fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21893
|
posted November 27, 2001 10:34 AM
Anyone running a 180 rear?
Thinking about next season's rubber..... I've pretty much decided to not go with Dunlop for a season....
So now it's time to think about tire profiles...
does running a 180 make this "land yacht" turn any better?
   
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 27, 2001 10:59 AM
a 180 is the cat's meow!
DRAMATIC IMPROVEMENT!
Because my dealer forgot to order my replacement 180/55 for their stock, I was forced to use one of my "emergency spare" 200/50, for one weekend. It was an interesting (actually it was frightening) comparason. I will never... I mean NEVER put another 200 on the back of my 12R AGAIN! The 200 made the bike so slow to respond to input.
Now there is a "hitch". I was also running a 120/60 up front. By far and away, the stupidest move I've ever done! I have no doubt that the front tire just compunded my problems. It reacted too quickly and with the 200 on back, it just made the whole bike a mess.
When the 180 came in, I put a 120/65 on the front. I also lowered the fork tubes back down from 1/2" to 1/8" above the triple clamp. It does not snap quite as hard as it did with the 120/60, but it is far more stable and is a lot less work to ride the bike. Odds are, I likely end up going back to a 120/70 (not real sure right now) and raise the forks back up in the triple clamp.
There are another two things about running the Pilot 180/55. They are a LOT CHEAPER then the 200 (in any brand) and I get at least 2500 miles out of a rear. Dunlops were good for 2000 miles, at best.
|
silver01bullit
Expert Class
on here too much
Posts: 333
|
posted November 27, 2001 11:26 AM
I think I'm gonna go with a 180/55 also. I'm thinking I'll be doing the Rennsports though. I like the pattern on them and I'll probably run a super soft up front and soft in back
|
frEEk
Administrator
ummm... yeah
Posts: 9660
|
posted November 27, 2001 04:27 PM
how can u possibly get enough grip out of a 180 to put any power down? a 190 i could still kinda see, but a 180? not to mention the whole thing about that the 200 is built stronger to take the load. is that all crap? r there any other advantages to the 180 besides fast response? & what about the disadvantages?
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 27, 2001 05:38 PM
I'd be interested to hear of a single drawback
Construction? No, the 180/55 Pilot is not constructed the same as the 200/50 Pilot HPX. I also don't spend the majority of my time hovering around the 200 mph mark either. As a matter of fact, the fastest I've ever been was just shy of 170 actual (185+ indicated). On an average weekend day's ride of around 250 miles, I'll average a speed of 55~60 with a maximum of around 140 (all actual speeds). I don't do ANY drag racing, burn outs or repeated high speed runs back and forth on one stretch of highway.
With that being the case, is the "special construction" specifically for the high power bikes just hype? For me... Yep, it is. Hell, how many race tires for bikes that put out more HP and are far more abusive, have this "special construction"? Having run 200/50 tires from both Dunlop (D207) and Michelin (Pilot HPX), when I compared the wear life of those two to the Michelin Pilot 180/55 (non-HPX)... guess what? I get the best and most even wear from the 180/55!
The D207 200/50 could bearly make it to 2000 miles. If I spent any amount of time on non-twisty roads, they would be flat spotted by 1500~1650 miles. I know what your thinking... it must be running a lower then recommended tire pressure, right? Actually, it's the opposite. At 41 psi cold, I'd be lucky to get 1800 miles out of a D207 and it would have a narrow (about 1 1/2" wide) flat spot strip. The tire that came with the bike wore out so quickly, that I was able to make a warranty claim on it and get a free OEM version replacement. That was after a Dunlop rep looked at the tire (little did they know).
At 38 psi, it prolonged the tire's life and widened the flat spot (which became appearent several hundred miles later then at 41 psi). 36 psi was the magic number for me to get over 2K out of a D207. Every single D207 that came of the back of my bike was showing metal cords. It's not that I ment for it to be that way, it's just that's what always happened. I'd be out on a ride and at a gas stop, I'd notice a few small horizontal slits in the center of the tire. By the time I reached the next smoke break (about 50~70 miles), there would be dozens of those slits. Some of them would be so close to each other, that it would look like a thin layer of rubber was worn off in that area. By the next 50~100 miles, large patches of metal cords would be showing.
The first Pilot I ran (200/50 HPX) did not show any signs of flat spotting until I had close to 2K miles on it. There was still plenty of tread left on the tire. I replaced it at almost 2500 miles. The following Pilot HPX rears would last around 2300~2400 miles. Even though I'd ride on them until there was no tread in the center 3"~4", I have never... I mean NEVER seen the cords of a Michelin.
What's even stranger is that the same would apply to the 180/55 Pilots too. There is one difference though. I've been getting 200~300 MORE miles out of the non-HPX 180/55. This is with running the tire at 36~38 psi. The 180/55 has also added at least 15% to my corner speeds.
Our roads are rather "gritty" down here and that probably has a lot to do with what kind of mileage I get out of a rear tire. If our interstate highways are ranked the worst in the nation, you can only imagine what our back highways and roads must be like. Hardly table top smooth. The additional grip of the Pilots combined with the quicker response of the 180/55 probably make me less abusive on my rear tire. No more braking hard before a corner, "babying it" through the corner and the whacking it as I come out of the apex. That's gotta be rough on any brand or size of tire.
With the 180/55 "smoothing" out my riding style (I'm sure being anything else besides a Dunlop helps too), my rear tires last longer. Throw in the fact that the 180/55 cost is around 65% of a 200/50, the savings can add up quickly. Especially when I have over 27,500 mile on the odo.
As it was discussed in the earlier tire size thread, most brands of 180/55 measure closer to the 200/50 (except in overall width), then a 190/50 does. Dunlop D207 190/50 being the exception. Bridgestone, Metezler and Michelin 180s are all closer in radius and circumfrence to the 200, then their 190 size tires are. In most cases, there are radical differences in size, when comparing the 200 versus the 190. Again, Dunlop D207s being the exception.
I just can't see how anyone could go wrong with a 180... even over a 190.
|
frEEk
Administrator
ummm... yeah
Posts: 9660
|
posted November 27, 2001 07:17 PM
hmm, most interesting. seeing as how i dont much enjoy paying the premium on the 200s, i may just do that. altho since i like to wheelie quite often & also like to take frequent top speed runs, im a littl concerned about that. i suspect that the 180 or 190s prolly are just fine at 200mph, but i would like to KNOW that b4 i kill myself.
|
TripodMeat
Expert Class
Posts: 125
|
posted November 27, 2001 07:33 PM
To Redelk..about that "indicated"..
Not to get off of the subject BUT...
Since I am still breaking-in, ( 1000 Mi.) What kind of
gap is there in the Actual / Indicated speeds ??
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 27, 2001 08:34 PM
A few things to keep in mind...
frEEk, the '99 Busa's 190 wasn't of any "special construction" (to the best of my knowledge) and bikes have been putting out more the 160~180 RHWP long before these tires came out. Even at the high speed runs at Maxton or Florida's 9/10ths, you can rest assured that all the folks bumping 200... are not running 200s on back. If "non-special constructed" tires can handle those enviroments, I'm pretty sure that they'll be able to stay together after anything you'll be putting them through. Just my opinion.
TM, since the Pilot's 180 circumfrence is very close to the 200's (probably around 1% or less), it really hasn't changed the bike's speedo error precentage that much. With that being the case, I'd guess-timate the error to be a little under 9%. In other words, when I'm doing an indicated 100 mph, in reality, it would be 91~92 mph.
To confirm my actual speeds, I use a Garmin GPSIII and a Sigma Targa. The Targa is a bicycle speedo that is accurate to 1/100th mph and can read up to 187 mph. Between the two, I have a pretty good idea on how fast I REALLY am going. I've used a Sigma for about 5 years and I've gotten so used to looking at it, instead of the bike's speedo. I wouldn't watch the bike's speedo, if it was the size of a wall clock.
The "yellow box" can correct this error on the bike's speedo (which can get even worse if you change sprocket sizes). It's just I've grown acoustom to looking at my Sigma. Oh... and the Sigma has a digital display, is less then $30 at any bicycle shop and is easier to install.
|
silver01bullit
Expert Class
on here too much
Posts: 333
|
posted November 28, 2001 06:34 AM
frEEk,
I know a guy with a stroker running a 180/55 on the back and he swears by it...to my understanding, the 190 would help but isn't optimal for turn in cause it sits a little wider (the profile). The 180/55 is taller and will give a bigger contact patch with the ground. Hope this helps a little. Just my .01
|
WhiteLightning
Novice Class
Posts: 41
|
posted November 28, 2001 07:14 AM
Silver-
Make sure you tell em... the guy, with the stroker, is not a drag racer.
You might wanna mention the tire is lighter and there are benefits there...
You could mention the tire is as tall and not quite as wide so the contact patch anywhere but straight up and down is larger. Also, the 180 is commonly measured on a 5.5 (but commonly mounted on a 6.0)
You could also mention that and large racebike runs a 5.75, 6.0 or 6.25 rear. Then tell em that race DOT tires are only availible in a 180.
And yes, I hear this guy will never go back to the 200. I hear he is quite annoyed whenever he has to mount his stock wheels (which holds a 207 200).
Me, personally? I think this 190 and 200 stuff is a mine's bigger then your's thing. It also tends to "dumb" the bike down. Not allowing you to get as much outta the bike, making you slower.
WL
|
silver01bullit
Expert Class
on here too much
Posts: 333
|
posted November 28, 2001 07:53 AM
 Edited By: silver01bullit on 28 Nov 2001 08:05
thanks WL,
I knew there was more to it 
frEEk,
yeah, what white lightning said.....
|
EastBayDave
Needs a job
Posts: 2245
|
posted November 28, 2001 08:24 AM
Edited By: EastBayDave on 28 Nov 2001 08:25
All fine & dandy. But can anyone tell me what the ACTUAL speed rating of a common 180/55 D207, Pilot, Rennsport, etc., is?
I'd hate to find out via a failure above 180.... YIKES!
____________
Enjoy the ride!
02' ZRX1200
00' ZX12R sold
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21893
|
posted November 28, 2001 08:49 AM
well.... what are they running on their WSBK bikes? Kawi? Ducati? what size rear anyone?... certainly they are rated for 180mph+ .... not to mention HOW many times are you gonna see 180+ , and if you do is it really only 175 with a higher indicated speed?
The poor wear of the 207's, combined with the land yacht navigation of the 12 (and the 3 sets of tires I went through last season) makes me think I am gonna have some changes next season... and this ... combined with some different gearing.. sounds like the ticket...
how bout a 48 or 50t rear sprocket?
|
Ninjaman12R
Needs a job
as a Deal's Gap tour guide.
Posts: 4767
|
posted November 28, 2001 09:06 AM
Fish I think you'll be happy with whatever tire you decide to go with. Just the change from Dunlop to Bridgestone made my 12 handle MUCH better. I wish I could comment on running a different size rear tire but I can't because I've always put the 200 series back on. I've got a yellow box on my 12 so I could recalibrate my speedo with no problem, and might try another size rear just for the hell of it.
Definitely try a 17t front sprocket on your bike. It really makes things better all the way around. I'm sure you've read my rants about it before so I'll spare the details. 
____________
What we're dealin' with here is a complete lack of respect for the law.
Sheriff Buford T. Justice of TEXAS
|
silver01bullit
Expert Class
on here too much
Posts: 333
|
posted November 28, 2001 12:44 PM
Edited By: silver01bullit on 28 Nov 2001 14:25
Fish, the first mod I did to my bike (besides the free mods) was change the gearing. You may like the 17/46 best, much better acceleration over stock. I've got the 17/48 gearing and it's a handful in first through third. I'd say try the 17/46 for a while first, you'll like it!!!!
|
frEEk
Administrator
ummm... yeah
Posts: 9660
|
posted November 29, 2001 03:42 AM
well, that settles it. im gonna do a 190 or 180 next. fuck the 200s! can't find them anywhere, and too expensive.
|
harryzx-12
Needs a job
Posts: 3643
|
posted November 29, 2001 11:20 PM
Rear Tires Expensive?
Chapparal has BT010's for $120 to my door.I had to put a 190 on my bike for the first rear tire change cause I couldn't get a 200. I like the 200 better than the 190 , personally.I'll probably try a 180 rear when I put rennsports on my bike when i do a track day.
____________
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways- Body thoroughly used up, totally worn out...Screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride !!!"
|
TurboBlew
Moderator
BUSY DOING THE SCHIAVO
Posts: 4590
|
posted November 30, 2001 03:51 AM
Well, Im running 6.25" rims and there is NO way in hell Im putting a 180 on!! The 180 and 200 have almost the same tire profile. (rounder) The 190 is slightly flatter than the 180 or 200. I do have a lower profile front tire on the front (120/60) and I know I will NEVER use anything but a 70mm profile again! The bike does turn in quicker, but it also gives too much feedback in the bars (read wobbles) under hard acceleration.
Coincidently Ive never had problems with the 200. Maybe Im just used to throwing around heavy bikes, but the 12 was an absolute dream for me this summer in the mountains ( 5,200 miles at Deals Gap and TWO) The only problem I have now is getting the suspension to my liking, which is going to run over $1k when its all said and done. Maybe tire characteristics will be more prevalent once the suspension is *tuned*. With over 11,000 miles on the bike I now have 4 rear Dunlops as *trophies* in my garage waiting to serve their final tread life at a dragstrip!!
____________
Official Charter Member of the RIDERS OF KAWASAKI MEMBERSHIP REVOCATION CLUB
Also a BadAss Internet Forum Moderator 4 Hire!! Come at me brah!
|
Koz
Expert Class
Posts: 304
|
posted November 30, 2001 04:59 AM
Different aspect ratio, may not be good with two-up at high speed.
Koz
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 30, 2001 06:26 AM
I know what you mean TB!
I hated my 120/60. I'm currently running a 120/65, but now, I have moved the forks back down in the triple clamps. It doesn't "snap" like it did with the 120/60, but now, it's far less work to ride the bike.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
EastBayDave
Needs a job
Posts: 2245
|
posted November 30, 2001 08:07 AM
quote:
well.... what are they running on their WSBK bikes? Kawi? Ducati? what size rear anyone?... certainly they are rated for 180mph+ .... not to mention HOW many times are you gonna see 180+ , and if you do is it really only 175 with a higher indicated speed?
The poor wear of the 207's, combined with the land yacht navigation of the 12 (and the 3 sets of tires I went through last season) makes me think I am gonna have some changes next season... and this ... combined with some different gearing.. sounds like the ticket...how bout a 48 or 50t rear sprocket?
Oh I 100% agree on the lousy mileage. I only get 900 miles out of a 200/50 D207zr! However I keep coming back to the fact that I like the way the Dunflops slide predictably, & I do occasionally attain top gear(s) speeds, so I worry about the thing coming apart a lot.
No one has been able to tell me (for sure) the speed ratings of these other tires, &/or the folks that run them at high speed on a frequent basis. I once got off from a run & checked the tire after a 4 mile 6th gear flight (on a hot day), & found the tire very hot & "balled up" in the center of the tire. Wheelspin? I donno but no one seems to be able to answer the question...
As for the racing world (WSB, etc.), they run racing tires. Slicks, D208's, etc. Those are rated for high speed running at Daytona, Talladega, etc. Most of these other tires Bridgestone's, Pilots, Rennsports, etc., I can't find anyone to tell me for sure the speed ratings. Even dealers...
Should I be concerned? Or just gamble my life on it? I'm sticking to the Dunflops until someone can tell me different...
____________
Enjoy the ride!
02' ZRX1200
00' ZX12R sold
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 30, 2001 08:38 AM
ABSOLUTLY NO DIFFERENCE!
There is no difference in the speed ratings of the 200, 190 or 180.
Check out these two previous tire threads
D207 190 wider then the 200
This one has the web addresses to all the major tire manufacturer
http://www.bikeland.org/board//viewthread.php?FID=1&TID=187
Good Tire Article
http://www.bikeland.org/board//viewthread.php?FID=1&TID=253
|
Ozzy
Needs a job
need guberment cheese
Posts: 3172
|
posted November 30, 2001 05:40 PM
Has anyone used Avon Azaro's? If so what is your opinion?
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted November 30, 2001 07:00 PM
I ran an Avon... once
First, I gotta say that it was a 190/50 and I originally ran it on my 7R (prior to '00). So, if the construction of the Azero has changed a lot since then, this opinion might not apply. I doubt if it construction and compound has really changed that much.
It was the only tire, out of the close to 40 rear tires I put on that bike (had about 69K miles on the bike when I traded) that I actually took OFF the bike before it was anywhere near worn out. I kept it as an "emergency spare" and ended up using it on the 12R. I hated it even more on the 12R.
Of all the different brands I had tried on my 7R, it was the softest and stickest tire I had every used. The Pilots I current use, now hold the "stickiest" title. It's over all durability was comparable to the other brands as far as mileage verus tread life. What was no comparable to ANY of the other brands was the tire's grip.
Like I said earlier, it was one of the sticiest tires I had ever used, up to a point. After about 1500 miles, while there was still plenty of tread left, the tire just let go. I had no grip, no matter how much you heated up the tire. It was as if someone had sprayed WD-40 on the tire, just prior to every ride. I never figured out why.
Unlike the Dunlops, Avon (like most other brands) does not have a balance mark. On the D207s, it's that dime sized yellow circle on one sidewall, that's lined up with the valve stem. My experience was the Avons was almost impossible to balance. I've heard that this is very common with Avon tires. While trying to balance the tire, I had to remount it several times, after rotating it 90 degrees, in an attempt to achive a better balance. It never worked. It took almost 3 OUNCES to get the rear tire to balance. The previous and following D207 I put on, required no weight at all.
Avons just don't seem to be a very popular sportbike tire, right now. Most get them for their unique tread pattern. The brands that are currently popular are...
Dunlop D207 - predictability (in when it will lose it's grip) and consistancy for the life of the tire
Michelin Pilots - excellent (if not scary) grip and better wear
Bridgestone BT010 - predictable and better grip then the D207 with unbelievable wear
Metzeler Rennsports - race tire like grip but limited wear *
* - I know only one person who has tried the Rennsports and their wallet could care less on how long the tire lasted.
|
sagot
Zone Head
Posts: 779
|
posted November 30, 2001 08:52 PM
Do you even need tires on a ZX-12? Just kidding. What ever you do, don,t let money be a factor in your bike,s handling! I used some Avon azeros at Portland raceway one time and that $100.00 I saved almost cost me $2ooo.oo
____________
Blank
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC