589 m/s 26's or 27's?
 

I've been kicking around the idea of buying some 589's for the Foreman. I want to keep the stock rims 6.0x12 front and 7.5x12 back. I also do not want to lift the quad at this time so the tires need to fit as is. I don't really want the tires to be too wide for the stock rims. I was going to get the 26x9-12 & 26x12-12 but the back width would have a difference of 4.5" and the front 3". Now I'm considering the 27x9-12 front and 27x11-12. This would make the width difference in the back 3.5" instead of 4.5". The front is still a 3" difference. Depending where you get the specs, the front weight is only about .1 more for the 27's compared to the 26's. The rear 27's are actually lighter than the 26's by around 2 or 3lbs. So by going with the 27's, I'd save about 8 to 12 lbs in the back. So, does anyone have the 589 m/s 27's installed on a 450 Foreman without a lift and on the original wheels? Do the tires rub at all? Do the tires hurt the power?

I've also considered the Mudlites in 26's but the width difference in the front 4" and back 4.5". (difference between the rim width and tire width)

Does anyone have pics of 589's, Mudlites, 26's or 27's on a quad?

589 m/s 26's or 27's?
 

I had 27 inch ITP 589's on my my 450 foreman es. (I did not have a lift kit or any type of suspension work/upgrades, but I did have them mounted on 12x7 ITP C-series wheels.) The past week (before the big snow storm) I mounted the 589's on my stock wheels for a P700 (traded foreman on a P700) Couldn't use my c-series wheels since the lug pattern is for honda/yamaha/suzuki. If you want me to take a picture let me know. I will say those tires and rims made a huge difference in the appearance of that machine- from boy to man. In addition, I found my machine to be more stable even though we increased tire height. The width of the tires kept better stability and contact points to the ground. For example, I have a few acres of hilly land. On one part of the property, I used to have the foreman in 4wd (stock tires) and have the bars tweaked with some good body english to keep the machine going across and barely going across (left to right not up and down). When I purchased the 27 inch 589's on the c-series wheels I was able to go across easily in 2wd- no body english, no ripped up grass. Overall, they are good tires IMO. They do ride a little hard on hard pack at slow speeds. I hear the mudlites are a little smoother. The tread pattern looks the same from the 589's to mudlites. The difference is the lites have a hollow type lug. Not sure how I feel about that. I have heard good things with those tires, but to me I would think that empty rubber lug would tear or wear faster since all the weight and contact is exclusively on the outline of the lug. Big difference though is the weight. I did notice my foreman not be as responsive of the line when I put the 589's- I also had a DynoJet kit. The foreman isn't going to when many drags, but I could have pulled a house down with that baby! For the type of work I was using the foreman for, the pros of the 589's out weighed the cons. Did you lose a little power, but how measurable will that be for your type of riding and use- increase traction, increased clearance, increased stability vs. losing a few mph at top end speed or not getting to 300 feet as fast as you did with your stockers. You will probably feel a difference with any tire bigger than stock duncraps. Good Luck. Guz

589 m/s 26's or 27's?
 

Thanks for the reply Guz. I also kind of like when the tread is solid because as you wrote it might break down faster with a hallow lug. I was thinking about the 589's with the anti-suctions but want to get the most wear out of them as I can. So I would probably go with the solid tread.