160/60?????

[2429jackm]

anyone ever run a 160/60 on the back of a 95 katana... just wondering if it clears the chain and everything else...
Thanks

[waveman]

Ask HS2020 I believe he has a pre

[steves]

http://www.motorcycleanchor.com/katana/katana_tree.html

[Court93kat]

I agree with steves. Check out and read CyberPoet's website. It will tell you more than you need to know about which size to run and why to not go wider.

But in a nutshell..... IF you still have the factory 3.5" rim, don't go wider than a 150. IF you have changed out rims to a 4.5" rim, you can move on out to the 160.

[steves]

But in a nutshell..... IF you still have the factory 3.5" rim, don't go wider than a 150. IF you have changed out rims to a 4.5" rim, you can move on out to the 160.

I thought a 160/60 was almost the same mounting size as a 150/70?

[HS2020]

You can run a 160/60 on the pre 98 rim. You just have to be careful of the tire you put on. The best one so far is the Metezler tires.

[The CyberPoet]

I thought a 160/60 was almost the same mounting size as a 150/70?

The offset of the sidewall height compensates for the change in treadface size, so the largest diameter of the tire (the one you use when riding straight) is approximately the same.

That, however, is not the problem. The problem is the angle between the mounting bead lip and the sidewall -- the narrower the rim, the more the tire gets pinched and the higher the stress on that transition area between the mounting lip (the part that's hidden by the rim) and the sidewall. General tire-industry advice is to never exceed the stock size by more than one step up (i.e. from a 140 to a 150, or a 150 to a 160) to avoid overstressing that boundary zone and to avoid possibly having the tire actually pull itself out of the mounting lip under lateral stress (such as when leaned over). While such failures are rare these days with the infinitely better tires than were available 15-20 years ago, the reality is that if you are the unlucky one, you probably won't know what hit you.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[Wade-Kat600]

cp - Is it safe to assume that the issue you described is at a higher risk riding 2up?

[The CyberPoet]

cp - Is it safe to assume that the issue you described is at a higher risk riding 2up?

It's safe to assume that any risk factor increases as the load level increases, whether that increase is from added total cargo weight, or simply from pushing the tire harder than you usually do running around turns faster/harder, braking harder, etc. Increasing the load weight tends to bow the sidewalls out even further where the contact patch is, increasing the stress at that bead-to-sidewall interface.

It is also generally safe to assume that this is the kind of problem that takes some time to develop (it's not like you put on a tire Tuesday and Wednesday it fails), and that it will start out as minor stress distortions on the inside of the tire (either discoloration as VOC's heat out of the carcass due to heat-stress, or as micro-tears at the stressed rubber, or more often as belt-shift cavitating larger holes in the carcass as the belts get tugged harder -- the last one can lead to internal tire delamination where the carcass below the belts separates from the carcass above the belts).
There are many ways the failure can go down, but as I noted above, if it does go down, it'll almost guaranteedly be while you're riding and you are very unlikely to know what hit you... It would probably be a catastrophic bead-to-sidewall failure, so not only would you lose pressure, but you would also lose the rigidity that forms the safety margin that using radial metal belts normally provide, and there's about an 50-50 chance between the tire demolishing itself as shards and the tire wedging itself somewhere it shouldn't be (and locking the rear wheel in the process).

Many people never have any problems, for whatever reason (such as the tire wearing down before the stresses get serious enough to cause a failure, so the tire gets changed before the rider experiences any problems). But personally, I have zero desire to play those odds -- it just doesn't make any sense to me to pursue the bling factor of a fatter tire that won't perform as well under worst-case situations (fatter tires hydroplane at lower speeds as well), esp at the possible chance of death as the payout if your number comes up

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[koncsolt]

I've seen a steel belted radial let loose on a car and the steel belts took out a good portion of the rear quarter panel. I can only imagine what it would do to your legs.

[Mr.Reyn]

I agree with steves. Check out and read CyberPoet's website. It will tell you more than you need to know about which size to run and why to not go wider.

But in a nutshell..... IF you still have the factory 3.5" rim, don't go wider than a 150. IF you have changed out rims to a 4.5" rim, you can move on out to the 160.

CP, will this 4.5" rim fit on a '03 kat and if so where do i get one?

[HS2020]

Umm your bike should already have the 4.5 inch rear if it is a 98+ bike. You can run the 160/60 and be ok.

[Mr.Reyn]

Umm your bike should already have the 4.5 inch rear if it is a 98+ bike. You can run the 160/60 and be ok.

ok now that i have made an a$$ of myself , i guess what i wanted to know is can i run a 170 on that rim and if so which brand should i use. yes i read CP's statements on going too big and the bling vs safety but i have been told that a 170 rear tire will fit but i dont know which manufacturer has that. thanks

[airforceranger49]

Umm your bike should already have the 4.5 inch rear if it is a 98+ bike. You can run the 160/60 and be ok.

ok now that i have made an a$$ of myself , i guess what i wanted to know is can i run a 170 on that rim and if so which brand should i use. yes i read CP's statements on going too big and the bling vs safety but i have been told that a 170 rear tire will fit but i dont know which manufacturer has that. thanks

abuut the only company that i've found so far that makes a 170 specifically designed to fit a 4.5 in rim is avon... but at that point your just going for looks more then handeling (as it most likey will slow your handeling down)... i runa 160/60 avon on the back '03 kat, and it still looks alot bigger then the original 150 crapadam's, yet the handeling is alot better too... just my .02 $ tho

[tobyrox]

I've got a 160/60 ZR17 Avon Azarro on the rear of my Pre, do I need to be hopping back to the 150? Or does anyone have a definitive answer on if it's safe to stay with the 160? I only ask for clarity as the thread offers either viewoint. As a "by the way", the tires were already on the bike when I bought it.