• Can't post after logging to the forum for the first time... Try Again - If you can't post in the forum, sign out of both the membership site and the forum and log in again. Make sure your COG membership is active and your browser allow cookies. If you still can't post, contact the COG IT guy at IT@Concours.org.
  • IF YOU GET 404 ERROR: This may be due to using a link in a post from prior to the web migration. Content was brought over from the old forum as is, but the links may be in error. If the link contains "cog-online.org" it is an old link and will not work.

Just curious, anybody go back to 50-series rear tire after trying the 55-series?

Charliedog

Charliedog

Guest
Guest
I realize the 55-series rear tire is popular, and that was what was on the 2013 when I got it used last fall.  I stayed with the 55-series when I replaced the tires this spring.  When I rode to Austin this past weekend I planned my gas stops-station to station.  Pilot Truck Stops that were 222 miles apart according to Google maps came up about 213 miles apart according to the bike.  I makes me wonder if the taller tire is throwing off the odometer.  The speedometer was right on according to my GPS, so that cannot be coming from the rear tire.  I think for my next set of tires I'll go to 50-series.  So, has anybody gone back to a 50-series rear tire after trying a 55-series?   
 
Yes, ran a 55 on PR4-GTs for the first tire change. Since then, have been through about nine sets of 50's and wont go back to 55's. Its a personal preference but without starting an argument with anyone, there is no benefit to me or the bike for running 55's. Good luck with whatever you decide to use!
 
Yes I went back to 50's after a 55 to get slightly better foot ground contact at stops and during pushbacks. 


Charliedog said:
The speedometer was right on according to my GPS, so that cannot be coming from the rear tire.
Click to expand...

Your speedo / odo variances are consistent with tire size changes, imo. 
Speedo reads high with stock tires, which is true of almost all MC's that I 'know of.' 
 
I went back to a 50 after trying a 55.  I like the  handling of the shorter sidewall and the more rounded profile for a bigger center contact patch and how a more  rounded profile comes back up out of a turn exactly how I rolled down into a turn...like rolling in and out of a turn on a basket ball.

My history with my C14 is different than most otbers have experienced. I would not ride or enjoy riding my C14 for about a year after buying it because I disliked how harsh and rough the stock shocks were. I also had to 'hold ' the bike down in a turn..and it would pop right back up on its own.  Yuk!  My modified C10 handled and felt better...not as fast but still...better

Then I installed AK20's and and Ohlins (with new springs to match my weight) and had a suspension guru adjust and set up my chassis geometry/sag for my weight. Wow!! Now I love my bike..rolls into a turn and rolls back up...no 'falling ' into a turn..no popping back up ..it stays right where I put it ..perfection.

Then I tried a 55. Dam bike falls into turn..easily..too easy..because now with the 55 I have to bring the bike up out of the turn...it does not roll back up..the bike wants to stay down in a turn.Yuk!

So bottom line...If we dont adjust the bikes sag settings for our weight..or we dont know how..or we just  dont want to..than we are the people who like 55's because all we are doing is raising the rear of the bike upwards so it falls easier into a turn.

I prefer getting the chassis gemetry correct and riding on the better profiled / smaller sidewalled  tire..the goal is for the bike  to be neutral when rolling in and out of a turn and not to fight it one direction or the other. ...
One way or the other..we both want the same results and there is more than one way  to get there.
 
I also went back to the 50, I found better seat angle for me and much better front tire wear and milage. The last 3 sets I've run are the Continental Road Attack 3's. Love them for a cold weather tire. If I need quicker tip in it's trail braking for me.
 
I tried one 55 and went back to 50. I did not notice any difference other then the speedometer and odometer. Went back to 50s as they were less expensive.
 
I have not switched back, because I never went to a 55 in the first place. I would not even attempt 55 series because I do not care for any additional height. I prefer to leave the geometry of the motorcycle as set by mother Kawasaki.
  I'm sure that many do it and prefer it, and that's fine... just not for me.
 
Red Fox said:
Yes I went back to 50's after a 55 to get slightly better foot ground contact at stops and during pushbacks. 
Click to expand...

This.  I thought the 55 corrected the speedo??  But, I lost a bit of footing.  Not a deal breaker, glad I tried it, but I'll go back to the 50.
 
I won't try a 55 as I spent so much time and effort to lower the bike - lower links, raised forks, custom lower seat, lower pegs, short side stand and now I can flat foot. I am inseam challenged so I'm good with the 50.
 
Old topic, but wanted to share my opinion. I switched my tires from 50 to 55, immediately felt the handling improvement. The weird feedback from the pavement uneven surface disappeared, and the push back of the bars in a turn was non existence. Long story short I sold the bike to fund another bike, and ended up buying another 2013 C14, as soon as I test rode the bike it reminded me the 50 size tire of my  previous C14, sure enough the bike Did have size 59 tire. I will change it to 55 when the time comes, the most irritating characteristic of the smaller tire is when lane splitting, as you go over white street lines and square reflectors the bikes shows a tendency to surprise you by jumping left or right abruptly, making me to hold on to the handle bars with extra pressure. For this reason alone I’m willing to switch to 55.
 
I switched to a 55 and definitely noticed it cornered better due to rear height coming up a bit. Might switch back for chits n giggles for a comparison. Someone mentioned why mess with what mama Kaw put on the bike.. I wondered...when the ZX14 came out prior to the C14 was a 55 series tire even available for them to use? Maybe that's why the 50 is on there and they just never bothered putting the 55 on. The current ZX14 still has a 50 and obviously ours as well. It works, why change it? Again, just a thought.

Ride safe
Chris :)
 
Not sure if this will be helpful but I have a few thoughts to share (and I don't want Ted to have the last word  ;))

I tried the 55 series tire and although I enjoyed the benefits noted above, I have gone back to a 50 series.  Here are a couple things to keep in mind;

  • Regardless of 50 or 55 series, when you switch from a worn tire to a new one....the handling/corner tip-in/resistance to follow pavement grooves/etc. will be improved
  • Varying brands of tires, even in the same size can result in minor differences in dimensions/profile/handling characteristics
  • Depending on your riding environment and bike usage, using a 55 may provide less overall mileage

My story: I switched from Pirelli Angel GT's in a 50 to a 55 and liked the improvements but quickly found the 55 series started "squaring off" more quickly than the 50.  If you live in an area where great roads are in your back yard and spend a lot of your time carving corners...the 55 may be a great choice.  In my case, I have at least a half to a full days ride to get to fun roads and use my bike for commuting so the 50 series was a better fit for me.

Hope that helps!
 
Thanks 1965 Soda.I have gone back and fourth between the 2. Unfortunately most of my riding is on the curve less plains. I have a Roadsmart 3 in 55 that is squaring off with 5000 on it. Was really hoping it was the tire that would give me 8,000. Next one will be a 50.
Wayne
 
Sailor Rich said:
I also went back to the 50, I found better seat angle for me and much better front tire wear and milage. The last 3 sets I've run are the Continental Road Attack 3's. Love them for a cold weather tire. If I need quicker tip in it's trail braking for me.
Click to expand...

Funny I have thought about this as well.  My front tire wears faster than my rear.  After 2 sets of Angel GT's both 55's the front wore out faster, 1 set of PR4GT's also a 55 the front wore out slightly faster.  The OEM's  50 the rear wore out first IIRC.  Never had a bike where the front wore out faster than the rear.

I was looking at the new Continental Road Attack 3 GT's and found out the rear only comes in the 50's and was going to pull the trigger till I found out the 190/50/ZR17 was not available yet and I needed the tires now, so I went with another set of PR4GT's but next time and it should be in less than 6 months I am determined to try the CRA3 GT's in the 50' size hoping I can get some more wear out of the front.
 
I would be concerned that the change in rotational wheels speeds would confound the traction control ans ABS calibration. Some may argue it isnt significant, but I would think it has to have an effect to some degree.
 
A tire diameter/height changes as they wear, and the Traction/ABS has to work as that happens.
For that reason, the slight change from going to 50 or 55 is accounted for.

NOTE: Most think the change in handling with a 55 is because of the different height.
          I've posted that the change was because of the different/rounder tire profile.
          Good to see others posting the same thought in this discussion.

Ride safe, Ted
 
There is about a 3% difference in rolling radius between a 55 and 50 series...or about 12/32 of an inch, which is far more than what wear will give you.  But in any case, the error from the aspect ratio change is additive to the error from wear, so wear can just make things potentially worse.  Now I'm not saying that this 3%+ change is significant on the Concours, as I have no direct experience, but is sufficient to at least consider as a potential issue.  There are track bikes out there that this much change  does cause problems with the stability software. 
 
I have now put about 1000 miles on the RoadSmart III's, 50-series rear, and I can say I love 'em.  The bike feels more responsive both in acceleration and handling than it did with the 55-series Avon Spirit tire that was on it.  Yes, the speedo is now 2 mph optimistic at 60, but that is no big deal.  I wonder if the odometer will be closer to accurate now also.  I felt it was pessimistic before.       
 
Yes, I am going back to the 50 series tire. Front and rear Avon Spirit is 243 shipped.

https://www.americanmototire.com/

I currently have 4100 miles on this set, one more trip to Oregon Coast and they will be shot.

I figure, under 5K miles. the fronts already are worn on the sidewalls. Some tread left but after this they are coming off.

This is about what the RS 3's gave me. Will buy what ever tire set that is less expensive,
 
I tried the 55's and went back to the 50. Flatter foot on the ground when stopped and it seems to corner better, plus they are cheaper. Just ordered another set of the Avon 3D-XMs with the 50.
 
RoadKillHeaven said:
Has anyone done tire stretch on rear wheel of C14?
I am not trolling.
I ask a legit question...
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with that term.  Could you elaborate further?
 
I am on my 3rd set of 55s but I am seriously going back to the 50s for the contact patch and the fact that 90 per cent of my riding in IN IL OH and MI is on flat ass roads with no curves to speak of. I  had a couple of the 55 rears wear out in the middle a little earlier than I would like. Huge Chicken Striops because the nearest curves are 4 hours away. I like the height as with the Seth Laam giving me a bit of height I find comfortable but I will take the 50s and maybe enjoy a little more road contact and mileage.
 
I guess I'm one of the few who'll forever keep 55s.
Just one of my favorite 17 mile rides close by...LOL

 

Attachments

  • Twists.jpg
    Twists.jpg
    136.9 KB · Views: 147
Im putting on a 55 tomorrow, I've done this with every bike I've owned that came with a 190/50. More cornering clearance and quicker steering is the usual result, but this is a heavier bike so im interested to see if it causes front tire wear issues.
 
HeavyRotation said:
Im putting on a 55 tomorrow, I've done this with every bike I've owned that came with a 190/50. More cornering clearance and quicker steering is the usual result, but this is a heavier bike so im interested to see if it causes front tire wear issues.
Click to expand...
No weird wear, much improved steering and rear doesn't feel skittish at all. Will stick with the 55 rear.
 
I went from 50 to 55 and back to 50 to save a few bucks. Going back to 55 in a higher quality model next time. I like the handling, and it's not worth the more frequent tire changes with the cheaper tire.  :motonoises:
 
This topic has my interest.  After years of running the 55 and liking it. I'm thinking of going back to the 50 because well I'm older, slower and short. Thinking the 50 might help with the stopping and ground touching?
 
I have used both but I put on 55 series PR5 because it has 75W rating instead of 73W this gives me almost another 50 lbs of carrying carrying capacity and I know doing a lot more two up fully loaded traveling.
 
Stubby said:
This topic has my interest.  After years of running the 55 and liking it. I'm thinking of going back to the 50 because well I'm older, slower and short. Thinking the 50 might help with the stopping and ground touching?
Click to expand...
:))
 
Old Man on a Connie said:
Stubby said:
This topic has my interest.  After years of running the 55 and liking it. I'm thinking of going back to the 50 because well I'm older, slower and short. Thinking the 50 might help with the stopping and ground touching?
Click to expand...
:))
Click to expand...
Is that all you got?  :'( you have seen me stop I'm not getting any younger dude. :rotflmao:
 
I do think this topic is important.  If anyone wants to know what a 55  or 50 feels like ..it is easy to do and it is free to do.
To know what a 55 feels like..raise your rear preload by 10mm

If you want to know what a 50 feels like and your running a 55..simply lower your rear preload by 10mm

A taller side wall tire (55)  is just that...taller.. You don't need to buy a  tire to make the bike taller... make the bike taller with pre-load... it does the same thing.
 
Daytona_Mike said:
I do think this topic is important.  If anyone wants to know what a 55  or 50 feels like ..it is easy to do and it is free to do.
To know what a 55 feels like..raise your rear preload by 10mm

If you want to know what a 50 feels like and your running a 55..simply lower your rear preload by 10mm

A taller side wall tire (55)  is just that...taller.. You don't need to buy it.
Click to expand...

Thanks I will try that while the snow is still on the ground. Cause sometimes an extra 10mm closer to the ground helps.  :)
 
Stubby said:
Old Man on a Connie said:
Stubby said:
This topic has my interest.  After years of running the 55 and liking it. I'm thinking of going back to the 50 because well I'm older, slower and short. Thinking the 50 might help with the stopping and ground touching?
Click to expand...
:))
Click to expand...
Is that all you got?  :'( you have seen me stop I'm not getting any younger dude. :rotflmao:
Click to expand...
And have never seen it done better.  :beerchug:
 
I've been using 50/200 and happy, the speedo is still happy by 1-2 mph at 50mph.

Just got new rubber yesterday going out now to wear tits off :motonoises: :beerchug:
 
Daytona_Mike said:
I do think this topic is important.  If anyone wants to know what a 55  or 50 feels like ..it is easy to do and it is free to do.
To know what a 55 feels like..raise your rear preload by 10mm

A taller side wall tire (55)  is just that...taller.. You don't need to buy a  tire to make the bike taller... make the bike taller with pre-load... it does the same thing.
Click to expand...

The 55 profile is 55% of the 190 width vs the original 50% aspect ratio. Has nothing to do with the sidewall measurement.

And spring preload doesn't change suspension ride height. If you want to "feel" the effect of the 55 profile while running a 50 rear, you would need to pull the forks up through the triple clamps a small amount to simulate raising the rear with the taller tire. Or, in a more complicated alternative, you could shim/add washers to the rear shock frame mount to "raise the tail" without adjusting the shock settings.
 
I'm w Mike on this one. People make a mistake when changing tire profiles. They fail to adjust the pitch to match. Then they assume the tire made the bike turn in easier. The right way to adjust the pitch is by pushing the forks up or down in the triple trees. This is better than playing w sag. We all need to have equal sag front/rear or else one end of the bike will be topping out over rises/undulations. Penske rear shocks we use in racing have a height adjuster. Not sure bout others. On chain bikes we need the swingarm at that Magic angle. Iirc it was 14.5deg. Feel free to chime in, but don't debate the fundamentals I'm giving you. If you want your bike to turn in quicker just push your form tubes up. Too much and you'll death wobble. Also you'll shimmy out of exits. Conversely, pitch the bike the other way and you'll run wide on the gas coming out of corners. Please don't debate me on this. I won't argue with you, but you're wrong 😎

More than 14deg and u don't get any squat when u drive out of the corner so your rear end shimmies, making your bars shudder. You'll be searching for the problem in your front end.... But it's the rear that's doin it

Less than 14deg and you'll run wide because you'll get too much weight transfer to the rear.

This is all independent of sag and ride height. You have ride height adjustment up front, it's how far u push ur forms up the trees. Not many have a height adjuster in the rear. We do in racing. Connie's do not....

I hope this information is going to result in something more than just me rambling...
 
Nooo,,, Keep rambling.  :great:
Pretty happy with everything, but wanting to learn more.
I have questions..    :)

ie; Where/how is that 14.5* measured?
    As we're road riding, not racing,, does the 14.5* work as well for straight line cruising and mixed twisties?
    As we don't have a chain, and accell "squat" is different {less} on a shaft bike than a chain. Does the 14.5 change?

NOTE: I lowered my bike rear a bit ** (I'm short) and lowered the front to match {plus a bit} when I removed the 55 series tire.
          I also set sag/rebound as best I could on the OEM's.

** I {with Guy Young's help} built my own Lowering links. {as the commercial links, dropped the bike too much}
    Commercially available Links are approx. 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" drop.
                                          Mine are approx. 5/8" - 3/4" drop.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Back on topic.
      I originally went to the 55's and then learned from Mike/Doug that the main** change in them is height.
        I went back to 50's when the Roadsmart II deals became available. {as the II's are not produced as 55's}

        ** I said main change, as I feel the 55 series tires offer a different/rounder profile, that I think helps turn in.
       
 
Vic said:
And spring preload doesn't change suspension ride height.
Click to expand...

Thank You Doug..you can explain things so much better than I can...

My C10 I did drop my front  10mm in the fork tubes just like Doug described after installing 1.2kg Sonics to get my chassis geometry correct. On my C14 I had  a suspension guru (which is not me)  set up that suspension when I went to an Ohlins and AK20s with new springs to match my weight. It took a while and a lot of measuring but  wow..night and day when set up correctly.. it took 3 of us..me sitting on and off the bike..one to hold the bike upright  and another to do all the measuring.

Vic,  Sorry bud,  Preload adjustment  is the exact same thing as ride height adjustment.. or chassis geometry adjustment or sag adjustment. All means the same on a  factory suspension system (as Doug said: race is different) .  It is a common misconception that preload can make a spring softer or stiffer. It cannot. For this reason we require new springs to accommodate/match the riders weight.


Google is your friend on that one. Searching google  this is what you find:

Preload is simply the amount the springs are compressed while the suspension is fully extended. A typical pair of sports bike fork springs are about 8.5-9.5N/mm. ... Preload makes the bike sit higher, or lower. It does not make the spring stiffer.
 
Mike is right that preload doesn't change the spring rate. It will affect ride height but unfortunately if we use preload to calculate the correct ride height for the bike we might find the front or rear tops out or sits too deep in the stroke. We need the front and rear to be equidistant into their stroke. Then we need to set ride height secondary. As a general roll most street bikes can only have adjustable front ride height by pushing the fork tubes up and down. Very very few bikes with adjustable ride height in the rear and as a result it's really hard to get the correct swingarm angle. As a result to get the bike pitched correctly we push the fork tubes up and down. But keep in mind that you should not be using preload to set ride height. Preload adjusts where you are at in the stroke.
 
connie_rider said:
Nooo,,, Keep rambling.  :great:
Pretty happy with everything, but wanting to learn more.
I have questions..    :)

ie; Where/how is that 14.5* measured?
    As we're road riding, not racing,, does the 14.5* work as well for straight line cruising and mixed twisties?
    As we don't have a chain, and accell "squat" is different {less} on a shaft bike than a chain. Does the 14.5 change?

NOTE: I lowered my bike rear a bit ** (I'm short) and lowered the front to match {plus a bit} when I removed the 55 series tire.
          I also set sag/rebound as best I could on the OEM's.

** I {with Guy Young's help} built my own Lowering links. {as the commercial links, dropped the bike too much}
    Commercially available Links are approx. 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" drop.
                                          Mine are approx. 5/8" - 3/4" drop.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Back on topic.
      I originally went to the 55's and then learned from Mike/Doug that the main** change in them is height.
        I went back to 50's when the Roadsmart II deals became available. {as the II's are not produced as 55's}

        ** I said main change, as I feel the 55 series tires offer a different/rounder profile, that I think helps turn in.
     
Click to expand...

Chain drive bikes resist squat more effectively than shaft drive bikes. By getting the swingarm angle just right we find that the chain is pulling from a pivot point that resists squatting. We don't want to completely resist squatting but we want to be able to control how much squat we get. Some squat allows weight transfer to the rear which improves traction when applying all that power. Too little squat and the back tire squirms and spins up. You'll notice that when your front handlebars start to oscillate. It's because the back end is shimmying as you try to drive out of a corner. Again that's when you're not getting enough squat. Conversely if you have too much squat the bike will run wide. To adjust how much squat you get you have to adjust swing arm angle until you get just the right amount. To adjust swingarm angle we have to adjust ride height in the rear. For those without a ride height adjustment they oftentimes cheat by adjusting sag or changing the spring rate. In between hot laps we play with the compression damping or the preload on the rear shock to get what we need. Too much compression damping and we find we don't grip in the back. chain drive is really effective at preventing too much squat but shaft drive doesn't have that advantage. When you get on the throttle of a chain drive bike the bike doesn't lean back...the back end of the bike actually lifts in the air because the chain pulls that swingarm and makes that angle greater thus lifting the bike up in the back. Too much of that and you won't get grip. This might be what's happening to our friend who is finding the bars wobble when he's on the throttle real hard. But again I don't know from here. Shaft drives are just not as effective at this. I recall something in the back of my mind that tells me the direction of the shaft spinning was chosen in direct relationship to what is needed to get the results desired. It's real hard to convey all of this without showing you with a bike in front of me and a protractor in my hand. Then I'd like to show you on some videos what is happening to some bikes when they exit a corner and wobble because they don't squat in the back or because they run wide because they squat too much in the back. It's just words on paper right now. Over a couple of adult beverages and some videos maybe I could illustrate it in detail
 
Douglas said:
connie_rider said:
Nooo,,, Keep rambling.  :great:
Pretty happy with everything, but wanting to learn more.
I have questions..    :)

ie; Where/how is that 14.5* measured?
    As we're road riding, not racing,, does the 14.5* work as well for straight line cruising and mixed twisties?
    As we don't have a chain, and accell "squat" is different {less} on a shaft bike than a chain. Does the 14.5 change?

NOTE: I lowered my bike rear a bit ** (I'm short) and lowered the front to match {plus a bit} when I removed the 55 series tire.
          I also set sag/rebound as best I could on the OEM's.

** I {with Guy Young's help} built my own Lowering links. {as the commercial links, dropped the bike too much}
    Commercially available Links are approx. 1 1/4" - 1 1/2" drop.
                                          Mine are approx. 5/8" - 3/4" drop.

Ride safe, Ted

PS: Back on topic.
      I originally went to the 55's and then learned from Mike/Doug that the main** change in them is height.
        I went back to 50's when the Roadsmart II deals became available. {as the II's are not produced as 55's}

        ** I said main change, as I feel the 55 series tires offer a different/rounder profile, that I think helps turn in.
     
Click to expand...

Chain drive bikes resist squat more effectively than shaft drive bikes. By getting the swingarm angle just right we find that the chain is pulling from a pivot point that resists squatting. We don't want to completely resist squatting but we want to be able to control how much squat we get. Some squat allows weight transfer to the rear which improves traction when applying all that power. Too little squat and the back tire squirms and spins up. You'll notice that when your front handlebars start to oscillate. It's because the back end is shimmying as you try to drive out of a corner. Again that's when you're not getting enough squat. Conversely if you have too much squat the bike will run wide. To adjust how much squat you get you have to adjust swing arm angle until you get just the right amount. To adjust swingarm angle we have to adjust ride height in the rear. For those without a ride height adjustment they oftentimes cheat by adjusting sag or changing the spring rate. In between hot laps we play with the compression damping or the preload on the rear shock to get what we need. Too much compression damping and we find we don't grip in the back. chain drive is really effective at preventing too much squat but shaft drive doesn't have that advantage. When you get on the throttle of a chain drive bike the bike doesn't lean back...the back end of the bike actually lifts in the air because the chain pulls that swingarm and makes that angle greater thus lifting the bike up in the back. Too much of that and you won't get grip. This might be what's happening to our friend who is finding the bars wobble when he's on the throttle real hard. But again I don't know from here. Shaft drives are just not as effective at this. I recall something in the back of my mind that tells me the direction of the shaft spinning was chosen in direct relationship to what is needed to get the results desired. It's real hard to convey all of this without showing you with a bike in front of me and a protractor in my hand. Then I'd like to show you on some videos what is happening to some bikes when they exit a corner and wobble because they don't squat in the back or because they run wide because they squat too much in the back. It's just words on paper right now. Over a couple of adult beverages and some videos maybe I could illustrate it in detail
Click to expand...
We have the adult beverages and there's always youtube. :)
 
Right on brother. Indiana is not that far from Little Rock and I do know somebody there who's planning a Kick Butt Rally next month. I hear airfare is cheap and we don't have to shake hands or share cooties or anything like that. I hear people have some time off from work. You could ride down  :motonoises:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top