170/80B-15 Rear Tire

[First_N_Last]

I did a search & didn't find any posts about this, so here goes.

 

My Kumho rear tire experiment has been a failure for me, so I am going to replace my rear tire with an Avon Venom AM42.

 

While doing that I am hoping to correct some speedometer error by putting an over-sized rear tire on.

 

Has anyone used/tried a 170/80-15 tire on the rear of their RSV?

 

My research is on an Avon Venom 170/80HB-15 tire. The only worry is the width which is 6.9" as compared to the 150/90 width of 6.3". The height of the replacement is only 1/2" higher. The 170/80 tire has a great load rating of 83H. That load rating is 1074 lbs.!

 

If anyone has some info to share, please do.

Thanks;

 

johnB

[friesman]

If your main reason for putting the bigger tire on is to fix the speedo, why not try a speedo healer, it seems to work for quite a few guys in here. Then you can use the tire intended for the bike.

 

Brian

[Freebird]

I agree. I also can't answer your question about the larger Avon but I do know that Metzler claimed that that size would work on the RSV but at least a couple of folks here have tried it and it rubbed. There is very little clearance, I wouldn't recommend it.

[V7Goose]

Unfortunately, I have never tested any rear tires on this bike except stock sizes. I do know that Metzeler does publish an optional wider tire for this bike, but many who have tried it with Metzeler's own tire have reported damage from that wider tire rubbing on the drive shaft housing.

 

I can tell you emphatically that the actual width of one brand/model of tire in a particular size is NOT the same to any other brand/model of tire in the same size, so the only likely way to determine if your idea will work is to purchase the tire and try it. Although I have not done actual width comparisons on rear tires for the RSV, I have done that for the front 150/80-15; for a while I was walking round at rallies with calipers measuring each different brand of tire I could fine. The differences between some tires was nothing short of dramatic. I published all these comparisons in a thread here several years ago, but it may be hard to find due to the age.

 

The other thing I have not done is actually compare the manufacturer's published width spec to the actual tire width when mounted, although that would be very helpful in this case. I'll see if I can remember to start doing that on the new tires I mount. The best I can suggest is to physically measure the gap on both sides of a tire in stock size on a Royal Star and see if the existing clearance is enough to support the spec for the new tire you are considering.

Goose

[First_N_Last]

If your main reason for putting the bigger tire on is to fix the speedo, why not try a speedo healer, it seems to work for quite a few guys in here. Then you can use the tire intended for the bike.

 

Brian

 

Trying to save $115+ of extra electronics (speedo healer) to fix speedometer error while getting...

 

1) saving $115 & correcting some of the speedometer error without added electronics

2) higher load rating for better/longer handling/mileage

3) higher rear height for better RSV handling

 

Thanks for the suggestion, but that research was already done. I may have to revert to a Speedo Healer if the swing arm clearance won't allow the 6.9" of the 170/80 tire. I have the Lust Racing Jack-Up Suspension Links installed. The handling difference is incredible! I figure another 1/2" will help even more & offset more weight of the rear on to the front.

 

That is my full rationale.

 

Has anyone tried or know of someone who tried a 170/80-15 on the rear of a RSV?

 

JohnB

[First_N_Last]

Unfortunately, I have never tested any rear tires on this bike except stock sizes. I do know that Metzeler does publish an optional wider tire for this bike, but many who have tried it with Metzeler's own tire have reported damage from that wider tire rubbing on the drive shaft housing.

 

I can tell you emphatically that the actual width of one brand/model of tire in a particular size is NOT the same to any other brand/model of tire in the same size, so the only likely way to determine if your idea will work is to purchase the tire and try it. Although I have not done actual width comparisons on rear tires for the RSV, I have done that for the front 150/80-15; for a while I was walking round at rallies with calipers measuring each different brand of tire I could fine. The differences between some tires was nothing short of dramatic. I published all these comparisons in a thread here several years ago, but it may be hard to find due to the age.

 

The other thing I have not done is actually compare the manufacturer's published width spec to the actual tire width when mounted, although that would be very helpful in this case. I'll see if I can remember to start doing that on the new tires I mount. The best I can suggest is to physically measure the gap on both sides of a tire in stock size on a Royal Star and see if the existing clearance is enough to support the spec for the new tire you are considering.

Goose

 

 

Thanks Goose;

 

That is my plan if I can't get 1st hand experience from someone who has already tried an Avon AM42 170/80-15 with a published width spec of 6.9"

 

I'll have to measure, measure & measure again... then possibly try it & hope for the best or just get the 180/90B-15

 

JohnB

[First_N_Last]

By the way my current rear tire...

Kumho 165/80R-15

has a published width spec of 6.5".

 

That leads me to believe that if I have about 1/2" swing arm clearance on each side now, I should be able to use the Avon width tire of 6.9"

 

I'll be checking that tomorrow.

[tsigwing]

By the way my current rear tire...

Kumho 165/80R-15

has a published width spec of 6.5".

 

That leads me to believe that if I have about 1/2" swing arm clearance on each side now, I should be able to use the Avon width tire of 6.9"

 

I'll be checking that tomorrow.

 

aren't those width specs also measured on a certain width rim? I think the biggest problem we have are our very narrow rims.

[SilvrT]

 

Has anyone used/tried a 170/80-15 tire on the rear of their RSV?

 

 

 

One of our members... Pecker ... has done this

 

I can provide you with the info and pics if you can't reach him.

[First_N_Last]

I agree. I also can't answer your question about the larger Avon but I do know that Metzler claimed that that size would work on the RSV but at least a couple of folks here have tried it and it rubbed. There is very little clearance, I wouldn't recommend it.

 

To this time, your negative recommendation makes the most sense. I will still measure the clearance, but am leaning towards the stock size Avon Venom AM42.

 

I also spent about a half hour of calculations to guesstimate that the best I could hope for in speedometer correction would be about 2% at 60 miles per hour. The only pluses if it would fit are a higher load carrying spec & a height increase of 1/2".

 

The down side is that after this change, if I still had a high speed wobble/shake, a dealer might say the non-standard tire size was the problem & not work on it.

 

Talking out the pluses & minuses while listening to the people on this site helps a lot.

 

For the record, I'm still deciding;

 

John B

[SilvrT]

I agree. I also can't answer your question about the larger Avon but I do know that Metzler claimed that that size would work on the RSV but at least a couple of folks here have tried it and it rubbed. There is very little clearance, I wouldn't recommend it.

 

I looked into putting a 170 tire on and according to a member who has done it, you have to grind away appx 1/4 inch from a specific area on the fender bracket.

 

I decided not to go ahead with it at this time but may still do it sometime in the future. One thing at a time and I want to install the levelling links next. Considering that they raise the bike by appx 1 inch, this might circumvent the need to grind away some of the bracket.

[BuddyRich]

My speedohealer is set at 9%. I don't think a 2% adjustment is really worth it. I love my speedohealer. No more compensating in my head. Just look down and that's the speed. If you only adjust 2% out your basically getting nowhere because you still have at least 5% error so why bother. My CT experiment was a failure also. Got an elite 2 which they quit making but mine is only a little over a year old and really like this Dunlop. I had run Avons but won't anymore after all the cracking sidewalls and the fact it felt slick on theses Texas roads for some reason.

[67mini67]

Trying to save $115+ of extra electronics (speedo healer) to fix speedometer error while getting...

 

1) saving $115 & correcting some of the speedometer error without added electronics

2) higher load rating for better/longer handling/mileage

3) higher rear height for better RSV handling

 

Thanks for the suggestion, but that research was already done. I may have to revert to a Speedo Healer if the swing arm clearance won't allow the 6.9" of the 170/80 tire. I have the Lust Racing Jack-Up Suspension Links installed. The handling difference is incredible! I figure another 1/2" will help even more & offset more weight of the rear on to the front.

 

That is my full rationale.

 

Has anyone tried or know of someone who tried a 170/80-15 on the rear of a RSV?

 

JohnB

 

 

Has anybody tried SPEEDO-TUNER-CALIBRATOR? It is less expensive and appear to be plug and play but does it work as well? Thanks, Wayde

[First_N_Last]

Has anybody tried SPEEDO-TUNER-CALIBRATOR? It is less expensive and appear to be plug and play but does it work as well? Thanks, Wayde

 

 

At $89 with $6 shipping... it could save about $25. It does claim to do the job. This fall I may try it if no one gives negative comment on it by then.

 

Thanks;

 

John B.

[First_N_Last]

I looked into putting a 170 tire on and according to a member who has done it, you have to grind away appx 1/4 inch from a specific area on the fender bracket.

 

I decided not to go ahead with it at this time but may still do it sometime in the future. One thing at a time and I want to install the levelling links next. Considering that they raise the bike by appx 1 inch, this might circumvent the need to grind away some of the bracket.

 

I recommend the leveling Jack-Up Links. They are something that Yami should do as a standard build. It is such a surprising handling difference!

 

John B

[First_N_Last]

My speedohealer is set at 9%. I don't think a 2% adjustment is really worth it. I love my speedohealer. No more compensating in my head. Just look down and that's the speed. If you only adjust 2% out your basically getting nowhere because you still have at least 5% error so why bother. My CT experiment was a failure also. Got an elite 2 which they quit making but mine is only a little over a year old and really like this Dunlop. I had run Avons but won't anymore after all the cracking sidewalls and the fact it felt slick on theses Texas roads for some reason.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience with the Speedo Healer. You are right that a 2% correction for the speedometer is not worth the effort.

 

Sorry for your bad experiences with Avon tires. Over the years I have had bad experiences with almost every tire maker & auto maker regarding factory build/design errors. The worst was with an X-Car & GM.

 

I've been riding the AM42 Venom on the front for a while now & am quite happy with it. One thing I am certain of is that I would only consider the H speed rating & not the v for the rear tire. This is due to the 80H having reinforced sidewalls & a higher load spec over the 74V.

 

John B

[beyeker]

I don't no why anyone would put anything but a Dunlop Elite III on. I have 16,500 miles on my rear Elite and still not to the wear bars.

[Squeeze]

Well, can't say anything about the Tire Question, but if you expirience minimal Tire rubbing on the left Side of the Swingarm, there's a Cure. You could buy or fabricate a big Steel Washer, Size is 20.5 by 28 by 2.5 or 3 mm thick and place it between Drive Hub and final Drive.

 

We do this quite often on the 1Gen Vmax when using a 190 rear Tire instead of the stock 150. Works fine if you use Steel and the narrower Contact Patch inside the Splines have no negative Outcome when you stay under 3.5 mm Thickness.

Edited June 23, 2010 by Squeeze

[V7Goose]

I don't no why anyone would put anything but a Dunlop Elite III on. I have 16,500 miles on my rear Elite and still not to the wear bars.

Well, I'll tell you why one person would put something else on besides an E3. Mind you, I'm not bad mouthing the E3; in fact, I'm running them myself right now. But IMHO the Avon Venom is a better tire for two reasons - the Venoms handle better than the E3s, and they are quieter. In addition, the front Venom (which is an AM41, not a 42) lasts longer than the E3.

 

The E3 gets the nod because the rear tire lasts longer (I get 14K out of a Venom and 17K out of an E3), and it is cheaper. Although it has a lower load rating than the 80H AM42 Venom, it is still higher than the load rating for the stock tires, so I don't think that makes a bit of difference; the bike would have to be way past its GVW before you could overload the tire.

 

The handling difference between the Venom and E3 is not huge, but it is enough that I definitely prefer to ride on the Venom. But even with that said, I still classify the E3 as an excellently handling tire for the RSV. If the Avon and the E3 were the same price, I'd put Venoms on instead. But I just can't wrap my head around the double whammy of having to pay more AND getting shorter tire life when the E3 is almost as good in the handling. That's why I have the E3 skins on right now. I think I am going to try the E3 rear and a Venom AM41 front combo - these tires are very similar design and profile, so maybe the Venom front will give me back that extra handling edge as well as the longer front tire life - no way to know without testing it!

[Guest tx2sturgis]

Thanks for sharing your experience with the Speedo Healer. You are right that a 2% correction for the speedometer is not worth the effort.

 

 

I've been riding the AM42 Venom on the front for a while now & am quite happy with it. One thing I am certain of is that I would only consider the H speed rating & not the v for the rear tire. This is due to the 80H having reinforced sidewalls & a higher load spec over the 74V.

 

John B

 

I installed a speedohealer on my 2007 RSV in July 2008 and it works great. I have a writeup on it here:

 

http://www.venturerider.org/forum/showthread.php?t=25233&highlight=speedohealer&page=2

 

As far as the higher load rating and the reinforced sidewalls...hmmmmm...I think you should consider ride quality. Stiffer, harder sidewalls, and a wider tire profile MIGHT cause some handling issues. I'm only guessing here, since I haven't tried it, but stiffer sidewalls and possibly higher inflation pressures would mean a harsher ride, and a wider tire usually means more resistance to turning, with the rider having to maintain more 'pressure' to keep the bike leaned over in a curve. Not that you cant get used to either one, but keeping the tire sized close to its intended loads is usually best.

 

And I haven't measured the clearance between my 150 Dunlop E3 and the driveshaft housing, but it aint much!

 

One more consideration. If you change the rear tire diameter, you are not only changing speedometer calibration, but also, overall gearing by a few percent. Meaning all your gears will be a bit taller, and you will have SLIGHTLY less take-off acceleration, slightly lower RPMS, ( meaning more downshifting to pass) and slightly more clutch wear due to slipping a bit more when starting from a standing start, due to the first gear being a bit taller. Probably not enough to worry about, just be aware there are ALWAYS trade-offs when you deviate from factory specs.

 

Let us know what you decide.

[hunter 1500]

I can't beleive you guys are getting this kind of mileage out of a rear tire. I've never got more than 8k out of any brand of tire and I have tried a lot of them. I just replaced the stock tire on the RSTD at 5k. No tread left at all. I'm trying the Michelin Comander for the first time. I ride a lot of twisty road and I ride pretty aggressive and that may be why.

[SilvrT]

I can't beleive you guys are getting this kind of mileage out of a rear tire. I've never got more than 8k out of any brand of tire and I have tried a lot of them. I just replaced the stock tire on the RSTD at 5k. No tread left at all. I'm trying the Michelin Comander for the first time. I ride a lot of twisty road and I ride pretty aggressive and that may be why.

 

I had over 22,000 kilometers (13,670 miles) on my stock D404 when I swapped it out and it wasn't even down to the wear bars. Granted, these bikes speedo's are out of whack but most who report tire mileage probably don't have the speedo healer.

 

Personally, I can't understand how some folks are getting such poor mileage ... wonder what kind of roads you travel on... what air pressure you run...?? 'nuther q ... how often do you do burnouts ??

[hunter 1500]

Never did a burnout just on the trottle in the turns and braking into them. On my LC1500 I got 8k on the Dunlop k555 180/15 tire. That was the best I got.

[Venturous Randy]

On ride height change, remember, a tire that is 1/2 inch taller only changes the height of the bike half that or 1/4 inch.

I know you all are talking about 2nd gens, but on 1st gens, I do recommend the Elite III, as the Avons were squirlly avove 70 mph and this has happened on a lot of 1st gens. Yes, the Avons were a bit more agile, but at low speed only for me. I also ran the Avon on the front and Elite III on the back for a while before the front tire became available and that was a real good combination for me.

RandyA

[First_N_Last]

To this time, your negative recommendation makes the most sense. I will still measure the clearance, but am leaning towards the stock size Avon Venom AM42.

 

I also spent about a half hour of calculations to guesstimate that the best I could hope for in speedometer correction would be about 2% at 60 miles per hour. The only pluses if it would fit are a higher load carrying spec & a height increase of 1/2".

 

The down side is that after this change, if I still had a high speed wobble/shake, a dealer might say the non-standard tire size was the problem & not work on it.

 

Talking out the pluses & minuses while listening to the people on this site helps a lot.

 

For the record, I'm still deciding;

 

John B

 

Decision has been made... I will just use the standard size for the rear.

 

JohnB