All along i was convinced the profile of a 55 series 190 was pointier than a 50 series.I,ve used 180/55,190/50,190/55,200/50.Well I WAS WRONG......I have a few tyres undr the house and looked at 190/50 next to a 190/55 and the only difference is the height of the sidewall,the crown of the tyre is the same.Don,t get me wrong, a 55 profile does tip in better as it raises the rear of the bike,but it has exactly the same contact patch as a 190/50 profile.So if a 190/55 is out of stock and a 50 profile is(cheaper too).if you can raise the rear ride height 5-10mm,it,ll have the same effect.Individual manufactures profiles have more effect on turning,eg michelin pilot powers are quite pointy compared to pirellis and bridgestones seem to be between the two.
Posts: 358
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation:
2
G/day Glen I remember speaking to you about this at Jindy as i only have used the 55 series once on the track with a very noticeable difference about the same difference as when i put the raising links on and dropped the forks through In the shed I have a 190/60 and contact patch is the same as 190/55 these are dunlop gp 209s The 60 is going on next week for a run up the Oxley . My concern with raising rear more and changing the geometry how much will high speed stability be affected?Is a better steering damper the go! As far as the 55 are concerned wont be going back to a 50 anytime soon.
Cheers Mark
I remember dad had a dunlop 60 series rear on at eastern creek once and it did head shake out of turn 5 a fair bit so yes it does affect stability.I,m all for raising the bike in preference to lowering the front,perhaps you can drop the forks in the clamps 5mm as well as putting the 60 series rear on.This gives a higher centre of mass at the front,better ground clearance,better tip in as the back will be 10mm or more higher,and your still tall enough to touch the ground,lol.Look at all the superbikes,they're all taller,as are there tyres and alot of them also have taller seats in them.Taller bikes stay on their sides and hold a line better.Having adjustable lowering links and fairly flat back tyres for the drags,with a low seat and converting that back to a stock seat,at full height with a 55 profile rear gives you a good comparison of the extremes of how the bike steers.
if it headshakes,just take a bit of preload out of the rear spring so it will sit down a little more,if not,have fun.
Also try a 120/60 instead of 120/65 on the front tyre.Combined with a 55 rear it would be alot better!My own 60 rennsport front never gave me head shakes and bump absorption is almost the same..
I'm on my second 190/55 rear and won't be going back to 50 as I prefer the way it corners. I also assumed it was "pointyer", so there you go.
Haven't noticed any stability issues at speed but I've only had it up to 260 or so.
a taller tyre raises the axle higher off the ground so the rear wheels centre of gravity will be higher,hence more inclined to tip in.As the rear wheel also includes the sprocket and rotor and chain,thats a fair bit of mass thats higher off the ground.raising the rear suspension only,only lifts the rear of the bike and rider a bit further up with the heavy spinning wheel still quite low down.I,ll still stick with a higher profile rear as you don,t have to decrease the trail and rake as much for better turn in.
dog bones and adjustable length shocks were what i meant.
Elka.the shock needs to be able to be lengthened.changing the dog bone length changes the ratio the how the shock/spring acts on the rear suspension .When i lengthen the dogbones for the drags it feels harder.
Posts: 1,284
Threads: 26
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation:
1
Just had a rear fitted should have gone the 55....oh well they don't seem to last long anyway i'll go the 55 next time round!! sounds like a worth while change for sure.
I'd rather be riding my Hayabusa thinking about God than sitting in church thinking about my Hayabusa