Ad Widget
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
I don't think he was making a argument, but rather speaking of what is generally accepted.
I corner my bike so sharp I feel like I run out of thread with the 160, I just feel safer with a 170. On the other hand, the 160 seems to fall over easier/turn with less effort.
For someone carrying a load/riding 2 up often, then you may consider a 170 for stability...just my opinion tho
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by 92xjunker View PostI can't, I've never ridden a bike with a 170 stuffed on a 160 rim, to compare with, handling wise. :
However, what we don't agree on in this statement:
"Proper fitment is a 160 max, stuffing a wider tire on a stock wheel deforms the tire." I don't agree, because it's a false statement on 2 counts. A 160 is not the widest tyre suitable for the stock post Kat 4.5" rim, and the correct 170s will not be deformed at all, but rather offer the perfect profile. FWIW, some 150/70 tyres are actually designed for a 4.0" rim, not 4.5. Obviously, as with most tyres, there is a design width, and then there are minimum and maximum rim widths either side of that.
Re handling ... because they're not "stuffed" onto the rim but fitted to the exact rim for which they were designed, those particular 170/60 tyres handle very well ... much better in fact than lowering the arse end with a 160. I know they handle well, because I've run several sets with 170 rears.
A 160 is a significantly smaller tyre in terms of OD than the stock 170.
Fitting a 160 will lower the rear of the bike. This effects handling balance and little things like ease of placing the bike on the centre stand. Fitting a 160 will also screw up the speedo reading even more.
But hey, there's a myth that the 160 is the largest tyre possible. Knock yourself out and perpetuate that myth. No point letting a few facts and some common sense get in the way of myths and egos.
Leave a comment:
-
I can't, I've never ridden a bike with a 170 stuffed on a 160 rim, to compare with, handling wise. :
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by TRPUT View PostI also prefer the 170. Some 170/60 tyres (such as Michelin, but there are others) are designed to fit the Kat rim width - hence, they are not distorted but at their design profile. Apart from the aesthetics of a wider tyre, the 170 offers greater load-carrying capacity and is closer to the original spec 150/70 overall diameter than the 160/60. There has been concerned expressed re the clearance to frame and swingarm with the 170, but I've had no issues on my 05 750.
Leave a comment:
-
I also prefer the 170. Some 170/60 tyres (such as Michelin, but there are others) are designed to fit the Kat rim width - hence, they are not distorted but at their design profile. Apart from the aesthetics of a wider tyre, the 170 offers greater load-carrying capacity and is closer to the original spec 150/70 overall diameter than the 160/60. There has been concerned expressed re the clearance to frame and swingarm with the 170, but I've had no issues on my 05 750.
Leave a comment:
-
I ran a Continental Road Attack for about 2-3 yrs and loved it. After switching back to a 160 I felt like I couldn't lean the bike over as much. I'm going back to a 170 next time for sure.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by 92xjunker View PostProper fitment is a 160 max, stuffing a wider tire on a stock wheel deforms the tire.
thank you very much for the information..
Leave a comment:
-
Proper fitment is a 160 max, stuffing a wider tire on a stock wheel deforms the tire.
Leave a comment:
-
How wide can you go?
What is the widest tire size you have on your 01 Katana 600? pics pleaseTags: None
Leave a comment: