Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Excel Addict
Joined
·
5,134 Posts
Even if you could, why?

Fat tyres might look "fat" but do nothing for handling.
I rode an SF years ago for about a week and handling was nimble. 200 would destroy that IMO unless yours is a to and from the cafe:laugh:

I only use 180 on my SS as the supposed design 170 is hard to find in various brands to suit what I want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
I'm not here to argue, but am curious as to where these ideas come from and what is behind them.

I've ridden bikes with 200 section rears that handle real nice.

I've owned bikes delivered with 160 rears and stepped up to 170s without a noticeable difference in handling.

I own a bike delivered with a 150 and changed the wheels and tyre to 180. Handling improved drastically, but I don't think this is relatable as it was changing from bias ply to radial tyres.


Would changing from a 190 to a 200 really "destroy" the handling as so many suggest? Have people tried this and found negative results? I wouldn't have thought it would make much of a noticeable difference, being only a 5% increase in width.

Either way, on the streetfighter with the minimal clearance of the stock sized rear tyre, I don't think I'd be trying it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,731 Posts
... it would make much of a noticeable difference, being only a 5% increase in width.
... which generates the question "why go through with the headache of using one?"

I'd be thinking about how much unsprung and rotational weight a 200mm tire adds and if any performance gains from using a 200mm rear tire offset the losses.

Then again I suppose there are bragging rights. :yeah:

Either way, on the streetfighter with the minimal clearance of the stock sized rear tyre, I don't think I'd be trying it.
... and then there is that.
 

·
Bon Vivant
Joined
·
10,497 Posts
I run a 200 on my Tuono and a 190 on the streetfighter. The tuono geometry is much quicker and more nimble than the SF and so the 200 does work quite well on that bike, but the SF is very relaxed with more rake and a longer swing arm, its a "strange" handling bike that is a bit on the sluggish side to me and a 200 wide tire will do nothing to improve that.


I do find that taller tires with narrow widths are quicker turning while a fatter tire (in theory) will offer a larger contact patch. Nobody on this forum will see any advantage from the minuscule amount of increased contact patch between a 190 and a 200 but we might be able to feel the loss of maneuverability that it will create. I say it's a "no win" swap.


But all of this is completely beside the point because it will NOT fit on a streetfighter. a 200/60 will hit the swingarm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
Don't think it is a stupid question.

I'd like to see someone explain the science.

My V4 Panigale runs a 200/60 rear as stock on identical sized Marchesini wheels that we have on our 1098 SF. Using the logic that the wider tyre & higher profile tyre somehow diminishes handling doesn't gel, I can tell you by riding a V4 Pani it turns on a dime.

The V4 SF will definitely run a 200/60, Carlin Dunne was running one on Pikes Peak.

If it doesn't fit physically , doesn't fit - all good, that explains that but I don't really get how anyone here came to their conclusions.

I ran a 190 rear on my Hypermotard 939SP and it vastly improved the handling on track and at speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
The Rosso Corsa II is a fantastic tire for the SFS. I am running a set now.

There are many ways to get a 200 to fit should the tire rub the swingarm, but keep in mind if you go that route you are doing so with no added benefit (unless you are fitting a 200/60 slick). The 200 will slow down the handling if you ride aggressively; I experimented with a 200 Supercorsa from my Panigale R with no fitment issue, however the handling suffered. The 190 went back on.

The SFS traction control system was also designed around a 190; it cannot be recalibrated to suit other dimensions.

OEM on my Panigale R is a 200/55 and the handling is sublime. That does not mean the same 200 would be optimal for the SFS. Completely different geometry.
 

·
Bon Vivant
Joined
·
10,497 Posts
Handling on a motorcycle is always a series of trade-offs - you trade quick handling for stability. Changing the width of the rear tire does 2 things, first it changes the size of the contact patch and second it changes the geometry ie. the location of the contact patch in relation to the frame center while at lean. Tires are only a part of the equation and while todays tires are the best that have ever existed they still can only work in relation to the rest of the bike - so the same tire on a Panigale is not going to give the same results on a Streetfighter.

If you have a bike that has light steering and quick transitions from side to side then a wider tire can tame that down a notch, on the other hand a sluggish turning bike can be livened up by going to a taller thinner tire with a steeper sidewall. There's no set rule about tires for all bikes, that's why there are so many sizes and profile types.

The streetfighter is a stable bike with slow transitions, IMO a wider tire would make that problem worse. I always go for the steepest profile I can find for my streetfighter (I like mich 2ct but not the latest pp4 which has more sidewall) Monsters and Hypers are twitchy, to me a wider tire or rounder profile like a Q3 could help make those bikes a bit more stable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
553 Posts
so.. I won't do your math for ya, but.. Physics YO!!! :rolleyes:

Parallel Axis Theorem

larger [same manf & series] tire at given diameter = higher mass = larger moment of inertia = larger force required to change direction or speed, FFS [scientific notation for the generally-accepted FerFooksSake factor]

A 190 turns in faster than a 200, all other factors remaining the same. I tried this on a 996, going from a 190 to a 180. Night, meet day!
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top