Tweet
Re: KTM Duke 390 - Ownership Reviews and Experiences
Begumpet and LB Nagar are same dealer (Sidhi Vinayaka). You must have checked with other financiers and showrooms.
----consecutive posts auto-merged-----
MRF is not at all suitable for 390. 390 will tear apart and life expectancy will be much less. Only MRF i liked was on First version of R15. Rest all were pretty average.
Metz is obvious best choice followed by Michelin.
Metz come with 2 rating now a days (H and W) with H being cheaper of two but still more than Michelin.
Michelin is good tire. And it does not come in Hard compound. Since sidewall is bit on higher side, bike will feel little more comfortable than on Metz.
Originally posted by bhanubond
View Post
Originally posted by bhanubond
View Post
----consecutive posts auto-merged-----
Originally posted by s1d
View Post
Grip wise, the mrf is as good or better than the pilot street. The advantages of the michelin i've mentioned earlier. So you chose based on your requirements.
I own a D200, and have ridden on the mrf revz c (old model) for 14k km and now running the michelin pilot street for the past 11k km. I also briefly rode a 200 shod with the c1's and it was just as good.
The revz is a tire well worth the money (both front and rear), and the c1 is good enough (correct speed rating) for the 390's as well. The michelin 150/60 seems to have slightly bigger contact patch/harder compound (the tire wear on my 11k run michelin looks like a 6k run mrf revz!)
Coming to the grip in wet, I don't see any significant difference between the two. and in the wet rider skills plays a more important part, so i don't buy the 'reviews' some guys put up saying M is better than M in wet.
I'd say save some money and get yourself the revz c1 (and live with the similar headaches as a metz wrt punctures
). If you tour a lot, then get the michelin's.
I own a D200, and have ridden on the mrf revz c (old model) for 14k km and now running the michelin pilot street for the past 11k km. I also briefly rode a 200 shod with the c1's and it was just as good.
The revz is a tire well worth the money (both front and rear), and the c1 is good enough (correct speed rating) for the 390's as well. The michelin 150/60 seems to have slightly bigger contact patch/harder compound (the tire wear on my 11k run michelin looks like a 6k run mrf revz!)
Coming to the grip in wet, I don't see any significant difference between the two. and in the wet rider skills plays a more important part, so i don't buy the 'reviews' some guys put up saying M is better than M in wet.
I'd say save some money and get yourself the revz c1 (and live with the similar headaches as a metz wrt punctures
). If you tour a lot, then get the michelin's.Metz is obvious best choice followed by Michelin.
Metz come with 2 rating now a days (H and W) with H being cheaper of two but still more than Michelin.
Michelin is good tire. And it does not come in Hard compound. Since sidewall is bit on higher side, bike will feel little more comfortable than on Metz.
the 390 comes with wonderful metz but a lot of people go in for a cheaper replacements.
)and simply follow the manual and service recommendations, it should be good.
Comment