Are you running the 200/60/17? Wondering if the profile difference from a 55 was enough to necessitate a geometry change? Id also like to hear your impression of that rear.
Yes, 200/60 rear for the slick. It does change the geometry, and it actually makes the turn in quicker. But I have to compensate by reducing rear rebound (increase rebound damping) by 1-2 clicks to make it more stable through the turn. Otherwise, the bike moves quite a bit.
Once that's done, it felt much better than the 1199 I knew.
I think it results in raised rear height, "more correct" steering head angle, and "more correct" swingarm angle, all closer to the 1199R or 899 geometry. Maybe...
Also, taller tyres = bigger rolling diameter = give better speed at the same RPM, both straight up and when leaned. When I went with how the bike felt (ie going at the same rpm), braking takes a bit of recalibration. But it becomes a lot easier to get faster laptimes (duh!!)
It felt a bit awkward first time when riding around the pit. Felt like the bike is very tall and I am not sure what it was doing. But within one lap I got into it and was enjoying it so much. Now i wished I could get SP/SC in 200/60 size
Interestingly, after four trackdays on the superbike slicks, I am still at 1:12.03 personal best compared to 1:12.30 on the SC1/2 supercorsa. It is not automatic laprecord breaker, but I felt comfortable at 1:12 whereas with the supercorsa SC I felt quick at 1:12., and with the SP I felt huge satisfying rush of adrenaline at 1:12 (and the knowledge I am not likely able to do 1:12 if the tyres have done more than 2 trackdays).
So, there you go, all three tyres are super capable. But there is definitely an incremental increase in the capability.
And the other way around, if the track/road is very cold and damp, I'd be ok with SP, scared shitless with SC, and would just wait for tow truck outright with the slicks.