<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by edwyun »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">while a 5.5" will work with a 180, isn't a 5.75" rim a better/correct size for a 180 (though I too like the stability of a 5.5 with 180, I wonder if there's more stability with a 5.75)?</TD></TR></TABLE>
I'm thinking, "Not really."
The first "cool racers with 180s" had them on 5.5" wheels. 5.75 is for 190s and the like. And even 190s are intended for 5.5" rims. I suspect that once past 5.5", the rim size and tire size work together to get the "feel" or "traction" right for the racer. Just as with the rim diameter (16.5 v 17), it's all about the continuous evolution of trying to find the next "Better thing".
5.75 and 6 and 6.25 are all aftermarket sizes. Got me what the japanese OEMs are doing ... I want to think that the GSXR1000 has a 6.0" rear wheel width.
The 9*6 bikes normally come with a 6" rim, the 748s come with a 5.5". I'm not sure about the latest 1000 Japanese bikes, but the older gsxr1000 & TL1000, etc., all came with 6" rims. Personally, I don't much like a 6" or a 190, but some people do. One of my kids races a 16.5 x 6.5" rim & love's it, so go figure.
does anyone in this thread own a bike or bikes with a six inch rim? i did a track day yesterday, so i put a new 180/55 on my aprilia. the bike has a six inch rim and i've had nothing but 190/50s on the bike up until yesterday and as i had suspected there was no difference i could tell between the two sizes of tires but for the twenty bucks i saved by buying the 180.
disclaimer: this has been the opinion of a real bike owner. do not try this without the consent of a qualified person.
There is a HUGE difference between 5.5/180 and 6.0/190 and it's an elephant standing in the room -- the weight. We pay all these bucks and everyone raves like hallelujah about the light weight wheels then peeps don't even mention the weight of the fat poser tires and wheels. My 900 SS now has 4.5/ 170 and it turns on a dime -- I'm never goin back to the Fat Side. The guys at the track know what they need but for the street and canyons light and tight rules.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mary2al »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">4.5/ 170 turns on a dime -- I'm never goin back to the Fat Side. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I've run 190 & 180 tires on a 6" rim on the Mille, & I think the 180 handles alot better. That holds true for other 6" rim bikes, but that's my preference, not neccessarily the final word on the subject.
Chris - I don't do any work on 9*6 bikes, but I buy quite a few used wheels from them for my own bikes. Of the dozen or so that I have experience with, all the 5.5" rears came from 748 bikes & all the 6" rims from 9*6 bikes. I wonder if the original 916 bikes had 5.5" rims & the later versions 6" rims??
I run the 170 on mu stage 2 99 M900, handeling, and grip is a pleasure. I can control the slight slippage in tight turns like I had 4 tires under me. Thought of going to a 180, but was advised not to by a road course instructor. He says the 180 would probably be a little sluggish, and not as Quick from Left to right twisties.
I have the 180 on My tricked out Foggy #"062" It needs the extra. If I don't seat slide forward to reverse on turning up the wick. It smokes like a mosquito fogger. Moving my 170 lb fanny to the rear a few in. It hooks up. Gotta get down on the Cycle Cats, to help the front on the surface tho. I've had some what I thought before I had some killer accel. on a Confederate 120 C.I. S&S, till I got the Foggy. I know what unbelievable launch is now!!! I've a friend with a R1000 CBX "05. I embarresed him. without trying. Trying to get him on a real Motorcycle. He'll come around sooner or later. Toppino Ed
Re: (edwyun)
Chris
Linear Mode
