Wilsons Sandbox

Mark I found the opposite to be true. The MT-21's were the scary ones and were wearing to quickly. For the money the Kenda's are a better tire all around. Even if they cost the same, I would buy the Kenda's again. They exhibit fair road manners and perform very well for me in the dirt, mud, and gravel. In my opinion the MT-21's are 80/20 tires. The Kenda 270's are 60/40 or 70/30. I can get around not leaning the KLR into curves at high speeds but I can't get around no traction off pavement. This comparison proved to me that expensive tires aren't necessarily better than cheaper ones. Just another opinion. DAngus A-11 -----Original Message----- From: Weaver, Mark [mailto:markw@...] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 11:02 AM To: DSN_klr650 Subject: RE: [DSN_klr650] Kenda K270's i have k270's. i would recommend them for dirt riding. i would not recommend them too much for pavement riding. the knobs are pretty flexible. i have about 1800 miles on them now, and they're just now not squirming like crazy anymore. i don't think they're dangerous or anything, but they sure aren't confidence inspiring on pavement when new. i will probably just cough up a couple extra bucks and get mt21's next time. i'm told they are not squirrelly on the pavement, and are probably better in dirt, tho they may not last as long.