I tried searching the forum and i have came across with plenty of different dicussions covering the use of a 190/55 tyre at the rear, however i haven't heard anyone discuss the use of a 195/55 tyre.
My bike is an SP1 but i have purchased an SP2 swingarm. Eventually i will get around to installing the swingarm but in the mean time. I wanted to fit a 55 profile tyre but i also wanted to go a little wider and use a 195 rear. I think the extra rear width would make the bike look more aggressive in the rear and at the same time give me with more traction.
So my querie is... has naybody used a 195/55 tyre before?.. would i have any clearance problems using the Sp1 swingarm?.. i'm still using the standard undertail so i guess there shouldn't be any problems with clearance here.
I'm using a moriwaki link and running 15/41 gearing
Would the 195 width be too much and bring back the lazy steering the mori link rectified?
I know i'll have to increase the number of links eventually when i install the SP2 swingwarm but would i need the extra 2 links on my 104 chain now to accommodate the new tyre?
well lets talk about the tire numerology for a second.
first # 190/195 etc etc. is the section width of the tire in mm.
2nd# (aspect ratio) 50/55 and so on is (in simple terms) how tall the tire is, and is a percentage of the width. ie. 55% of 195 mm.
so with all of that out of the way let's talk about why everybody likes to use the 180/55 and 190/55. it's because of the profile. if you look at the tire from behind it's the shape of the tread. they are much more round. so there is more tread surface on the side. these two tires have a larger contact patch when leaned over because of their shape. most go with the 180 because it is cheaper, but some would argue that it's profile is better than the 190.
the 190/50 has a pretty flat profile and is considered crap. I think for most street riders it is fine though, but most rc guys are not your typical street rider.
so now lets talk about the 195/55. so in essence you have gone to a tire that is 5mm wider right? since the width and aspect ratio are not a directly linear relationship you have effectively negated the benifits of using the 190 or 180/55. sure it's going to be taller by default, but not enough to offset the increase in width. think about holding a pipe cleaner and curving it. if you push the ends closer together it gets taller/ or has a higher aspect ratio. if you pull them apart you decrease the aspect ratio and have a flatter profile. so the question is do you want to put more rubber on the road while you are verticle or when you are leaned over?
well lets talk about the tire numerology for a second.
first # 190/195 etc etc. is the section width of the tire in mm.
2nd# (aspect ratio) 55/55 and so on is (in simple terms) how tall the tire is, and is a percentage of the width. ie. 55% of 195 mm.
so with all of that out of the way let's talk about why everybody likes to use the 180/55 and 190/55. it's because of the profile. if you look at the tire from behind it's the shape of the tread. they are much more round. so there is more tread surface on the side. these two tires have a larger contact patch when leaned over because of their shape. most go with the 180 because it is cheaper, but some would argue that it's profile is better than the 190.
the 190/50 has a pretty flat profile and is considered crap. I think for most street riders it is fine though, but most rc guys are not your typical street rider.
so now lets talk about the 195/55. so in essence you have gone to a tire that is 5mm wider right? since the width and aspect ratio are not a directly linear relationship you have effectively negated the benifits of using the 190 or 180/55. sure it's going to be taller by default, but not enough to offset the increase in width. think about holding a pipe cleaner and curving it. if you push the ends closer together it gets taller/ or has a higher aspect ratio. if you pull them apart you decrease the aspect ratio and have a flatter profile. so the question is do you want to put more rubber on the road while you are verticle or when you are leaned over?
Not that I'm an expert but I have put thousands of miles on the track in the last 15 years. I have used a 190/50 and 190/55. When the 190/55 first came out I started using it and have not used anything other. But to each his own.
Just my about the tires.
I was in the motorcycle industry for a long time, and have met tire reps that couldn't do the supperb job your did there Johnny in explaining the true definition behind the #'s...someone needs to sticky that and make it a mandatory read before you post a "I want a wider tire" thread!!
Sorry to thread jack there RG, that "I want a wider tire" comment was a generality not directed to you.
thanks for the kind words fellers. I find very few people actualy know how the system works especialy when it comes to M/C tires. was just trying to put it in simple terms.
Thank you all for your input... that explanation was really good and makes a lot of sense..
The reason why i started to search on 195/55 tyres is because i got intriged as to what would be the difference between the 195/55 and 190/55 on the road or track...
There is a guy on my street that races professionally and he's always throwing out slicks with both of the above profiles... So i thought maybe i should try a 195/55 on my SP thinking that it would give me the benefits of a 55 profile but with a wider track.. i guess not then!..
looks like i'll stick to my initial thoughts and buy the 190/55...
after spooning on a fresh set of tires yesterday I started thinking more about this. I was thinking; what kind of lean angle it takes to get to the edge of the tread with each of these tires. I'll try to devise a simple way to measure the 190/55 since I have a a brand new one right now. hopefully somebody will follow suit and measure the 190/50 in the same manner. And then maybe it could be made a sticky or something.
So would a 180/55 be ideal? Would it not give you almost as much tread width when leaned over, compared to the 190/55, but it would fall in faster since its abit narrower? Also cheaper and maybe a touch lighter?
So would a 180/55 be ideal? Would it not give you almost as much tread width when leaned over, compared to the 190/55, but it would fall in faster since its abit narrower? Also cheaper and maybe a touch lighter?
I have the same question.
__________________
SP2 number 2...
Quote:
Varium
Dude, nobody cares. That's why they are all jizzing on your head and telling you its raining.
the 190/55 and 180/55 both have great profiles. the 190 will put slightly more rubber on the road simply because it is a larger tire not only in width, but in circumfrence as well. Some say that the 180 turns in faster, but believe me the 190/55s profile makes for some realy fast turn in.
190/55 didnt fit on my SP1 it hit the swing arm in the front so i had to put on a 190/50 that fit fine but i think i might go with the 180/55 next time. the turn in on the 190/50 is decent but i do only sprited riding
__________________
00 RC51, Jardine 2 into 1, PC 3, flapped, K&N
so after purchasing a track dog yesterday I now have one of each brand new michelins in my garage 180/55 and 190/55. so my plan as soon as I have time is this: I'll inflate them to 36lbs. Grab an angle finder and rotate it until it touches the edge of the tread and then report my findings. does anybody have a brand new 190/50 that they could do the same with?
well in a word sure. I can tell you doing spirited street riding I never had any chicken strips with a 190/50. and with 190/55s and the same same type of riding there are some strips present. better to have a little head room rather than running off of the edge on a consistent basis.
195/55 Tyre
06 rc51 banzai/Simons, pcIII,ohlins... the usual
about the tires.
Linear Mode
