Wow you must be really fun at parties. You're right if you're considering tyres with no width, then the angle of leaning is the same regardless of CG height. However, with real tyres with non-null width there will be a difference in angle. The difference is greater the thicker the tyre, as the actual point of contact between the tyre and the ground is no longer aligned with the bike's (now inclined) vertical plane. Will it be subjectively noticeable? Maybe, maybe not, I've never measured it myself, nor do I plan on buying multiple tyres to measure it. That being said, I suppose I could have given more details on my original post.
Here's some easy reading on the subject:
http://www.stevemunden.com/leanangle.html ("What's the real lean angle" section)
That page is mostly right, but has some statements which could make it be interpreted the wrong way.
For example "side force == friction". More correct/precise "side force <=
lateral friction", and at the limit "side force == lateral friction". I could be dragging a tire while going around a curve at the limit. In that case clearly friction > side force... I'll note that even my statement has inaccuracies since you don't necessarily need friction, you just need force. Thus, if you're riding on a curved/elevated track (e.g. a cyclodrome), you could run into things other than friction being your problems (e.g. ability of tire to resist pinch-flat, or rider to maintain consciousness). This isn't purely theoretical-- F1 drivers have had this problem (with 5.5Gs of force)...
Also the page differentiates "apparent lean angle" from actual lean angle. This is good.
The
actual lean angle (a line from the contact patch through the CG) will be the same angle for a given lateral force (otherwise force and reaction wouldn't equal and you'd be accelerating towards the ground).
The
apparent lean angle is a function of lateral tire stiffness (i.e how much the contact patch shifts when lateral forces present to the tire), inflation, rider weight (impacts the amount of lateral force required), etc. and not *just* the CG height.
It'd be more correct to say "all other things equal, moving the CG up/down while using a tire which shifts the location of the contact patch when subject to lateral forces, a lower CG will cause a higher
apparent lean angle than a higher CG).
imho, whatever, it basically feels the same unless you can get the CG substantially lower than normal, which mostly you can't.