180 or 190

[t-homo]

Yeah, i knew what it meant as far as size. Just wondering if one was better than the other or what.

[marko138]

I'd stick with what came stock, in this case the 190.

[t-homo]

Originally Posted by marko138

I'd stick with what came stock, in this case the 190.

fair enough. After looking at my buell's 120/60s16, That thing is absolutely massive.

[NONE_too_SOFT]

i'd go w/ 180, personally

[Lamnidae]

For the Busa...

Tires Front: 120/70-ZR-17
Tires Rear: 190/50-ZR-17

[t-homo]

I think mine might be the same ambly. I will check after I get out of a meeting.

[DLIT]

Originally Posted by NONE_too_SOFT

i'd go w/ 180, personally

Negative. You lose more of a contact patch which is needed on the liter bikes to handle the power delivery. In fact, a lot of 600 and 750 owners/racers will go up to the 190 for that reason. So they can get on the throttle quicker and harder. They just have to set their suspension up to compensate for the rear being raised more because it's a taller tire.

So stay with the 190, T. It's what is meant for that bike.

[PhiSig1071]

Originally Posted by PhiSig1071

190 refers to the rear tire width in mm's. A 190 is slightly wider than a 180. I'd say keep the 190. A 180 will give you quicker handling at the expense of some traction, you need traction more than handling on that bike. At least for now.

The explanation of the rest of the code:

190/50/ZR17

190 is tire width,
50 is aspect ratio at max lean
ZR is speed rating
17 is rim size.

Originally Posted by t-rock

Yeah, i knew what it meant as far as size. Just wondering if one was better than the other or what.

I figured you did, I just wanted to illustrate why I thought a 190 would be better. Rather than just posting "Keep the 190"

[Mr Lefty]

actually because the 180 is going on a wider rim it will flatten it out and increase the contact patch for straight line... but reduce the profile and give it reduce handeling... or in theory it should...