3.5" rear wheel vs. 4.5" rear wheel

[signaramatn]

Just for clarification, I misspoke regarding the chicken strips. What I meant was that each tire that Ive had on it scuffs THROUGH the portion of the tire that would normally make up the chicken strips. In other words, the tire is scuffed from one edge of the sidewall to the other. Again, this is with a 160.

I can obviously see that, as you said, you do take full advantage of the bike' lean capabilities. As a matter of fact, Im positive that the lean angles shown in your pics are lower than I go. And still my tires are scuffed from 'edge to edge'. What make and model tire is that in the picture? I have been running Bridgestone BT023's and PP's but recently switched to Metzler M3's exclusively.

I will admit though that you have me intrigued to where I may just try a 150 next time.

[Kreylyn]

Krey, I have to disagree with you on this one. Lean to lean transition is smooth and cosistent from one side to the next. The rear tire feels very well planted and handling is as good as any other bike Ive owned of its size.

Also, about losing the last 1" of tread on each side is not correct as evidenced by the fact that my rear tire is scuffed all the way to the chicken strips. Also, it is quite easy to lean the bike to that point.

What chicken strips?

You mean like this?

http://katriders.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1750419&postcount=5

Those "chicken strips" ARE what I was talking about ... 1" of tire you can't use because it can't possibly be put on the pavement. You would be sliding the side of the bike on the ground and that last 1" still would not be on pavement.

Now it's just simple math... 1" = 25.5mm. If your not able to use 25.5mm on either side, that's 51mm of waisted tire tread, and subsequently... your distorting the profile of the tire so badly it's basically giving you a contact patch of a 110 tire. Smaller than the 150 significantly.

Before responding, just read through a few more posts on over sized tires for the rims... I've posted way to much of this information to just repeat typing it out...

http://katriders.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1793141&postcount=34

http://katriders.com/vb/showthread.php?t=107043&page=2

And there is lots more detailed info with pics on this website discussing 160/60s on a 3.5" rim...

I'm no stranger to getting the bike over... and I'm no stranger to having ridden with a 160 on a 3.5" rim on the same bike. Above picture is my bike with me getting it over as far as it was going to go. That's probably the 4th or 5th 160 I tried before I knew better. I know with out any doubt the profile is wrong, the handling is compromised, and the transition is not smooth at all. You may think it is, but man are you going to be surprised when you get the right size tire on there.

And just for clarification... I do get the bike over to know exactly how it handles at the edges of the tire. And yes, the pic above was ridden just like below... only below I have a much better tire profile.







Tmod has said many times... "The best you know, is the best you've ridden."

Well, I've ridden better now and know the difference.

BTW... if you want a real eye opener... Keep that tire when you replace it, and took at the surface profile with out it mounted but worn down .... That's a real clear indication it was improperly profiled by the rim.


Krey

[signaramatn]

Yes, both pre and post use the same B1 17X47X14 BEA bearings for the rear wheel. The hubs are not exact, but extremely close. I suggest you use the hub designed for the wheel your using. The minor variances cause rubbing between the hub and the wheel when you mix them.




I understand you have put one on the wheel, and I understand it does not "rub" on anything... but it does not fit that wheel correctly.

It's extremely distorted in profile, and your tire is actually less wide now than the 150 mounted would be. Add to that your now not able to use 1" of the tread surface on either side making your contact patch smaller, the tire provide less grip subsequently, and a horrible transition from lean to lean... You CAN put one on, but you gain nothing of what you wanted when you did... not even the larger size.

So why would someone do that when they know this information? They wouldn't, so that is why the OP asked about the 4.5" rim.

Krey

Krey, I have to disagree with you on this one. Lean to lean transition is smooth and cosistent from one side to the next. The rear tire feels very well planted and handling is as good as any other bike Ive owned of its size.

Also, losing the last 1" of tread on each side is not correct as evidenced by the fact that my rear tire is scuffed all the way to the chicken strips. Also, it is quite easy to lean the bike to that point.

[Kreylyn]

Thanks krey. Your a smart dude lol. I will post pics in a couple hours when i get off work. I am also gonna post a pic of my oil pan. can you tell me if its the post oil pan? I am assuming it is because the exhaust has been changed to a 4 to 1 header already and there arent any marks where somebody was beating on the exhaust to make it fit lol.

Yes, I would be able to identify pre/post oil pans... and with measurements on depth of the pan, probably verify if it's 600/750cc if there was a difference.

Post pics of the exhaust (down tubes, under the engine, and the midpipe/can... ) and I can probably verify what it is as well.

Krey

[mhuddle8]

Thanks krey. Your a smart dude lol. I will post pics in a couple hours when i get off work. I am also gonna post a pic of my oil pan. can you tell me if its the post oil pan? I am assuming it is because the exhaust has been changed to a 4 to 1 header already and there arent any marks where somebody was beating on the exhaust to make it fit lol.

[Kreylyn]

Thanks krey. The only problem is im not sure what year kat the wheel came from. I cantacted the guy i bought the wheel from and he didnt know either. He has a 93 kat 600 and he put the hub from wheel he sold on his current bike. Also, my rear rotor has a 4 bolt pattern and the rotor on the new wheel is a 5 bolt pattern. Will this affect anything? I checked the diameter of the rotors and the 5 bolt pattern is about 1/4" bigger in dia. Thanks again.

The pre kats use the 4 bolt pattern 250mm OD rear rotor, thickness 6mm, min. thickness 5.5.

http://metalgear.com.au/mgear-brake-disc-rear-p-5068.html

The post kats use the 5 bolt pattern 240mm OD rear rotor, 5mm thickness, 4.5mm min. thickness.

http://metalgear.com.au/mgear-brake-disc-rear-p-5044.html

The pre caliper will work for that rotor no issue.

As for the year... measure the hub width, and post pics of the wheel both sides clearly... and I can verify if your going to see any issues. FYI: 98-06 post kat rear wheels are the same wheel.

Krey

[mhuddle8]

Thanks krey. The only problem is im not sure what year kat the wheel came from. I cantacted the guy i bought the wheel from and he didnt know either. He has a 93 kat 600 and he put the hub from wheel he sold on his current bike. Also, my rear rotor has a 4 bolt pattern and the rotor on the new wheel is a 5 bolt pattern. Will this affect anything? I checked the diameter of the rotors and the 5 bolt pattern is about 1/4" bigger in dia. Thanks again.

[Kreylyn]

I am going from a 3.5" to a 4.5" rear wheel so i can put the 160 rear tire on. I am wanting to change the wheel bearings just to be sure they are fresh. I am pretty sure the wheel came from a post kat. Are the wheel bearings the same size from pre kat to post kat? And are they the same hub and dampner from pre kat to post kat. Thanks for your input.

Yes, both pre and post use the same B1 17X47X14 BEA bearings for the rear wheel. The hubs are not exact, but extremely close. I suggest you use the hub designed for the wheel your using. The minor variances cause rubbing between the hub and the wheel when you mix them.

You dont have to go to a 4.5" for a 160. Ive had a 160 on my 3.5" all along and have never had a problem. It fits with plenty of clearance.

I understand you have put one on the wheel, and I understand it does not "rub" on anything... but it does not fit that wheel correctly.

It's extremely distorted in profile, and your tire is actually less wide now than the 150 mounted would be. Add to that your now not able to use 1" of the tread surface on either side making your contact patch smaller, the tire provide less grip subsequently, and a horrible transition from lean to lean... You CAN put one on, but you gain nothing of what you wanted when you did... not even the larger size.

So why would someone do that when they know this information? They wouldn't, so that is why the OP asked about the 4.5" rim.

Krey

[signaramatn]

You dont have to go to a 4.5" for a 160. Ive had a 160 on my 3.5" all along and have never had a problem. It fits with plenty of clearance.

[mhuddle8]

I am going from a 3.5" to a 4.5" rear wheel so i can put the 160 rear tire on. I am wanting to change the wheel bearings just to be sure they are fresh. I am pretty sure the wheel came from a post kat. Are the wheel bearings the same size from pre kat to post kat? And are they the same hub and dampner from pre kat to post kat. Thanks for your input.