike / tyre setup that I've ever had where this is the case. Nothing against TT100s though.

I use TT100 for the same reason as Craig

Alan: What would be the reason for fitting a wider rear rim and tyre?

In my experience, wider tyres does nothing to improve the handling. Rather the opposite, in fact. Slower handling and heavy cornering. I have experienced this on two of my bikes, that both came with too fat tyres: A 1956 BMW R50 and a 1981 R80/7. Both improved noticeably when I put the original tyre dimensions back on.

OK, these were BMWs, but I suspect this is not limitied to BMW.

Only asking!

Regards, Anders F. R.

Hi guys------- the Bullet's standard wheel set-up( and therefore tyres ) seem to my eyes to be wrongly proportioned from a weight carrying point of view. In general terms almost all bikes tend to have at least a larger SECTIONED rear tyre if not a smaller diameter/ wider rim as well. Over the years and quite a few bikes owned / worked on only 2 types come to mind with the same back and front sizes ie the Bullet and most of the Pedal & Pop early mopeds. Even my recent 1970's Honda CG125 had a larger section rear (same diameters though ). I noticed that bikes of a similar wheel base and chassis weight ( T120 and T140, Commando etc) all have the 19" front, 18" rear set-up. Don't get me wrong though----this is just a "Bee-in-my-Bonnet" thing and, besides---I enjoy the experimenting which the Enfield allows us to do so readily. Mind you---taken to the extremes, my previous Yamaha Virago (or any other "cruiser" come to that) had typically a pencil thin 21" on the front with HUMUNGUS sectioned 16" on the rear. Improve the handling, ANDERS ?? Any change has got to be an improvement ?? So, I'm proposing the WM2x19 on the front and WM3x18 on the rear with the appropiate tyres fitted-- But I'm not too concerned with "turn-in" and the like, as I'm just a 50's (MPH) boy at heart. (Brace yourself now Rodney--here comes all the Tech. stuff).