StromTrooper banner

Pilot Road 4 Rear Trail Vs Normal

5K views 14 replies 13 participants last post by  PTRider 
#1 ·
I'm due for new tires again and I'm interested in Pilot Road 4s. On the front I have to go with the Trail version because of tire size. On the rear I believe I can go Trail or Normal based on size. The price difference is around $20 more for the Trail version which has a medium center and soft sides compared to the normal with a hard center and medium sides.

Am I correct in thinking that the normal will wear better but not offer as much grip as the trail which will wear quicker?
 
#2 ·
Very interested in people's opinions on this myself. I have trails front and rear but will soon need a new rear. I was considering going with the road version.
 
#3 ·
I don't know why the "trail" version should offer more grip? Plenty of sport touring bikes on standard versions with all the grip they can use. I have a high opinion of the PR3 front trail version. I am over 13,000 miles and it still looks good. Rear PR3 lasted 8,500 miles. Replaced it with a PR4 trail. It won't make 8,500 miles. So much for increased wear! Neither rear tire has ever slipped and both have been on the bike when pegs touch down. That said I am not pleased with the wear vs cost and the only way I would buy another PR4 rear was to go to the standard version. I originally bought these thinking maybe the Trail version had a heavier and therefore more puncture resistant casing for gravel road rides. I don't think there is any difference now.
 
#8 ·
Interesting topic, need a front soon, T-30 got almost 13k, but have got great ( sort of) milage from PR 3's in the past on much heavier machines, not sure about PR 4's.
It's been my understanding from reading as well as shooting the breeze with a friend that has owned an independent shop for almost thirty years, that any tyre that it labeled as dual sport, dirt bike, trail, etc, has much stiffer sidewalls for the off road stuff, so much so that the owner will not mount dual sport tires period, which says much because in the spring he actually makes a substainal part of his cash from just doing mounts with tires bought on line.
Personal experience fighting with Conti Trail Attacks on a KLR, brutal mount, and I'm been mounting my own for, um, lots of years, (decades) and I use a No-Mar, still tough. YMMV
 
#9 ·
I have pr4's on my Honda CBR1000RR Fireblade and they are pretty good tyres, I cant see how a trail version can offer more grip, but can vouch for the grip of the standard one, and trust me, my Vstrom is not physically capable of working a tyre anywhere near as hard nor near the angles of lean as that capable on the blade.

To summarise, I think the extra is prob bit of marketing hype to cash in on the 'adventure' (and I use that term loosely!) bike market.

If you wanna run road tyres i'd say the standard PR4 would fit the bill perfectly and if can suffice the needs of a sport bike, I'm sure a vstrom wont tax it much, and you should get good km from it.
 
#10 · (Edited)
tread depth is the difference between trail vs normal. iow's tread is ticker on trail version. due to the extra weight is probably why trail has lower speed rating. therefore, trail should last longer for street duty. i'm pushing 13k on rear trail 3. worn flat but not yet to the wear indicators. i recommend the trail version. its worth the extra $20.

----------------------------------------------
V-Strom (Suzuki DL1000) | Fuelly
 
#11 ·
With the PR3s Trail I was getting about 40K out of a front tire and 18-20K out of a back. I tried the PR4s. The first PR4 standard rear I got the same mileage as the PR3 Trail. So still have the first PR4 regular front tire and working on my second PR4 regular rear tire. I really thought I would get more mileage out of the standard version compared to the trail version but at least with the first rear tire that didn't happen.
 
#12 ·
It was my belief that the PR4 standard compound is hard center and soft sidewall, thus making it a sportier tire. It's what i went with after a PR3 Trail rear (11,000 miles).

I don't know yet how the 4 std. rear will fare, but I suspect no better. I have somewhere in the 7,000 mile range on it now, and it looks ok, but a bit scalloped here and there.
 
#13 ·
I am really happy with my PR4 trail front standard rear.
I am about 9,000miles on theses tires. Some weird cupping on the rear but I use the rear brake a lot more on the bike because of the ABS. I expect at least a few thousand more miles.
I have not had the displeasure of riding in the rain with these tires.

I would buy this same combo in a heartbeat.

A little more about me.
My riding is mostly faster freeway commuting and canyon/twisty road riding. I run the tires at 34FR 36RR psi.
I ride solo with just a top box.
 
#14 ·
No idea but I'm simply riding around sports bikes in the rain with PR4's on my bike. Wear seems O.K. both ends, the trails certainly aren't a short lived tire with my riding.

Useless offroad on anything but very hard packed surfaces but they handle very bad seal just fine.

Pete
 
#15 ·
Michelin doesn't tell us much about either of the tires. Two things, the standard is zero degree radial (note the ZR in the size description) and W speed rated. The Trail version is not zero degree radial belt (maybe stiffer carcass under the tread, not necessarily stiffer sidewalls) and V speed rated. I do not know what functional difference these make for most of us...the V speed rating is good only up to 149 mph; above that you need the W up to 168 mph.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top