velofish Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Time for a new rear tire on my 2000. 170 is stock, but I have heard of people going to a 160 because it supposedly fits the rim better and handles better. Anybody done this? How did it work? Anybody use the new Michelin yet? The one with the hard rubber in the middle for longer wear and soft on the edges for grip? First-- what is it called, and second-- how well does it work. Thanks guys. BTW, This last weekend I went to the Virginia rally and got to ride the Blue Ridge Parkway for the first time. Outstanding. Rt 250 east of Monterey VA was even more fun. Highly recommended. fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ratchethack Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Vfish, I've got the same bike and presumably the same stock rear wheel (4.5"). Tried 170's (had 'em on when I got it) and went to 160's. The 160's work LOTS better - tracking, feel, turn-in, road manners, etc. The conventional wisdom is don't go ANY wider than the rim width dictates. This article in Sport Rider I ran into yesterday explains it pretty well, "Does Size Matter? Squeezing a wide tire onto a narrow rim can be a big mistake. Here's why": http://sportrider.com/tech/tires/146_0206_size/ Don't know about the Michelins, but hit the "back to the tire guide" link at the end of the article and check out Sport Rider's reviews, including the Metzeler Z6 - I just put a set on & like 'em a lot so far (replaced M1 Sportecs), tho haven't been able to really push 'em hard yet. LOVED the Sportec's, but only got 4K on the rear, hoping for more like 6K on the Z6, will give up some grip to get it. MAN, y'er a lucky dawg. I'd LOVE to give the new Z6's a workout on the BRP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velofish Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 NOW I'm excited! Thanks rachethack. My dealer is a great guy, but is mainly a cruiser type-- kinda mystified by the sport bikes, I've been wanting to go with the the 160, but wanted some feedback first. The BRP is a great ride. I swear they must go out and dust the thing every morning-- it is that clean. I am anxious to get the 160 on to improve the turn-in. Kinda a luddite; I enjoy wrestling with the goose, but need to improve two things-- the turn-in ability, and the on/off throttle transition. I hope the 160 will improve the leanibility, and an ace goose mechanic is at a local (80 miles) tuning link center. Once I get my Power Commander dialed in, I will go back to the BRP and REALLY enjoy myself. Thanks again, fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe camarda Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 vfish and rhack...there was a thread about this subject a year or so ago and the consesus was that the 160 was the way to go. But...I thought the stock rim was a 4.0 on the early Sports and the later models bumped up to a 4.5 inch rim. I'm not sure that you would want a 160 on the 4.5..... But I'm only going from (dim and distant) memory here, and although I'm sure I'm right, I could also be wrong. Best check the thread. BTW I have a 4.0 rear and will swap to a 4.5 if anyone is interested(?) Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve G. Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I use a 160/70 on my 2001, the same rear wheel you have. With the 70, it raises the rear of the bike a bit, which is a good thing as these spine frame machines need more weight transfered to the front. And the 170 mm is too wide for these rims for 2001 and earlier. Ciao, Steve G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O2 V11 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Just curious, has anyone downsized from the 180/55 to a 170/60 on the wider 5.5 inch rim of the 2002 onwards bikes? If so what difference did it make? Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe camarda Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Okay. I think Ive got it now! Pre-2002 (like mine) have a 4.5 inch rim. Post-2002 models have the 5.5 inch rim. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldini Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 ... has anyone downsized from the 180/55 to a 170/60 on the wider 5.5 inch rim of the 2002 onwards bikes? If so what difference did it make?... Yes. Pretty much same effects as described above going to 160 on the 4.5". It improves turn in - front & back turn in together rather than feeling like there's a hinge in the middle with back turning in seconds later than front. But depends also on tyre type. I changed from 180/55 BT020 to 170/60 Diablo, which gave a massive improvement in turn in. It also has a slightly larger circumference than 180/55 which like Steve says is no bad thing. But Diablo profile is different to BT020 also & IMV gives better handling regardless of size. I went back to a 180/55 Diablo (not as sweet as the 170/60) because I was concerned that the 170, being stretched flatter across the 5.5" rim would run off the tread earlier than the 180 (this is just my theory - but it seems logical to me - anyone know for sure?). I use the edge of the tyres a lot, & although this didn't happen I was concerned it might. If you don't push the tyres that hard I think the 170 is all good, the V11 just doesn't have the drive to need real fat tyres. 170/60 & 180/55 are listed fitment for 5.5" rim in manufacturers table (can't remember which - probably Pirelli). I will try a 4.5" rim/160 one day I think the 5.5" is just fashion & totally unecessary on these bikes. Try something on smaller rims & tyres (I noticed it recently riding J O'S's Centauro) - see how much sweeter handling can be. KB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antonio carroccio Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I put today a new rear tyre. Metzeler M1 190/50/17. Such soft rubber. You can go with your nail on it! I already have a set avon 45/46 - 120/190 at home for the winter. I think this is my last set Metzeler..! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldini Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 ...I put today a new rear tyre. Metzeler M1 190/50/17.... .....Course there's always the other point of view KB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ratchethack Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 .....Course there's always the other point of view KB 55053[/snapback] Hmmmmmm.........a 190/50, eh?....... Think this might have something to do with Antonio's comment about how much he disliked Metzelers about a year ago? What say you, Antonio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antonio carroccio Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Do you really want to know??? The front tyre is 2.4 bar. And now almost 50%. Why do I have to change the all set, front and rear? The rear tyre comes from Ebay for 127,- Euro. That's not that much, and.....it's soft. Good for the jiffy!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Minnaert Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 so and how is the 190 rear driving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antonio carroccio Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 so and how is the 190 rear driving? 55214[/snapback] Straight on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldini Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 ...Straight on!.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now