Dark side, Insurance

[Yammy]

I am concidering buying a Kumho, The darkside is very appealing, traction, cost, and tire life, but, a good friend asked me: If you had an accident with a car tire on your bike, would your insurance cover you? Anyone know?

 

Mark

 

FYI For canadian riders. I made a call to Primmum insurance. Asking about using car tires on a motorcycle. He laughed, "the dark side". He seemed to know all about it! Then said, "this is an

unacceptable modification and if you don’t disclose this modification to the insurance company and are involved in an accident your insurance will be void, under material misrepresentation. You will also be tagged and not be able to get insurance for three years". He said most insurance companys will be the same.

Please check for yourself.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Yammy

[tsigwing]

I am concidering buying a Kumho, The darkside is very appealing, traction, cost, and tire life, but, a good friend asked me: If you had an accident with a car tire on your bike, would your insurance cover you? Anyone know?

 

Mark

 

 

check your policy. your tire is DOT approved, that is all most care about.

[slick97spirit]

I am concidering buying a Kumho, The darkside is very appealing, traction, cost, and tire life, but, a good friend asked me: If you had an accident with a car tire on your bike, would your insurance cover you? Anyone know?

 

Mark

 

There's no doubt mine would cover me here in the states. Now in Ontario, I'm not real sure. Don't you guys have state sponsored insurance. I'd start by looking at the exclusions area of your policy.

[thebighop]

I would play it safe and look your policy over....

I would call your insurance companies main headquarters office and ask some questions without telling them who you are.

Mine told me that the tires have to be DOT approved...they could be made of balsa wood for all they really cared.

[1 Canuck]

I am concidering buying a Kumho, The darkside is very appealing, traction, cost, and tire life, but, a good friend asked me: If you had an accident with a car tire on your bike, would your insurance cover you? Anyone know?

 

Mark

 

You have an accident caused from your rear tire or any accident on your bike? Insurance may be the last thing you worry about.

My 2 cents.

[Bummer]

... but, a good friend asked me: If you had an accident with a car tire on your bike, would your insurance cover you? ...

 

Good for you, taking your friend's question seriously.

 

In the US, car tires are DOT approved for passenger cars, not motorcycles. That's the way DOT approval works. Passenger car tires are approved for passenger cars, light truck tires are approved for light trucks, and motorcycle tires are approved for motorcycles. Put a passenger car tire on your bike if you want, but it is not DOT approved for that use.

 

Since you're in Canada there are added points: What does Canadian law say about US DOT approval? Anything? What are the chances the politicians missed this? Does Canadian medical care have any "outs" that might relate to this.

 

Let me ask you this, though it relates to the US - not sure about Canada: If you're laying in the hospital, run over by an uninsured motorist (You guys all do have maxed out uninsured/underinsured, right?) do you want to have to worry that the insurance inspector will notice that you were running a tire that's not approved for use on motorcycles? My personal answer to that is an unequivocal NO, and I have the t-shirt. It says Hurrle Orthopaedic. I spent my time worrying about staying alive, then worrying about keeping my leg, then worrying about rebuilding that leg so I could ride again. I was very glad I didn't have to also worry about my insurance bailing and leaving me holding a $150,000 medical bill and the balance owed on the bike, all because I was too cheap to buy an actual motorcycle tire.

 

While these other gentlemen are no doubt well intentioned, they're not lawyers any more than I am. You really need to ask a lawyer. Not just casually, but as official paid legal advice. Our friends in this forum are missing the subtleties of the answers they've been given, and making assumptions. A lawyer selling legal advice won't do that, any more than the insurance company facing handing over a couple of hundred thousand dollars will.

[ediddy]

The only way to be 100% sure is to talk to the claims department of your insurance company. If they say it would be covered, get them to send you a letter stating that it would be covered. Just getting a verbal answer wouldn't do anygood in the event of an accident'

[tsigwing]

Good for you, taking your friend's question seriously.

 

In the US, car tires are DOT approved for passenger cars, not motorcycles. That's the way DOT approval works. Passenger car tires are approved for passenger cars, light truck tires are approved for light trucks, and motorcycle tires are approved for motorcycles. Put a passenger car tire on your bike if you want, but it is not DOT approved for that use.

 

Since you're in Canada there are added points: What does Canadian law say about US DOT approval? Anything? What are the chances the politicians missed this? Does Canadian medical care have any "outs" that might relate to this.

 

Let me ask you this, though it relates to the US - not sure about Canada: If you're laying in the hospital, run over by an uninsured motorist (You guys all do have maxed out uninsured/underinsured, right?) do you want to have to worry that the insurance inspector will notice that you were running a tire that's not approved for use on motorcycles? My personal answer to that is an unequivocal NO, and I have the t-shirt. It says Hurrle Orthopaedic. I spent my time worrying about staying alive, then worrying about keeping my leg, then worrying about rebuilding that leg so I could ride again. I was very glad I didn't have to also worry about my insurance bailing and leaving me holding a $150,000 medical bill and the balance owed on the bike, all because I was too cheap to buy an actual motorcycle tire.

 

While these other gentlemen are no doubt well intentioned, they're not lawyers any more than I am. You really need to ask a lawyer. Not just casually, but as official paid legal advice. Our friends in this forum are missing the subtleties of the answers they've been given, and making assumptions. A lawyer selling legal advice won't do that, any more than the insurance company facing handing over a couple of hundred thousand dollars will.

 

so how about my 2004 GMC Sierra that came from the factory with DOT approved passenger (not LT) tires? More information on this and other darkside (non) issues on Delphi

 

not wanting to start an argument, but there are only two tires spec'd in the owners manual for tires, and they aren't Metzlers or Dunlops or Avon's so that argument doesn't hold water either.

[Guest scarylarry]

The only way to be 100% sure is to talk to the claims department of your insurance company. If they say it would be covered, get them to send you a letter stating that it would be covered. Just getting a verbal answer wouldn't do anygood in the event of an accident'

 

I don't know but I will call Farm Bureau tomorrow and ask them, though I will never us a CT but good info to know..

[Bummer]

so how about my 2004 GMC Sierra that came from the factory with DOT approved passenger (not LT) tires?

 

My wife's Ford pickup has LT tires on it.

 

More information on this and other darkside (non) issues on Delphi

 

not wanting to start an argument, but there are only two tires spec'd in the owners manual for tires, and they aren't Metzlers or Dunlops or Avon's so that argument doesn't hold water either.

 

Passenger car tires are not DOT approved for motorcycle use. Nothing on Delphi is going to change that. As to the manual, that's just Yamaha's recommendation, and doesn't include any P type tires. It still in no way relates to the nature of DOT certification, or insurance contracts. Oh, and my manual does in fact include Dunlop tires: D404 to be specific.

 

Put whatever you want on your vehicles. Frankly, I don't care. It's really none of my business. Yammy, however, asked a question. He received what appear to be inaccurate answers. Yes, passenger tires are DOT approved. They're approved for use on passenger cars. No they are not approved for use on motorcycles. No amount of disagreeing will change that.

 

How will an insurance company react to this? I don't know. Neither do you. I believe that the failure to use tires approved by the DOT for the application will give the insurance company the opportunity to deny coverage should they want to. Of course, they may not want to, or even notice. Then again they may.

 

I suggested he ask a lawyer. That suggestion still stands.

[Squeeze]

..

not wanting to start an argument, but there are only two tires spec'd in the owners manual for tires, and they aren't Metzlers or Dunlops or Avon's so that argument doesn't hold water either.

 

Not trying to get into an Argument either, but excuse me ....

 

in a Lawyer's World where, i.e. Winnebago was sentenced to a huge Restituion because they failed to mention that the CC isn't built to allow you to get up and make yourself a Cup of Coffee, or a Microwave Oven isn't built to dry Pets in there, or McDonalds didn't mention that their Coffe is actually hot or or or ..

 

What makes you think you won't get into an Argument with an Insurance over using a Car Tire on your Motorcycle. Even i would try to get out without paying, so would you ....

[wizard]

It's really sad, or a sign that the times are changing, when its necessary to hire a lawyer when we modify or change out an item on our scoots. There was a time when we modified our bikes to make them a reflection of our individualism. There were few bikers than, but as the population changed, we are seeing more riders that are really nothing more than posers. Along with these posers, come the safety Nazis who would like nothing more than to save and protect us, passing laws, such as mandatory helmet usage, special endorsement licenses, limiting horse power, and top speed and so on. It looks like we are headed in a direction where we will not be able to modify a bike in any way. The kids today are now in a situation where they can't have a motorcycle because they might ingest a lethal dose of lead. Somebody save me.

[Bummer]

... The kids today are now in a situation where they can't have a motorcycle because they might ingest a lethal dose of lead. Somebody save me.

By eating the battery or the valve cores, no less.

 

Still, what is, is. I can recommend that people vote for a party that's actually against that sort of thing, but if one really does, there's no chance of them winning since neither of the big two really support personal freedom. That, of course, takes us smack into the middle of politics. So I won't go there.

 

Bear in mind that Yammy lives in Canada. That's even different different. That's why I told him to ask a lawyer. It inhales sharply through pursed lips, but that's probably the only way he's going to know.

[Guest tx2sturgis]

I think it COULD come down to the OTHER drivers insurance company denying coverage of your damages, and trying to prove that the C/T intensified the accident...something along the lines of: Well, Judge, had Mr. Smith been running an approved, good handling, proper motorcycle tire, he should have been able to stop that bike and not hit my client, (who made an improper turn in front of Mr Smith).

 

Any insurance company can deny ANY claim...if they think they will win in court. Most pay up knowing that the court costs and judgements could exceed the original claim.

 

If they think a jury of peers might question the overall wisdom of running a car tire on a motorcycle, ( which all the expert witnesses will confirm is NOT prudent) then they may just deny that claim and let YOUR insurance company try to subrogate the claim.

 

If you DO have some sort of one-vehicle accident involving ANY kind of visible skid marks on the pavement...good luck with that claim.

 

[crockettrider]

Then we could assume the same argument could hold for all after market parts.

You didn't make the corner or hit the pedestrian due to the ape hangers you installed inhibiting maneuverability.

You didn't use OEM brake pads or you would have stopped in time. I could see this going on and on?

[Maritimer]

A bike is and has never been intended to pull a trailer either. Many do. But if push comes to shove how legal is it to pull a trailer? There are tons of stuff that fall under that insured/not insured argument. Nuf said.

[Grey Ghost]

You guys are negating the reason for riding the bike in the first place. It's for RELAXATION and ENJOYMENT.

 

You can't enjoy the ride if your'e worrying about something that may never happen, which is exactly what is worried about most; things that never happen.

 

Put the freaking car tire on and enjoy the ride!!!!!!!!! Life is short.

 

Jeff

[gunboat]

hi jeff

thanks for your post. everyone else also thank you for your post as well, postive or negative. it's a personal choice i myself have made, and very happy with it. as some have tried it and it's not been up to their expections. others have and it's working for us.

just get out and ride, enjoy life no matter what tire you use front or back.

best reguards

don c.

[BradT]

I think it COULD come down to the OTHER drivers insurance company denying coverage of your damages, and trying to prove that the C/T intensified the accident...something along the lines of: Well, Judge, had Mr. Smith been running an approved, good handling, proper motorcycle tire, he should have been able to stop that bike and not hit my client, (who made an improper turn in front of Mr Smith).

 

Exactly, anyone can make a claim or statement, take teh matter to court and then it's up to a judge to decide. He obviously will have expert witness state that a car tire is made for a car, etc.........

 

So Don and Jeff I like your answers.

 

Brad

[davecb]

I'm gonna say this one time....Car tires are NOT made for motorcycles. If you research it, you will find that car tires are not made for cornering. No matter who says what, the experts will tell you NOT to do it.

 

My opinion...If your in a corner...How much tire contact is there on the road compared to a motorcycle tire.....

 

I would rather spendthe extra money for a motorcycle tire than put my and my wifes life in a dangerous situation.......

[Hummingbird]

at this point of the discussion it is just rhetoric - there are no legal presidents referenced and it appears that all of the negative rhetoric is from ones that WOULD NOT run a ct on their bike for one reason or another.

I have a Kumho on my Venture, and if somebody runs over me, how does my having a ct make that person any less liable ? Perhaps my add-on led's blinded him or the non factory passing lamps distracted him, or even the fact that my Midnight Venture is not solid black anymore was the cause of the accident.

Without legal president, this is all just talk.

[Cougar]

Great Topic, Umm:think: I got 2 C/T's on the rear of my Trike

and I am fully covered, I really did enjoy reading all the post

in this thread.

[BigBoyinMS]

My opinion...If your in a corner...How much tire contact is there on the road compared to a motorcycle tire.....

 

As you are against car tires then I'm sure you haven't done the research to see the proof that you have more contact in a corner with a car tire and you definitely don't have any experience to be able to speak about it.

After doing the research AND actually running a CT, it's MY opinion that it's a safety feature just like my headlight modulator, extra rear lighting and louder horn. It grips better for braking, cornering and acceleration along with having a higher load rating.

And, believe it or not, the tires on the front of ALL cars do lean in a turn (camber) and they are also subjected to much more lateral force from a car that weighs 2000-5000 lbs.

[paperboy]

Let's not argue about tires anymore. Let's talk about something safe. How about we talk about OIL?

[Cougar]

Group Hug?