[92xjunker]

Call me stupid but, when i was in high school, my friend and i built a riding lawnmower with his mom's gl1000 motor in it. it was stuip freekin fast. crashed it doing baja stunts.

[Kreylyn]

For reference in the discussion...

My bike is raised 1.75" in the rear from where it sat with an OEM shock. That shock probably had a little sag on it from age, but...

Running a rear 5.5" rim with 180/55 Conti Road Attack tire; I have no strip when running the curves hard.
Running a front 3.0" rim with 120/70 Conti road Attack tire; I always have about 1/4" left. Pretty sure the profile on that size tire fitted to that rim (after many different tires) means the last little bit is pulled over far enough I'll not get that part of the tire to contact pavement.

Krey

[Omnivore]

I have Q2's 120/60-17 on my front and 160/60-17 (the stock Kat rims) and still have about the same size strips on those tires.

I look at it a bit different. Thus far these are WAY better than any other tire i've run on a Kat, and I do scrape pegs. So the bad, with a lower profile than 170's I get less lean before my pegs scrape,. The good I can't over-ride my tread, meaning i'll run out of lean before I run out of tire and lower profile means more stable. SO if you are not able to remove your chicken strip it depends on why you can't. If you can't because you went lower profile, perhaps bad if it really effects you on the street. If you can't because the tires attack angle is too great, good. I've had others tell me they couldnt shag the edges on the Q2's either with stock specs.

For me, as I said, the Q2 has been fantastic, and they don't make a 150\70 or 160\70 for that matter, so it is what it is, and thus far the best tire I've put on a Kat. (Although at 2k miles it's about 1 k away from being done.) I will probably get another set after I try out a set of PR3's next.

[Slofuze]

I have Q2's 120/60-17 on my front and 160/60-17 (the stock Kat rims) and still have about the same size strips on those tires.

I look at it a bit different. Thus far these are WAY better than any other tire i've run on a Kat, and I do scrape pegs. So the bad, with a lower profile than 170's I get less lean before my pegs scrape,. The good I can't over-ride my tread, meaning i'll run out of lean before I run out of tire and lower profile means more stable. SO if you are not able to remove your chicken strip it depends on why you can't. If you can't because you went lower profile, perhaps bad if it really effects you on the street. If you can't because the tires attack angle is too great, good. I've had others tell me they couldnt shag the edges on the Q2's either with stock specs.

For me, as I said, the Q2 has been fantastic, and they don't make a 150\70 or 160\70 for that matter, so it is what it is, and thus far the best tire I've put on a Kat. (Although at 2k miles it's about 1 k away from being done.) I will probably get another set after I try out a set of PR3's next.

I'm running Q2s (my 3rd set on the Yammi) and I'm impressed with them. They seem confident without too much warm-up and track well in the rain. The only other tires I was happy with were MetZ6's that I ran my Kat on. I was hoping to try a set this year to run on the Yammi, and the dealership I deal with couldn't get them in til mid-October for some reason. As if I could wait that long. My riding style hasn't changed, but on the Kat...160 rear I had maybe a 1/4 " strip. I still have about a 1/2" strip on the 180 Q2 rear.I'm not a tire guru, but I think you're right about a tire's profile.

[thetable]

Good looking out. I just assumed that with a 3.5" wide rim, that they would have fitted a 120 from the factory...... and since nobody really makes 130/60's, I guess I'll be sticking with 120/70's.

It was the end of the 80s, we all did strange things.

My tire pressure is set as it says under the seat.

That was based on the factory bias ply tires. Since it looks like you are running the RS, Dunlop happens to give recommended pressures... 36F 42R. Use that pressure as a starting point and work from there for feel and making sure they are also getting up to temperature. Based on your description of the front end feel, I'm guessing that the front is significantly lower than that.

In thinking about the tires in question a little more, I do seem to remember the front RS having a very round, almost flat profile, while the rear was very pointy. I think that is how they went about trying to create a tire which was fairly stable in the straights, but also capable of decent grip out back in the twisties.

what do you suggest? Like I said, I do a ton of highway commuting, but the front Roadsmart doesn't seem to have a profile that will allow the bike to get over very far without running off the edge.

Pilot Road 2, they can go for miles and miles and miles and miles. For my purposes, I'm really liking the PR3, but as to longevity, the PR2 wins. The PR3 seems to have a little extra grip in the twisties, and significantly more wet feel and grip.

Now that I think about it, you might be the person to ask about this (maybe the two symptoms are related)...... This bike requires a TON of effort to take a corner on. You have to really muscle the bars to get it over, and then it requires a ton of effort to keep it there. If you let up a little bit, it wants to stand straight up in a hurry. Could these two things be related somehow?

I think I mentioned it in the other, low pressure up front will make the front end an ugly thing. Could cause the wear you are showing. The RS front has a fairly flat profile (going on memory, haven't run them in a few years.) First guess is still tire pressure.

[scottynoface]

It was the end of the 80s, we all did strang e things.

I popped out of a dark cave, THAT was weird.

[thetable]

So far, given that I have spare rubber both F and R, I feel more confident on my non-standard set up of 120/170 - and as such I'd be happy to have a chicken strip .. or 4.

I've run past the tread on the Kat running a 150, while not particularly fun, it wasn't OMG I'm gonna DIE!!!. What you are gaining in mental confidence that you won't run out of tire, you are loosing based on tires that now have a longer contact patch rather than a wide contact patch in the corners. Your tires are also going to be running hotter, and thus wearing faster.

[loudnlow7484]

It was the end of the 80s, we all did strange things.


That was based on the factory bias ply tires. Since it looks like you are running the RS, Dunlop happens to give recommended pressures... 36F 42R. Use that pressure as a starting point and work from there for feel and making sure they are also getting up to temperature. Based on your description of the front end feel, I'm guessing that the front is significantly lower than that.

In thinking about the tires in question a little more, I do seem to remember the front RS having a very round, almost flat profile, while the rear was very pointy. I think that is how they went about trying to create a tire which was fairly stable in the straights, but also capable of decent grip out back in the twisties.


Pilot Road 2, they can go for miles and miles and miles and miles. For my purposes, I'm really liking the PR3, but as to longevity, the PR2 wins. The PR3 seems to have a little extra grip in the twisties, and significantly more wet feel and grip.


I think I mentioned it in the other, low pressure up front will make the front end an ugly thing. Could cause the wear you are showing. The RS front has a fairly flat profile (going on memory, haven't run them in a few years.) First guess is still tire pressure.

Thanks for all the advice. When these ones go, I'll definitely look into the PR's (not Puerto Ricans). For now, I'll give those pressures a shot and see how it feels. I hope that cleans up the handling a little bit..... it's quite a workout trying to muscle that thing around.

By the way, you're a hell of a valuable guy to have on this board.

[scottynoface]

I really want to give the Q2s a shot...but they're Dunlops...yech...I like my Rossos a lot so I might have to stick to the DC3s, but the price gap is very large.

[thetable]

I really want to give the Q2s a shot...but they're Dunlops...yech...I like my Rossos a lot so I might have to stick to the DC3s, but the price gap is very large.

If I were to pick a sport tire to run TODAY, it would be the Q2! I haven't run them myself, but from the people I've talked to who have and I trust, I'd run them no questions asked.

By the way, you're a hell of a valuable guy to have on this board.

Thanks.

I think I got everything, but it was a long thread and a lot of reading while I was trying to do a bunch of other stuff.

[TRPUT]

I've run past the tread on the Kat running a 150, while not particularly fun, it wasn't OMG I'm gonna DIE!!!. What you are gaining in mental confidence that you won't run out of tire, you are loosing based on tires that now have a longer contact patch rather than a wide contact patch in the corners. Your tires are also going to be running hotter, and thus wearing faster.

It's nice to have mental confidence ... even if lacking in mental ability!

If there is a brief answer for someone who failed senior physics - can you explain why LONGER and HOTTER? (OD for the 150s and 170s is almost identical.)

[Kreylyn]

It's nice to have mental confidence ... even if lacking in mental ability!

If there is a brief answer for someone who failed senior physics - can you explain why LONGER and HOTTER? (OD for the 150s and 170s is almost identical.)

Profile changes pretty dramatically between a 150 and 170 tire on the same rim, and the profile directly ties to how much rubber is going to be on the ground and in what kind of contact patch. Profile will also effect the temp of the tire, as the further out of proper profile you go, the hotter the tire will run on avg.

Krey

[TRPUT]

Cheers Krey - but this is a Stinko 170 that apparently is designed for the rim size so profile should be "proper".

[Kreylyn]

Cheers Krey - but this is a Stinko 170 that apparently is designed for the rim size so profile should be "proper".

Most 170s would be at the top end of the 4.5" rim size... there will be some minor pull in on the edges leaving you with almost always a "chicken strip" but not enough to generally to be a major issue. A 160 would be a better profile for the 4.5" rim and run cooler as such.

Krey

[TRPUT]

Ok Krey - I'll just nod and agree. Hopefully understanding will come later.