Good point on the real cost difference.
And even if a the tires are changed by the rider, for 'free', it is still a lot of additional effort.
Motorcycle tires are expensive relative to auto tires and I think all of us tend to look for the cheaper way out, at least those of us who ride a lot and use a lot of tires. Just about every time I buy tires I think about getting a less expensive type and then buy Michelins or Pirellis for the C-14, at least so far. But it does seem that I have to at least consider Shinkos every single time just because they are so much less expensive. Others who have used them seem to find the same thing as you mentioned regarding lifespan though so they may not be a bargain after all (it seems this way from the posts of others, I have not tried Shinkos myself).
Brian
For a 100 bucks more, you can buy a pair of PR2s that will last more than twice as long as the Conti Motions. I thought these tires were going to be my rubbers of choice, but after "smoking" a rear tire after just two regional rides (3000 mi) I decided that I didn't want to have to pay for mounting new tires so often. In terms of "real" tire cost, you are better off buying more expensive, longer lasting tires and saving the additional price of mounting by half. With shops charging upwards of $40 per wheel to mount and balance -- this is a significant cost. Watch:
25000 miles of riding:
Conti Motions: 8 sets of tires lasting 3-4000 miles = $170 per set plus $60 mounting per set = $1840
Michelin PR2s: 4 sets of tires lasting 6-7000 miles = $280 per set plus $60 mounting per set = $1600
See? Penny-wise and dollar foolish......... Not thrifty