richdeloup
100 W
Thanks John,
No wonder we are often confused (or I am), a comprehensive quick ref chart would be cool to have, maybe fork sizes should also be included?
19" Motorcycle Wheels vs 26" Bicycle Wheels (rim and tires)
- Thread starter GCinDC
- Start date
Thanks John,
No wonder we are often confused (or I am), a comprehensive quick ref chart would be cool to have, maybe fork sizes should also be included?
Rix
100 TW
richdeloup said:
The reason you are seeing some of us posting different widths for the same tire are the tires are mounted on different rims. I mic'd my 2.75-19 SR241 at 3.1 inches mounted on a 19x1.4 rim. However, Zombies mounted the same tire on a 19x2.15 size rim and the tires inflated wider to 3.3 inches. The Shinko Tire Manufacture claims the width of the 2.75-19 SR241 is 2.95 wide. They must be measuring the tire on a 19x1.20 wide rim because even with the tire not mounted or inflated, its 3 inches easily. The wider the rim, the more the tire flattens out on the tread, the narrower the rim, the more the tire is rounded and the narrower the width is.
Kent
1 kW
Well here are the three sisters-yes in the bedroom... 
Actually, I just received my new MXXUS laced in a 18-1.60 by Roadrash and since they were all loose and unmounted, I thought a good time to line them all up and see the differences.
Actually, they are alot closer than one may assume by the numbers. Actual heights are:
IRC 18"-2.50 23.5" in height
Heidenau 19"-2.25 24.0"
Deestone 19"-2.50 24.5"
So with my new setup of the 19-2.25 in the front and the 18-2.50 in the rear, there is only .5 inch difference in height between the two. I originally had a 19-2.50 in the front as well, but that tire developed a bump and since I had to replace it, I thought I would try one size narrower-and lighter.
View attachment 1
Visually, the 18-2.50 looks fatter than the 19-2.50 although they measured the same width wise, but, the 19" is on a 1.4 steel rim and the 18" is on a 1.6 steel rim so as was mentioned earlier, the wider rim pushes the tire out a bit more.
So here is a closeup of the tread pattern of the 18-2.50. It is a smooth street tread which should also be good in the wet. You don't need a big chunky knobby if your sticking to the street. My only concern is that since my set-up has a battery box on the front forks, there is extra weight up front which helps counterbalance the weight in the rear but makes for heavier slow speed handling.
We'll see if this new lighter set-up is worth the un-sprung weight savings.
That is once the snow is gone.
Actually, I just received my new MXXUS laced in a 18-1.60 by Roadrash and since they were all loose and unmounted, I thought a good time to line them all up and see the differences.
Actually, they are alot closer than one may assume by the numbers. Actual heights are:
IRC 18"-2.50 23.5" in height
Heidenau 19"-2.25 24.0"
Deestone 19"-2.50 24.5"
So with my new setup of the 19-2.25 in the front and the 18-2.50 in the rear, there is only .5 inch difference in height between the two. I originally had a 19-2.50 in the front as well, but that tire developed a bump and since I had to replace it, I thought I would try one size narrower-and lighter.
View attachment 1
Visually, the 18-2.50 looks fatter than the 19-2.50 although they measured the same width wise, but, the 19" is on a 1.4 steel rim and the 18" is on a 1.6 steel rim so as was mentioned earlier, the wider rim pushes the tire out a bit more.
So here is a closeup of the tread pattern of the 18-2.50. It is a smooth street tread which should also be good in the wet. You don't need a big chunky knobby if your sticking to the street. My only concern is that since my set-up has a battery box on the front forks, there is extra weight up front which helps counterbalance the weight in the rear but makes for heavier slow speed handling.
We'll see if this new lighter set-up is worth the un-sprung weight savings.
That is once the snow is gone.
richdeloup
100 W
I was looking at those IRC's but no source in Europe as far as I know?
Going to try at pair of these for street.
Going to try at pair of these for street.
adriftatsea
100 W
Kent said:
Nice collection of wheels. I'm digging the IRC the more I see it.
Kent said:
Ah, you guys are killing me with leaving out the widths in all these posts
. Can you break out the calipers again and get some measurements for the 'width chart' I'm trying to build?
Kent
1 kW
richdeloup said:
Nice tread patterns on those. Look like they will be good in the rain.
Heidenau are German made. Most of the others are made in Thailand-probably all in the same factory. How many moped tire manufacturers can there be in Thailand?
So what sizes are you considering-widths?
I had a closer look at the the IRC 18-2.50. This puppy is 4 ply and DOT rated. Here in the states that is a big deal.
I ran into this DOT bit on my first inspection. It turns out that tires 2.75 in width on up are considered motorcycle tires and and are usually DOT stamped.
Tires 2.50 in width are borderline and may or may not be DOT rated as they are considered moped tires and are not in your usual motorcycle size charts. Of course 2.25 and 2.0 are strictly moped tires and are not DOT rated.
So I am ending up with a collection of wheels and tires some of which are rated and some are not. But at my next inspection this spring, I can point out not only the new rubber, but also personal knowledge of the law as stated above.
Kent
1 kW
adriftatsea said:Kent said:
Nice collection of wheels. I'm digging the IRC the more I see it.
Kent said:
Ah, you guys are killing me with leaving out the widths in all these posts
Well since you asked about the three sisters...
It looks like actual width does vary a bit from stated factory width. Some of that can be attributed to inflation pressure and rim width as has been mentioned.
These tires were all at around 25 psi.
So the 19-2.25 is 2 and 3/16", on a 1.4" rim
the 19-2.50 is 2.5" on a 1.4" rim
the 18-250 is 2 and 7/8" on a 1.6" rim
So we can see from 1/16th up to an 1/8" difference from stated manufacturers width.
For those getting out the tape measure and are trying to figure out what fits, your chart will come in quite handy.
Many thanks!
Rix
100 TW
Very nice front wheel 100 volts, please post a pic when you get it mounted.
Rix
100 TW
Kent said:Well here are the three sisters-yes in the bedroom...
Actually, I just received my new MXXUS laced in a 18-1.60 by Roadrash and since they were all loose and unmounted, I thought a good time to line them all up and see the differences.
Actually, they are alot closer than one may assume by the numbers. Actual heights are:
IRC 18"-2.50 23.5" in height
Heidenau 19"-2.25 24.0"
Deestone 19"-2.50 24.5"
So with my new setup of the 19-2.25 in the front and the 18-2.50 in the rear, there is only .5 inch difference in height between the two. I originally had a 19-2.50 in the front as well, but that tire developed a bump and since I had to replace it, I thought I would try one size narrower-and lighter.
View attachment 1
Visually, the 18-2.50 looks fatter than the 19-2.50 although they measured the same width wise, but, the 19" is on a 1.4 steel rim and the 18" is on a 1.6 steel rim so as was mentioned earlier, the wider rim pushes the tire out a bit more.
So here is a closeup of the tread pattern of the 18-2.50. It is a smooth street tread which should also be good in the wet. You don't need a big chunky knobby if your sticking to the street. My only concern is that since my set-up has a battery box on the front forks, there is extra weight up front which helps counterbalance the weight in the rear but makes for heavier slow speed handling.
We'll see if this new lighter set-up is worth the un-sprung weight savings.
That is once the snow is gone.
Kent, have you had a chance to put the MXUS 3k through its paces yet?
Kent
1 kW
Kent said:adriftatsea said:Kent said:
Nice collection of wheels. I'm digging the IRC the more I see it.
Kent said:
Ah, you guys are killing me with leaving out the widths in all these posts
Well since you asked about the three sisters...
It looks like actual width does vary a bit from stated factory width. Some of that can be attributed to inflation pressure and rim width as has been mentioned.
These tires were all at around 25 psi.
So the 19-2.25 is 2 and 3/16", on a 1.4" rim
the 19-2.50 is 2.5" on a 1.4" rim
the 18-250 is 2 and 7/8" on a 1.6" rim
So we can see from 1/16th up to an 1/8" difference from stated manufacturers width.
For those getting out the tape measure and are trying to figure out what fits, your chart will come in quite handy.
Many thanks!
Following up on this, this shows why inflated width is important to consider when choosing rims/tires. It turns out that my 18-2.50 has about 1/16th clearance on both sides all do to the taper on the chainstays. That's why I didn't go for the popular 2.75 because that puppy is 3" + wide inflated.
Don't forget as one goes to smaller diameter wheels, it moves you closer to the hub and puts the tire in a part of the tapering chainstay which was not designed for that. They are designed for 26" wheels.
100 volts, nice xmas present! Now there's something that women have trouble getting their head around-why men want tires for xmas!
Kent
1 kW
No Rix, not yet. I just spent most of xmas day fiddling with washers trying for the best combo to get the wheel centered and get clearance for the brake caliper.
Right now its centered and I can get a piece of paper between the caliper and the hub.
I hope the bearings stay tight on this thing and don't get sloppy! I've got no room for any side play.
What do you guys think of making our rear tires tubeless? most of you probably heard people with bicycles doing this, but what about these motorcycle tires?
Maybe with a system like this. It will help reduce some weight also of those heavy motorcycle tubes.
Some other advantages.
Able to run tire flat if needed, I got a flat once on my shinko 241 tire and it sucked. With this you can ride slowly home I believe, or what other people said. You can almost ride the shinko 241 flat but not quite.
Easier to change tires by not having to deal with that annoying tube. It takes me so long to mount the shinko tires, last time I punctured the tube in two spots. I fixed only one hole and remounted only to find out that I punched two holes in the same spot. Took hours to get the tire on.
Easier flat repairs. Just use a plug! no more pulling tire off to fix a flat. Last flat took me over an hour to repair and I punctured the tube. Worst experience ever.
Tire supposedly feels better in the rear when running lower PSI because of not folding as easily
No pinch flats, even though this hasn't been a problem.
This tubeless system helps prevent the rim from bending, so less chance of a bent sidewall.
Seems to get great reviews from everybody. Some saying we are crazy for still using tubes.
So have I convinced anybody?
https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/p/864/19110/Nuetech-Tubliss-(Tubeless)-Tire-System
[youtube]nrNpccioeWI[/youtube]
Maybe with a system like this. It will help reduce some weight also of those heavy motorcycle tubes.
Some other advantages.
Able to run tire flat if needed, I got a flat once on my shinko 241 tire and it sucked. With this you can ride slowly home I believe, or what other people said. You can almost ride the shinko 241 flat but not quite.
Easier to change tires by not having to deal with that annoying tube. It takes me so long to mount the shinko tires, last time I punctured the tube in two spots. I fixed only one hole and remounted only to find out that I punched two holes in the same spot. Took hours to get the tire on.
Easier flat repairs. Just use a plug! no more pulling tire off to fix a flat. Last flat took me over an hour to repair and I punctured the tube. Worst experience ever.
Tire supposedly feels better in the rear when running lower PSI because of not folding as easily
No pinch flats, even though this hasn't been a problem.
This tubeless system helps prevent the rim from bending, so less chance of a bent sidewall.
Seems to get great reviews from everybody. Some saying we are crazy for still using tubes.
So have I convinced anybody?
https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/p/864/19110/Nuetech-Tubliss-(Tubeless)-Tire-System
[youtube]nrNpccioeWI[/youtube]
Rix
100 TW
I ran tubliss on my KTMs rear and loved it for the pinch free worry tire changes. Tubliss states that its up to 3 pounds less. I believe they are comparing weight differences with heavy duty big tubes that go on the rear. A friend of mine was running them on the front and rear. Couldn't tell much difference in the front and if there was a weight savings over stock, it was so minimal I didn't notice it. But in Enduro and GNCC races, quick flat repair is a must so the front was an awesome asset as well. All he carries are tire plugs and CO2 catridges for inflation. In that respects, this could be the answer for us ebikers out on the road for simple flat repairs. The other thing I am not sure of is if the unit can be mounted on narrow rims. All of Tubliss' rear wheel options are for 1.85 and 2.15 wide rims. I am sure it could work on a 1.4 or 1.6 wide rim, as the internal tubliss bladder is inflated to 110PSI and forces the bead of the tire to spread onto the bead of the rim. It acts like a bead lock that goes all the way around the entire rim. This is why tires can be rand down to 4 psi and ridden flat as the bead stays lock up.
I wish I hadn't seen this tubeless thing. Now it's stuck in my head, but luckily it's down the list 4 or 5 positions of radical things I want to try first... like getting a motorcycle license and getting my bike legally registered...and building a jig to saw my bike into thirds and making a battery tank.
Rix
100 TW
Guys, I don't think the tubliss option will be the answer for us. Go to TUbliss' Neutech Web site, and look how much that set up weighs. Cut and pasted below. I figured they were comparing the weight savings to a big rear heavy duty MC tube which can hit 5 pounds by itself, but the regular duty MC tubes I used don't quite hit the 1 pound mark on the BR scales.
PRODUCT DETAILS #333;} TUBLISSFITS RIM SIZEWEIGHT 18"18"x (1.85-2.15)1lb.13oz. INCLUDING rim lock 19"19"x (1.85-2.15)1lb.14oz. INCLUDING rim lock 21"21"x 1.6"1lb.12oz. INCLUDING rim lock - See more at: http://nuetech.com/tubliss/#sthash.Dyedi1d4.dpuf
PRODUCT DETAILS #333;} TUBLISSFITS RIM SIZEWEIGHT 18"18"x (1.85-2.15)1lb.13oz. INCLUDING rim lock 19"19"x (1.85-2.15)1lb.14oz. INCLUDING rim lock 21"21"x 1.6"1lb.12oz. INCLUDING rim lock - See more at: http://nuetech.com/tubliss/#sthash.Dyedi1d4.dpuf
crossbreak
1 MW
yep, i think there wont be much weight savings, too... since the tubles kit itself weights almost as much as a tube.
Still this is interesitng because of the the flat-repair thing. This seems a lot easier in the field. My father told me today that he reapired a flat years ago that was as large as ~7mm dia besides the highway just with a patch and a tire iron
he uses tubeless since decades and wouldn't even buy anything other
Still i did'nt convert to moto tire yet...still looking for an affordable aluminium rim in 1.40x19 here in europe but can't find any so i think about ordering from the US :/ anyway, the tubless thing would be something i would spend money on
edit: the tire i wanna get hands on is a heidenau k46 2.50x19" so i have no chance to get it tubless i guess (?)... there is no different tire i can buy here in europe that is 2.50x19 (i did not find any other one yet)
Still this is interesitng because of the the flat-repair thing. This seems a lot easier in the field. My father told me today that he reapired a flat years ago that was as large as ~7mm dia besides the highway just with a patch and a tire iron
he uses tubeless since decades and wouldn't even buy anything otherStill i did'nt convert to moto tire yet...still looking for an affordable aluminium rim in 1.40x19 here in europe but can't find any so i think about ordering from the US :/ anyway, the tubless thing would be something i would spend money on
edit: the tire i wanna get hands on is a heidenau k46 2.50x19" so i have no chance to get it tubless i guess (?)... there is no different tire i can buy here in europe that is 2.50x19 (i did not find any other one yet)
Dougt
100 mW
anybody know the effective spoke diameter for a pro-wheel 19x1.85 rim?
Rix
100 TW
Dougt said:
My 19x1.85 Excell Tegasko was 470mm. Not sure if that will be the same for the Prowheel 19x1.85. My 19x1.40 Prowheel is 477mm.
richdeloup
100 W
Ah, you guys are killing me with leaving out the widths in all these posts
richdeloup
100 W
Looking to get 2.5's but they arent road legal and having trouble finding a supply as race tyres and crazy expensive. May give them a miss as im a few mph short of the 200mph rating
chucho
1 kW
crossbreak said:
I am like you
If you find one please get in contact with me :wink:
Kent
1 kW
richdeloup said:
So for those of us here in the states, kindly tell us what the rating system is in europe that makes them "road legal" and when are they required? Are they inspected once mounted and if so, why?
Similar threads
