190 Rear tire
 

Tell me about the time you put one on yours. How did it effect the handling? How did you like it? I currently run a D211 on the front, and a Qualifer on the rear(180). I want to run the D211 in the rear as well, but am unsure of how much it will effect the handling. I am all the way at the edge of the tire, and I know the bike has more left in it. I am starting to turn my rear tire into a greasy mess, and comming out of a corner hard on the throttle with the back end stepping out is starting to really get my attention.

Don't do it, there is absolutely no benefit except maybe looks, and the SH is so scrawny that it wouldn't even look good on that. I had a 190 on my CBR1100xx when I got it and just assumed that it was correct, even replaced it with another 190 before I realized it was supposed to be a 180. I changed down on the next tire change and the difference was shocking, bike turned in MUCH easier, felt much more flickable, more settled in the turns.

I guarantee that you'll regret it after the initial excitement wears off.

I'm not doing it for the looks. I want a tire on the rear that going to allow me to lay on the throttle more comming out of a turn, and I can get D211GP's for $80(take off's). As it sits currently, I am turning my rear tire into a mess. The Hawk really isn't an easy turning bike to begin with IMO. It's heavy, and takes more effort than other bikes I have ridden to get down in a turn. I appreciate you comments, but I want to know how it effects the Hawk.

All this is assuming you mount the 190 whatever tire to the stock 5.5" rim...

The 190 makes the bike turn in slower, needing more force to push it down into the turn, and with the wider profile of the 190 squeezed on the narrow rim, it's very unlikley you will be able to use the edge of the tire at all...

And that's not a reflection of the rider, it's more geometry... It simply isn't possible to lean the bike over to that extent, since the resulting profile has the edges rolling off, to meet the rim... Ie slow turn in, vague edge grip, and unpredictable limits...

So, in short, no benefits that I can see...

So back to what you are doing to the tire now... I'm going to make wild guess here... You are probably running the stock rear suspension and you are not 220lbs+ ?

Because if that's true, the reason you are greasing those tires are more down to improper setup, than to little rubber... With either cold tear, or skipping, or a number of other possible problems that a harsh rear spring with incorrect damping can produce... Because lets face it, swapping to a 190, you won't actually get a measurably larger surface area, and it's not going to make the tire respond better to overheating...

The Qualifier is a nice enough tire, and I doubt you are running at a pace (on street) that should grease those... If you do, get on a track, period...

If you are not, then the pace is irrelevant, and you have a setup issue... That's not solved by swapping to different size tire... It's solved by having the bike/suspension in balance, so you get good grip without overheating the the tire...

I see your point, and now I see that my OP was a little unclear. I am looking at the D211, which isn't availible in a 180. The setup of my bike is decent. The rear has been done by Racetech(I think). It's a Superhawk rear shock with a remote resivor. The previous owner had the bike set up for his weight, who was about 5lbs heavier than me. But I do notice the bike wallows through the turns a little when I am starting to push things a little. I think it needs to be gone through. I sent Jamie an e-mail recently, and am planning on sending him my rear shock to freshen it up. But I still feel like I am at the limits of the Qualifier tire in the rear.


Let me ask this. How much of an improvemnt is the Q2 over the Qualifier?

tweety is correct relative to 99% of the tires in terms of squeezing a 190 on a 5.5"rim. I am running a power pure 190x55 on a 5.5" and the sides are too steep for me on the street.

However, the Q2 is and possibly other dunlops are the exceptions in that the arc of the 190 mounted on a 5.5" rim is similar to the 180. I just mounted a 190 on a friend's cbr600 and he loves it, best handling tire he's had on, bar none, with bigger contact patch and rubber left at the edges if needed for security.

Based on comparing the arc/profile of the 190 Q2 to my 190x55 mich power pure, i am looking forward to trying the 190x55 Q2 next purchase.

check out the preferred rim size on the link below:

http://dunlopracing.com/tires-products/d211gp/

if it helps I can say this much I had started using the q2 (front and rear) and just love the leaning and handling of them. I have now about 600 miles on them and they are great right out from fresh.

I assume you went 180, but i know they're grippy. I'm anxious to try the 190 here shortly.

Have to support Tweety & Nath opinion on this... No need in anything else applied.. Sad topic, and Useless.

I've run a couple 211 take offs on the hawk. I liked the handling. I race dunlops so the feel was welcome. Thier triangle profile makes the bike less stable at turn in but solid when really heeled over. The profile raises the rear which quickens the steering to my liking. I agree that the dunlops have a different personality than other tires.

You should put it on and try it. I went back to a bridgestone 180 for wet/snow grip but I did like the dunlop 190

yeah but nath is going to try another brand 190x55 on a 5.5 rim based on dunlops unique rounded(as opposed cliff-like michelin and bridgestne and probably all but dunlop 190s when squeezed on a smaller rim). Acc to dunlop link cited above together with my experience of mounting a Q2 on a friend's crb600, I believe this anomaly could be a win-win. That is, a little longer wear based on the additional circumferance as well as a little more contact patch for those with no chicken strips on 180s.

i rode my 99 vtr with a 190 in the rear was awesome felt much more stable esp. comming out of turns, you will need to cut a small slit in the chain guard tho.

may i ask why youve chosen the d211? (is this the ntec uk gp or the gpa?)

the gpa, for the record, is US made and is quite triangular in profile. i used to think i liked a more progressive profile (read: round) but the tippiness is comfortable for me now. much like the michelins.

anyways, i run the gpa's on a 5.5 rim. theyre my track/race tires hands down. i dont like using them on the street because they wear out insanely fast. i would estimate about 1000-1500 miles and theyd have a crazy flat spot. point is, they ONLY come in 190/55+. theres no 190/50 and no 180/55. and imo they were intended as a race tire to be competitive in superstock classes (where dot approved tires are required, no slicks). id like to point out that theres a pretty good distinction to be made between a 190/50 and a 190/55. 55's are taller--sometimes by alot depending on manufacturer. some manufs' 190/50's have a smaller overall diameter than their 180/55 of the same model.

as far as going 190/55 in the first place, theres no real benefit especially on the street, imo. you're spending a shite ton more money is really only it. you do however get a nice boost in rear ride height, which steepens steering geometry, which results in less trail, which results in faster steering. not a TON, but its noticeable imo. thats for you to decide, but i wouldnt steer you away from doing it on a superhawk, unless you're not really too sure what you're doing or if your front suspension is stock and you weigh north of 140lbs. might have a sour experience with a 190/55, unwarranted, which wouldnt be cool.

i dont like riding 180/55 tires on my bikes anymore, and much prefer 190/55, although i doubt id ever do it on the superhawk. for my purposes, its not my go-to sport bike. my 600rr and rc51 run 190/55 tires full time. i may try the q2's next for the street. personally, ive opted to forgo 190/50 tires altogether, whenever possible.

btw, some guys that go from 180/55 to 190/55 on the same bike get a little freaked out. my friends got spooked by it, they thought it tipped too quickly. i came from an rc51 to a 600rr, that in and of itself was a shocker as far as handling goes. then moving to a 190/55 didnt bother me at all. ill also attest that its pretty hard to get all the way to the edge on a 190/55 on a 5.5 rim. very minor issue. id rather have extra tire than not and thus should not really be a determining factor.

Well I'm not going to get into which tire you should run but because of your superstock reference I would like to add a little tid bit for thought.

I'll use FIM Supersport for my example. This class also uses "road legal" tires and have gone to the larger (or wider tires) in the last couple of years.

This is all good but..... I find it a bit strange that most of the lap records are still held by Cal Crutchlow while running the older "skinner" tires.

Now sure Cal had a lot to do with it and Laverty pushing him also helped a bit but it can also show that wider is not always better.

Carry on.

I run a 190 because that is what was on the bike when I bought it and when I recently bought new tires I just went with what it had. Thinking of going back to stock with the next set of tires to see what I like better.

the superstock reference was mine, but that's a good thing you're pointing out for the OP. tire size isnt everything, bottom line.

bottom line to the OP: yes, 190/55 tires (the available size for d211gpa's) change handling characteristics towards sharper (trading stability theoretically). in my case, i like the change. others might not. 190/50 tires are a whole nother animal. just making sure the difference between 50 and 55 series tires are understood.

I run a 190 on my bike sometimes, a 180 other times. Frankly, there is more difference between manufacturers and models. Pros and cons aside, you can make the VTR handle good with either one. Just as not to sit on the fence: I prefer running a 180.

did you ever run a 190x55 Q2? I've been screwing around with front/rear geometry and suspension settings ever since I mounted the the 190 Pure. However, the 190 Q2 profile is much different than the BTO-16 and the Michelin Pure and hence better suited for instilling confidence at lean.

Not the 55, just the 50's. This won't sit well with some people, but the Qualifier/Q2 tires are much better overall than the Michelins or the BT's. Those are ok for the track where you are generating plenty of heat to get them going. The Dunlops are excellent everywhere, be it street or track. I think you will be just fine.

Well I can't comment on the sizes as I have only run the 180 but other than that.... :iagree:

But I am also biased as I am a Dunlop guy anyways.... ;)

and they should call the 180 at least a 185......lol that thing is wide..... ;)

55 and 50 have the same profile, that is, the same arc across the tread, the only difference in sidewall height as you know, and i know how they handle because I mounted a 190 Q2 on a friend's F4I 600 and he's now much faster in the turns. He loves it and says it is confidence inspiring and much gripier than his previous 190 BTO-16.

I'm trying to wear out my Mich Power Pure fast, ya hear me, fast, but it looks like it's going to go over 5000 despite running 28psi cold. I'll probably get it on JIT for the snow.haha

That's about right for that tire, even on the street. The Pilots are stiff carcass tires and need really low pressures to generate enough heat to "get them going".

after 4000+miles, the 190x55 power pure on a 5.5" rim was basically a failed experiment. It's not recommended for sure, as tweety noted earlier, and as michelin states in their recommendations(not preferred). If you look at the picks below, you can see that the edges of the rear tire are very steep indeed, and have caused rather abrupt slippage when pushed too hard, esp when leaned quickly and steeply. That said, they still held, but a bit too tentative for me. I mean it puckered me up a few times when i must have been having a little too much fun.

Interestingly, the front has a narrower chicken strip than the rear which is the first ever for me. In addition, the crown in the middle is quite pronounced (for the last 1000 miles or so) and is a little unnerving when you transition the bike from side to side quickly, esp on downhill alternating turns.

I also had to add a half turn of rear rebound to help reduce instability on fast turns with wavelike undulations, whereas with the previous 180 i had not noticed this wallowing precursor to headshake, like you wanna steering stabilizer now. Another pucker upper. haha

Anyway, having recently mounted a 190x50 Q2 on a friends 600 honda, I noticed that the arc of the tread was more like the 180s I had been running. This convinced me to give the 190x55/5.5"combo another try in terms of the Q2 which you can tell by the pick below has a much friendlier tread arc profile.

I will report later on this for those who may be contemplating such an arrangement.





https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...flats-3262.jpg

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...d-bye-3261.jpg

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...5-rim-3249.jpg

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...ofile-3248.jpg

I can say that on the racetrack I had similar bad experiences with putting a larger michelin on than a larger dunlop. I think profile and carcass stiffness are the issues. Dunlops handled better and lasted literally 4 times as long.

I would like to hear opinions of a 180/55 on a 6" wheel.

well i can confirm that statement, at least relative to better handling, unequivocally. Last night we took off the 190 Michelins and mounted Q2s($239 to the door), 190x55@5.5" rim. Took a 250mile run today and it's a totally different ballgame. Roads were damp with dry spots, temps 45-50F, cold pressures 30psi front and rear. Very planted with slip and grip slippage on a couple of wet curves; otherwise perfect. No drop-off at the edges like the 190 michelin; instead there is a nice gradual arc right out to the end as seen in the above pic. Awesome! Also, there is the traditional front/rear chicken strip pattern of smaller back than front. The bike feels much more balanced, the front felt planted, and overall confidence inspiring.

Based on riding bike and with a friend with 190s on 5.5" rims, I can see no reason not to choose this set-up if you want a bigger contact patch and great handling.

190/55 Mich Pure's on 5.5in Wheel - Page 2 : Suzuki GSX-R Motorcycle Forums: Gixxer.com

6" wheel: prefer 190 but 180 acceptable.

It's doable but not the preferred. Check the dunlop spec sheet for this. i don't know what they say.

wow! Gotta share this because I believe it's significant for those who are serious leaners, as opposed touring/straight-up/mileage oriented type riders. I can't comment on the longevity yet, but this combo is a winner for the Tail of the Dragon wannabes like me. I can recommend the 190 Q2 on a 5.5" rim without reservation. Best handling tire yet for me. These chicken strips could easily be erased at the track without much effort and even on the street if there are wide open turns with no traffic/obstacles to slide into.

Can lean extreme with great contact patch and still have some left compared to other 190s i've tried, that is BTO-16 and Mich Power Pure, which are def not recommended because of steep edges. This causes instability/nervousness through corner and undesirable front/rear wear characteristics which places too much stress on front causing slip and chatter when pushed.

I don't believe there is much reason to run a 180 when you can get this great tire for $239 front and rear to the door.

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...5-rim-3284.jpg

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...-rear-3285.jpg

Mich and Bridge definitely not good on a 5.5" rim as you can see below:

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...tires-3288.jpg

hang off the bike more into the turns so that the bike is more upright. that will give that little bit more you want in the turns.

Not sure how much more I can hang off this thing, and still stay on it.I have one cheek fully off. I think I am doing it right, just running out of tire.


http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6034/...f44150b9_b.jpg