What do Wheels Weigh?

The spoke Norton wheels don't seem all that heavy to me. By way of comparison, I found a review of BST carbon fibre wheels, done in 2010.
The reviewers used a 2010 Honda cbr600rr for their review. They claimed that the Honda had the lightest OEM wheels of any new 600 at that time.
Comparing the Norton wheel with an alloy rim and Madass disc to the OEM Honda 600, the Norton wheel does OK. The Norton wheel in that state weighs just over 15 lbs, the OEM Honda 14.1 lbs. The Honda is twin disc, the Norton single disc, but that big single Madass disc is all the brake you need or want on a Norton. Anymore brake and you need a new frame!

If a tubeless kit is used on the Norton rim, it would be very close to that OEM Honda with tires mounted, given the smaller sized Norton tire.
BST Carbon fibre wheels knocked 2 pounds off the OEM Honda front weight, that's it for 2 grand per wheel!

I'm liking the flanged alloy spoked Norton wheel with lightened disc, maybe in tubeless. Better looking than plastic wheels too.

Glen

Like I said in Edgar's advert' in the "for sale" forum for those morris mag wheels, "They are a deal of a lifetime". They were exactly what I was looking for a few months earlier, but I ended up with 1.85 x 19 on my front, and 2.15 x 18 on the back instead. The wider rims would certainly given a my tires an improved profile... but the wheels I have mounted now work great, so I can't complain.

The Norton stock disc is a boat anchor, by comparison to modern bike brake discs. I also run my cast wheels tubeless with no issues losing air so far. The gearbox no longer issues a loud "click" when I shift into gear. I think the large yamaha rubber cush drive hub is the reason for that.

I still have both the front and back wheels that I removed with tires on them, so I could measure their weights Ken if you want me too. I also have and extra cast front wheel with a tire and a disc on it that I could weigh also for comparison, but I don't have an accurate scale in my house. When I placed the front wheels on my bathroom scale, they seemed close enough in weight that their could be almost no significant weight difference. (I need to weigh them again to know exactly what they weigh, maybe at the post office... they're pretty accomodating)

Personally, I had multiple issues that made me want to go to cast wheels. Primarily it was the cost of changing my early style non-cush hub to a madass' spoked cush drive hub, the cost of new alloy rims, plus the cost of new tires that kept me from going in that direction. I didn't want to get new tires and put them on that original non-cush hub. I also wanted to get rid of the steel 1.85 rims for lighter and wider alloy rims too, so I was at a cross roads of "do it all" or keep my non-cush, poorly handling (IMO) wheels. In some ways, I wish I had bit the bullet and went with the alloy rims and madass cush drive hub with spokes because it looks more like the stock norton parts, but I thought it would be cheaper to adapt cast aluminum wheels, I'd loose a bunch of unsprung weight, and get rid of the inner tubes to boot... As it turned out, it's not that much lighter, it didn't cost much less, but I did get rid of the inner tube... if that means anything.

My bike's handling is much better now, but I changed so many things at once (swingarm, wheel bearings, rim sizes, tires, and a solid rear axle) that it's impossible to say which change had to greatest effect to improve my bike's handling. Handling has gotten so much better that now when I zoom down the hiway, I don't worry about weaving. I worry more about whether I'm going to blow my engine up doing 90 mph with a 21 tooth sprocket. (which would suck...)

I remember years ago when I first saw the carbon wheels at a motorcycle show, It almost blew the top off my head how cool they looked. After talking to the guy about cost I could only wonder how long they would last, what I wondered most about was changing tires. I don't change my own tires anymore because it's just a pain in the ass, and I would worry about the guy who does coming to me and saying, "I have some bad news." I really don't know why I have such a hard time doing it as some make it look so easy. :roll:

I don't have anything against wire wheels. I've run them on all my Nortons, both steel and aluminum rims, although I eventually went to cast wheels for two of the race bikes. They aren't all that heavy once you get rid of the stock brake rotor. I'll eventually get enough info to generate a table showing direct comparisons of complete wheels, brakes, cush drives, and tires. I got started on this compilation while trying to decide what sort of wheels to use on my restomod MKIII. I'm inclined to go to 18" tires because of the wide choice available, and I'd like to go tubeless. That pretty much limits me to cast wheels. I know there are ways to seal the spoked wheels for tubeless tires, and I've read of several Nortoneers who have done so successfully, but it still doesn't look like a good idea to me. Just personal choice, I guess. I considered going to 17" tires, but I still like the feel of the tall, skinny tires on a Norton, and they are much more forgiving of pot holes, which seem to be the new standard for California secondary roads. I like the way a stock 19" wheeled Commando falls easily into corners, kind of like power steering. I'm sure I could get around a track quicker on 17" tires, but I'm riding on the street, not a race track. Anyhow, if anyone has more weights too add, please do so. The more info the better.

Ken

I have apprillia pegaso /BMW f650 wheels on my commando but with a 19" morrad alloy rim on the back in place of the 17" the hubs /discs callipers are very light I will weigh them next time they are off ,my mate was telling me about an article in the motor cycle news where a sports bike was fitted with light weight carbon fibre wheels that was tested on a race circuit and was found to be lapping several seconds faster with no other changes to the bike! Did anyone read this article? Cheers

The review of the Honda CBR600rr fitted with BST carbon fibre wheels found a half second per lap improvement with the cf wheels vs stock.
There is also another test out there with a GSXR 1000. In that one the times were a bit slower with the BST wheels, the complaint being twitchy steering.

Glen

If you retrofit modern wheels to your commando and reduce the unsprung weight, should you also change your suspension spring rate or damping ? Similarly, if you retrofit a 5 speed close gearbox, would you raise the overall gearing or leave top gear where it has always been ?

acotrel said:

If you retrofit modern wheels to your commando and reduce the unsprung weight, should you also change your suspension spring rate or damping ?

Click to expand...

Depends on what other changes are made to the bike. When making a lot of changes, as I am, I expect to experiment with suspension settings when the bike is finished, to get it to suit me. But I generally expect to do that on any bike I own. But that's because I enjoy trying to make even small improvements, not because the bikes need changes just to be rideable. I've had a great time on bikes that suffered a lot of flaws, but it was still fun to ride them within their limits. I'm pretty sure we over think this stuff a lot. But hey, it keeps me happy and occupied.

On a normal Commando, if you just change to lighter wheels, but keep the stock forks and shocks, I wouldn't think you'd want to change much. Might try a little lighter fork oil, maybe even a little less pre-load, but that's about it, and only if you're really sensitive to suspension changes. With no changes, you'll still notice that the bike feels better over bumps and pot holes with the lighter wheels, particularly when leaned over, but that's about it. For most of us that's enough to justify the change.

Similarly, if you retrofit a 5 speed close gearbox, would you raise the overall gearing or leave top gear where it has always been ?

Click to expand...

Why change it? Both stock 4 speed and replacement 5 speed have the same 1:1 top gear. I generally gear for a comfortable cruising rpm on the road, in my case probably the 55 mph to 85 mph range. If I were doing a lot of freeway flying, I'd probably gear a little taller. If putting around the city most of the time, I'd gear a little lower to make up for the taller first gear. But it's not critical like on a race track. On the street, any reasonable gearing choice should work well for almost everything.

Ken

Norvil hub and 11" disk (lightened) with Buchanan stainless spokes and non-shuldered Akront WM -19 alloy rim, Avon 110/80-18 AM22 with tube, and titanium fasteners – 24 lbs. 11.6 oz.





Barnes QC rear with Akront shouldered 2.50x18 alloy rim, Buchanan stainless spokes, with spacers and bearings, sprocket, and swiss cheese disk, Avon 130/70-VB18 AM23 – 27 lbs. 11.6 oz.





These are the wheels I was using on my Featherbed/Commando racer in AHRMA vintage racing.

Additional weights:

Heavy duty tube 3.00 – 3.25-19 – 1 lb. 8.4 oz.
Heavy duty tube 4.10-19 – 1lb. 13.8 oz.
Dunlop K81 4.10-19 – 11 lbs. 7.0 oz.

Ken

Ken, that's a nice combo and relatively light.
I'm going to give the Outex tubeless kit a try. Two friends have used the kits, one has been riding on it for a year, the other for two years. They both say that their bikes have not lost any tire pressure in all of that time. Previously, with tubes fitted, they were adding a little air every now and then, which is normal.
I think it might be a safer choice than tubes in that deflation is unlikely to be rapid with the tubeless, whereas a ripped tube can deflate to nothing in a second.
Add the Ride on balancing/sealing fluid to the tubeless set up and a few ounces of weight are added back in, but the safety margin goes up again. You can also get rid of all rim balancing lead weights once the Ride-on is in place.

Glen

Thanks for the reference to Outex, Glen. While googling for them I ran across this excellent discussion of the various ways of sealing spoke wheels for tubeless tires. Lots of food for thought there.

https://adventure-motorcycling.com/2012 ... ess-tyres/

I haven't seen a lot of discussion on how to true a wheel after using one of the sealants (silicone, epoxy, etc.) on the nipple. I assume you just have to strip everything and start seal it again after truing. On the other hand, with the heavy duty spokes from Buchanan, I've so far never needed to true the wheels after the initial build, so maybe that's a non issue unless you hit some serious potholes or curbs.

Ken

A motorcycle is essentially two gyroscopes connected by a frame. When you turn a right hand corner, the rear wheel tends to lean the bike to the left, however the rate of turn of the rear wheel is slow, so the precession is slow. When you reverse steer by pulling on the left-hand bar to get the bike to lean to the right, the precession is faster. However the stability is affected by the wheel mass. If your steering is set up slow, as it is in most road bikes, the steering will probably improve if you fit lighter wheels. However if you have the steering geometry set up as much as possible towards self steering, fitting light wheels might make the bike too twitchy and it won't then inspire confidence. The early commando had different fork offset to the later ones because a few inexperienced riders got chucked off after riding over the 'cats-eyes' which occur in some British roads. That should tell you how sensitive a commando is to changes in it's steering geometry. If you think about it - a bike becomes more stable under brakes - what part of a degree does the rake change if you carefully apply braking as you go around a tight corner ? Also when you accelerate the bike should feel positive and very slightly self-steer into the corner. This feeling is caused by the rear end squatting and changing the rake - again probably only a fraction of a degree. If you ever ride a bike which has the front brake dragging, you will probably find yourself running out of road. I suggest anyone playing with their steering geometry should be very careful, because the changes that make a difference are miniscule.

lcrken said:

Thanks for the reference to Outex, Glen.

I haven't seen a lot of discussion on how to true a wheel after using one of the sealants (silicone, epoxy, etc.) on the nipple. I assume you just have to strip everything and start seal it again after truing. On the other hand, with the heavy duty spokes from Buchanan, I've so far never needed to true the wheels after the initial build, so maybe that's a non issue unless you hit some serious potholes or curbs.

Ken

Click to expand...

The spoke replacement/trueing issue has kept me from trying one of the liquid or semi-liquid sealing methods. I do replace the occasional broken spoke that might show up after riding on rough roads two up.
The Outex kit seems to have that issue covered. Small stick on Teflon disc go onto each spoke nipple before the sealing tape goes on. This way if the nipples are turned for either trueing or spoke replacement , the sealing tape is not damaged and the seal remains unbroken.
Outex recommends running a finger over any turned spoke nipple just to reattach the tape to the Teflon disc at that point.

Glen

About the gearing - with the 5 speed close gearbox, you get there faster and it is possible to pull a higher top gear - I'm talking about the overall gearing. Naturally as you increase it, you move everything up. However a 5 speed close box usually covers a slightly wider range than a 4 speed close box, so the lower gears don't become silly so easily. You wouldn't bother to fit a 5 speed close box to a commando intended for touring, it would be a waste. However if you are into hooning-around, it would be good. What intrigues me is that if you improve your motor's torque output, it doesn't seem to become evident unless you increase your bike's overall gearing. One thing I've found with my own bike is that it always feel safer when I'm hard on the gas, so the gearing is extremely important. It doesn't pay to float around very high speed bends. I noticed that when the Brits and Yanks came to our international historic meeting at Phillip Island the other year, turn one worried most of them. If you cannot stay on the gas around there, it is horrible.

acotrel said:

what part of a degree does the rake change if you carefully apply braking as you go around a tight corner ? Also when you accelerate the bike should feel positive and very slightly self-steer into the corner. This feeling is caused by the rear end squatting and changing the rake - again probably only a fraction of a degree.

Click to expand...

Depends on the bike. For a stock Commando, the rake change will be between 1° or so under very light braking to 5° or so under very heavy braking, if my rough calcs are right. You can do more exact ones if you like. It's simple trig. It's enough change that you notice it being easier to tip into a corner with a bit of front brake first, as long as you don't get carried away with the trail braking. On the other hand, even though it feels more stable to me to ride that way, it may not be the fastest way around the corner. Depends on the bike a lot. When I was racing two strokes, keeping up the corner speed was the fastest way around most tracks. But I raced 70's superbikes too, and with flexy frames, big sticky tires, and lots of horsepower, you really had to square off the tighter corners with the point and shoot style to make them work. Now I just ride on the street, and rolling off the throttle a bit at corner entry and getting back on it on the exit just makes me feel more secure.

You seem to really worry a lot about the bike being super sensitive to any changes. I don't see that on the bikes I ride on the street. Yes, changing the ride heights, or damping, or wheel weights, or whatever, has an effect, but it's not something that's going to throw you down the road unexpectedly unless you ride like a complete idiot. You make some changes, see what effect they have, and ride accordingly. The street is not the track. Actually, my experiences on the track must have been very different from yours too. I found the Commando to be very forgiving of mistakes, relatively neutral in corners, and very stable in high speed sweepers. I made a lot of changes over the years, wheels, tires, and suspension, and they did have some effects, mostly good, but never changed the basic nature of the bike. I also raced some much harder edged race bikes, and they were not as forgiving, but still not exactly death traps, just waiting to throw you off in a corner if you got in a little too hot. Unless there's something drastically wrong with the bike, it's the rider that throws it away, not the bike. You can crash any bike if you try hard enough. I had a lot of crashes, some quite serious, but none were the fault of the bike, except for cases of mechanical failure. They were either my mistake, or I got taken out by another rider.

Fortunately, I don't have to worry about that any longer. Since I retired, I've re-discovered the pleasures of riding interesting roads, and it's much less stressful than track riding. I'm still trying to improve my bikes, but it's more because I enjoy it, not because the bikes really need it that much.

Time for me to quit preaching and get back to weighing stuff.

Ken

I just weighed my NOS Dunlop K591 Elite SP 110/90-18 55V rear tire on the bathroom scale :? 12.8 lbs with the labels still on.
Lance

Thanks for adding to the data base, Lance. I've run out of tires to weigh unless I pull them off rims.

Ken

I was brought up riding a bike which gave me severe anxiety whenever I went near a race meeting. The Seeley does not do that. However the longer I am away from racing, the more edgy I get. I'd ride the Seeley anywhere and any time, however I still recognise the fact that I might end up as a skin bag full of bone chips. Fortunately, these days I can rarely afford to get back onto a race circuit. But its one of those things of which more medicine is better for the disease. I've promised myself an on-board camera project in the next 6 months. I want to do it, just to record the way the Seeley handles and performs. I noticed that Kenny Cummins uses similar fork offset, however I don't think many of the US circuits are tight enough for him to get the full benefit of his set-up.
I don't think I'd ever return to riding on public roads - bikes are not intended for that. Like sports cars, they belong in the past and guys like us simply enjoy the nostalgia trip.

acotrel said:

....I was....whenever I ... the longer I ...the more edgy I..... I'd ride..... however I.... that I might ...... I can rarely....I've promised... I want to ...I noticed.... however I don't....I don't think I'd...return to riding on public roads - bikes are not intended for that.... enjoy the nostalgia trip.

Click to expand...

Umm, the title of this thread is What do Wheels Weigh--- Maybe you could start a thread in the "Pub" about how you think motorcycles are not intended to be ridden on the street.

So you deny that the weight of the wheels can affect the way a bike handles. It probably doesn't matter much on a road bike because you are rarely in the situation where you are fighting to stay alive. When I am in an extreme situation, I always like to know what the bike will do. Any other time, it doesn't matter a stuff what the wheels weigh.