Guest ChicagoAJ Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 So as promised, after riding both mine and another FZ07, the differences are pretty decent actually. It dose feel like a bit more pickup, and i feel more able to get down faster on the 170/60 tire than the 180/55 through the corner. the other thing i'm noticing is the transition between corners, after leaning hard left it is so much easier to come back over to the right than the OEM size. On another note, the PR4 vs the PR3, So much better in the rain! Love this tire!!! Could the lean angles be affected by the tire height alone and not the width? A true test would have to be a 170/55 vs. a 180/55 vs. a 170/60 vs. a 180/60, assuming they make all those sizes, haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crafty Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 So as promised, after riding both mine and another FZ07, the differences are pretty decent actually. It dose feel like a bit more pickup, and i feel more able to get down faster on the 170/60 tire than the 180/55 through the corner. the other thing i'm noticing is the transition between corners, after leaning hard left it is so much easier to come back over to the right than the OEM size. On another note, the PR4 vs the PR3, So much better in the rain! Love this tire!!! Could the lean angles be affected by the tire height alone and not the width? A true test would have to be a 170/55 vs. a 180/55 vs. a 170/60 vs. a 180/60, assuming they make all those sizes, haha. It could possibly, Like i said before I have a good amount of riding experience, but I am no professional by any means. this is just my findings compared to stock. That being said, would I do it again? Yes Do I think it helps the bikes composure? Yes Is it Worth the $$? if you are switching the rear out anyhow why not! I think with the tire change, a good front fork change, and maybe a better rear shock, this thing would really rip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member blackout Posted September 7, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted September 7, 2016 So as promised, after riding both mine and another FZ07, the differences are pretty decent actually. It dose feel like a bit more pickup, and i feel more able to get down faster on the 170/60 tire than the 180/55 through the corner. the other thing i'm noticing is the transition between corners, after leaning hard left it is so much easier to come back over to the right than the OEM size. On another note, the PR4 vs the PR3, So much better in the rain! Love this tire!!! Could the lean angles be affected by the tire height alone and not the width? A true test would have to be a 170/55 vs. a 180/55 vs. a 170/60 vs. a 180/60, assuming they make all those sizes, haha. Actually, 55 and 60 is the aspect ratio, not a direct height measurement. A 170/60 is actually very close in height to a 180/55, it is only .1 inches taller, if I remember correctly when I calculated it last week when I first saw this thread. As the tire gets more narrow, the aspect ratio increases if the diameter stays close to the same. Craig Mapstone Upstate New York Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 The aspect ratio determines width to height (from the ground to the wheel). 60% of 170mm = 102mm 55% of 180mm = 99mm That makes it 3mm (yep, .12") taller from ground to rim and 6mm (1/4 in or so) bigger in diameter. The profile will likely be different. Hard to say how as the aspect ration plays into this. But even a 3mm raise in back will result in a quicker steer - much like using a shock with a height adjustment or raising the fork tubes 5 or 10mm in the triple clamps to lower the front. I have the basic Ohlins rebound adj. only shock on mine and sorta wish I could raise the back end up a bit. This size tire will be on my list when it's time. In the meantime, I think I'm gonna try lowering the front 5mm. And yeah, ya want to transform the bike's handling - throw away the all-steel-no-damping shock and also modify the front - either Pattonme's retrofit or one of the cartridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjet Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 I wasn't being sarcastic about the rain performance. On the way to Phillip Island it rained for 3 days ( and temp down to 1degC) The PR4's were superb. In the big storm it was raining so hard I could only see about 100m, but I was having so much fun, and the tyres were so predictable, I just kept going faster and had to keep myself in check. Couldn't stop grinning and thunder and lightning all around. Love these tyres. Go forth and modify my son...go forth and modify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckles Posted September 13, 2016 Author Share Posted September 13, 2016 Well I finally got around to installing the 170 and I put about 400 miles on this weekend. I know some of it is from the new tire but I must say I think this is the best "mod" I have done to the FZ (2nd being the R6 throttle swap). Instead of the tougher lean in at higher lean angles I experienced with the stock 180 the 170 pretty much falls in once it gets over. It surprised me so much that I thought something was wrong after my first hard corner. The 170 looks like it gives you more available lean angle as well, the 180 had about a 1/16" wide strip left after touching feelers down and the 170 has about a 1/4" strip left. The last thing that I noticed is how smooth the bike corners now, before it felt like I was fighting the bike during a spirited ride and now it feels like it's on rails. Now this is all based on my calibrated butt dyno but next time I need a tire I will be sticking with the 170. Here are a couple before and after pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChicagoAJ Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 @chuckles - all those positive changes could simply be a brand new PR4 versus an old PR3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckles Posted September 13, 2016 Author Share Posted September 13, 2016 @chuckles - all those positive changes could simply be a brand new PR4 versus an old PR3. Yes, I realize that. Once I get a few throusand miles on it I will provide an update on how it wears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Raising the rear up a smidge and having a round profile will definitely make the thing easier to roll in. Both are things this bike needs a bit. I'll probably go this route when the time comes. I'm gonna raise my fork tubes up into the clamps to see how that makes the bike respond. It's easy enough and a std/ trick to aid turn-in. Might start at a conservative 5mm to see how it feels and then go 10mm if the 5 makes an improvement. Don't think I've ever owned a motorcycle that likes to travels a straight line the way this one does. My Aprilia needs new tires and no camber in the road to track straight w/o hands. And no one is gonna call that sport tourer flickable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChicagoAJ Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Raising the rear up a smidge and having a round profile will definitely make the thing easier to roll in. Both are things this bike needs a bit. I'll probably go this route when the time comes. I'm gonna raise my fork tubes up into the clamps to see how that makes the bike respond. It's easy enough and a std/ trick to aid turn-in. Might start at a conservative 5mm to see how it feels and then go 10mm if the 5 makes an improvement. Don't think I've ever owned a motorcycle that likes to travels a straight line the way this one does. My Aprilia needs new tires and no camber in the road to track straight w/o hands. And no one is gonna call that sport tourer flickable. I wanted to do this about a month ago and some people around here told me it would screw up the geometry of the bike. I would still like to do this, especially after seeing some supersports around with their fork tubes 2-3 inches up through the top triple tree clamp. I'll be tuning in to see what your experience with this is before I do it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've never had a problem with the front end aside from some nose-dive when braking hard. Either a preload adjuster or PVC spacer between the fork cap/spacer in the tube would probably suite me just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member pgeldz Posted September 13, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted September 13, 2016 Raising the rear up a smidge and having a round profile will definitely make the thing easier to roll in. Both are things this bike needs a bit. I'll probably go this route when the time comes. I'm gonna raise my fork tubes up into the clamps to see how that makes the bike respond. It's easy enough and a std/ trick to aid turn-in. Might start at a conservative 5mm to see how it feels and then go 10mm if the 5 makes an improvement. Don't think I've ever owned a motorcycle that likes to travels a straight line the way this one does. My Aprilia needs new tires and no camber in the road to track straight w/o hands. And no one is gonna call that sport tourer flickable. I wanted to do this about a month ago and some people around here told me it would screw up the geometry of the bike. I would still like to do this, especially after seeing some supersports around with their fork tubes 2-3 inches up through the top triple tree clamp. I'll be tuning in to see what your experience with this is before I do it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've never had a problem with the front end aside from some nose-dive when braking hard. Either a preload adjuster or PVC spacer between the fork cap/spacer in the tube would probably suite me just fine. I think it would be better to raise the rear via adjustable length shock, rear suspension link, taller rear tire, or a combination of any one of those methods then to lower the front, for ground clearance purposes. Just my 2 cents... - Paulie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChicagoAJ Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 I wanted to do this about a month ago and some people around here told me it would screw up the geometry of the bike. I would still like to do this, especially after seeing some supersports around with their fork tubes 2-3 inches up through the top triple tree clamp. I'll be tuning in to see what your experience with this is before I do it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've never had a problem with the front end aside from some nose-dive when braking hard. Either a preload adjuster or PVC spacer between the fork cap/spacer in the tube would probably suite me just fine. I think it would be better to raise the rear via adjustable length shock, rear suspension link, taller rear tire, or a combination of any one of those methods then to lower the front, for ground clearance purposes. Just my 2 cents... - Paulie Can I do any of those for under $100? Hahaha, if I had the money I'd be on an S1000RR or some other crazy racing machine. I got this because it's nice and affordable. It's not as easy on the wallet as I was hoping it would be, especially when I keep wanting expensive stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member pgeldz Posted September 13, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted September 13, 2016 I think it would be better to raise the rear via adjustable length shock, rear suspension link, taller rear tire, or a combination of any one of those methods then to lower the front, for ground clearance purposes. Just my 2 cents... - Paulie Can I do any of those for under $100? Hahaha, if I had the money I'd be on an S1000RR or some other crazy racing machine. I got this because it's nice and affordable. It's not as easy on the wallet as I was hoping it would be, especially when I keep wanting expensive stuff!You got me on that one...nope, probably can't do it for under $100 - Paulie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 My Futura is considered a "sport tourer", but the bars are far more sport than tour, so lots of guys added risers under the clip-ons (which are above the triple clamps) One brand of those risers required pulling the tubes up a full inch - another even more. It's kinda a double edge sword - you want higher bars but you have to lower the front bridge a full inch to install them - huh? No one complained of ill handling after that much of a change. Most guys recommended a 10mm drop in front to quicken steering - Ive left that alone on mine. Anyway, I'm talking 10mm (3/8") max. Guys are installing shocks with adjustable ride height on this bike - I'm guessing it's not to lower the back end. Will the bike be less likely to keep going straight ahead after I fall asleep? I sure hope so. As for brake dive - Andreani cured that. I can hammer the front brakes to the point of howl, the front will go down, but you'd never describe it as dive. I'm pretty much locked in with the basic single click Ohlins in back - it would probably be better to raise aft, but with the Andreani's spring being stiffer than OE and me weighing maybe 150 with full gear, i'm thinking ground clearance shouldn't be an issue. I'll let ya know - I tend to be conservative after changes so will proceed with some caution - at 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckles Posted October 27, 2016 Author Share Posted October 27, 2016 Hey guys just a little update, I have about 2k on the 170 now and I am still loving how it turns in and corners. It is a big improvement over the 180 on this bike IMO. I will have to wait till next season to put a few thousand more on since it will be too cold to ride here soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattonme Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 who wants to join me in the madness that is running a 160? Ok, maybe not. But a 120/60F might be useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twotone Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 That front will reduce your trail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjet Posted November 27, 2016 Share Posted November 27, 2016 A 120/60 will also be lighter and have less rotational mass , so less gyroscopic stability. The trail when lent over will be pretty much the same at extremes. Also lower the CoG of the bike. So if you want to get more turn in then that is a good way to go. If you like the front GEOMETRY as is then stay with the 120/70. Me When I finally get around to changing tyres ( haven't been able to ride the bike much at all for months) I will go 120/60 and 170/60 PR4's and probably reset the back adjustable link to std height ( currently 25mm raised). Remember this is for road riding not high speed track work. Go forth and modify my son...go forth and modify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteinpa Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 I was also going to say the new SV650 only has a 160/60 on the back. That'on a 5 in. Rim. We have a 5.5 in. Rim. So how about it??? Try a 160?? It would be a cheaper tire. Got new red 2015 FZ-07 on 7/22/16! Black 2006 Honda ST1300 53K miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattonme Posted November 28, 2016 Share Posted November 28, 2016 the SV has had a 4.5" rim since 1999 to 2008. Did they really change it for this next go-around? I've got piles of 160 tires but I looked at Dunlop and Pirelli's sites and I just can't see the bead sitting properly on a 5.5. People have run 165 race slicks on the 5.5 supposedly. The 160 tire has the sidewall angled in such a way as to target the 4.5 rim width. It's not just the width of the tire but the width between beads and how it alters the overall shape and shoulder angles. I'm sure it can be ridden, just not sure if it would be such a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickshift Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 People have run 165 race slicks on the 5.5 supposedly. Bridgestone 165 slicks are ideal for 5.0" wheels, but are approved to fit onto 4.5 - 5.5 rears so it's certainly an option for track 07's. I've used them on track in the past and they were mega fun. I wouldn't be game to try a 160 on the 5.5" rim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member botticelli Posted December 10, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 10, 2016 160 on a 5.5 and you are asking for trouble. Get a 170/60 if you need to deviate from the stock size. I agree its too big and would love a 160 but only on a 4.5 rim. I'm not chaining the rim any time soon so I stick with the 170/60 '16 FZ07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjet Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 Don't know ifm you are asking for trouble but as much as I would like to put a 160 on, if you put it on this rim, the bead width is soo wide the tyre will end up wider and lower profile anyway. If you spread the bead to fit against the wider wrim walls, it makes the tyre wider and lowers the profile. So even if it seats, it will be wider and lower than sidewall figures. If I were racing it AND the class rules allowed I would probably go to a 4.5" rim and fit a 160 or 165. Lighter rim, lighter tyre and better contact patch and deformation for bike weight/power. On the road I will be happy with a 170/60. Do not like 180/55's in general for anything ( though I am sure there are bikes that would benefit). Go forth and modify my son...go forth and modify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member botticelli Posted December 10, 2016 Premium Member Share Posted December 10, 2016 Don't know ifm you are asking for trouble but as much as I would like to put a 160 on, if you put it on this rim, the bead width is soo wide the tyre will end up wider and lower profile anyway. If you spread the bead to fit against the wider wrim walls, it makes the tyre wider and lowers the profile. So even if it seats, it will be wider and lower than sidewall figures. If I were racing it AND the class rules allowed I would probably go to a 4.5" rim and fit a 160 or 165. Lighter rim, lighter tyre and better contact patch and deformation for bike weight/power. On the road I will be happy with a 170/60. Do not like 180/55's in general for anything ( though I am sure there are bikes that would benefit). 100% Agree, My FZ is 100% street duty and the 170 does the job. Track duty would certainly warrant the changes for all the benefits of the 160. '16 FZ07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunblock Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 Excuse my ignorance, but does changing the tire dimensions affect the odometer's speed measurement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.