Red frame tyres

[mjseymo]

Hi All,

Have been trawling through some of the posts on the forum and come accross several suggestions but what are people's favroutite choice on the earlier red frame models? I know that the suspension tweaks suggested and lowering the forks can improve matters but what would you go for with regards to tyres?  Also do lots of people go for the 170 on the rear?

TIA

 

Martin

[Kane]

I think a 180 / 55  rear tyre was stock. I have a 170 / 60 on mine and it works well. I have read that some people enjoy a 160 instead of a 170 for improved handling. I might try a 160 next tyre change.

[docc]

So, early RedFrames (and the 2001 Rosso Mandello) have 4.5 inch rear rim width and were delivered with 170 tires. My 2000 came with really soft, 'pointy' Pirelli Dragon Corsa that were gone in a flash.  The 170 is a little bit of a "pinch" onto that rim which then looses some "roundness" in the profile. I have found the 160 on the 4.5" rim much nicer on the turn-in, especially with a more "sport-touring" tire (currently Bridgestone Battlax T31).

Beginning with the 2002 LongFrames, rim width increased to 5.5" and came with a 180 tire. Lots of folks, similarly, have gone with a 170 on the wider rim of the later V11.

YMMV!!

[gstallons]

Can you fit the wider wheel on the red frame bike ?

[docc]

51 minutes ago, gstallons said:

Can you fit the wider wheel on the red frame bike ?

I don't see why not. But I also don't see you would . . .

[LowRyter]

Red frames have 170 rears.  This keeps the bike agile.  Wider tire will slow down the handling.  Personally, I wouldn't monkey with it.

[cash1000]

I've always run 120/70 front & 170/60 rear on my RM 70k so about 10 sets.

Front wears to a v and rear wears flat. 

I admit I don't wear the chicken strip out these days.

Probably getting a bit old & slow

 

[footgoose]

Please realize 180's were generally adopted on most 'average guy' sport bikes for purely esthetic purposes. I think they (everybody) went with the 5.5 rim just to fit the 180 so it was more appealing, ... and Docc's post is spot on.

[gstallons]

8 hours ago, docc said:

I don't see why not. But I also don't see you would . . .

Makin' conversation

[docc]

Seems one might be more inclined to got the other way round and fit the narrower early rim to the later Longframes. Less unsprung weight and such . . .

I've long wondered if the change to the 5.5 rim, in addition to footgoose's observation about the marketing of the day, was Moto Guzzi's extensive redesign that may have been in response to reports of the early bike being less "stable" than expected. So, we got a longer wheelbase, frame and subframe bracing, bigger rear rim/tire, bigger forks.

@gstallons is an a unique position to compare the changes with an '03 Sport and a RedFrame Sport . . .

[jtucker]

As others have mentioned, red-frames originally came with 170s, but I've run a 160 on mine for as long as I can remember. As others have stated, the 160 is better suited for the 4.5" wheel. Anything wider is purely cosmetic.

__Jason

[Lucky Phil]

On 1/19/2021 at 11:16 AM, gstallons said:

Can you fit the wider wheel on the red frame bike ?

Yep, thats what mines got.

Ciao

[docc]

9 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Yep, thats what mines got.

Ciao

Was that part of the V10 changeover?

[Lucky Phil]

16 hours ago, docc said:

Was that part of the V10 changeover?

No docc mines had the wider rear wheel for years.

Ciao

[docc]

9 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

No docc mines had the wider rear wheel for years.

Ciao

I figured you for the guy that would go for lighter, smaller, faster . . .

Bigger is better for those smoky parking lot burn-outs?