No, the 190/55 should be MORE responsive. It has a taller profile.

you may be right because everything effects everything else, but I'm thinking that it's more a matter of the arc of the tread no matter what the diameter. The 190x55 is taller than the 50, but I'm guessing the arc is shallower because of wider tread on shorter sidewall.

shape of the tire has to differ somewhat on the 6" vs the 5.5"wheel.

I was writing at the same time. Yea, I would think since the circumference is greater(1977mm for the 180x55 and 2037mm for the 190x55. Didn't measure my 190x50 on the 6" wheel to see how it compares, but I will).

finally got around to measuring and found that circumference of the 190x50 BTO-16 is a bit less than the 180x55 by approx 12mm(1965mm vs 1977mm) on a six inch wheel.

comments/opinion in the interest of others who contemplate tires for 6" rim:
I don't like the profile of the 190x50 BTO-16 as the last 1/2" on either side is steep and unpredicatable and for me unusable on the street(as mentioned in a previous post, there is more rubber but less usable [5mm less] than my previous 180x55 BTO-14). i have nearly gone down on several occasions, one rather violent slide, trying to use the edges. Seems stupid to many maybe, and it is in this instance, but it's one way I learn what the tire is doing in a feedback sense. However, this steep arc does not seem to be the case for the Pirelli Diablo I just looked at on an 08 R1. The Pirelli arc appeared more uniform across with no drop-off at the edges similar to my previous 180x55.

Anyway, since I don't like the present set-up, I'll be changing to a 190x55 BTO-16 as soon as i burn this sumbitch up, and I'll update this post then.

FWIW, I am running a 180/55 on my 6" rear rim adn it works fine (I decided to make the leap for a few reasons: 1) tire mfr websites I visited listed both teh 180 and 190 as options for this rim size 2) tried the 190/50 and did not like it, bike flet lazy mid-corner 3) some RC51 owners run 180/55 and note quicker handling 4) 190/55 are $$$$).

I noticed while reading a recent issue of Sport Rider that the BT-016 in 190/55 weighs just slightly more (1/2 lb if I remember) than the 180/55 so not too much of a weight penalty.

cheers

I know 5.5 and 6.0 are considered interchangeable, but it seems that it would have to alter the tread arc by a little(1/4" on each side), though probably not enough to notice.
You have a good memory cause i just looked in april 09 SR mag and for the bridgestone, it is indeed only .52lb more for the 190x55. If i would have read that didn't like the 190x50, it would have saved me from buying it. I will probably try the 190x55 before i go back to the 180.
The Diablo and the Viper Xtreme are the lightest(a little over 13lbs). the bridgestone is a 1+ lbs heavier and I don't like that either.
A major difference is circumference. the 190x55 is 60mm greater circumference over the 180 and this would yield a little height gain in the rear. You're right about the big bucks, so that will bear on my decision when it's buying time.

i have a stock shock and that is gettin old quick too. jamie will be doing an f4i upgrade shortly so I'll be interested to see how that changes things in the rear, because i agree with you in that I don't like what I am feeling now since I put the 190 on. :cheers:

I may look at putting on a 190/55 at some point in the future (for the ride height and aesthetics basically) but as I just replaced the BT-021 with a new BT-016, it won`t be for a while.

Getting back to Sport Rider, the BT-016 fared extremely well, finishing second only to the Michelin (much more expensive). Given my focus on shedding weight (PVM rims,...) I am mindful of the tire weight but the half-pound difference for the BT-016 is acceptable IMO.

Either way, no more 190/50 for me, I did not like what ti did to the handling. If I must have a 190 it`ll be a 55 or nothing.

+1

at least we agree that something ain't right, huh? start selling shit to get the money to get another tire quick, do a few burnouts. :lol: Hopefully this may help others not make the same mistake. But like I said, the Diablo was not shaped the same, so................it may be a whole diff ballgame if you didn't want the added height????

Curiously, Ducati fit a 190/50 on a 5.5" rim on the 999. Not sure what their reasons were alas. Am not sure why some bike still come with the 190/50 as it is a sluggish tire mid-corner. Granted, there are some differences between brands and models. The one I had tried was a BT-014 and did not like it!

I can't speak definitively on anything than other mine, but there were only minuscule chicken strips on the 190/50 Diablo on the R1 when I looked at this past Sunday, so maybe they didn't have a BTO-16 on the duc/

Definitely not a BT-016 on the Duc as that tire just came out last year and the 999 went out of production in 2006 I believe (2007 being the first year of the 1098 lineage)

BTW, the ZX-10R was the first to use the 190/55 as standard equipment (in 2006 I think). It has since been joined by the new R1 (not sure about the other big-bores...)

Clarification please
 

Hello everyone, newby to this forum, Sorry for being so thick could someone please clarify which year of cbr900rr the rear wheel fits the VTR as I love this mod.

There is a thread that addresses modifications that are direct fits to the superhawk. Search around a bit and I'm sure you'll find it.

check this one out.

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...ad.php?t=13106

oh and feel free to intro yourself on a new thread and your bike. Welcome to the forum.:)

190x50 is less of a angle, u can wear the chicken strip off a 190x50 first day, it takes a hard ride in the mountains to wear chicken strip off a 190x55, i ran several of both, i went back to 180x55 pilot power, seems to work the best for hard riding

you may be right, but what brand of 190 tire were you running on what width wheel?

i need to clear the air relative to some issues raised by me on this thread with respect to my tire/wheel comments above as my most recent findings may clarify things a bit. Believe I owe it to those who offered suggestions and others who read these theads.

Several months ago, I purchased Carrozzeria wheels from Inderocker. The wheels arrived in great condition, well packaged, complete with original spec sheet that states that the rear rim is 6.00x17 and recommends a 190x50 (or a 180) tire. Naturally, I purchased a 190x50(BTO-16) and put it on the wheel. Not expecting that I purchased a 6" rear, I PM’d Inde and ask if he was running a 190 and he replied that he wouldn’t put a 190 on a 5.5 rim, but never mentioned the discrepancy on the spec sheet. Since he told me he never ran the wheels on his bike, I thought perhaps he didn’t know. I should have inquired further, but no matter now.

After riding the wheels/tires a bit, I noticed 1/4" chicken strips whereas I previously never had these on any of my tires. I tried to erase these thinking that 6.00x17 wheels shod with 190 tires might be a new dimension in terms of lean angle, but I just kept sliding the rear with no diminution of the 1/4" chicken strips. I met a guy on an R1 that was running a 190 with 6” rim with no chicken strips and we compared but could not explain. Regardless, I eventually realized that if I continued to increase lean angle, I would soon be on my ass or worse. I don't give a shit what people who look at my tires think about my riding skills, but I do care about my ability to lean the bike and so this was an enigma to me.

Anyway, I've been removing my front wheel often over the past couple months trying to uncover the cause of hard brake application shudder, and I noticed today that the front wheel bearings were tight and rough turning. Carrozzeria recommends 1/2 the torque of stock wheels and i may have exceeded this a bit, albeit I did significantly reduce the torque of both wheels from OEM. Since the front bearings were not free spinning, I removed the rear wheel to see if the bearings were in the same condition, and they were. In the process of examining the rear wheel bearings, I noticed a stamp on the spoke indicating that the wheel size is 5.50x17.:eek: What a dumbass! I should have seen this when I mounted the tire, but never did, probably a result of my vision(difficulty seeing black on black). This new information explains the 1/4" chicken strips that my sliding the rear couldn't erase. Squeezing a 190 on a 5.5" rim, at least in the case of the BTO-16, changes the shape of the arc and according to my experiences, this results in a sharp drop-off at the edges that is less tractable and more unstable than those of the 180.

I’ll be ordering new bearings, front and rear as well as the correct size rear tire. Now I’m thinking that the rough front bearings in the front may be the culprit causing the hard braking shudder, but the front tire is worn unevenly also, probably since it’s been on for the life of 2 rears. We’ll find out soon hopefully.

I know I’m a dumbass, but learning the hard way is sometimes the only way I learn. I feel obliged to present information that corrects or clarifies previous questions for the benefit of all on the forum.

Sorry for the length.

Thanks, nathan:)

thought id show mine also

Lookin sweet Hawxter. hopefully the date is wrong on your camera or a lot of us will be dead by the time you "get er done"!:winner:

hell its been damn near the death of me!
yeah date is more than 6 yrs off.

When you get into unchartered territory like you are, it's not worth rushing things. Take your time and make certain everything is right and it'll likely save time and money and maybe even you're ass in the long haul. looks great so far!:)