19 replies to this topic
  • FOX426

Posted January 10, 2001 - 06:06 PM


I posted about tires a couple of weeks ago and I apprreciate all the info. I am going to order tire next week. I have decided on Dunlops brand for sure, 756 rear but still undecided 756 front also or 755. Looking for best bite in soft to intermediate terrain (emphasis soft) but also good wear.

  • Glen_T

Posted January 10, 2001 - 09:15 PM


Haven't tried the 755, but I like my 756 on the front! I ride both soft and hard terrain and It works a lot better than the 759fa that was stock on all surfaces. I'm not sure I like the durability of the rear 756 though.


  • Boit

Posted January 10, 2001 - 11:25 PM


Yeah, tire selection is such a hit or miss best. For soft to intermediate, from what I hear, you won't be going wrong with either the 755 or 756. I'm using the 756 front and rear and have mixed feelings about this tire. It's outstanding in soft loamy soil, but as soon as the soil gets packed enough to form a blue groove, it's out of it's element. Since track conditions change over a short period of time if there are a lot of bikes running, I suppose the rider has to select an "average" type of tire and try to predict what the conditions will be at mid-moto. Does that make sense or am I rambling like an idiot? Where I raced last Sunday, the track became a mixture of hard packed blue groove, to soft loamy deep rutted soil. What tire works best for that? In my opinion, you look at what the track consists of mostly and choose accordingly. Since I bought the Talon/Excel/Buchanan wheels and have an extra set of stock wheel sets, I can have two different tire compounds to choose from.......hey, almost like the factory guys!

  • scottzx7rr

Posted January 11, 2001 - 03:06 AM


I run 755 on the front and 756 on the rear. I love the combination. Previously I had ran the 752 on both but with my area of the world(Missouri, ie ROCKY ROCKY) they didn't have the staying power. I have found that the 755 grips better as the terrain firms up. We ride alot at a place called Chadwick(part of the Mark Twain National Forest) and it is know for rocky conditions. With the 755 on the front I was able to firm up the suspension and it stuck great. Before that I was having a non fuzzy feeling of the front was going to washout. But it never let go. I had a riding buddy that has a pumpkin bike(300exc) and he noticed the same thing as I. So we played with the suspension and it was correct by the stiffening up the front.

But good luck. You will love the grip and wear of the 755/756 over the 697/739 series.

Scott #431
Some Fear Racing "Cause if you don't have any you ain't going fast enough"
'99 YZ400F(Coming to a Theater near you soon)
'92 ZX-7R and '97 ZX-7RR
"Doesn't hurt till the bone is exposed"
"When cut do you bleed green? I do!"

  • MaxGrip

Posted January 11, 2001 - 01:11 PM


Yamaha gives us euros Pirelli soft-med tiers (made in Brazil!), so i was looking for a hard-med terrain tire. After trying all the popular Bridgestone’s, I got a pair of Michelin Star Cross MH2. This tire wears better than a hard-only tire while giving excellent traction especially when powering flat, long turns. Because I don’t ride in the mud anymore I mount a MH2 on the second wheel set also, one for practice and a fresh one for practice with friends :)

Boit , we all have a extra set of wheels here in Germany, the 426 is a popular Supermoto bike (17’ road tires, monster disks) and the dealer sells the left over wheels for les then half the price of a Talon/Excel (with a Brazil Pirelli of course).

[This message has been edited by MaxGrip (edited 01-11-2001).]

  • mike_dean

Posted January 11, 2001 - 02:57 PM


I have found my 756 rear to work great in soft terrain,and not bad on hard pack. the best feature though is the durability. MX action did a report on the tire said it was the best wearing tire they found. very hard rubber but does not chunk out. you can not go wrong with this tire on a big 4 stroke.

  • Matt406

Posted January 11, 2001 - 04:00 PM


The 756 and 755 are very similar. They have the same rubber compounds, and the only difference is the tread width. The 755 is a little bit wider making it better suited for soft terrain. I have ran both and like the 755 because of the width, altough I didn't feel it tracking any better because the distance is onle about 3/16-1/4 of an inch. I still run the 755 because it makes sense that it would be better in soft stuff. I have never had a problem with it in hard pack.


  • FOX426

Posted January 11, 2001 - 04:03 PM


Everyone seems to agree on the 756 REAR and seems to be spilt, everyone satisfied, with both the 755 and 756 front. Does anyone know the real difference?

The world loves talent but, pays off on character.

  • FOX426

Posted January 11, 2001 - 04:05 PM


Matt, you posted your reply just as I was posing the question. Thanks for info.

The world loves talent but, pays off on character.

  • Boit

Posted January 11, 2001 - 04:06 PM


I think I will give the 755 a shot on the front soon.

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • ToddW

Posted January 12, 2001 - 07:20 AM


I have run the 755 and 756 front. The 756 has wider knobs and because of that it wears better. They both stick like glue. The 756 works even better when you switch to a 20" wheel. I would go with the 756 either way.

  • Tim

Posted January 12, 2001 - 09:14 AM


I have not heard anyone talk about the 755 rear being very prone to "chunk out". I had one last year on my cr500 and the thing was JUNK after about 5-7 rides. Complete nobs tore clear off. Just something to remember. I did love the 752 front, this will be my next tire on the 426.

  • Scott_F

Posted January 12, 2001 - 10:52 PM


I have worn out many 755 rears, and never chunked knobs, except when a loose chain "tickled" the side knobs and caused tiny bits of chunking. But I don't ride in rocks either.

Dunlop considers the 755 front more intermediate than the 756, even though it looks more like a sand tire.

  • TW

Posted January 12, 2001 - 03:29 PM


I have a 755 on the front and it has been a very good tire. I ran a 755 on back which is usually no problem in the area's I ride. Last October I rode in Tenessee where it was a mixture of dirt/rocks rock/loose rock, a new rear 755 came apart in one weekend. Not a good rock tire in my opinion. Michelin M12 on the back has held up great in all conditions.

99 WR400

[This message has been edited by TW (edited 01-12-2001).]

  • Guest_Guest_*

Posted January 12, 2001 - 09:03 PM


hey fox.....
Last year at our awards banquet I won a Michelin 50 gift cert........and I never used it for about 4 months cuz i thot mich were overrated and to much $$$$$.
I tried the m-12 on the rear and liked it but felt like stopping on ice.....
I switched to the s-12 rear and absolutely love it .....I will never buy anything els is extremely hard to keep tires on this bike and the mich are definitely worth the extra$$$$
I have the s-12 up front and plan on changing to the m-12 which seems to be a better all round tire and more stable on roads/hardpack
just my $.02

ride BLUE

  • benhit

Posted January 18, 2001 - 07:22 PM


755, 756, and s12, m12 are good tires, but from my expience with southeastern harescrambles and enduros, the pirelli mt32 beats both hands down. they work great in all terrain, but really excell in slick clay and roots. and they never seems to wear out, at least not as quick. they are a couple dollars cheaper too.

[This message has been edited by benhit (edited 01-18-2001).]

  • Boit

Posted January 18, 2001 - 11:14 PM


Ben: My KTM friend also rants about the Pirelli's. I seem to recall that those things are extemely expensive. I'm looking at an ad from Chaparall and they are listed at $72 for my rear size, whereas, the 755 is $61. While that's not a financial hardship for me to pay more, I want to be satisfied that I'm getting what I paid for. Is this a hard terrain targeted tire? I need a soft/intermediate.

  • SUnruh

Posted January 19, 2001 - 04:33 AM


the combo from Pirelli you want is a MT44 front and a MT18 rear. this is a very good combo. if you want more of a sand/mud combo then go for the MT32A front and MT320 rear.

email me for more info.

  • 4banger

Posted January 19, 2001 - 06:54 AM


I run s12's on everybike I have and love them. I have tried most of the other tires and the michelins are the best for my hare scrambling and trail riding in muddy and intermediate terrain. I am also satisfied with the durability of them.

  • Guest_Guest_*

Posted January 19, 2001 - 09:06 AM


I would have to agree with you 100%
I have found that desert racing eats a tire about every 2-3 races includin practices...
That is stretchin it!
I found that the M-12 rear is a piece of garbage for the 4str engine braking.
It feels like stopping on a hockey rink.
and I have a friend w/cr500 and thinks the same thing.......he actually tried to GIVE his M-12 to me cuz' he took my advice and went to the s-12 rear and is havin' a hard time gettin used to how good it hooks up and he cant believe the diff in stopping ability.
I have tried Mich/Dunlop/Prelli/Maxxis and a couple of other cheaper brands and have found that the Mich S-12 rear is the best by far for this bike. Believe it or not the Maxxis did come in second (in my book) and did exceptionally well for the price ...$43
So if you are in a bind for $$$$$ try the Maxxis not sure of the model # but similar to the s-12 in looks.
When i had my yz250 the only thing i could afford was the maxxis and i was really happy with them on that bike too.
$ .02

ride BLUE

Related Content


Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.