Best Tire Size for Handling

[1olbull]

Okay, in for a penny....in for a pound.....gulp.

If you are twisty hoon like me, I guarantee you'll not be sorry!
You can max out the Rocket's lean angle and that Road 5 sticks like glue then begs for more lean!

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Okay, in for a penny....in for a pound.....gulp.

Okay, in for a penny....in for a pound.....gulp.

I like the Michelin Commander two

I have looked at a bunch of online tire sites and each of them show the Michelin Road 5 in the 150/70R/17 size as a, "Rear" tire. Where am I going wrong?

I use the Michelin 140/75R 17 commander 2 front on my modded Roadster

 

[Boog]

@1olbull Steve, pardon my ignorance, would you explain why running the front tire backwards in this case is better for mileage and traction? I'm always open to learnin'...

 

[vindex1963]

Interesting thread.

 

[Joesmoe]

I asked you some years ago when you put out this wonderful gem -- if you would parametrically provide the equivalent chart for your Touring brethren. Did you ? Would you ?

@Boog -- you "know" this answer.

When a vehicle is accelerated by a turning force (as opposed to a rocket engine), there is (not nice to fool Mother Nature) an equal and opposite reaction.

Power delivered, in our case, to the rear wheel, causes the well-known squat in the rear, and in the extreme, a lifting of the front as the rear wheel attempts to rotate the bike about the rear axle. In practical terms, what we understand is that there is an effective weight transfer to the rear, so the rear benefits from more traction, and during acceleration is when you want the most traction, and because of the weight transfer, that makes sense to do in the rear.

So the tire designed for the rear, can be be advantageously biased to improve grip in that direction, as the cat has claws on the front of its paws to help it pull itself forward.

Change the vector of the acceleration to the opposite direction as we attempt to slow and stop, and the same physics is working, this time trying to remove energy from the system using the brakes to turn that energy into heat. Similarly, the brakes are attempting to rotate the bike forward over the front wheel, resulting in the well known dive when braking. This is effectively weight transfer to the front, improving traction in the front - as much as 90%. Designers of front tires can bias the the grip in the "backup" direction to improve braking. Using the example of the cat and its claws, one method a cat *could* use if it thought its rearward bias were useful for braking, is jump up in the air and swap ends, once landing, all claws would be facing aft -- still "pulling" by their original design, though in this case, pulling in the negative direction to help it stop.

So a tire designed for the rear, to pull like the cat's claws, needs to be reversed if put on the front.

As for mileage, that is not related to the direction of the tire on the axle -- more an endorsement of using that tire.

 

[warp9.9]

Its kind of like running a tire not made for that particular wheel (being a rear tire on a front wheel) hopefully there is no other people on this site that run a tire not made for the rear of the bike, ie. dark side. Off for my cup of coffee let the games begin

 

[1olbull]

@1olbull Steve, pardon my ignorance, would you explain why running the front tire backwards in this case is better for mileage and traction? I'm always open to learnin'...

My pleasure, Boog,
Reversing the tire has little to do with mileage. The mileage increase is from the amount of tread depth on a rear compared to a front tire.
Reversing is to compensate for the difference rear tires are made (laminated) versus front tires.
The primary reason to use this tire is to garner the superior benefits of one of the most serious tires developed for handling (traction) and performance.

 

[1olbull]

I asked you some years ago when you put out this wonderful gem -- if you would parametrically provide the equivalent chart for your Touring brethren. Did you ? Would you ?

@Boog -- you "know" this answer.

When a vehicle is accelerated by a turning force (as opposed to a rocket engine), there is (not nice to fool Mother Nature) an equal and opposite reaction.

Power delivered, in our case, to the rear wheel, causes the well-known squat in the rear, and in the extreme, a lifting of the front as the rear wheel attempts to rotate the bike about the rear axle. In practical terms, what we understand is that there is an effective weight transfer to the rear, so the rear benefits from more traction, and during acceleration is when you want the most traction, and because of the weight transfer, that makes sense to do in the rear.

So the tire designed for the rear, can be be advantageously biased to improve grip in that direction, as the cat has claws on the front of its paws to help it pull itself forward.

Change the vector of the acceleration to the opposite direction as we attempt to slow and stop, and the same physics is working, this time trying to remove energy from the system using the brakes to turn that energy into heat. Similarly, the brakes are attempting to rotate the bike forward over the front wheel, resulting in the well known dive when braking. This is effectively weight transfer to the front, improving traction in the front - as much as 90%. Designers of front tires can bias the the grip in the "backup" direction to improve braking. Using the example of the cat and its claws, one method a cat *could* use if it thought its rearward bias were useful for braking, is jump up in the air and swap ends, once landing, all claws would be facing aft -- still "pulling" by their original design, though in this case, pulling in the negative direction to help it stop.

So a tire designed for the rear, to pull like the cat's claws, needs to be reversed if put on the front.

As for mileage, that is not related to the direction of the tire on the axle -- more an endorsement of using that tire.

Very impressive!
I really like the cat claw analogy!
Shall likely steal it as well.

 

[1olbull]

Its kind of like running a tire not made for that particular wheel (being a rear tire on a front wheel) hopefully there is no other people on this site that run a tire not made for the rear of the bike, ie. dark side. Off for my cup of coffee let the games begin

Or God forbid, a modified welded rear wheel on a 200 mph motor?!?!?!?!

 

[1olbull]

@warp9.9 Warpo,
I hear birds tweeting and chirping - do you?