Modern Vespa

I am vertically challenged. (5'4")

I love the Fuoco, but hate the ride height.

However, I do like the riding position, so I'm not keen on reducing the padding in the seat.

So, I'm thinking shorter shocks. Yes, I know, you also get shorter suspension travel, and you increase the ease with which you scape something on corners.

Well, as far as the travel is concerned, the scoot has 110mm, so there's a bit to play with.

Scraping - On other bikes, when you reduce the shock height, you also make things like the centrestand closer to the ground - so you scrape them more easily. HOWEVER, with the Fuoco, the centrestand (the bit that scapes first) actually moves with the wheel, so it really doesn't matter if you change the shock length. The ONLY thing (I think) that will change the ease of scraping the stand is the size of the rear tyre. Is this why JimC recommends it?

So, two questions:

1. any thoughts on the above reasoning?
2. anyone have suggestions about replacement shocks (say 14-1/2", 360mm long) which have the RIGHT SPRING RATES?

Gonzo.

a 160/60-14 rear tire will drop the seat height some and rides great.

A resounding +1!

Hmmm....

Using my logic from the first post, wouldn't a smaller profile tyre make the centrestand scape more easily?

Gonzo.

The with of the tire accounts for a lot too. You're going up 2 sizes in width.

I have never scraped the center-stand w/the 160/60, even at Tail of the Dragon.
Guess that makes me officially... chicken.

come ride with us in Sept and maybe we can change that for you

a 160/60 tyre will lower it by 2mm i don't think you will feel any differents

140mm * 70% = 98mm

a 140/70 is 98mm high
a 150/70 is 105mm high
1 160/60 is 96mm high

I disagree. I felt the difference -- in my head position, shoulders, back and hip.
Everything felt immediately better! Try it and see.

Think the shorter shock support, would also have less rear tire clearance! question being which is shorter, shock travel or tire clearance?

Well, the idea would be to make a new lower shock mounting so that the position of the wheel when the shorter shocks are fully compressed would be the same as for the longer ones. Fortunately, the bottom mounting is a fairly simple bracket.

Gonzo

+1
The 160/60-14 is noticeably lower than stock. (Remember the labeld width is not actual measurement. If you can find manufacturer's actual measurements they vary significantly from specification embossed on side of tire.) The extra width has the kickstand dragging about the same as stock. If not worried about leaning and dragging kickstand and wanting even lower height a 140/60-14 will fit.

I haven't thought about how to shorten the shock but the 160/60-16 gives some clearance to do it and since a 150/70-14 fits there is some room even with stock. This will ov course increase the dragging of kick stand.

I have ridden all 3 on at least 2 tires each. I like the ride of the wider tires and none scrape the kickstand unless riding agressively on tight turns.

Not that this is helping our Aussie friend, but Scootertrap has the Michelin 140/60-14s on sale for $52, which I'm pretty sure is a good price. The 160/60-14 remains ridiculously high so I continue to hope for a darkside solution...soon (or I'll no doubt be kicking myself for not snagging this deal).

$46.99 and in stock -- the Shinko SR568R 160/60-14 Rear.



Doesn't look too shabby next to a Ducati, either.

You beat me to the punch! I was just checking out the major sites - scooterworks doesn't even offer a 14" tire at all, is that possible? - and was looking at BikeBandit. I saw the tire you refer to - I take it you like this tire personally? - for $46 and said, that's either a tube tire (apparently not) or has something wrong with it. They also have the Pirelli Diablo on sale for $95, I know good things have been said about that here.

I read several reviews on the Shinko name. All of the "professional" site reviews seemed positive, although none of them were looking at scooters. The only one that really trashed the brand was a sportsbiker forum, and not a single one of the many posters there who hated them seems to have actually tried one...

So - I am on track for 6,000 miles on my OEM dunlop. What would I obtain on a $46 tire? In other words: are you recommending (assuming you are) the Shinko as a tire with good grip/ride but you don't know/don't care how long it lasts because you swap out tires well before anyway, or would you say that the longevity of the Shinko is comparable to the OEM and other name brands?

I had a Diablo before the Shinko. Of course the Shinko is not quite the performer as the Diablo; but I bought it for the value (and hopefully that will prevail).
Currently testing mileage/longevity. So far, after approx. 5,500 miles, so good! 8)

I guess I love and hate MSS. Love, because the Shinko 160/60-14 just came back in-stock for the $46 price and only $7 shipping (wow, it costs me more than that to ship a pair of UFP brackets!), and hate because I signed up for their "e-mail when its available" feature, and they didn't. Furthermore, a lot of MSS's tires, including the Shinkos, are practically an "easter egg": if you use the MSS "find by tire size" feature, the only brands that are reported for 160/60-14 are Pirellis, Michelins, and Metzeler; and yet they most definitely have the Shinkos listed in that size elsewhere on the web site, and probably many others. Very frustrating.

But for $53 shipped, I think the "love" side is winning out!