16" vs 18" wheels

Two questions.
Why would Kawasaki use 16" rear wheel on a 79 KZ1000LTD and 18" on a 79 MKII 1000?

What other KZ model rear mag wheels interchange with the MKII? I am considering going 16" to help lower the bike as I have short legs.

you will dig having a 16" if you are used to the 18" i switch mine back and forth a lot to change the handeling...it will turn a little quicker in the back end, and give the feeling of falling into the corner untill you get used to it,and it'll change your revs a lot,you might find that you need to go to a 16 tooth front sprocket for freeway speeds to be your normal feel...but you'll like it a lot i bet.. is your seat cut down any?...that help guys with shorter legs big time...peace craig

Exit, Just my guess, But I figure K was experimenting with the pre-blvd/chopper look. at the time a 130-16 was a pretty big looking tire, compared to the 400/425 18's of the day. and Mags were the rage, Morris and Lester were the most common tho heavy & still used tubes. I would rec. you try to measure both a 16-18 wheels' height w/rubber mounted before commiting. and bear in mind that most of what may be gained (lost)in diameter,will be lost to tires' aspect height. lowering seat height is a trade-off, What you gain in comfort is lost to ground clearance or butt ease. You can trim @ a inch from seat before it becomes too harsh ( trimming from between pad and pan is by far the neatest) and going to 12-12.5 in shocks and dropping forks in clamps @ 3/4 " all help, but at a price. hope this helps,G

I am swapping out the spoked wheels on my 74 z1 900 this winter, for the dual disk front and single disc rear 16 inck mag's off of a 79 ltd 1000. I will let you know how it rides when i get it done and it is nice enough to ride it.

I think as mentioned the 16" was purely for looks as in the "cruiser look". No comparison in function, the 18" is superior in every way. However I've only owned one KZ with a 16" rear, a 76 900LTD and in comparison to all 20 or more KZs I've had with the 18 it was painfully evident the 16 was definately for looks, not function clearly.

Exitpupil wrote:

Two questions.
Why would Kawasaki use 16" rear wheel on a 79 KZ1000LTD and 18" on a 79 MKII 1000?

What other KZ model rear mag wheels interchange with the MKII? I am considering going 16" to help lower the bike as I have short legs.

Overall diameter of rear tires on mentioned models is very nearly the same, maybe 1/4" difference in seat height.

Outside diameters of various size tires may be found and compared at Dunlop's official website.

Dunlop

Imo, the fatter and softer 16" rear tire gives a slightly cushier ride, especially appreciated during longer distance riding with extended hours in the saddle.

Consider for example rigid-frame chopper riders where the only rear "suspension" is provided by the huge relatively low psi rear tire.

Good Luck!

Well I already have the 79 LTD with 12.5" rear shocks and front forks slid up the trees and I like the fit and handling. Admittedly I have not measured the the MKII to compare yet (I need heat in the shop!). I'll post the measurements in a day or two. Must be significant or the gearing change would not be noticeable as mentioned above?

Exit, as noted,ground clearance is paramount.when cornering clearance is limited by dragging frame/exhaust/cases. it's time for platforms, or a narrower bike.G

to reveal the handling characteristics at full push of any component . "Roadracing" wether it's on a track or some of the best canyons in the u.s brings out the two inch dif in two completely dif rims..as a matter of FACT this i KNOW as i have went through rear tires on each 16 and 18 inch seperate rims and two fronts in the last three months...there is a GREAT difference. 5-10 mm is change nowadays and at speed any change is multiplied..and an 18 and 16 rim will turn different rpms and will settle into and accelerate out of a corner differently,cuasing all other components to react in turn at a dif rate than before...this is not my opinion it is a fact changing the diamiter of a rear rim is allmost the same as changing a tooth on the rear sprocket....RonKZ650 wrote:

I think as mentioned the 16" was purely for looks as in the "cruiser look". No comparison in function, the 18" is superior in every way. However I've only owned one KZ with a 16" rear, a 76 900LTD and in comparison to all 20 or more KZs I've had with the 18 it was painfully evident the 16 was definately for looks, not function clearly.

16"wheels tend to have taller profile than 18" wheels,ive had both i prefer the looks of 17-18" myself

Update- Since I have both on bikes in my garage I measured them today. The 130-90-18 on the MKII was 26-5/8" tall. The 140-90-16 on the LTD was 25" tall. So It would definitely lower my bike to swap to 16". I have a rolling chassis I recently bought from an 89 Ninja coming so maybe I can just swap the suspension from it and be lower. I think it has 18" front and rear, plus lighter tubeless tires!

I use the 16 inch wheel to lower my 78 KZ1000. It also has shorter shocks, I think off a 650. The forks are also slid up in the trees in front to lower it. Im not short, the bike just works better at the drags this way. Im no road racer but I dont see much difference in normal riding. Youve got the wrong bike anyway if you are a road racer