Ducati Monster Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I got a quick look at a 696 with what appeared to be about a 200 rear tire. I love the look of that and need to know what I have to do to put the widest rear tire I can on my 09 696 without spending an arm and/or leg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
I got a quick look at a 696 with what appeared to be about a 200 rear tire. I love the look of that and need to know what I have to do to put the widest rear tire I can on my 09 696 without spending an arm and/or leg
your going to get flamed for this question. for the record, i think its hot too. Im considering swapping to a 190 on the my m1100.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
The direct answer to your question is that you will need to fit a wider rim, and measure the clearances carefully so as not to interfere against the chain, swingarm, or brake components.

The wider (so-to-speak) answer is not a flame, but an admonishment. From a rational functional standpoint this is a bad idea. It will be detrimental to your handling and ride, and offer exactly zero advantage other than "style". Functionally, what you want on a bike is the *narrowest* tire that your engine won't overwhelm. For most 600SS bikes, Monsters, and other mid-powered bikes, that should really be a 160. My M900 came with a 180 tire, because Galluzzi (the designer) liked the way it looked. The M750 version came with a 160, and handled noticeably better for it. I have considered switching mine to a 160 sometimes, but I am told that the change from the stock 5.5" rim to the 4.5" required is a PITA.

PhilB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
There is a good thread about a 180 'upgrade' done to a 696. The poster says that handling is compromised, minimally, but I think that after doing all that work to fit a new wheel and tire, he may not be able to admit (to us and himself) the amount of lost handling.


If you want to do something really cool and different to a 696, why not change it over to a SSS. The swingarms are on ebay, as are the wheels. It is supposed to be a direct bolt on. With the new chain, and tire, you should easily be able to do it for under $1500
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Indeed. While I agree it does look a little skinny having a 160 on the back, I love how easily the 696 falls into corners and wouldn't want to change that characteristic.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
Most bikes have wheels/tires that are too wide in my opinion. Almost comical.
I fully agree. It's the current fashion.

My first-gen CBR600 had 110 front and 130 rear, and that was enough tire. Modern 600s are more powerful than that was, but only by about 25%, so a 160 is plenty of tire in real life for those.

The last couple weeks, I've been on an older bike, a 1987 BMW K100. Here again, I'm on a 600lb touring bike, 1000cc, and it has a 110 front and a 130 rear, and those are fine.

To me, putting fat tires on everything is the same as the ricers putting big exhausts and huge spoilers on economy cars. Sure, a very fast and powerful bike needs a fat tire -- for the current crop of liter-class supersports, a 180 or 190 rear is appropriate. Just like very fast cars need big exhausts and wings and all. But that does not mean that putting those things on machines that don't need them is good, useful, or cool.

PhilB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
guys. why do we put carbon fiber fenders on? Why do we paint racing strips, why do we get belly pans, why do we powder coat the passenger pegs, upper triple, handle bars, why do polish lips.. etc.. etc. None of these will make our monsters go faster. purely looks. some of us like the look of fat rears... (bike).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
416 Posts
Who cares if someone puts it on because they like the looks? Do what you want. The difference between a 160 and 180 rear for street riding is a minimal impact on handling. If you are trying to squeese every millisecond off of lap times OK.

I think a 180 looks badass on any naked bike.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
Sure, many if not most, people make modifications just for looks/fun/whatever. Fine, whatever makes you happy. But when you make a modification that makes the bike *less* functional, that raises the question of why you have it in the first place. Are you a rider, or is this just a fashion accessory. And, of course, either answer is fine; it's your money.

My point is to explain the actual effects of such a change, so that a person who wants to be a rider primarily does not screw up his bike for that purpose, by not knowing that this fashion improvement will have a detrimental effect on his bike for riding purposes. I've ridden Monsters with both, and it is a noticeable difference between the 160 and the 180 (much less the 200 the OP was looking at).

Most of us probably have some disdain for the whole stretched/slammed Hayabusa with flashing lights and funky paint scene. I wouldn't ever say those people shouldn't be allowed to do that; they have every right to. But to take a highly competent motorcycle and practically destroy its capability seems to me to be a silly thing to do. The subject of this thread, although on a much smaller scale, is the same idea, and I think it is silly to do.

But feel free if you like. I'm just posting the facts about what it will do to your bike, along with my opinions about it. You're free to ignore me all you like.

PhilB
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
416 Posts
Well I agree on the Hayabusas especially stretched (OOPH). But that's a pretty extreme example, No?? lol. I cannot compare wheels on a Monster with different size tires, as I've only ridden Monsters with stock wheels tires. I can however tell you that changing out a stock wheel on an SSSA Hawk with a VFR wheel (Going from 150 stock to 180) didn't feel any worse to me. Actually felt pretty damn good. I'd actually argue that you may gain some benefits if you actually laid down some coin on a well engineered set of lightweight aftermarket wheels, regardless of the tire being slightly bigger. But that's neither here nor there. You are not ruining the bike by adding a larger wheel and tire, just modifying it to your own taste. As you can tell I prefer the larger size... lol. And I'd be a hypocrite for saying I did it for any other reason than it looks badass. But if you do it the right way any negative effect on handling would be negligible. Especially between a 160 and a 180. And negative is relative, it may not turn in as quickly on a twisty road, but you may give that up for more highway stability. And I'll take the debate even further, if you are pushing it on the street to the limit where it did become a detriment, than you are speeding!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
Well I agree on the Hayabusas especially stretched (OOPH). But that's a pretty extreme example, No?? lol. I cannot compare wheels on a Monster with different size tires, as I've only ridden Monsters with stock wheels tires. I can however tell you that changing out a stock wheel on an SSSA Hawk with a VFR wheel (Going from 150 stock to 180) didn't feel any worse to me. Actually felt pretty damn good. I'd actually argue that you may gain some benefits if you actually laid down some coin on a well engineered set of lightweight aftermarket wheels, regardless of the tire being slightly bigger. But that's neither here nor there. You are not ruining the bike by adding a larger wheel and tire, just modifying it to your own taste. As you can tell I prefer the larger size... lol. And I'd be a hypocrite for saying I did it for any other reason than it looks badass. But if you do it the right way any negative effect on handling would be negligible. Especially between a 160 and a 180. And negative is relative, it may not turn in as quickly on a twisty road, but you may give that up for more highway stability. And I'll take the debate even further, if you are pushing it on the street to the limit where it did become a detriment, than you are speeding!
OK. Do what you like. I personally am very biased toward the riding side, and have little or no interest in bling. If people like to bling out their bikes, I have no problem with that. But people should be aware of the facts, if they are thinking about a change that they think is just cosmetic but in fact will affect their actual vehicle dynamics. This question comes up pretty often, and I just wanted to provide some actual information so someone doesn't mess up his bike through ignorance of engineering reality.

You have now been provided with the facts, so my intent is fulfilled. Have fun.

PhilB
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,593 Posts
Phil as always from a real rider's perspective, you are dead on.

Johnny5, the only neg I have for your comment about how we do things all the time such as powder coat rear pegs. The thing is, from what I've seen, powder coating rear pegs bright red has never negatively affected the handling or safety of the motorcycle.

If you want to do anything with wheels it should be to make them as light as possible.

As to the first poster, if you really want to do it, then do it. Just understand, and I agree fully with anyone that laughs at a Busa with a 14" "astended" swingarm, that you may make the bike a worthless ride just for aesthetics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,080 Posts
Does anyone else think it's strange that the so called 'ultimate monster' the winner of the monster challenge is one of those bikes?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,593 Posts
haha, you ever notice that one thing about show bikes?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
haha, you ever notice that one thing about show bikes?
<shrug> It's fine for a show bike; they are for shows. It's fine for a bike-night bike, or a fashion accessory bike, if that's what a person wants. Whatever floats your boat. It's just that the current fashion has managed to convince a lot of people that the wider the tire the better, and from a handling and an engineering standpoint, that's factually wrong. So I'm trying to counter the misconception, because one of the things I am about is rational truth and logic.

It's always kind of amusing how defensive people get about being informed about reality, though.

PhilB
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
416 Posts
Hey, well I hope you don't think I'm defensive... hahaha. I'm just having a little friendly debate. I have to admit though a couple of you guys seem a little bit condescending about it, which is why I chimed in my 2 (10?) pennies. I ride about 4-5000 miles per year, from April through November... mostly commuting to work. I do not race. I've been riding since I was a kid. I consider myself an experienced intermediate rider.

So my point was, for an average rider like me, who also likes to enjoy the beauty of what I'm riding, it's totally NOT a detriment to change your rear wheel out to a bigger size, if you do it the right way, ESPECIALLY for street riding. It is in no way dangerous to run a 180 tire as opposed to a 160 on the street as long as the wheel fits your bike and is the correct size for the tire you are running. And one of the reasons I love Ducatis, is because I can go out into my garage and stare at a Monster with a smile on my face, and a little subtle but well placed bling makes it that much more interesting, a little bit more "my own". I like to turn around after I lift my leg over and off of my bike in the parking lot of my office in the morning and admire my bike with a smile for a minute or two. Makes my day a little happier.

Again, if you are trying to shave every millisecond possible off of your lap times, then I would absolutely agree, stick with the stock size.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,917 Posts
Hey, well I hope you don't think I'm defensive... hahaha. I'm just having a little friendly debate. I have to admit though a couple of you guys seem a little bit condescending about it, which is why I chimed in my 2 (10?) pennies. I ride about 4-5000 miles per year, from April through November... mostly commuting to work. I do not race. I've been riding since I was a kid. I consider myself an experienced intermediate rider.

So my point was, for an average rider like me, who also likes to enjoy the beauty of what I'm riding, it's totally NOT a detriment to change your rear wheel out to a bigger size, if you do it the right way, ESPECIALLY for street riding. It is in no way dangerous to run a 180 tire as opposed to a 160 on the street as long as the wheel fits your bike and is the correct size for the tire you are running. And one of the reasons I love Ducatis, is because I can go out into my garage and stare at a Monster with a smile on my face, and a little subtle but well placed bling makes it that much more interesting, a little bit more "my own". I like to turn around after I lift my leg over and off of my bike in the parking lot of my office in the morning and admire my bike with a smile for a minute or two. Makes my day a little happier.

Again, if you are trying to shave every millisecond possible off of your lap times, then I would absolutely agree, stick with the stock size.
My riding is about 70% commuting/errands/basic transpo, about 25% touring, and about 5% sporting. I do not consider myself to be a hard rider. But I don't have to be "shaving milliseconds" to be able to tell and appreciate how well a bike is handling. And I can easily tell the difference in handling between otherwise similar Monsters, one with a 160 and one with a 180.

To me, that's why you buy a Monster in the first place instead of, say, an SV650 -- it has quality suspension components, it handles better, it's dynamically a superior machine. And I just don't see any sense in compromising that for style. But then, being an engineer, IDGAF about style in the first place (just ask my wife. :) ).

I do care that the bike is a pretty design, and it is a very big bonus to me that the Monster is. I love looking out the window and seeing it parked there; it makes me smile. So I do get what you mean. (Likewise, conversely, no matter how good a bike it was, I never could have brought myself to buy a first-gen MultiStrada -- just too fugly.)

But I just can't see reducing its performance for style. It just doesn't make sense to me. So that's where my opinion of the proposal comes from. Maybe it's condescending, but oh well.

The more useful point, and why I bothered to post in the first place was just to try to ensure that the OP was aware that this would not be *just* a cosmetic change; that it would have other effects. A lot of people aren't aware of, or just might not think of, that.

PhilB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
If you want to put a 200 on the bike, I say go for it. Just don't plan on doing any hard riding in the twisties or track days. It will definately affect handling in a negative manner.

The dispute about the differences between a 160 and a 180 are hard pressed however. Certainly, if you had a bike with a 160 stock and changed it out for a 180 you would notice a difference in handling. But IMO it's impossible to compare a bikes handling with a 160 to that of a bike with 180. Even if the bikes are similar, the suspension, geometry and setup are different. So it's not really a fair statement to say that you can easily tell the difference between the two.

Overall, I would say that the quickness in steering and turn in between the two sizes is negligible, but it really depends on the bike. Obviously a touring bike from the '80s isn't going to handle as aggressively as a 696, even if they do have the same size tire.


Sent from my Motorcycle iPhone app
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top