Metzler 880 Width

[Rio Wil]

Hey, someone please measure your inflated M880 width.  My installed 150-80-17 Dunlop is 157.5 mm wide.  The M880 un-inflated is 144.0 mm wide. In a thread some weeks ago, we were looking at possible rear tires that would be usable as fronts and the 160-70-17 came up.  It was unknown if this tire would fit within the front fender, based on the width of my installed Dunlop, if the 160-70-17 is really 160 mm wide it should be a no brainer..(2.5 little mm).  I am amazed at the apparent different sizes of two tires with the same specs......]

[Sodbuster]

I'd be willing to bet that metz tire will be wider when it's installed with a flatter crown ....

[Friagabi]

There is a 150/70R17 out there also. Would be great if a few pictures were posted showing the front fender clearance using either a 160/70R17 or 150/70R17.

[Rio Wil]

Thats what I am getting at....the Dunlop 150-80 appears to be virtually as wide as a 160-70, presuming the 160 is really right at 160 mm wide and not over wide like the 150 Dunlop.  Or is it under wide like the M880 appears to be.  The bead distance on the 880 is right at 3.5 inches now unmounted so the side wall flare would have to be considerable to even stretch it to 150 mm.   Come on......some body measure their 880....pretty please.

[X Ring]

Rio, the next time I'm at my buddy Jim's house I will measure the width of the Metzler mounted on the rear of his BMW K1200LT.  It uses that 160 size we were discussing.

Marty

[Ricky-D]

You are correct in noting the narrowness of Metzler tires size for size when comparing them to Dunlop.

They just run that way!

Airing up the tire should make no appreciable difference than what you observe.

***

[Anthony]

my front metzeler measures 142,5 mm wide on the bike.

note : it's already quite worn :
depth of grooves at centre : 2mm, groove depth at side ; 2,5mm

it s not just the width, also the outside diameter is different :
last year on our way to inzane with 7 valks, we compared the tripmeters :
those who had the same front tire brand, were within 2 km difference at every tankstop.
between metzeler & dunlop the difference was usually 10km, on a 200km distance. that is 5% difference.

Anthony

[Ricky-D]

Here is the url for the Metzler specs. You have to download the whole catalog and then proceed to the correct page to find the tire specifications.   
Page (6) is the ME880 bias and radial specs

http://www.us.metzelermoto.com/en_US/browser/attachments/pdf/2008_METZELER_FULL_LINE.pdf

You can then go to this page on the Dunlop site for the specs on the E3 radial.

http://www.dunlopmotorcycle.com/tirecatalog_tire.asp?id=91

Simple matter to compare all the info for the two tire.

regards

[Rio Wil]

Thanks Anthony.....so the width doesn't change much inflated.  I wonder if the wider flatter width of the E3 is why Smokin Joe can't keep the front end under the bike  with E3s.......the further you lean the bike the narrower the contact patch as you approach the flat sharp edge of the tire.  With a more rounder tire the patch doesn't narrow so much.....?

[Friagabi]

Ha!! It aint just Smokin Joe. I have a E3 on the front and it's the last Dunlop. Chased that tire across half a lane two Saturday's ago. I ride a IS so it can be corrected for the diameter of the tire. Foot print on the rear tires can and do keep the size of foot print as you lay over the tire. In fact some claim a bigger footprint the farther over the tire goes. Clearance is the big question. Catalog specs do not always give you a correct picture. All of the specs are based on the tire being on the correct width wheel. Change the wheel width by a half of an inch and the other measurements will change. I know it can be argued that the tire will grow slightly as it gets inflated. But it grows even bigger the faster you spin the tire. It would be a bad day if the front tire hung up on the fender brackets while going 100+ MPH. Dropping tire diameter will give more clearance from the center of the tire and the fender. That is OK but miss the width and that won't be as forgiving.