SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> New Rear Tire
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1132679622

Message started by lancer on 11/22/05 at 09:13:42

Title: New Rear Tire
Post by lancer on 11/22/05 at 09:13:42

I got some new rubber on the rear wheel this week, and it is just amazing how much difference that makes. I had forgotten what new rubber feels like, and it sure is nice. I put on a 140/90/15...one of the inexpensive brands since $$ are tight...the dealership mounted/added new tube/ & balanced the thing for $34. I thought that was very reasonable.
The stability with the new, round and balanced rubber is VERY NOTICEABLE, feeling like it is really stuck to the road. When I get the Progressive 418's on there it should be downright awesome. Now I need to start working on getting the Ceriani forks back on the front end. With that suspension combination I should be able to ride any road on the planet with absolute security.

Say, does anyone know what the biggest size tire will work on the front wheel? I want to go with a FAT PIECE OF RUBBER...like a 4.00 or better.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/22/05 at 13:49:56

here was the chart from awhile back

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=RubberSideDown;action=display;num=1109239317;start=14#14

it listed these 19" tires - the stock rim is a 19x2.15 the 110/90 me880 on the '95 certainly fills the rim and the fender - it is list as the minimum size for a 110mm (2.15/2.50/2.75) looks to me the rim is just too narrow to go any bigger without rolling the tire up - I doubt you keep the fender on if you went to a >110mm - can't remember if you removed it yet or not

19" Tyres Permitted Rim

275*19 1.40/1.60/1.85
70/90*19

300*19 1.60/1.85/2.15
360*19

325*19 1.85/2.15/2.50
350*19
410*19
90/90*19
90/100*19
100/90*19

110/90*19 2.15/2.50/2.75
120/90*19

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by lancer on 11/22/05 at 15:20:39

So according to the chart a 120/90 should work on the rim. I think the problem will be finding one in my price range though. If so I will just go with the 110/90.
Thanks for the help.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/22/05 at 17:34:16

Went out to garage and was mic'n around - I'm sure different brands are really different sizes but the me880 110/90x19 @28lbs is really 114mm wide - with respect to the fender - the clearence on the sides looks to be 4 or 5mm and 6mm tread to fender clearence at the top - when installing the front tire/wheel it does drag a little on the fender bolt heads on the way in. Man if you add another 10mm to the width and 9mm to the heigth looks to me like you'd be rubbing in all directions unless you went sans fender.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by lancer on 11/22/05 at 17:37:36

Thanks for the info.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by kikuchiyo on 11/22/05 at 19:57:10

Hey guys, I researched this topic on previous posts but would like to confirm with the experts! I would like to install 140/90/15 rear:
1. do I need to install progressive shocks to avoid the rub or stock shocks will do? (I am 180lbs, occasionaly +115lbs passenger).
2. If progressives are a must what is the minimum/maximum size 11/11.5/12.5 I can install without problems to the belt/any other moving parts?
Thanks a million.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/22/05 at 23:10:09

A number of folks have installed the 140/90 with stock shocks. I have not. depending on the brand, as some 140s are bigger than others, these folks have usually turned up the preload and in some cases "shrank" the head of the through bolts on the rails.

you ask a more interesting question on the shocks and the sometime load - if you want to keep the bikes stance close to the same the 11" progressives do that. but the spring rate needs to be considered - I used 90/130lb springs and weight 180 as well - these give a very soft ride on the 1st click about right on the 2nd and a little firm on the 3rd. That doesn't give you much room to work with if you add another 115lbs so the heavier 115/150's would do the trick I'd bet - as well as the 1/2 inch or so of lift may very well eliminate any concern with the bolt heads - the 11.5" shocks would for sure cure the bolt business but you'll have a good bit more lift in back over stock.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by lancer on 11/22/05 at 23:46:32

Love that lift! I know that not everyone is a fan of extra lift, but I sure am. I like the extra room that the longer travel gives and I like the way the bike feels and handles with the rear end jacked up that way. It is a quicker handling bike this way and I like the steering feel of it.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by mpescatori on 11/23/05 at 07:44:38

This sounds interesting, as I believe my bike has a very firm ride because of worn out rear shocks.

What brand/model/length shocks would you recommend? I am 5'6" x 200+lbs, with my 8y.o. boy a more likely passenger than my 140lb wife.

Ideally, I would like my new shocks to be about one inch longer (higher) than the standard ones, with 3-5 step adjustment, Maybe that is what you call 'progressive'. In Italy we call that 'adjustable'. ::)

Any suggestions please?

Maurizio

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by lancer on 11/23/05 at 08:33:09

The term "progressive", refers to the type of spring. It is designed so that the first inch or two is compressed at a rate of (example) 115 pounds, and the rest of the compression is at 150 pounds per inch. The result is a nice smooth ride under normal conditions, but under harder riding/rough road/more load etc, you get the added support of a stiffer spring. "Dual-spring rate" is probably the way to say it.

I have been buying the "Progressive" brand of shocks. The are good quality and can be found on ebay at really good deals. The first I had was a 13.5" 412 model, and they worked very well...MUCH BETTER THAN STOCK shocks (retail for $200-300). I just got a set of 12.5" 418 model shocks (posted here) and will be putting them on today. These are a higher quality shock with more capability (retail for $400-500).
Compared with the stock shocks, you will notice an IMMEDIATE improvement in ride and handling quality.
I am 5'6 1/2", weigh 200+, and since I began using the Progressive shocks I have never had a bottom-out experience...and I had a lot with the stock shocks.
As far as what shock length is best? That will depend on your preferences. I like a tall shock, because it will give more space under the fender...a little more shock travel...quicken front end handling because of the higher angle. With the 13.5" shocks I did have to remove the belt guard because it rubbed the front of it a little. With the 12.5" 418's I just got, I should be able to put it back on.
As far as adjustment capability, the 412 model had only spring preload adjustment. The 418 model has spring preload and dampening/rebound adjustment capability.
That is a significant difference, and that is the reason why I purchased the 418 model shocks.

Since I bought these shocks on ebay, slightly used, I do not know the exact spring rate for them yet, I will have to call the manufacturer for that info.
I hope this has been helpful.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by klx650sm2002 on 11/24/05 at 02:35:15

After a closer look at the shock I'm going to use on my SR project it too is a dual rate with 5 preload positions. No damping adjustment.

Clive W :D

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Savage_Rob on 11/24/05 at 19:44:52

klx650sm2002 wrote:

After a closer look at the shock I'm going to use on my SR project it too is a dual rate with 5 preload positions. No damping adjustment.

Clive W :D

That sounds a lot like the 412's.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Mr 650 on 11/24/05 at 21:40:17

Yo, I picked up a complete swingarm from the dude that parted a 2002, ($10) on ebay recently. (Reel, I backed off on the motor after I saw you were already on it)

I like the idea of the longer progressives, however I do not want to significantly increase the ride height.
Has anyone experience with cutting the lower shock mounts and moving them back to accommodate the longer Progressive shocks? I have not come up w/ an adjustable setup yet.
I was dreaming about a cool sliding block lower shock mount of some type that would allow infinite adjustment over about 1-2” frt to back, then chrome the whole mess.?
Then if that works, (darn this thing won't stay lit) repeat the shock mount location on the original arm, (wouldn't have to be adjustable if I find a sweet spot w/ adj. deal) then carve/torture/reinforce my original arm for a wider wheel.
Looking at Lotsbub's bike, had to extend the pulleys and I am not really wanting to do that, but may be required. Wanna keep the belt.
Thought I should consult the SS brain trust 1st.
I can hack this $10 arm as required.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Hammy211 on 11/24/05 at 23:45:38

Sounds like a cool idea, but I think it would be difficult to design something moveable that was able to withstand the pressure and impact of having a shock mounted to it.

You would lose the full benifit of the shocks and the progressive function, but how would a Savage behave if only one 12.5 was mounted and the other remained stock to keep the rise under control? I have seem similar setup of different functions on different sides of front forks, but without a crown brace I don't know if it would be effective on the rear of a bike.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by PerrydaSavage on 11/25/05 at 03:31:07

8)Here's a couple of wheel/tire combos I'd love to see on an LS!
http://www.bobbershop.net/Parts/wheels/BlackBikeWheels-148.jpg
http://www.bobbershop.net/Parts/wheels/BlackBikeWheels-124.jpg

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by bentwheel on 11/25/05 at 11:06:42

Mr 650 wrote:

I was dreaming about a cool sliding block lower shock mount of some type that would allow infinite adjustment over about 1-2” frt to back, then chrome the whole mess.?
.

Interesting idea Mr 650. My first thought is the original lower shock mount is only 1 3/4 inches from the end so there is not much room for relocation. Rather than going for a movable block, why not weld one large bracket with three different mounting holes drilled? In the late seventies when Husqvarna was sticking with the lay down shock theory, they had multiple lower shock positions.
BTW how did Lotsbub extend his pulley? Did he cut a new countershaft?

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by bentwheel on 11/25/05 at 11:25:58

Hammy211 wrote:

but how would a Savage behave if only one 12.5 was mounted and the other remained stock to keep the rise under control?

.

You are kidding, right?

Hammy211 wrote;

>> I have seem similar setup of different functions on different sides of front forks, but without a crown brace I don't know if it would be effective on the rear of a bike.<<

I know what you mean. Modern motocross bikes use that theory but the forks are identical length.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by bentwheel on 11/25/05 at 11:31:25

PerrydaSavage wrote:

8)Here's a couple of wheel/tire combos I'd love to see on an LS!

You got that right. I love those wheels, especially the orange.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/28/05 at 05:06:36

mpescatori wrote:

If you open this pdf and go to the section on the 412 series shock - starting with the numbers 412-42xx you are into the metric shocks (these ship with metric size bushing - and the thin wall is a perfect fit for the savage).

http://www.progressivesuspension.com/pdf/7100-105.pdf

I used the 412-4232c at 90/130lb shock - I would not go any lighter for the savage - and it's too light if your going to have a passenger. The 412-4233c at 115/155lb would work better - these are both 11" and will give you 1/2" to 3/4" lift as measured in this post before you sit on the bike -

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=RubberSideDown;action=display;num=1126562337;start=59#59

if a little over an inch of lift is ok you have other options with the 11.5" shocks - you have the 90/130, 115/155 and 412-4236c at 125/170lb - I sure wouldn't go over the 125/170lb or you'll likely end up with a ridged frame type of ride that handles very poor, rides like crap, and vibes you to death - sorry if we have any ridged fans , been there , done that - but never again - I want a suspension that functions.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/28/05 at 05:09:36

Mr 650 wrote:

that motor got away - as did some fine progressive 440's while I was busy with thanksgiving - oh well family first toys second this time of year!

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by kikuchiyo on 11/28/05 at 15:14:45

Please explain to me what is the meaning behind these numbers 90/130, 115/155 rate lbs/in on progressive shocks. I am looking for a 12.5 inch shock, however, not sure what to do about those numbers. I am 180lbs + occasional 115 passenger. I would like a softer shocks than stock. \
What rate lbs/in do I need?
How stock shocks are rated?
Thanks.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/28/05 at 18:02:53

Ok - Progressive springs are progressive. Say a shock with 2inches of travel and is rated 90/130lb has a spring the takes 90lbs of pressure to compress the first inch and an additional 130lbs to compress the last/next inch.

I'm 180lbs (maybe a tad more after all that turkey!)- and have the 90/130lb 412-4232C shocks installed. So let's take the first number 90lbs and double it because we have 2 shocks that's 180lbs. So in theory my weight would compress the shocks 1 inch. This does not happen because the shocks are angled - they only compress about 1/2 inch. So for you to get the same reaction from the shocks that I do and your 180+115 rider that's 295lb - let's round that up to 300lbs. So if we cut that in half - 150lbs - that is the load for each shock. But noway are you going to want 150lb springs they'd ride mighty stiff with just you on there - so in comes the 5 preload settings - each click adds load to the spring that makes the spring shorter - so for instance if you could add an inch of preload on the 90/130lb springs then the first inch (really the second inch because we already compressed it one inch with the preload) now takes 130lbs to compress - to finally get to what I would do with this much weight - is install the 412-4233C 115/155lb shocks and keep them on the 1st preload setting when by myself and add a couple of clicks or more until I did not bottom out when the extra 115lbs was with me. These are not going to give you as smooth a ride as the 90/130s when your by yourself but they should deal with the 300lb riders better and keep close to the stock bike stance.

Sorry - just read that you wanted 12.5 inch shocks - (after all those wonderful words!) since you have quit a lot more travel with a 12.5" something like the 412-4208c 105/150lb may do well - but remember - a 12.5" shock is going to lift - "jack up" the rearend quite a bit - say 3 inches at least - also you'll need to modify the belt guard as the steep angle causes it to rub the belt, and then you have the issue of find an up hill place to check the oil in order to get the sight glass level,,,,,

are you sure you want 12.5's?

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by kikuchiyo on 11/28/05 at 21:39:50

Reelthing! That was an awesome explanation, and I appreciate the effort. I DO want to raise the rear of the bike with 12.5 shocks and I do NOT want to mess with the belt rubbing against the belt guard (unless I can take belt guard of and that is the end of the problem). If removing the belt guard is not enough then what shock lenght do you recommend instead of 12.5 -12? 11.5?

Thanks for taking you time.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Reelthing on 11/28/05 at 23:08:54

Length wise I doubt that 11.5 would rub the belt guard but it looks like 12.5 does according to Savage_Rob and Babbalou I think. But it also was a minor mod to cut the top out where it rubs. If I calculate correct the 11.5 should give you about 1.25 inch of lift when measured from the cnter of the rear axle to the helment lock - see the bottom of this post
http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=RubberSideDown;action=display;num=1126562337;start=55#55

I'd bet the 412-4201C 115/155lb 11.5" would work if you want a bit of lift and carry 300lbs of riders - but like the 11" shocks - 90/130 would ride best solo - best is not the right word - softest without bottoming out.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by Savage_Rob on 11/29/05 at 06:04:34

It really was a minor mod to cut the portion that rubbed but then the angle still just looked wrong so I took it off completely. If you want to preserve the original look as much as possible, I think you're right about going with the 11" or 11.5". I have come to really like the higher look and feel of mine with the 12.5" though.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by kikuchiyo on 11/29/05 at 16:04:30

Thanks! I will look for 11.5". Hopefully there will not be trouble with the belt and oil checks.
Thanks again.

Title: Re: New Rear Tire
Post by VIC on 12/01/05 at 18:11:24

I just removed my rear wheel to get a tube replaced and patch the almost new tire. Any thoughts on doing this. Some people tell me to get a new tire, but hell, the thing is almost like new.... ::)