Why would smaller 100/120 tires weigh more than the stock larger 120/130 tires?
Did not weigh the TT93 yet, still mounted on the bike.
The Mitas MC35 are DOT tires. Great tires but the medium rear wears flat in the center after less than 1K road miles.
The Kenda is a fresh tire, made in 2021. Not sure why some would have a red logo and others not.
Good to know about the Mitas. Maybe, I’ll try those someday, too. I think they cost quite a bit more than the Kendas, if I remember correctly. The red logo thing is strange. Yeah, none of my 120/70 or 130/70 tires have it.
As far as the weights go, I felt that the 120/70 and 130/70 Kenda’s weights were pretty reasonable and a good bit lighter than stock, which I welcome. I like the compound. I’m not sure how Michelin makes the Power Pure so light. They must be thinly constructed, but it is a great tire. I think everyone is in agreement that they don’t provide the amount of grip that the Kendas do. I’d personally rather ride on high grip, low mileage tires. I feel safer, when riding fast.
I’m guessing it is the height of the 100/90 and 120/80 that contributes to the additional weight? Would running stock sizes be out of the question for you? Maybe stock sizes would be a good compromise, regarding weight, if they lasted longer than say the Dunlop or Mitas tires. If you keep this set of Kendas, maybe you can at least get some miles out of them. Ultimately, I suspect you will prefer something else, due to the weight penalty alone. It will be interesting to see where the Dunlop TT93 comes in regarding weight.
Realistically, I’ll probably keep running Kendas for a while. I love the grip and the price. I paid $89 shipped for this pair. My mountain bike tires cost that much each…lol.
I saw a YouTube video once where a guy was at a Grom meetup in the Smokey Mountains. Kenda was there with a tent setup. I believe that guy paid $20 a tire for KD1s. How do you beat $40 for a set of great performing Grom tires?
I wonder if the Kenda KD2s are any lighter?