just wondering if a 160 would be noticeably heavier than a 140 and if it would affect acceleration? Maybe individual brand/model has more to do with this than a 20 size difference?
just wondering if a 160 would be noticeably heavier than a 140 and if it would affect acceleration? Maybe individual brand/model has more to do with this than a 20 size difference?
...Full throttle till you see god, then brake.
That depends on just what you are asking. I don't know of any motorcycles that have both 140 and 160 models, but if it's a Piper Cherokee you're thinking of then the weight is almost identical.
Oh.... It's tyres. Weight will not make any difference, but the size difference will have a major effect on handling.
Time to ride
Weight difference will have effect of course.
I am just asking about difference in weight between 140 and 160, not handling.
...Full throttle till you see god, then brake.
You are correct in assuming that brand/model has a greater effect on the weight than the size.
Drew for Prime Minister!
www.oldskoolperformance.com
www.prospeedmc.com for parts ex U.S.A ( He's a Kiwi! )
Down to the bike shop with some scales for you, cause next you'll wanna know which brand is lighter!
All things being equal (ok, so they never are, but...) then sure a smaller one will have less materials so will be lighter.
wouldnt the weight difference be proportional to the increase/decrease in width, assuming the side walls are the same?
I cant really think of an application where the weight would be more important than the resulting handling characteristics
the 160 is only the same mauw as the 140 if it started life as a 140 and was re-engined. an original 160 is good for another 250-300lbs over a 140/modded 160.
i fly a 140 regularly, and you wouldn't want to put 4 adults in it! a 160 - maybe - a 180, definately. my pick is the 200-r and the Pathfinder![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks