tyre sizes vs handling? (mine arnt the same)

i have a 26x1.75 road/slick tyre on the front wheel and a 26x2.2 road/slick on the rear hub motor.
both rims are aproximately the same width. i fill both to around 50psi.

motor is a 1000w hub run on a 72v 1500w controller.

my reasoning was...fatter tyre on hub motor to protect the rim from its extra weight, and thinner tyre on the front as the sidewall flex from a 26x2.2 felt "not good" when cornering.

i have no complaints about my current setup (or ive gotten used to its badness) but im wondering what negatives there are to a skinny front and fatter rear tyre?

would i be better off with both as 26x1.95 or 26x2.1?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/312894845323?hash=item48d9fc718b:g:TrIAAOSw8A1d-RXS ive seen these vandorms on ebay, any good?

jimmyhackers said:

i have no complaints about my current setup (or ive gotten used to its badness) but im wondering what negatives there are to a skinny front and fatter rear tyre?

Click to expand...

Many motorcycles do exactly that. They may even use smaller diameter rear than front.

If it works for you, and doesnt' create any problems...why change it?

If you have a specific problem with it you need to solve, then I would define the problem as exactly as possible, so a solution to that can be found.

both tyres have been on the bike for about 5 years now and are getting to the end of their life tread wise.
im just wondering about my "options" for replacements.

its really a bicycle thats been made into a hodgepodge "motorcycle" and most bicycles use matching front and rear tyres, but as you pointed out, motorcycles do mismatch front and rear. hence my confusion/asking.

the front tyre was the only other slick i had at the time and its always felt a bit.....too skinny. The ride is somewhat harsh on bumps/potholes. I havent damaged the rim yet but my mechanical sympathy alarm goes off over every pothole.

as for the rear, i still have an exact unused 2.2 replacement....looks/feels fine but its over 5yrs old. how old is too old?
im wondering if my concerns about protecting my rear hub motor rim with a fatter tyre are valid, what is too skinny?

basically, the front feels too skinny and the rear could beneift from less sidewall flex.

my thoughts are to go for either matching 1.95 front and rear. or 1.95 front, 2.1 rear.

It's normal to use a bigger tire on the wheel that bears more weight. It's also normal for some bikes to use a bigger tire on the front for improved traction and shock absorption.

Tires get harder with age, but 5 years isn't old enough to present a problem. I have some tires on my bikes that are 15-20 years old, and I probably won't replace them until they show cracks. They work fine, although I don't ask much of them.

Motorcycle: Streetbike: Same size front and rear, you iwill go fastest on 17" rims ... thin and aerodynamic front, quick to o turn low inertia... , very verystrong to take conerting side loading forces. Wide fat rear for stabiliyty

Motorcycle: Dirtbike: Wide fat rear, for stability. Agile thinner front, often larger dia than rear for stability over obstacles.

Bicycle: Same size front and rear, larger on streetbikes, smaller on off road bikes, its the going trend. Typically same size F to R. ( Some go larger in the front, a " mullet" tire setup).

best choice depends on applications. Tire compositions are a whole nother world.

Tires get old, they lost their stiffness, the spring, the strong... they become floppy carcasses. A junk tire offers no performance. Do not look for performance with a floppy, tired, old, five year old chunk of rubber that rolled for years and oxidized for years inside and out.

New rubber is good. I hear they replace rubber often in high performance situations... ( racing )...

i aint spellchecking... its to cold.

i went for a single 1.95 vandorm wind on the front. it came in less than 3 days.

seems ok after the first ride, fronts less harsh on bumps and i havnt noticed a detriment to the tyrewall side flex during cornering.

the steering characteristics have changed a little....but i cant exactly put my finger on it, its like the two tyres are closer to the same profile/flex so they dont seem to be fighting each other as much. or there isnt as much of a discrepancy between the two.

i only got one tyre to gauge the size in person, and i think a 1.95 would still be a little too skinny on the rear, im going to grab a 2.1 of the same make/pattern for the rear and see how it goes.