My new-to-me '92 specs a 170 rear, but there's a 180 on it. It looks OK on the rim, however, turn-in is a bit more pronounced (meaning, tire probably isn't as flat on the ground as a 170 would be). Nothing's making contact with the tire.
Anyone aware of any problems running the wider tire on the narrower rim?
Misspent Youth, Dec 28 2006, 07:43 AMMy new-to-me '92 specs a 170 rear, but there's a 180 on it. It looks OK on the rim, however, turn-in is a bit more pronounced (meaning, tire probably isn't as flat on the ground as a 170 would be). Nothing's making contact with the tire.
Anyone aware of any problems running the wider tire on the narrower rim?
I believe the 92s have a 5.5 inch rim, so you should be fine as long as nothing hits or rubs. The 94-97s had the 5 inch rim. For those, stay away from a 180 as it will hurt the handling. The latest 180 tires are made for a 5.5 inch rim, so it should handle fine.
The 180 is definitely OK for the third gen. However, when it wears out stick with 170's as long as you can get them in the compound of your choice. It really helps in transition, and afterall it's what the bike was orignally designed to run. In my experience 170's are cheaper too. smile.gif
Had a 180 on my '93 (and old Pilot Sport I got for low $$). It rubbed--just a little--but nothing to worry about. I've since purchased new tires and went with the 170.
It'll run fine, but like you mentioned turn in is affected. I like my '92 much better with a 170 out back. Only item to worry about is getting the muffler out of the way when you change the tire. With the 170 it clears the muffler (after swinging the muffler out of the way) with just a bit of room to spare. With the 180 it will hit the muffler and requires some wiggling, or even pulling the muffler completely off to get the wheel off.
JoeW, Jan 16 2007, 07:34 PM'92-93 models had a 5.5 rear rim and a 180 tire stock from the factory.
180 is spec.
My '90 has the 5.5 as well but came with a 170 factory, even the little tire sticker on the chain guard confirms this. All the tire fitment guides for '90-'93 VFR's state a 170 rear.
That being said, aside from the higher availability of 180 tires, I don't see the point in running a tire wider than a 170 for a bike that could use all the steering it can get, and only puts down around 80hp. I run a 180 on my GSX-R, but it also has 46 more hp.
ok ok ok... being a bike fixer.. i get tires outa da trash.. the boss will not plug or patch a tire.. that means i dig out tire that have 200 miles on them.. patc 'um and run'um! i have a 200 on my 93 right nowsince thats " too wide" it is taller due to being " pinched...it rubed for 5 minutes .. now it fine, i have run 180 190 and 200.. unless you are a speedster and want to squeeeezzzzz evey little bit out of you handling.. adding a bigger tire for looks will not kill you.
I wouldn't worry about it either. I have run both 180 and 170 on my 1996 at track days. the 180 definately had a little slower turn in but that was it. I actually prefer that to a tire that turns in too quickly. to each their own.
Dennis The Menace, Jan 19 2007, 05:22 PMI wouldn't worry about it either. I have run both 180 and 170 on my 1996 at track days. the 180 definately had a little slower turn in but that was it. I actually prefer that to a tire that turns in too quickly. to each their own.
Agree about the to each their own bit. To me, VFR's can use all the turn in they can get.
gll429, Jan 19 2007, 05:02 PMok ok ok... being a bike fixer.. i get tires outa da trash.. the boss will not plug or patch a tire.. that means i dig out tire that have 200 miles on them.. patc 'um and run'um! i have a 200 on my 93 right now since thats " too wide" it is taller due to being " pinched...it rubed for 5 minutes .. now it fine, i have run 180 190 and 200.. unless you are a speedster and want to squeeeezzzzz evey little bit out of you handling.. adding a bigger tire for looks will not kill you.
gll429, Jan 19 2007, 05:02 PMok ok ok... being a bike fixer.. i get tires outa da trash.. the boss will not plug or patch a tire.. that means i dig out tire that have 200 miles on them.. patc 'um and run'um! i have a 200 on my 93 right now since thats " too wide" it is taller due to being " pinched...it rubed for 5 minutes .. now it fine, i have run 180 190 and 200.. unless you are a speedster and want to squeeeezzzzz evey little bit out of you handling.. adding a bigger tire for looks will not kill you.
I think it is simply a matter of tire availability at the time. The VFR 3rd Gen was designed in the late 80's as well as Honda's own CBR1000F 90-95 which also specs a 170 tire on a 5.5 inch wheel. Nothing out there had 180 tires when these bikes were designed. Honda was ahead of the game with the 5.5 inch wheel.
Even Suzuki's 1990 GSXR1100 had a 4.5 inch rear wheel although the GSXR750 had JUST put a 5.5 (180 tire) on their bikes in 1990. The 1988-1989 GSXR750 had a 4.5 inch rear wheel.
Since these first bikes, every bike since that sported a 5.5 inch rear wheel has also had a 180 rear tire. EVERY one. I'd say this is akin to looking in your old bike's owner's manual and seeing that they require Dot 3 brake fluid, an older spec type of engine oil or an older type of chain. It was considered normal back in the day but things have progressed. Today's VFR, CBR600RR, CBRXX, CBR900RR, VTR all have a 5.5 rear wheel and a 180 rear tire. I'd say all the manufacturers now agree that the optimum tire for that rim size is 180.
JoeW, Jan 20 2007, 07:46 AMI'd say all the manufacturers now agree that the optimum tire for that rim size is 180.
I think it has to do more with business reasons that acutal motorcycle reasons.
So all the manufacturers and racers decided it was good business to run a 180 tire on a 5.5 inch rear rim? Unlikely.
It comes from racing... The racers wanted longer lasting tires... How to get more rubber with out making the tire taller??? Make it wider... Now most racers have 200 tires... And street bikes have 180...just like when the racers had 150 and the street had 130....
JoeW, Jan 20 2007, 08:38 AMSo all the manufacturers and racers decided it was good business to run a 180 tire on a 5.5 inch rear rim? Unlikely.
I wish I had the time to get into the whole thing, but I don't. Just take my word that dollars and cents comes into play.
It certainly makes more sense that bottom line reasons have more to do with it than a desire to slow the steering of a 500lb motorcycle or give something with only 80hp to the wheel a wider tire than it already doesn't need.
gll429, Jan 20 2007, 09:00 AMNow most racers have 200 tires... And street bikes have 180...just like when the racers had 150 and the street had 130....
Not true, depends on the track, bike, rider prefrence, etc. The last year I was at Willow Springs for the 200, only the liter bikes were running 190's. The smaller bikes are hooked up, so they try to maximize their cornering advantage. Even MotoGP bikes play with widths AND diameters througout the season.
There is a design limit for tire widths depending on the width of the rim it is being mounted on. You can't push the limits too far one way or the other and still keep a good balance. A 5.5 inch wheel will accept a 170, 180, 190 or 250 or whatever. But there is an optimum range where handling suffers due to tire overhang, sidewall construction and contact patch. This doesn't have anything to do with business. It's physics.
Rim widths may be standardized for cost concerns but the tire sizes needed to fit the rims have to be within certain parameters for optimum handling. I think the 180 became the optimum tire size for most uses on a 5.5 inch rear wheel due to many variables based on physics, not business.
I can see the 5.5 inch wheel being a business decision but not the tire.
Generally if a race team is running a 190 they probably have a 6 inch wheel. These tire sizes weren't derived due to business decisions...they were derived because they work.
Like I said, the rim sizes might have been a business decision but I doubt the tire sizes cam about that way.
the bottom line... tire got the way they are now from racing and racing... so the guys at willow spings are running 190.... fine... they 210 at some other track...blah blah blah....................... saw some guy in phoenix corner with ELBOW on the ground!!! i asked him what was that!?! he runns 210 on the bike.. and corners differently through out the race keeping the tire as fresh as possable, to have as much traction left and the end...... that was one of the yahmaha PRO riders.. dont know his name...dont care either..just had fun watching them go.
Tyrmeltr, Dec 28 2006, 04:21 PMThe 180 is definitely OK for the third gen. However, when it wears out stick with 170's as long as you can get them in the compound of your choice. It really helps in transition, and afterall it's what the bike was orignally designed to run. In my experience 170's are cheaper too. smile.gif
I dont think the 170 is cheaper, at least 180 is more common and that cut prize.
180 on rear of a 3 gen VFR whit a 5,5 rom should be fin as Metzeler made/makes a 180/55r17 of the Sportec M1 rear just for the 90>97 VFR, only note is have to have a 5,5 whit rim.
Tyrmeltr, Dec 28 2006, 04:21 PMThe 180 is definitely OK for the third gen. However, when it wears out stick with 170's as long as you can get them in the compound of your choice. It really helps in transition, and afterall it's what the bike was orignally designed to run. In my experience 170's are cheaper too. smile.gif
I dont think the 170 is cheaper, at least 180 is more common and that cut prize.
I pay almost $20 less for 170 Pilot Power. Your theory makes total sense, but in practice (at least for me) it works out different.
gll429, Jan 20 2007, 01:55 PMthe bottom line... tire got the way they are now from racing and racing... so the guys at willow spings are running 190.... fine... they 210 at some other track...blah blah blah....................... saw some guy in phoenix corner with ELBOW on the ground!!! i asked him what was that!?! he runns 210 on the bike.. and corners differently through out the race keeping the tire as fresh as possable, to have as much traction left and the end...... that was one of the yahmaha PRO riders.. dont know his name...dont care either..just had fun watching them go.
gll429, Jan 20 2007, 01:55 PMthe bottom line... tire got the way they are now from racing and racing... so the guys at willow spings are running 190.... fine... they 210 at some other track...blah blah blah....................... saw some guy in phoenix corner with ELBOW on the ground!!! i asked him what was that!?! he runns 210 on the bike.. and corners differently through out the race keeping the tire as fresh as possable, to have as much traction left and the end...... that was one of the yahmaha PRO riders.. dont know his name...dont care either..just had fun watching them go.
who makes a 210 sport tire or track tire?
Shinko I think.. High end tire!! Sweet tread and traction. Excelent wet and dry grip - hard sidewall. Beauty of a tire...... fing02.gif
The only tire I've ever had on my '91 VFR750 is a 180. I knew it wasn't stock, but was happy with how it worked, so when I ordered tires last time, I went back with the Dunlop Sportmax 180. I may try the 170 in the future if it would give me better handling though. The 180 is a very close fit next to my chainguard, but doesn't rub.
Tyrmeltr, Dec 28 2006, 04:21 PMThe 180 is definitely OK for the third gen. However, when it wears out stick with 170's as long as you can get them in the compound of your choice. It really helps in transition, and afterall it's what the bike was orignally designed to run. In my experience 170's are cheaper too. smile.gif
I dont think the 170 is cheaper, at least 180 is more common and that cut prize.
I pay almost $20 less for 170 Pilot Power. Your theory makes total sense, but in practice (at least for me) it works out different.
Did some reserch on local price.
make 170 180 BS BT014 236euro 218euro BS BT020 206 206 Dunlop D220 207 207 Dunlop Qual 265 273
So price is even or little up or down bepending on make and model... So I guess price aint a big advange
I'm glad I ran across this topic, as I've debating whether to go with the Pilot Power 2CT 180 or Pilot Power 170 rear. The new 2CT looks like an incredible tire (much stickier than the regular PP), but they don't make a 170 rear. I looked at the two tires side by side, and the difference of 5mm is almost unnoticable, as is the height difference; but I know the difference is there.
Seems like there is a 50/50 response as to putting a 180 rear on a 3rd generation. For anyone who notices a slower turn in time with a 180, is this a drastic change we're talking about? I don't want to kill my bike's performance just to get a stickier tire.
I don't own a 3rd Gen, but here's my 2 cents anyway : )
Your bike runs a 5.5" rear rim. The VFR800 runs a 5.5" rear rim. I can guarantee you the 800 owners aren't wondering whether to run a 170 or a 180 (well, most of them anyway, but we'll get to that*). Regardless of what was specced in 1990-93, a 180 is the correct spec for your wheel given current tyre technology.
Ok, then, let's look at some reasons for/against experimenting with tyre sizes. I hope some people who have actually tried different sizes will chip in here, rather than those who reach for their owners handbook and tell everyone what is best for them.
You can potentially improve the turn-in of your bike by going a little smaller* than stock on the rear tyre - i.e., a 170 rather than a 180. My 4th Gen runs a 5.0" rear rim, which is specced for a 170. I've had a few different brands and models but the one that really stands out for me is the 160 D207 that I put 4800km on. It made my VFR750 feel just like the Triumph TT600 that my girl owned at the time. Now that's high praise if you don't know the TT - down maybe 5kW of power compared to the run of the mill 600s at the time, if you can call the 'class of 2002 600s' run of the mill, but the TT600 handled at least as well as the best of them.
The 160 rear/120 front was the best overall handling tyre set-up I've ever used on the Viffer. That's not to say the 170 D207 was a dog - 5000km is the most that I ever got out of the handful of D207s I've had, all of which were 170s bar the one mentioned above, and I never had a problem with traction with them. But the 160 most definitely made a difference.
However, my epiphany took a blow exactly a year later - I took a mate's 4th Gen away for a fun weekend (I'm the Murray in this report) and it happened to have a 180 Pilot Power on the back - and of course I couldn't fault the handling (crash notwithstanding! that was my fault pure and simple). So as far as I'm concerned, the jury is out on tyre sizes, and the thing to look for is the compound that fits the sort of riding you do.
The 2CT is, by appearances to date, in a different kettle to the other fish. I'd give it a run if I were you.
End of thread · 34 posts recoveredWayback Machine snapshot 26 Mar 2007