mudlite's vs 589's
#1
#2
mudlite's vs 589's
The 589's grab logs good if you throw some studs in them, test drove a Kodiak during hunting season and the owner had studs in the rear tires and I noticed the front tended to shred the bark on wet trees and not get a good grip but when the rear tires hit the log you were gong over in a hurrry. I bought the Mudlites for the Kodiak 450 I bought and they are alittle more plyable and get better traction going over logs and grip the rocks extremly well. I would like to stud them for the winter and late fall rides when the the ground gets covered with ice, not fun when there is snow and you can't tell until your halfway up the hill and then you realise it, still made the hill as the tires dig down thru the ice to get enough traction to get up to the top. Still would like to add some traction, I feel you can not have enough.AlaskaBoy.
#5
mudlite's vs 589's
Have seen mudlites studded with car studs. I just put some car studs on a set of rincon factory tires. I drilled holes with a router. You need something with high rpm as you need to melt the rubber. A dremel should work or also a die grinder. I bought a die grinder but my air compressor was not big enough. I could only do 4 or 5 holes. It seems that people put 75 to 100 studs per tire. More would be even better but may compromise trail riding on hard surfaces such as rocks. Mudlites are much more pliable that the 589 but traction is not as aggressive in most situations. But Mudlites are far superior in the snow. Their rubber compound is much softer giving them more traction on ice, etc. On the otherhand, they will wear quick if you ride rocky areas. I have 589's and they are great but I only use them when I think they are neccesssary.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
yamaguy
Drivetrain, Suspension & Tires
4
04-19-2003 10:32 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)