XR400R Shinko 244 Rear Question

Go with the 4.1 or the 4.6 inch width? Honda spec says 110mm which works out to 4.33 inches.  (110/100 18 on Honda's site. Is the 100 the aspect? or the range of the width?) .

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Why the 244? $51 for this DOT tire.

Shinkos are ceartainly economical to buy.  I was worried they were too cheap, but I have burned off three of them with no problems at all.  I like the 700 a little better than the 244, mostly for looks since they both acted about the same on the rear.  The 700 is my new favorite front tire, 9000 miles and counting.  Bet it will go 12 at this rate.

The 244 looks like it might have more bite than the 700. The 700 tread seems a little tighter. I have the 244 on my KLR650 (rear only) and have been very happy with it. Ok, now,  what size?

A 4.6 would look funny on a XR400!  Watch out for the non-metric sizes: 4.6 is smaller then 4.5.  Find out the specs from Shinko.

Edited by XRMarc

Methinks our friend in BC is partaking of too much KGB. I am are referring to rim width, in which 4.6" is certainly larger than 4.5", but not by very much. The question pertains as to whether it is better to get .2" narrower than 4.3, or .3" wider to best fit the rim of the stock XR400 rear tire. The available widths are 4.1 or 4.6 inches. 4.5" is not an option here. (Monty Pythonesque tone being taken on by this thread)

 

 

A 4.6 would look funny on a XR400!  Watch out for the non-metric sizes: 4.6 is smaller then 4.5.  Find out the specs from Shinko.

Methinks our friend in BC is partaking of too much KGB. I am are referring to rim width, in which 4.6" is certainly larger than 4.5", but not by very much. The question pertains as to whether it is better to get .2" narrower than 4.3, or .3" wider to best fit the rim of the stock XR400 rear tire. The available widths are 4.1 or 4.6 inches. 4.5" is not an option here. (Monty Pythonesque tone being taken on by this thread)

 

Rim width is 2.15 inches.  From Kenda for the K270 which is similar to the Shinko. S.W. in. is the tire width.

 

 

Part No.             Size          Ply Rating     O.D. (in.)       S.W. in.
042701858C0     4.50-18      6PR, 73P     27                   4.8
042701860B0     4.60-18      4PR, 63P     25.7                4.3
Edited by XRMarc

I am running a shinko 244 5.10-18 on my XR250L and it fits fine. I would go with the 5.10 on an XR4

Edited by jg83

I think either size would fit the rim fine.  The thing I would worry about most is tire clearance.  If you get too big of a tire the side knobs can reach out an touch things it shouldn't, like the chain and plastic fender parts.  i don't think the sizes you are contemplating fall into that category, but I would study the bike carefully and go with the larger one if it looks like it will clear easy. 

 

I noticed no difference in bite between the 244 and 700 on the rear of my XL, in fact both seemed to spin easier in gravel than previous tires.  It did make the rear more predictable on gravel road corners because it broke free and slid predictably rather than like other which would break free then grab and stand you back up in corners.  I have since put on a T63 and it hooks up better on gravel roads at least.

Methinks our friend in BC is partaking of too much KGB. I am are referring to rim width, in which 4.6" is certainly larger than 4.5", but not by very much. The question pertains as to whether it is better to get .2" narrower than 4.3, or .3" wider to best fit the rim of the stock XR400 rear tire. The available widths are 4.1 or 4.6 inches. 4.5" is not an option here. (Monty Pythonesque tone being taken on by this thread)

The old american sizing is a bit tricky. Any thing after the decimal that is odd is a 90-100% aspect ratio. Anything after the decimal that is even will be 75-85@ aspect ratio.

So a 4.00x18 would be roughly 4inches wide and 4 inches tall. A 4.10x18 would be roughly 4 inches wide and 3.4 inch tall sidewall.

A 4.50x18 would be roughly 4.5 inches wide and 4.5 inches tall. A 4.60x18 would be roughly 4.5 inches wide and 3.8 inches tall.

Pardon to my Canadian friend for my snarkiness and for not understanding about the aspect ratio that is buried in tire width measurement. From what I'm hearing, the 4.1, 4.6, and 5.1 would all fit. Odd numbers have a higher aspect ratio. Why don't they just use a proper aspect ratio after the width? Honda specs indicate a 4.3 with 110% aspect which would come out to to 4.75". With that in mind, the 5.1/18 should be the best fit (5.1" height). If it works in an XR250L (perjg83), it should work on my 400 I'll assume.

Pardon to my Canadian friend for my snarkiness and for not understanding about the aspect ratio that is buried in tire width measurement. From what I'm hearing, the 4.1, 4.6, and 5.1 would all fit. Odd numbers have a higher aspect ratio. Why don't they just use a proper aspect ratio after the width? Honda specs indicate a 4.3 with 110% aspect which would come out to to 4.75". With that in mind, the 5.1/18 should be the best fit (5.1" height). If it works in an XR250L (perjg83), it should work on my 400 I'll assume.

The lack of info is probably why we are all running the metrics tires now. Lol. But the odd is after thr decimal place so a 5.1 would be the lower aspect ratio 5 inches wide by roughly 4-4.25 sidewall. A 5.0 would be 5 inches wide with a roughly 5 inch side wall.

The lack of info is probably why we are all running the metrics tires now. Lol. But the odd is after thr decimal place so a 5.1 would be the lower aspect ratio 5 inches wide by roughly 4-4.25 sidewall. A 5.0 would be 5 inches wide with a roughly 5 inch side wall.

 

5.1 * 0.9 = around 4.6. So if it is 90-100% ratio, it should be between 4.6 and 5.1. Yes it is confusing and my math was wrong in my last post. Is this better?

The 5.1 is wider and has the same diameter (27'') as the 4.5.  It's lower profile.  Looks betIer and weighs less too.

.9 would be for a 90% aspect ratio tire or a 5.0. The 5.1 would be at a 75-85% ratio. Check out http://faq.ninja250.org/wiki/Tires_101:_An_Introduction

 

This is one of the sites I found when researching tires for a project Yamaha XS650 I am building. It probably does a better job explaining it then me.

Methinks our friend in BC is partaking of too much KGB. I am are referring to rim width, in which 4.6" is certainly larger than 4.5", but not by very much. The question pertains as to whether it is better to get .2" narrower than 4.3, or .3" wider to best fit the rim of the stock XR400 rear tire. The available widths are 4.1 or 4.6 inches. 4.5" is not an option here. (Monty Pythonesque tone being taken on by this thread)

 

BTW, what is KGB???

I didn't know I was gonna have to learn math and stuff or I would not have signed onto this thread.  Who woulda thought tire buying would be so hard?  I don't know why they just don't stick with the good old easily understood sizing we have grown accustomed to.  Next thing they are going to do is go metric on wheel size too like BMW tried to do once with their now defunct 330's.

BTW, what is KGB???

Killer Green Bud. Do you like the 5.1 size?

Yes.  I had an old 5.1 when I bought the bike and got a 4.5 to replace it and it's too skinny looking but prolly better for tight corners. 

Shinko 5.1 fits fine and it has extra grip

 

2013-04-11190432_zpsbee123c8.jpg

Cool beans. 18/5.1 it is.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now