620cc 2004 - Anyone try rear tire higher than recommended size

ab · September 27, 2011, 04:31:49 PM

I was wondering if anyone tried to put a higher size rear tire on a 620cc monster ? Would there be clearance from the rear fender? What size would fit other than the 160.

I believe the stock size is
Front Tire (Full Spec) 120/60 ZR17
Rear Tire (Full Spec) 160/60 ZR17

polivo · September 27, 2011, 07:41:55 PM

if i knew, id help ya. I do know is that your probably gonna get a bunch of remarks about why? why? why? personally, im thinking of doing the same. ihave been considering 190 rear on my m1100 for months now.

Howie · September 27, 2011, 10:02:28 PM

You will also need a wider wheel on that 620. Handling will not be improved. put the money elsewhere, like suspension.

Kev M · September 28, 2011, 06:25:34 AM

Quote from: howie on September 27, 2011, 10:02:28 PM
Handling will not be improved. put the money elsewhere, like suspension.

+1 Brazilian

Duc Buz · September 28, 2011, 08:29:38 AM

Ran a 170 (Got a good deal on a tire good tire) on the stock rim for about 3K miles (Nail), was not a huge difference but turning and leaning were different, good or bad , not really just different. I am currently back on a 160.

A wider rim, and alot wider tire is something I have not tried but I would give it a shot. Gonna be heavier so may not be a good idea. Already the 620 monster is not very powerful so adding weight is detrimental.

Handling will probably be affected but it could probably be worked out by raising/lowering the front or rear, as well as a good suspension setup.

zarn02 · September 28, 2011, 01:26:42 PM

What I've always heard is that throwing a wider rear tire on the 620 conveys no functional benefits and makes handling slower. Having not owned a 620 I can't speak from experience, but that's the party line.

ab · September 28, 2011, 03:26:03 PM

Thanks for your input everyone. Just curious about the 170 tire on her. Was curious if the 170 benefit on the twisty rides or not. Was not sure if the rear-fender clearance?
Zarn02 - was clearance an issue on the rear-fender ?

Quote from: howie on September 27, 2011, 10:02:28 PM
You will also need a wider wheel on that 620. Handling will not be improved. put the money elsewhere, like suspension.

I have adjustable Penske Suspension on her. (Honestly, I wish I put that money on my S3)

zarn02 · September 28, 2011, 07:03:20 PM

Quote from: ab on September 28, 2011, 03:26:03 PM
Zarn02 - was clearance an issue on the rear-fender ?

I don't really remember if there were clearance issues with a 170. I think you ran into issues trying to go to a 180, but I don't remember well enough to swear to anything.

ungeheuer · September 29, 2011, 12:27:28 AM

Quote from: ab on September 28, 2011, 03:26:03 PMWas curious if the 170 benefit on the twisty rides or not.

Not. A fatter rear tyre will just make turn-in a little slower.

EEL · September 29, 2011, 06:35:44 AM

All you'll get with the 170 is a heavier bike and one thats harder to turn. Larger tires are only installed to two reasons

1) To provide a large contact patch when a bike has loads of power to offer. (620 doesnt qualify for that one)

2) To look cool when posing.

BK_856er · September 29, 2011, 12:21:19 PM

Quote from: EEL on September 29, 2011, 06:35:44 AM
All you'll get with the 170 is a heavier bike and one thats harder to turn. Larger tires are only installed to two reasons

1) To provide a large contact patch when a bike has loads of power to offer. (620 doesnt qualify for that one)

2) To look cool when posing.

and...

3) To accommodate aftermarket wheels that are usually only available in 5.5" width (or more).

A heavy 160 tire can be comparable in weight to some wider 170/180 tires, so tire selection is a big part of the weight equation. And the tire weight is where it matters most...unsprung/rotating/outer perimeter.

But I agree that 160 is usually the best choice for the little monsters with 4.5" rims.

BK

Kev M · September 29, 2011, 01:29:54 PM

Somewhat apples-and-oranges - but on one of my current Guzzis and on our current Harley we took the rear tires (granted they are bia-ply's in both cases) DOWN 10mm in width to improve handling.

The Jackal to a 130 from a 140

The Harley to a 140 from a 150

Duc Buz · September 30, 2011, 09:56:02 AM

3) To accommodate aftermarket wheels that are usually only available in 5.5" width (or more).

A heavy 160 tire can be comparable in weight to some wider 170/180 tires, so tire selection is a big part of the weight equation. And the tire weight is where it matters most...unsprung/rotating/outer perimeter.

But I agree that 160 is usually the best choice for the little monsters with 4.5" rims.

BK
[/quote]

^
Yes
The 170 I ran was actually a bit lighter than the 160 I have now. A lighter than stock wheel in a 5.5 and a good tire will not be much if at all heavier than what you have now. I do not have a rear mudguard so don't know about clearances.

camatt29 · September 30, 2011, 09:02:10 PM

i have a 620 i run a 170 and im almost certain u could squeeze in a 180 but in my opinion the 170 feels fine and almost rides better than the 160 i started with. the tire seems slightly flatter in the center so on groovy pavement it dosnt throw you- my opinion

H-2 CHARLIE · October 01, 2011, 12:32:41 PM

I had a over sized rear before on a GPZ 600cc and it was bad on turns , really luged it carving turns ... im only running the OEM size ... IT WAS SO BAD IT PULLED YOU DOWN WHEN ON CORNERS

News:

620cc 2004 - Anyone try rear tire higher than recommended size