Conti Trail Attack rear with TKC front?

[dcstrom]

In Quito, Ecuador and tire options are limited. I got a good deal on a Trail Attack rear ($170) but can't get the same deal on a front - the only one I can find is $165. Looking for something a bit dirtier anyway. I can get a TKC front for $85. Will probably do quite a bit of dirt in Peru, so at least a TKC front will help me there. Not sure how long it will last though - might end up changing both in Lima at 5000 miles or so.

I could also get the TKC's as a set, but not keen on 3000 miles or less I'd get out of the rear.

Thoughts?

 

[Dirt_Dad]

In Quito, Ecuador and tire options are limited. I got a good deal on a Trail Attack rear ($170) but can't get the same deal on a front - the only one I can find is $165. Looking for something a bit dirtier anyway. I can get a TKC front for $85. Will probably do quite a bit of dirt in Peru, so at least a TKC front will help me there. Not sure how long it will last though - might end up changing both in Lima at 5000 miles or so.

I could also get the TKC's as a set, but not keen on 3000 miles or less I'd get out of the rear.

Thoughts?

Checkswrecks gave me a warning about putting a better traction tire on the back. Told me he ended up in a low side pretty quickly when the rear gave him a lot of confidence that the front could not match. Personally I have no experience with that type of combination, but his warning stuck with me. Of course if he chimes in here and contradicts everything I just said, go with his word over mine.

 

[dcstrom]

Checkswrecks gave me a warning about putting a better traction tire on the back. Told me he ended up in a low side pretty quickly when the rear gave him a lot of confidence that the front could not match. Personally I have no experience with that type of combination, but his warning stuck with me. Of course if he chimes in here and contradicts everything I just said, go with his word over mine.

Yeah I think if you have to chose, it's better to have more traction on the front. Trouble with the TKC in this combo is that it will help me in the dirt, but have nowhere near the handling or roadholding of the Trail Attack rear on the road. I'm torn, but looking at the map I could easily do 2000 miles between here and Lima. (Not by the most direct route, of course, why would I want to do that??). My Heidi front is going to be pretty slick by then.

I'm thinking I'll stick with the well-worn Heidenau front for a while, and I have a used Avon Distanzia from Freedom Cycles (bike rentals in Quito). Worst case, I'll fit the Avon, and it will get me to Lima. I just have to refrain from playing racer on the nice twisty roads with this combo! That's one reason I should just say screw the price, and get a nice new Trail Attack front to match the rear. I might still do that... Arrrg! decisions decisions...

 

[RogerJ]

Trev........have seen a TKC front with a lesser gripping rear on a TX bike in the Copper Canyon in Mexico on the dirt and gravel roads there. Can't vouch for it myself (never tried it) but the owner thought it was an ok idea. That said, if budget allows I would put equivalent rubber on back AND front. The Heinendau front when well worn can get a little floaty and slow to hook up on the "roads" you will hit in the Andes especially when well worn like you say yours are. Consider that you are a long way from support and weather is a big factor. Personally I would go the same front and back. YRMV.

FWIW the MOA magazine April 2013 at page 104 onwards rates the available "Adventuring" tires. It gives the Conti Trail Attack excellent marks: 10 on Pavement; 8 on Gravel; 6 on Sand; 7.5 on Mud; 10 on Ride quality (harshness, noise,vibration) and 10 on Confidence level. The Conti TKC setup they gave 10 on Pavement; 8 on Gravel; 6 on Sand; 7.5 on Mud; 10 on Ride quality and 10 on Confidence level. So......given comparable performance scores and much better rear tire life I would go with Conti Trail Attacks set especially since you have access to a set. Some bikes I rode with in Peru, Chile and Bolivia had them on and did very well in the gravel dirt and sand we saw. Best of luck and have a great ride.

 

[dcstrom]

Trev........have seen a TKC front with a lesser gripping rear on a TX bike in the Copper Canyon in Mexico on the dirt and gravel roads there. Can't vouch for it myself (never tried it) but the owner thought it was an ok idea. That said, if budget allows I would put equivalent rubber on back AND front. The Heinendau front when well worn can get a little floaty and slow to hook up on the "roads" you will hit in the Andes especially when well worn like you say yours are. Consider that you are a long way from support and weather is a big factor. Personally I would go the same front and back. YRMV.

FWIW the MOA magazine April 2013 at page 104 onwards rates the available "Adventuring" tires. It gives the Conti Trail Attack excellent marks: 10 on Pavement; 8 on Gravel; 6 on Sand; 7.5 on Mud; 10 on Ride quality (harshness, noise,vibration) and 10 on Confidence level. The Conti TKC setup they gave 10 on Pavement; 8 on Gravel; 6 on Sand; 7.5 on Mud; 10 on Ride quality and 10 on Confidence level. So......given comparable performance scores and much better rear tire life I would go with Conti Trail Attacks set especially since you have access to a set. Some bikes I rode with in Peru, Chile and Bolivia had them on and did very well in the gravel dirt and sand we saw. Best of luck and have a great ride.

Thanks Roger, great info, and just what I need. I'm been holding off buying the Trail Attack front, not only because of price (about $40 more than US, so not really that bad) but because I though it would be pretty crap in dirt and I'd be stuck with it for 10-15000 miles (however long it lasts). But if the tests say it works pretty well in dirt, I may just have to go for it... I'm really surprised though that the Trail Attack rates the same as the TKC for offroad. No way I'm getting the TKC rear anyway, I'll be lucky to see 3000 miles out of it.

 

[Checkswrecks]

Checkswrecks gave me a warning about putting a better traction tire on the back. Told me he ended up in a low side pretty quickly when the rear gave him a lot of confidence that the front could not match. Personally I have no experience with that type of combination, but his warning stuck with me. Of course if he chimes in here and contradicts everything I just said, go with his word over mine.

You got it.


Years ago, I was being aggressive on a road, leaned over pretty good, and the rear of the bike kept going around the turn while the front headed toward the gravel. It sure wasn't like the normal low side where you hit sand or something else slippery. I had one of the old hard compound hi mileage tires on the front, so learned about mixing tires.

 

[dcstrom]

Thanks Bob,

Yeah I wasn't keen on mixing these two, which is why I asked here. The TKC front was half the price ($85) as the Trail Attack front... but then again, would only last half as long.

On the other hand I was worried that the Trail Attacks would be pretty crappy off-road, and I'd be stuck with it for 10-15000 miles (or however long it lasts).

i decided to bite the bullet and just get the matching Trail Attack on the front. At least now I'm free to wander and don't have to make a bee-line to Lima for a tire. Nice light handling on the road, no off-road test yet.

Trevor

 

[Andrew]

TKC front/ Trail Attack (or similar trail tire) rear is pretty common here in TX for lots of gravel, at least on smaller dual sports. I have TKC front/Kenda 761 rear on my KLR with no complaints, and my girlfriend runs TKC front/Trail Attack rear on her Versys during our winter-spring dirt rally season. Also, I rode my T from Whitehorse back to South Texas on a K60 front and Trail Attack rear; admittedly 99% pavement but no complaints about the rear, and I got used to the new K60 squirming when pushed (or it stopped squirming) after about 500 miles. I think the front TKC is comparable to the Heidi on pavement.
Best of luck