I been wanting to research the R3T tires for some time now.
Your post caught me at the right time so . . . OEM Tire Chart
130/90R16 Front
The R3R OEM tires place the bike on a reverse rake with the front axle a half inch higher than the rear axle. This sux for handling!
The R3T OEM tires do not do this. The front axle is a quarter inch lower than the rear axle. This is good for handling. See OEM Tire chart.
What is troublesome is that the R3T with a longer wheelbase and smaller front wheel, has much more trail (7.2" v. 5.83") even with the same rake as the R3R (32°). This slows the handling down a lot.
I'm pretty sure the R3T already has less lean angle than the R3R, so I would be very cautious before further lowering of the front axle.
A 130/90R16 front tire further lowers the front axle another .11". The 130 sidewall height of 4.6" is lower that the 150 sidewall of 4.72" and the narrower width should improve handling sharpness. With use of this tire, I would also consider taller rear shocks as the OEM R3T seat height is about an inch lower than the R3R. Raising the rear with taller rear shocks will reduce the trail some and help quicken handling.
I've no hard evidence; however, having ran a 130 front tire on my R3R, I feel a 130mm width front is too small and provides inadequate contact/friction for a big-ass heavy road bike in the twisties. BUT, IF this .11" lowering of the front axle does not impair lean angle too much and considering rider aggressiveness in the twisties, this could be a slightly better front tire for the R3T.
Note: I find all the Michelin Commander II front tires, including this size, to be a Bias ply. If so I would NOT run it on any Rocket.
I shall get to work on putting together a R3T tire choice chart.
I been wanting to research the R3T tires for some time now.
Your post caught me at the right time so . . . OEM Tire Chart
130/90R16 Front
The R3R OEM tires place the bike on a reverse rake with the front axle a half inch higher than the rear axle. This sux for handling!
The R3T OEM tires do not do this. The front axle is a quarter inch lower than the rear axle. This is good for handling. See OEM Tire chart.
What is troublesome is that the R3T with a longer wheelbase and smaller front wheel, has much more trail (7.2" v. 5.83") even with the same rake as the R3R (32°). This slows the handling down a lot.
I'm pretty sure the R3T already has less lean angle than the R3R, so I would be very cautious before further lowering of the front axle.
A 130/90R16 front tire further lowers the front axle another .11". The 130 sidewall height of 4.6" is lower that the 150 sidewall of 4.72" and the narrower width should improve handling sharpness. With use of this tire, I would also consider taller rear shocks as the OEM R3T seat height is about an inch lower than the R3R. Raising the rear with taller rear shocks will reduce the trail some and help quicken handling.
I've no hard evidence; however, having ran a 130 front tire on my R3R, I feel a 130mm width front is too small and provides inadequate contact/friction for a big-ass heavy road bike in the twisties. BUT, IF this .11" lowering of the front axle does not impair lean angle too much and considering rider aggressiveness in the twisties, this could be a slightly better front tire for the R3T.
Note: I find all the Michelin Commander II front tires, including this size, to be a Bias ply. If so I would NOT run it on any Rocket.
I shall get to work on putting together a R3T tire choice chart.
I been wanting to research the R3T tires for some time now.
Your post caught me at the right time so . . . OEM Tire Chart
130/90R16 Front
The R3R OEM tires place the bike on a reverse rake with the front axle a half inch higher than the rear axle. This sux for handling!
The R3T OEM tires do not do this. The front axle is a quarter inch lower than the rear axle. This is good for handling. See OEM Tire chart.
What is troublesome is that the R3T with a longer wheelbase and smaller front wheel, has much more trail (7.2" v. 5.83") even with the same rake as the R3R (32°). This slows the handling down a lot.
I'm pretty sure the R3T already has less lean angle than the R3R, so I would be very cautious before further lowering of the front axle.
A 130/90R16 front tire further lowers the front axle another .11". The 130 sidewall height of 4.6" is lower that the 150 sidewall of 4.72" and the narrower width should improve handling sharpness. With use of this tire, I would also consider taller rear shocks as the OEM R3T seat height is about an inch lower than the R3R. Raising the rear with taller rear shocks will reduce the trail some and help quicken handling.
I've no hard evidence; however, having ran a 130 front tire on my R3R, I feel a 130mm width front is too small and provides inadequate contact/friction for a big-ass heavy road bike in the twisties. BUT, IF this .11" lowering of the front axle does not impair lean angle too much and considering rider aggressiveness in the twisties, this could be a slightly better front tire for the R3T.
Note: I find all the Michelin Commander II front tires, including this size, to be a Bias ply. If so I would NOT run it on any Rocket.
I shall get to work on putting together a R3T tire choice chart.
I did have longer shocks made by ikon for me, they are tall as I barely touch the ground, they did help handling but I also went to exerdra max radials from commander 11 bias ply at the same time, oem sizes, handling is noticeably better, I would like to get bike down just a little to feel more comfortable when stopped and moving bike around with feet, but loosing any of the handling at speeds I don’t want to sacrifice for this want. Thanks
Steve I’m wanting to run a mile track this spring also, speed and load index must meet or exceed oem specs and speed rating must be with what speed you plan on running, I think v is it as all I’ve found in w is a 160 rear wide tire and only has load index of 69 so I don’t think that is spec.