I have tried the skinny TM II's and the wide ones havent noticed any difference at all. Im going back to the wider one though.

 

tires are sized by width/section height (in percentage of width)/and finally rim size. so a 110/90 is taller than a 110/80, duh. but also a 120/90 is taller than a 110/90, because the width has changed, and so has the section profile with that. if you want lower gearing, try a 110/80(worn out, felt like i had a 13t cs on), for taller, 120/90 or even 130/90 will do just that (did 90 with 130/90).

 

http://www.denniskirk.com/jsp/tpl/ti...izeexplain.jsp

 

Wider = taller???????? huh?



I just got new skins on my cycle today. I went from a 120/100 on the back to a 4.60, which should be about a 110/100. And if anything, this tire seems taller, not because it really is, but because its rounder when installed and inflated, making it appear taller. my 120/100 was flatter.

 

ems's link explains it better than me. im terrable at putting things to words some times.

 

OK, I'll check that out. Thanks

Just looked...

Its because the width and aspect ratio intrude on each others terriroty, thats why........thats effin stupid. No wonder I didn't get it. I thought width meant width...silly me.

I like the American system, its 4.5 inches wide, 18 inch rim. Which makes no sense in a metric cuz is 110/100 - 18. Mixing metric and American. Who the hell comes up with this ****?

 

Jason, if I understand the two tier metric system, width is width. That first number is the actual width in millimeters. The second number is the height of the tire measured by the percentage of the width. So my 100/100 rear TrakMaster is 100mm wide and 100mm tall. A 120/90 tire would be 120mm wide and 108mm tall. At least this is the way I understand it. And frankly I've found the two tier metric system to be more consistent than the "inch" system. I've seen one tire in a 4.50 that was the equal of another's 5.25...and similar comparisons.

 

Good choice! Let us know how he likes the tires.

 

Thats because every tire is different and so is every rim. One rim might be narrower than another squinching the tire up, making it taller. It doesnt mean the wall is higher, it means the width is being squinched. That would be a personal outcome and should have no effect on shopping for tires because if the tire is applied properly, it should be X tall and X wide. Also, side treads may also lead to width confusion, but a tread is not the tire, its tread, so you can't look at that either. I just don't see whats so hard about it.

 

You guys wanna hear something that i think is really stupid. My father in law just got a suzuki boulevard C50T cruising bike.

Next to my KLR.


Ok its a suzuki right, jap bike. They also make a c90 and m108. The numbers are the motor size in cubic inches. Why in the hell does a metric bike have an american standard motor displacement????