I'm about to pull the trigger on some lightweight forged aluminum wheels for my M695.
Problem is, stock is a 4.5" rear rim width with 160/60 rear tire and 120/60 front tire.
All the aftermarket stuff is 5.5" rear rim width, which would pair with a 180/55 rear tire and 120/70 front tire (like the S2R).
So I shed some significant unsprung/rotating weight, but go up in rear tire width. I have good aftermarket adjustable suspension all around, so I should be able to dial everything in. My priority is handling/performance over looks and I already have a designated track bike, so this one is for ripping up the twisties. Love to hear from anyone who has made the switch. I'm worried that I might end up with something that rides funky. I want the weight reduction, but I'm not sure about the 180 tire - how do those behave on the small monsters?
BK
(Here's the ride)
(http://i42.tinypic.com/29usvpv.jpg)
Basically, it's gonna feel like the bike weighs half as much as it does.
The profile of a 180 tire on a 5.5 rim is not that different from a 160 tire on a 4.5 rim. It's wider, yes, but it's basically the same "round-ness." The width is going to change the geometry of your front/rear contact patches *slightly*, but you're giving up so much rotational mass that you're going to notice how much easier it turns in more than you're going to notice that you require 1.5-2 degrees more lean angle to compensate for your new wider rear tire.
Also, nice ride. Love that color combo. [thumbsup]
Will the wider wheel bolt right on, no issues?
You can run a 170 on a 5.5" rim without any issues. My '98 ST2 with 5.5" rear rim came with a 170 from the factory. I generally run a 180 on it, though.
As for the 5.5" bolting on without any mods - I would assume it will. The extra inch in rim width should not pose any issues with clearance on the bike. A 170 rear tire would probably give you a better turn-in feel than a 180 (but less than a 160). The lighter wheels will make more of a difference than the 160/170/180 argument, though.
I'm doing this right now on a 695 swingarm in my shop.
Your existing caliper carrier and rotor will bolt-up w/o issues. With regard to the chain side, here's the differences:
The existing sprocket carrier doesn't place the sprocket far enough away from the new tire to make it work. You will need a 5.5" (25mm axle) sprocket carrier ***AND*** the sleeve which goes through the carrier bearings as well as the conical washer that sits against the swingarm.
Your existing chain guides on the bike will need to have the ridge removed so that the chain floats over them w/o issue (or you could find/buy the ST2 chain guides just be sure to get the ones from a steel swing-arm bike and I don't know what years those are).
You'll have to move the front sprocket to align with the rear (but that one's obvious if you're moving the rear sprocket....)
As far as tires go, I wouldn't run a 180 on the 695. I'd go with a 170. The further the mass is away from the axle centerline the greater affect it has on the inertia of the rotating mass. So, what that boils down to is that that heavier the tire, the more you're already offsetting the benefit of the lighter wheels. I'd run 170/60/17 in the rear and a 120/65/17 in the front. That way, you're not shooting yourself in the foot with regard to rotational weight.
*(The 120/70 up front will, however, provide more cushion in the event you contact a pot-hole... Just a suggestion on the 120/65...)
Thanks for the awesome info!
The 170 rear size seems like a good compromise here. Unfortunatley my favored Pilot Power 2CT does not seem to come in that size, but others do, so I'll need to look into a candidate replacement. That'll be a another big change.
I'll quiz my supplier on the fitment details. I definitely want perfect alignment. The wheels I have in mind require a comletely new carrier/sprocket in the BST design, so I thought that issue was sorted. As for my upper rubbing block, well it's ridge is pretty much already worn down, so no problem there!
BK
For clarification on my end:
I'm putting aftermarket wheels that were designed for the M1000 onto an M695 using the stock M695 swingarm. I don't think there's much you can do with the wheel design to move the sprocket further out to clear the wheel/tire without offsetting the wheel centerline too much.... But, I don't know first-hand so....
Quote from: Duck-Stew on February 03, 2010, 05:50:35 AM
The existing sprocket carrier doesn't place the sprocket far enough away from the new tire to make it work. You will need a 5.5" (25mm axle) sprocket carrier ***AND*** the sleeve which goes through the carrier bearings as well as the conical washer that sits against the swingarm.
Good point. My brain's a bit IZ_, but I think I do recall hearing that the carriers are different between the 4.5" and 5.5" rim models.
Quote from: Duck-Stew on February 03, 2010, 05:50:35 AM
(or you could find/buy the ST2 chain guides just be sure to get the ones from a steel swing-arm bike and I don't know what years those are).
Steel swingarm are all '97(Euro)/'98 (USA) to '02 ST2 bikes and all '99-'0....'00 or '01 ST4 bikes (before the ST4s came out). The ST4s has the aluminum swingarm.....I don't know any of the details of the ST3 models, though.
These would seem to be the correct chain guides (from an '00 ST2 with steel swingarm):
44710301A upper
44710311A lower
The parts diagram shows the bolts on the opposite sides compared to mine, so that makes sense with respect to the offset. Currently my chain nearly rubs my aftermarket rear hugger, which I guess is technically made for a 5.5" rim, so more offset in the outboard direction should put the chain in the middle of the opening/passage where this hugger expects it to be.
How do you handle the front sprocket? Just flip it around and shim under the retainer as required to get correct front/rear alignment? No case clearance issues with a 15t?
BK
(http://i47.tinypic.com/25u73tf.jpg)
Exactly. Fornt sprocket gets flipped to provide proper offset. Check chain alignment before assuming that is all you need to do.
One thought that comes to mind (since you have a track bike)
Why change to a wider wheel at all on the rear?
What's wrong with a 160 tire?
If you're spending money on trick wheels to get that weight reduction, why back slide by going to a bigger wheel and tire (and adding weight)
Plenty of heat can be brought by a rider with a 160 rear. . .
One answer is that aftermarket wheels for Ducatis are only found w/a 5.5" rear width or wider (5.75" or 6"). The aftermarket hasn't done 4.5" wheels to my knowledge (please someone prove me wrong...).
Oh.
Well then. . .
Quote from: Duck-Stew on February 06, 2010, 07:17:08 AM
One answer is that aftermarket wheels for Ducatis are only found w/a 5.5" rear width or wider (5.75" or 6"). The aftermarket hasn't done 4.5" wheels to my knowledge (please someone prove me wrong...).
Exactly. I have no issue with a 160 on the M695, but I don't want to put one on a 5.5" rim. I just want to add lightness.
BK
Hmmm. . .
add lightness. . .
is that like military intelligence?
;D
Point taken though.
I spoke w/Carrozzeria a couple years ago about custom doing some 4.5" rear wheels for Ducati's and he was receptive to the idea but my then-customer backed out so it never went any further...
Quote from: Duck-Stew on February 06, 2010, 04:04:58 PM
I spoke w/Carrozzeria a couple years ago about custom doing some 4.5" rear wheels for Ducati's and he was receptive to the idea but my then-customer backed out so it never went any further...
so they would be willing?
Seemed like he would and I am a dealer for Carrozzeria wheels... I have the email somewhere.
If there's serious interest, I'll run it by him again. Best part for me is that they're local. 8)
thanks, will be putting that on the list when i'm ready. i don't want to go up to 180's either. seems the extra weight and turn in effort completely defeats the point of the lightweight 'addition'
Are the Alpina Tubeless Spoked Wheels available at Monster Parts available in the 4.5 width?
Does anyone know what they weigh relative to stock wheels?
I have some here in the 5.5" width and they're definitely heavier than a stock cast aluminum 3 or 5 spoke Ducati wheel.
Wow, heavier than the stock wheels on the lower end bikes with the 4.5 rear like the 620? Very disappointing.
It's been a few years, but the trick lightweight 4.5x17 rim was from the racing Aprilia RS250. Somewhere there was a lightweight FZR400 rim available from the aftermarket as well. I've seen these latter adapted to M750's for racing. (guy did the swap as the Japanese bike lightweight wheels were cheap in comparison to Ducati direct swap items) Same type of swap as putting Honda CBR600RR wheels on a Ducati that is posted elsewhere.
(Stuart -- maybe a kit with all the parts to make easy swap kits for folks? There are some cool non-Ducati rims that would look good on a Monster and some are 6.5in wide rear!)
Quote from: MotoCreations on February 07, 2010, 08:10:20 PM
It's been a few years, but the trick lightweight 4.5x17 rim was from the racing Aprilia RS250. Somewhere there was a lightweight FZR400 rim available from the aftermarket as well. I've seen these latter adapted to M750's for racing. (guy did the swap as the Japanese bike lightweight wheels were cheap in comparison to Ducati direct swap items) Same type of swap as putting Honda CBR600RR wheels on a Ducati that is posted elsewhere.
(Stuart -- maybe a kit with all the parts to make easy swap kits for folks? There are some cool non-Ducati rims that would look good on a Monster and some are 6.5in wide rear!)
hmmm OZ is making some killer rims for the 250's (more things that make me go hmmm )
So "about to pull the trigger" stretched to about 6 months...the whole tire size issue really damped my enthusiasm...but eventually I caved in after realizing that a new bike is probably not in the cards this year.
Here's a tease pic. Ordered from MW yesterday, and had the wheels less than 24hrs later.
Now I need to settle on some rubber. It'll be 170/60 with either 120/60 or 120/65 front. LOTS more choices with the 120/60 size. Did the math calculations and the differences in radii are quite small.
Been real happy with Pilot Power 2CT. Also considering BT-016, Rosso, M3 and Sportmax Q2. Any opinions?
BK
(http://i31.tinypic.com/noye6p.jpg)
Powers.
I run 70 series for added rim protection, but you can run any size you want. ;D
Ordered the parts in quoted text below and received them today. Holes are in the wrong place!
Seems the part number for the upper has been updated, but the lower is the same one that I ordered:
44710302A upper (listed as 1000 M/03 on label)
44710311A lower (listed as ST2-ST4/02 on label)
Somehow I screwed up. Anyone have a part number that'll work for me, ie steel DSS sliders compatible with 5.5" wheels?
Plan B is to modify the existing M695 slider. Any tips/pitfalls on that?
BK
Quote from: BK_856er on February 04, 2010, 09:24:58 PM
These would seem to be the correct chain guides (from an '00 ST2 with steel swingarm):
44710301A upper
44710311A lower
The parts diagram shows the bolts on the opposite sides compared to mine, so that makes sense with respect to the offset. Currently my chain nearly rubs my aftermarket rear hugger, which I guess is technically made for a 5.5" rim, so more offset in the outboard direction should put the chain in the middle of the opening/passage where this hugger expects it to be.
How do you handle the front sprocket? Just flip it around and shim under the retainer as required to get correct front/rear alignment? No case clearance issues with a 15t?
BK
(http://i47.tinypic.com/25u73tf.jpg)
Wheel are mostly on! Everything bolted up no problem. More details on measurements later.
Flipped the front sprocket around. Clearance near the clutch slave is tighter.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/oqf4vs.jpg)
Sighting down the sprockets looks good. Quick check with my Profi laser tool shows perfect alignment all the way to the front sprocket.
(http://i38.tinypic.com/2dind5s.jpg)
Took a box cutter to the ridge on the upper slider, then made it perfectly smooth with a dremel. Polished it up with some sandpaper. Coverage looks decent, about half in the rear and maybe one-third in the front. It'll do for now. The ST2 sliders I bought actually WILL WORK PERFECTLY. But I will need to drill two new holes. Is a rivnut really required, or can I just tap a hole for an M6 bolt??
(http://i35.tinypic.com/2197x8j.jpg)
Looking pretty darn good! I still need to fine-tune the rear alignment and take a few more measurements before the first ride.
(http://i36.tinypic.com/103vcj9.jpg)
BK
Mission accomplished! Here's a first ride report. For various reasons I decided to go with 120/70 and 180/55 Pilot Pures as the first set of rubber. Measured circumference/radii were VERY similar to my previous 120/60 160/60 2CT tires, so no significant change to geometry. Less "fall into the turn" sensation than the 2CT, but very precise and linear. No negative consequences so far to the larger tire size - still feels like a nimble little monster. Brakes definitely bite harder and the bike scoots better with hard throttle. Overall greater level of responsiveness for sure, which is exactly what lighter wheels promise. Maybe it was just the virgin rubber, but the back end got a bit squirly on some downshifts (wet type slipper clutch) and driving out of one particular turn I got an unexpected little rear slide. I'll need to be a bit more careful with this new responsiveness. The Nichols flywheel likely contributes there. The modified chain slider worked perfectly - thanks, Duck-Stew!. I didn't get good weight measurements due to an untrusty scale, but with rotors/tires/sprockets installed the front "felt" similar and the rear was substantially lighter than what I was running before. A bonus on the 120/70 front tire is that it is far more compliant than my previous 120/60 size, so that finally helps solve a long running issue I've had with my Matris forks. Overall I'm pleased with the outcome, but I still would have preferred to stay with a 4.5" rear wheel. I will say tha the OZ wheels are superbly designed and manufactured - a real first class item.
BK
I was poking around Carrozzeria's site and noticed they have sets for motards as well which have 5" rear wheels (no 4.5 available).
Emailed them about it and a nice guy name Craig quickly answered and told me they could provide me with a set for my '01 M750 for about 18 houndred $. Time to start saving ;)
Quote from: BK_856er on July 30, 2010, 06:32:12 PM
Been real happy with Pilot Power 2CT. Also considering BT-016, Rosso, M3 and Sportmax Q2. Any opinions?
BK
(http://i31.tinypic.com/noye6p.jpg)
i just bought oz's too for my Dss and trying to decide what tire to run. the pilot power 2ct or bt-016. i heard the bt-016 are about 3 pounds lighter for the set compared to the pp 2ct's. i like the multiple compound bt016.
Quote from: Düb Lüv on August 17, 2010, 12:26:57 PM
i just bought oz's too for my Dss and trying to decide what tire to run. the pilot power 2ct or bt-016. i heard the bt-016 are about 3 pounds lighter for the set compared to the pp 2ct's. i like the multiple compound bt016.
Lots of good tire options out there. 3lbs/set is a lot, and at the most important physical location. I find it annoying that the MC tire industry does not publish meaningful specifications. How hard could it be to list weights and installed diameters for all sizes? The specs are not the only consideration, but they are important. Let us know what you go with. I'm enjoying the Pures so far.
BK
perelli publishes theirs.
http://www.us.pirelli.com/en_US/brow...LI_FULL_07.pdf (http://www.us.pirelli.com/en_US/brow...LI_FULL_07.pdf)
here's an interesting thread.
http://www.ducati.ms/forums/showthread.php?t=29854 (http://www.ducati.ms/forums/showthread.php?t=29854)
Quote from: mrEnke on August 17, 2010, 12:03:48 PM
I was poking around Carrozzeria's site and noticed they have sets for motards as well which have 5" rear wheels (no 4.5 available).
Emailed them about it and a nice guy name Craig quickly answered and told me they could provide me with a set for my '01 M750 for about 18 houndred $. Time to start saving ;)
I have no regrets on my new 5.5" wheel, but having said that I still believe that the world needs more lightweight narrow wheel options!
BK
Quote from: Düb Lüv on August 17, 2010, 01:06:07 PM
perelli publishes theirs.
http://www.us.pirelli.com/en_US/brow...LI_FULL_07.pdf (http://www.us.pirelli.com/en_US/brow...LI_FULL_07.pdf)
here's an interesting thread.
http://www.ducati.ms/forums/showthread.php?t=29854 (http://www.ducati.ms/forums/showthread.php?t=29854)
If only all them would follow pirelli's example...
Interesting comparo of the 2ct and bt016 weights in the second link.
BK
Caught some OZ wheels at the Brno 125cc motogp race. Talk about skinny, light wheels! Anyone know the width on these? Looks like about 2" on the rear??
BK
(http://i35.tinypic.com/2h3pffl.jpg)
i believe it's probably their 3.5in magnesium wheel.
http://www.ozmotorbike.com/ (http://www.ozmotorbike.com/)
Quote from: Düb Lüv on August 19, 2010, 12:38:51 PM
i believe it's probably their 3.5in magnesium wheel.
http://www.ozmotorbike.com/ (http://www.ozmotorbike.com/)
Good catch: 6 spokes = magnesium, 5 spokes = aluminum.
Although I'm sure at that level pretty much anything is possible.
BK
can't imagine how much magnesium OZ's are. probably make a fool out of mag marchesini's