TOPIC:

Just a quick one - yes, white sticker on the neck of the triple tree.

This sticker vertical of course.





Another idea, and it might be a good one for you! My bike is 1982, but the electrical harness shows 1981. So... check the harness for a tag!

Thanks Stan, my wiring loom is toast, and no label.

But the label on the frame gives me (besides a different frame number than on the import paperwork - that will be interesting!) the date of manufacture as being 7-79. So although from 1979, mine is actually an A2 model!



I did some measurement and the widest tyre I can get in the standard configuration is: rear 140 and front 120. But again interestingly, my front wheel/tyre is a 19 rather than an 18.... ?



Not entirely sure now how to get the 'same size tyres front and back' effect, but If I do decide to change the front wheel to a 17, I will need to extend (and probably widen) the forks (currently length is 81cm from centre of the wheel hub to the centre of the top clamp).

Rear shocks will need to be relocated further forward and thus need to be slightly smaller (currently 37cm) to keep the stance right, but once I start taking the frame apart, I will experiment with different front and rear lengths.

Paul

That's too bad about the harness. I was hoping you could make your case, as I could probably make, pushing the idea that parts were actually manufactured in 81 but the bike put together in 82, and that's when it came off the assembly line and got branded. I think the oldest year of a part manufactured would stretch the manufacture date to that year, with some parts added later. Not the other way around. Well, at least this 'lawyers talk' would make the case to consider, although perhaps they have a stiffer set of rules.

Speaking of which, maybe you could go by the engine year? Did you check the serial number on it and tried to decipher? Perhaps there is a code in it pointing to manufacture date. I will have to look again at mine and see what it offers.

Speaking of wheels, as you see above, my rear wheel is 140. Scotch has 150 and said no problem. I just looked at the rear and the swing arm, and there is lot of space there all around! Except the right side next to the swing arm. The weld seam is sticking out quite far. It is quite a common modification on Vmax, where there almost not much space for wider tires, to notch the swing arm. It is round, so trickier. With a square shape KZ, this should be a straight forward thing to do. I'd just cut out a square and weld it up with a steel plate leaving nice space for a wider tire. I have no idea how wider you could go on the stock rim, but that's to research. In case of my Vmax, I converted to radials and had to get a custom wheel for it. The swing arm untouched. Standard size on Vmax is 150, and I have a 180 installed now. Looks fat and good. Quite a difference when stopping at lights - seems to be standing on it's own! haha I can't imagine what it feels like having a 200 or 240 rear tire. Like sitting on an airplane wheel? I wouldn't want too wide tires anyway. I see no point in it, unless someone want's that 'bad ass' look (whatever the hell it means), or go fast in straight lines mostly. I wouldn't want it for a daily rider.

Are you sure about front and back tires the same size? Or just a fatter front? I think you'd curse your bike if you had 150 front and 150 back. You'd need power steering! haha
Especially in the parking lot. A standard on Vmax is 110, and people changed them to 120. Most went back to 110. Why? Makes the steering worse. I suppose fat tires are fine on some large cruisers but perhaps their geometry is designed for it. Different rake and trail, gravity center, etc. Personally, I wouldn't go past 120. It will already look much fatter.

So... a good question would be - how fat can you go on the stock Kawasaki rear rim?

Keep in mind tire sizes are not %100 uniform across MFRs: i.e. one MFR's '140' my be wider (once installed) or narrower than another MFR's '140'.

Keep in mind tire sizes are not %100 uniform across MFRs: i.e. one MFR's '140' my be wider (once installed) or narrower than another MFR's '140'

Yes, thank for reminding it.