Well per my new guy listing, I have finally put on a Michelin Powersport 200/55 zr 17. Will answer some questions some may have about it fitting - off came the old Bridgestone Exedra Max 200/50 zr 17, so width wise there are no issues. actually the Michelin appears narrower than the 200 Exedra! the profile certainly is higher, the entire tire sits a good 1.5 inches taller than the worn 200/50. Definitely will improve lean in, as it was a very flat profile previously. Some guys for sport touring may not like this, or think it is a smaller contact patch; it may be a tiny bit smaller, but handling will definitely improve with lean in and lean angle. I have a souped up R1 so I like to take the turns steep.

Will take a few pictures tonight when I get the tire home and on the bike again.

Cool! Lookin' forward to the pics.

My question is still whether a 200/55 tire will fit under my Puig hugger. zx14rider345 messaged me "approx 26", but I suspect it's gonna be so close that I'd prefer to try to know for sure before ordering.

Without even putting the tire on the rim, I had a little concern about a 200/55's fit on a bike that was designed for a 190/55. I think it will be fine but a hugger might need some modification to work with it.

I know there are differences between manufactures but just doing the math on the 2 tire sizes the 200/55 is only 6mm taller? Divide that by half only putting the tire 3mm closer to hard parts? The 200/55 on the stock 14 wheel is probably going to contribute to the tire being taller also by bringing the sidewalls in.

Lookin forward to some ride reports. And pics.

* Last updated by: david5525 on 3/17/2016 @ 6:13 AM *

Here are the old vs new pics. Sorry I will get it out of the garage and take a better profile picture of it from a distance but for now this shows the tire. I really do not believe that it is as big a deal as thought for the 200 width. It fit no issues whatsoever on the rim, and there is really no "squeezing" to speak of... as a matter of fact I measured the width on a Metzler spare 190/50 r17 tire vs this one, and the difference in mounting difference is a couple mm's... plus as said the old Exedra tire was a 200/50 anyways, and it was also about 2 mm wider on each side when looking at the chain guard and where it sits compared to the old tire.

fills the back end much nicer... this is a track tire, so the profile is more rounded for quicker drop in during turns. The profile height is nearly 2inches higher than the old 200/50 which was worn down but still noticeable. This raises up the back end almost 1 inch, I could feel it the moment I sat on it.

For me this is a good thing. I was shocked I started scraping a bit of metal on a fast sweeper a few days ago so I am happy to have greater ride height. This has lowering links, and the set up was with lowering links on the longest (lowest) setting. Previous owner obviously did not care to turn so much. I understand for "drag" lower is better, but for using this bike as it was meant to be used, fast everywhere, I want more height... I do have a track-able Street R1, so that is my bias anyways. Plus after I get this tire out for a ride day, my plan this weekend is to raise the rear "up" one hole, so I can actually get my knee down a bit rather than this bike turning like a cruiser...

My best recommendation is go with what a tire that you want, do not worry about reduced patch etc unless you are using that last 2% of the bike performance. For touring, go with a good sport-touring - for fast straight or drag, slam it and go with a stock or even 200/50. For the twisties and track or fast turns there is absolutely no issue whatsoever going with a 200/55, especially one on sale!

as for losing torque, yes you will lose some due to it being a taller tire... however my bike is already -1 and + 3 on the sprockets so it is already significantly geared lower. A bit higher gearing with the taller tire will be hardly noticeable, will pick up an additional 3-4 mph at cruise speeds for the same rpm.

* Last updated by: Jkden on 3/17/2016 @ 1:51 PM *

PS per discussions about tire huggers, I do not know but I think it may scrape. Mine does not have one due the 9 inch extension and Big 'ol Nitrous bottle siting there now! Looks much better than a tire hugger..

Anyways, if you put in some spacers or stack washers under the hugger, you may be able to fit the stock hugger over a 200/55. As said it would be almost 1 inch higher radius than my old 200/50, and almost 1.5 inches higher with a 200/55 vs the stock 190/50.

Thanks Jkden - Yep, sounds too tight to fit as-is, and I don't think I'm interested in spacing the hugger up off the swingarm. Sounds a little too, uh, backyard engineered.

Thanks, david.

Someday I'm going to make a fiberglass hugger that fits a taller tire. It looks like you could make how close it fits to the tire adjustable by sliding the hugger forward or back. Horizontal screw slots instead of holes might be the answer.

Had it for a little spin, she definitely has far more grip than the harder sport touring Exedra! No issues whatsoever with what may be a "smaller" contact patch, and as said pinching is minimal to non-existent. If there is, a wider tire, even if taller, will still have almost an identical patch-size due to it being a slightly wider tire to begin with. If indeed the contact patch is smaller, it is so small as not to affect performance or grip. I am much more confident in the turn now with this tire, not so much worried it will slide out on cooler temperatures. Lean in is far better, and MUCH better drop in feel on turns. I like that!

I will be eventually replacing the PP4 sport touring tire with another PP Power Sport. Then I will not be afraid to drop my knee down as much (after raising the adjustable links 1 notch for a bit more ride height). Reducing ride height on the back end reduces stability due to increased trail on the front end; the taller tire helps reduce trail which REDUCES stability and increases how quickly it drops into a turn. "tire pinching" (which is barely a factor from a 190 t0 a 200 width, IMHO now that I have had two 200 width tires on my bike) is not a noticeable factor here, it being so small to begin with. At most you are only talking about 10 mm on the widest part of the tire, and you also need to remember that a 200 tire vs a 190 tire, the inside width as per the manufacturers, is meant to fit a majority of rim-widths in the industry. The standard rim width on most litrebikes is 6", so the 200 tire is designed to fit this by the manufacturer.

I get the bike looks cooler with a slammed back end, but your maneuverability is reduced due to increase trail on the front end. (Being a convert from a cruiser into sport bikes, well, I will not go back to the lazy steering feel of a cruiser again). With the ride height being dropped due to lowering links, raising my back with a taller tire, only gets it more back to normal of the geometry of the original set-up.

The trick to grip is not so much the contact patch, but the tire itself. With all the multi-compounds, the tire softness is still the greatest factor in grip. You want to sport-tour then go with a harder tire for longevity. You want to drag, then go with a Shinko super-soft drag tire and replace it every 10 runs! You want to use this as a hyper-bike, then go with a softer track-street tire, plain and simple, and accept it will not last as long - I think sometimes everyone overthinks tires too much...

As for the hugger, I do not think it has to look backyard, you are really only raising it, and the only thing you may notice is that the bottom of the hugger is raised off the swingarm. I did this on my R1 hugger by a couple washer-widths to make sure I fit the 190/55 tire and you do not see the washers - plus after final adjustments where it needs to fit, the clearance was similar to the 190/50.

So in short, do what you want but for me, no issues whatsoever to mounting a 200/55 and only gains to every aspect of handing.

* Last updated by: Jkden on 3/18/2016 @ 12:27 PM *

[img]

2 pics from ride, I am liking the size for sure, see last post for the update with the 200/55. Hope it can be of some use for your decision...

* Last updated by: Jkden on 3/19/2016 @ 10:04 PM *

That's a big ol' chunky tire! Lookin' good. Thanks for all the info and pics.

That looks great!

For what it's worth, I just installed a new set of Michelin Power 5s on my 14R, with the 200/55/17 on rear. I have been running Pilot Power 3s (190/55/17) repeatedly. I really enjoyed the quicker turn in with the 55 series tire given the increased height and tire profile. The Power 5s with 200/55/17 only increases those characteristics. Taller in rear. Quicker turn in (a lot quicker and easier) and way more meat on the side of the tire. I also ride the 14R more like a 600 and will shred the sides more than the center. If you're that kind of rider, I can't recommend enough! Here is my riding style for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyPjL4Qglvk

Nice!

... and it just dawned on me: It's very common in vehicles to orient gauges so the 'normal' reading is straight up ... engine temp, straight up ... volts, straight up ... On the ZX14R's speedo straight up is 110 mph. Obviously, that's the normal speed the vehicle should be operated at

Welcome fellow rider of the Pacific North West. Started watching video and thought, that looks familiar and that looks familiar. Then looked down and saw the Brendan riding around the PNW. I went to the 200/55 couple years ago running track days on my 14. Definitely makes the bike feel more agile.

Dave

Any downsides to the 200/55? Squirrely on straights / highway?

I need new tires soon. They have the dreaded Florida Flats spots along the middle. Sides are looking good not enough trips to NC.

I started off running the Dunlop Q3s at the track and on the road. I really liked how the bike handled. Was averaging 3-3.5K miles out of them. Similar wear to the Michelin PP2s I used to run on road. Then switched to Pirelli Diablo RossoCorsa SC2. More expensive but they do feel solid and planted in the corners. Haven't noticed any issues with either of the taller tires on the straits or highways. Even without steering dampener my bike is stable at speed.

Dave

The only downsides I noticed to the 200/55/17 are:
- Added unsprung weight. The rear feels heavier. Slight, but noticeable.
- Side to side transitions take a bit more effort. While the taller tire wants to lean in easier and stay in the turn with tons of traction and stability, flickability becomes more of a chore. The bike seemingly wants to stay in the turn.

Other than that, the positives outweigh the negatives.

and it just dawned on me: It's very common in vehicles to orient gauges so the 'normal' reading is straight up ... engine temp, straight up ... volts, straight up ... On the ZX14R's speedo straight up is 110 mph. Obviously, that's the normal speed the vehicle should be operated

The only reason I'd go back to a 190/50 would be to compare it to the 190/55s and 200/55s I've been using for the last 9 years. I liked the 190/55 so much better and I agree, the 200/55 is a little step better. I never went back to a 190/55. I don't wear my sides out before the middle but one of these taller tires seems to stay rouned longer rather than flattening off severely in the center. I corner as hard and as often as I can and the 200/55s don't look terribly squared off by the time I change them.

Last week I mounted a Dunlop RoadSmart II 200/55/17 and on my first ride I immediately noticed that my off the line performance decreased. Since the Dunlop (18lbs.) is approximately 8 pounds heavier than my previously mounted Michelin Angel GT II @ 10lbs.(190/50/17), the additional unsprung rotating weight definitely hurts performance. The tip in was much better than the 190/50 series, however, since I'm not a twisty road rider I plan to go back to my old tried and true Michelin Angel GT 190/50 series tire as soon as I can find one. Performance over looks!