love2ride (Regular)  |
| Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:53 am |
| Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti |
It's the same with automobiles. The more power the vehicle has the wider the tires, lower performance numbers the smaller the tires.
Lower displacement bikes have always had smaller tires. Lower torque certainly requires smaller tires to turn.
|
|
|
Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear tire: — TwoFiftyR, Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:33 am -
nah...130mm rear is quite reasonable...120mm kicks tail! — klown, Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:18 am
-
I have MT75s which means a 120 rear tire. — Anthony, Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:34 pm
-
Re: I have MT75s which means a 120 rear tire. — TwoFiftyR, Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:03 pm
-
Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti — TwinJet, Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:48 am
-
Good ole FAQ answer it beautifully here ya go
— HotWheels, Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:31 am -
Re: Good ole FAQ answer it beautifully here ya go — TwoFiftyR, Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:42 pm
-
Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti — Unbridled Rage, Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:31 pm
-
Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti — love2ride, Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:53 am
-
Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti — EdCA, Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:46 am
-
Re: Is Wider better? 2008 250R's "Slim" 130/70-17" rear ti — jraice, Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:37 am