Kawasaki Ninja 1000 Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm getting close to needing to replace my OEM tires, and am considering the 55" rear that a lot of people have used. My concern is the height. I'm 5'7" and already not able to flat foot this bike with both feet with stock sized tires, and I'm not sure I could handle this bike as well if it gets any taller. Please give me some feedback on whether the difference in height is significant or noticeable.
thanks,
Adam
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
545 Posts
what exactly is the 55" rear?
A 190/55 size rear tire as opposed to the stock 190/50 size. Improves handling significantly.

I don't think you'd notice either athenstiger.... Once you go to a 55 you'll never go back. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
slight increase in seat height but not enough to make a differance, much improved handling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
468 Posts
This was one of my considerations too before I switched to a 55 rear tire. We're the same height, I cam definitely feel the taller seat but it's not a life altering change as far as putting your foot down when stopped. I little adjustment in your body positioning and you're good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
I'm 5'6" with a 30 inseam, I went with 180/55 PP3's which gives you the same height in a 55 profile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
828 Posts
Keep in mind that only the rear is rising a small amount and at the axle. That translates into less lift at the seat.

As for the 180/55, if it is the same height as the stock, you are losing some of the benefit of the taller rear which quickens the steering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,106 Posts
According to the tire size calculator, the diameter would go up by 0.7". So, the rear should only raise by 0.35" and the seat less than that. If it's less than 1cm at the axle, I can't imagine it being very noticeable at the seat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
According to the tire size calculator, the diameter would go up by 0.7". So, the rear should only raise by 0.35" and the seat less than that. If it's less than 1cm at the axle, I can't imagine it being very noticeable at the seat.
This is admirable geometrical logic. Thank you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Stock Bridgestone S20's lasted 3800 miles, total crap. Went with Michelin Road Pilot 4's. 190/55/17 rear vs. the 50 rear. I have 8000+ miles on the tires, much better traction and handling than the OEM tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
A 190/55 size rear tire as opposed to the stock 190/50 size. Improves handling significantly.

I don't think you'd notice either athenstiger.... Once you go to a 55 you'll never go back. :p
Sounds good I will keep this in mind when I change my OEM tires this summer, got 8000km on them and their still in ok shape but dont think they will last more than another 2000 km..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
551 Posts
Are you a new or somewhat-new rider? I ask because I usually see questions about flat-footing from new or new-ish riders. And I mean no offense by that either, we all were new at one point! Anyways, all you really need is to be able to get one foot down. On my WR250R for example, I can only get one foot down, and it's by my toes, not even the whole foot. As long as your low speed maneuvering is up to snuff, then only one foot is ever really needed. Sure, it can make moving the bike around in neutral while in the seat a pain, but other than that there should be no issue.

And no, you'd be hard pressed to notice the height difference with a 55 profile tire. I've sat on a stock with the 50, and of course the one I bought with a 55 on it. I didn't notice a difference in height.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top