180 rear on f3
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
From:
RE: 180 rear on f3
ORIGINAL: blade8r
take example the stock steelie honda rim that you see on eg/ek hatches are 185/70r14 which btw are 5.5inches wide respectively. this tire is in terms of circumference and width is only slightly differnt from each other. conversion of a 185/70r14 to a 17 wheel would be 185/55r17 only 5 differnt in terms of width. but motorcycle tires are without the 5 in the end. tires are basicly if anything the same size. but this i know holds true. i have in my lifetime put countless 180 sized rtire on countless 5 inch rims. so i know it is more then capable of fitting the same size onto a motocycle rim.
take example the stock steelie honda rim that you see on eg/ek hatches are 185/70r14 which btw are 5.5inches wide respectively. this tire is in terms of circumference and width is only slightly differnt from each other. conversion of a 185/70r14 to a 17 wheel would be 185/55r17 only 5 differnt in terms of width. but motorcycle tires are without the 5 in the end. tires are basicly if anything the same size. but this i know holds true. i have in my lifetime put countless 180 sized rtire on countless 5 inch rims. so i know it is more then capable of fitting the same size onto a motocycle rim.
YOU FAILED TO ADDRESS THE ORIGINAL PROBLEM.
160 (stock) is the radius. putting a 180 radius will change the profile of the tire due to the rim being smaller and the tire being bigger.
Does you company know that you don't know the difference between the profile and the width? sounds like you've got a problem.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From:
RE: 180 rear on f3
okay.lets do the math on conversion numbers
lets take your standard 185-70r14 and convert it to a smaller 165 with a 17 inch wheel series tire
185/70r14 we have to down the size so your right the profile has to change and that'll change to witch you are right about. but this will make it this size.
165/75r14 now we have to bumb up the size of the rim. also btw r doesn't mean speed raiting. it means radious or rim size in inches.
165/70r15 changing to a 15 in rim
165/65r16 changing to a 16 in rim
165/60r17 changing to a 17 in rim
opps guess what.. we got our conversioun number for whitch happens to be simular to the stock tire 160/60r17 if we were to up the size of the width of the tire to a 180 you'd have to drop the profile to 55 instead of leaving it at 60. your right about that. but i did do my numbers correctly. and i do know about the difference between profile raiting and width. using a 180/55r17 is most accurate tire size that is 1 step bigger then a 160/60r17 standard tire.
oh yeah also the speed raiting is listed on every DOT raited tire ever produced. but it's usually listed right next to the size of the tire. which should say something like 99W
now that letter listed in that area indicates the speed raiting whitch usually starts from Q,S.T.H.W,V,Y OR Z in raiting respectably.
now if you like you can find out with a quick search on google and see what they mean in terms of speed index.
but did you know the differnce between speed raiting to the meaning of R = radious in the size of the tire. sounds like you don't.
lets take your standard 185-70r14 and convert it to a smaller 165 with a 17 inch wheel series tire
185/70r14 we have to down the size so your right the profile has to change and that'll change to witch you are right about. but this will make it this size.
165/75r14 now we have to bumb up the size of the rim. also btw r doesn't mean speed raiting. it means radious or rim size in inches.
165/70r15 changing to a 15 in rim
165/65r16 changing to a 16 in rim
165/60r17 changing to a 17 in rim
opps guess what.. we got our conversioun number for whitch happens to be simular to the stock tire 160/60r17 if we were to up the size of the width of the tire to a 180 you'd have to drop the profile to 55 instead of leaving it at 60. your right about that. but i did do my numbers correctly. and i do know about the difference between profile raiting and width. using a 180/55r17 is most accurate tire size that is 1 step bigger then a 160/60r17 standard tire.
oh yeah also the speed raiting is listed on every DOT raited tire ever produced. but it's usually listed right next to the size of the tire. which should say something like 99W
now that letter listed in that area indicates the speed raiting whitch usually starts from Q,S.T.H.W,V,Y OR Z in raiting respectably.
now if you like you can find out with a quick search on google and see what they mean in terms of speed index.
but did you know the differnce between speed raiting to the meaning of R = radious in the size of the tire. sounds like you don't.
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 771
Likes: 0
From:
RE: 180 rear on f3
blade8r, I'm not attacking you here. I'm merely pointing out something that is very apparent from your posts.
No doubt you understand car tires. The one thing is blatantly obvious though in reading your posts in this thread is that you don't understand motorcycle tires very well. Let me explain why....
Firstly, its obvious you sell car tires (and are familiar with them) and you're making an assumption that concepts that apply to car tires will apply to motorcycles. That's wrong! Cars and bikes use tires in completely different manners (simply because a car has 4 of them and a bike only has 2). This leads into my next point...
Secondly, you're assuming that when a motorcycle tire person speaks of profile that we are talking about the same thing that a car tire person speaks of. In motorcycle terms, profile is not the height of the sidewall of the tire as in car tires. Instead, profile refers to the shape, radius of curvature, and carcass of the the tire's tread area (i.e. the part that makes contact with the road), not the sidewall.
When you put a wide tire on a narrow rim (i.e. a rim not wide enough to accomodate the tires width), you change the shape and the radius of curvature of the tire itself. This, in turn, changes how the bike behaves when cornering. This is what the previous people have meant by "it changes the profile".
This concept is very different from cars. In cars, the tread surface is always in contact with the road. With bikes, only a part of the tread surface is in contact. The profile of the tire is designes such that the contact patch is always the same size to give constant grip and feel as you lean from one side to the other. When you change the profile, this no longer becomes the case (and in some cases, it can be painful). This gets really amplified is you usea tire with a rounded profile such as aMetzeler Sportec (as compared to a triangular profile like a Michelin Pilot Power).
To further illustrate this, go here: clicky-clicky
And yes, I have done this. I can tell you firsthand that taking an F3 at corners speeds of 120+ mph will go much easier and smoother on a 160 than a 180 (can you say the same thing?????????). This is why people who race F3s never go wider than 170.
Yes, a 180 will "fit" on a 5-inch rim (hell, you can squeeze a 300 on there if you forced it on). But its not a question of can you but more of a question of should you. The only reason you're not feeling a difference in how the bike turns is because you're not pushing the bike very hard.
Anyway, welcome to the realm of bikes. Just keep in mind that car experience does not equate to bike experience.
No doubt you understand car tires. The one thing is blatantly obvious though in reading your posts in this thread is that you don't understand motorcycle tires very well. Let me explain why....
Firstly, its obvious you sell car tires (and are familiar with them) and you're making an assumption that concepts that apply to car tires will apply to motorcycles. That's wrong! Cars and bikes use tires in completely different manners (simply because a car has 4 of them and a bike only has 2). This leads into my next point...
Secondly, you're assuming that when a motorcycle tire person speaks of profile that we are talking about the same thing that a car tire person speaks of. In motorcycle terms, profile is not the height of the sidewall of the tire as in car tires. Instead, profile refers to the shape, radius of curvature, and carcass of the the tire's tread area (i.e. the part that makes contact with the road), not the sidewall.
When you put a wide tire on a narrow rim (i.e. a rim not wide enough to accomodate the tires width), you change the shape and the radius of curvature of the tire itself. This, in turn, changes how the bike behaves when cornering. This is what the previous people have meant by "it changes the profile".
This concept is very different from cars. In cars, the tread surface is always in contact with the road. With bikes, only a part of the tread surface is in contact. The profile of the tire is designes such that the contact patch is always the same size to give constant grip and feel as you lean from one side to the other. When you change the profile, this no longer becomes the case (and in some cases, it can be painful). This gets really amplified is you usea tire with a rounded profile such as aMetzeler Sportec (as compared to a triangular profile like a Michelin Pilot Power).
To further illustrate this, go here: clicky-clicky
And yes, I have done this. I can tell you firsthand that taking an F3 at corners speeds of 120+ mph will go much easier and smoother on a 160 than a 180 (can you say the same thing?????????). This is why people who race F3s never go wider than 170.
Yes, a 180 will "fit" on a 5-inch rim (hell, you can squeeze a 300 on there if you forced it on). But its not a question of can you but more of a question of should you. The only reason you're not feeling a difference in how the bike turns is because you're not pushing the bike very hard.
Anyway, welcome to the realm of bikes. Just keep in mind that car experience does not equate to bike experience.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From:
RE: 180 rear on f3
well put post abadfish. although i do not agree with you completely. but for now, i will continue to test and see how my tire responds to my command. i personally am the type of person who wants to try it out for themselves and not jump the internet band wagon.
but for now ill experiance and wait and see. so far i enjoy my 180 tire. but time will tell when i continue beating it up.
but for now ill experiance and wait and see. so far i enjoy my 180 tire. but time will tell when i continue beating it up.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2021
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Need a honest and true opinion
blade8r, I'm not attacking you here. I'm merely pointing out something that is very apparent from your posts.
No doubt you understand car tires. The one thing is blatantly obvious though in reading your posts in this thread is that you don't understand motorcycle tires very well. Let me explain why....
Firstly, its obvious you sell car tires (and are familiar with them) and you're making an assumption that concepts that apply to car tires will apply to motorcycles. That's wrong! Cars and bikes use tires in completely different manners (simply because a car has 4 of them and a bike only has 2). This leads into my next point...
Secondly, you're assuming that when a motorcycle tire person speaks of profile that we are talking about the same thing that a car tire person speaks of. In motorcycle terms, profile is not the height of the sidewall of the tire as in car tires. Instead, profile refers to the shape, radius of curvature, and carcass of the the tire's tread area (i.e. the part that makes contact with the road), not the sidewall.
When you put a wide tire on a narrow rim (i.e. a rim not wide enough to accomodate the tires width), you change the shape and the radius of curvature of the tire itself. This, in turn, changes how the bike behaves when cornering. This is what the previous people have meant by "it changes the profile".
This concept is very different from cars. In cars, the tread surface is always in contact with the road. With bikes, only a part of the tread surface is in contact. The profile of the tire is designes such that the contact patch is always the same size to give constant grip and feel as you lean from one side to the other. When you change the profile, this no longer becomes the case (and in some cases, it can be painful). This gets really amplified is you usea tire with a rounded profile such as aMetzeler Sportec (as compared to a triangular profile like a Michelin Pilot Power).
To further illustrate this, go here: clicky-clicky
And yes, I have done this. I can tell you firsthand that taking an F3 at corners speeds of 120+ mph will go much easier and smoother on a 160 than a 180 (can you say the same thing?????????). This is why people who race F3s never go wider than 170.
Yes, a 180 will "fit" on a 5-inch rim (hell, you can squeeze a 300 on there if you forced it on). But its not a question of can you but more of a question of should you. The only reason you're not feeling a difference in how the bike turns is because you're not pushing the bike very hard.
Anyway, welcome to the realm of bikes. Just keep in mind that car experience does not equate to bike experience.
No doubt you understand car tires. The one thing is blatantly obvious though in reading your posts in this thread is that you don't understand motorcycle tires very well. Let me explain why....
Firstly, its obvious you sell car tires (and are familiar with them) and you're making an assumption that concepts that apply to car tires will apply to motorcycles. That's wrong! Cars and bikes use tires in completely different manners (simply because a car has 4 of them and a bike only has 2). This leads into my next point...
Secondly, you're assuming that when a motorcycle tire person speaks of profile that we are talking about the same thing that a car tire person speaks of. In motorcycle terms, profile is not the height of the sidewall of the tire as in car tires. Instead, profile refers to the shape, radius of curvature, and carcass of the the tire's tread area (i.e. the part that makes contact with the road), not the sidewall.
When you put a wide tire on a narrow rim (i.e. a rim not wide enough to accomodate the tires width), you change the shape and the radius of curvature of the tire itself. This, in turn, changes how the bike behaves when cornering. This is what the previous people have meant by "it changes the profile".
This concept is very different from cars. In cars, the tread surface is always in contact with the road. With bikes, only a part of the tread surface is in contact. The profile of the tire is designes such that the contact patch is always the same size to give constant grip and feel as you lean from one side to the other. When you change the profile, this no longer becomes the case (and in some cases, it can be painful). This gets really amplified is you usea tire with a rounded profile such as aMetzeler Sportec (as compared to a triangular profile like a Michelin Pilot Power).
To further illustrate this, go here: clicky-clicky
And yes, I have done this. I can tell you firsthand that taking an F3 at corners speeds of 120+ mph will go much easier and smoother on a 160 than a 180 (can you say the same thing?????????). This is why people who race F3s never go wider than 170.
Yes, a 180 will "fit" on a 5-inch rim (hell, you can squeeze a 300 on there if you forced it on). But its not a question of can you but more of a question of should you. The only reason you're not feeling a difference in how the bike turns is because you're not pushing the bike very hard.
Anyway, welcome to the realm of bikes. Just keep in mind that car experience does not equate to bike experience.
Let's say for an average Street/Highway rider , Would it be okay or convenient to out the 180/55/17 (73W) on my 98 f3?.... I don't ever ride track or "Race"... I just found a pair of tires for a steal of a price & don't want to kill The handling completely or anything else at that. Or is it just a bit different & Manageable for a Experienced rider..? Thanks
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
