View Single Post
Old 09-23-11, 09:07 PM
  #6  
gyozadude
Senior Member
 
gyozadude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sunnyvale, California
Posts: 1,180

Bikes: Bridgestone RB-1, 600, T700, MB-6 w/ Dirt Drops, MB-Zip, Bianchi Limited, Nashbar Hounder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mithrandir
I ride 26x2.0, which is like 50mm. I prefer the fat tires as they really suck up the road static. After 50+ miles I can really feel it in my arms on smaller tires.
+1. I ride 26 x 1.9 slicks for most commutes. Next is 700x32c (ISO 32x622 - measured width at nominal psi 32.5mm). You may already be aware that there are bunch of tire makers still out there that put 700x28c or 700x32c on their sidewalls, but inflated the width is 22mm or 23.8mm. I bought some Performance commuter tires in 28c and they had ISO numbering of 28x622. That was bogus. The guys at the shop said that tires can stretch upto 5mm given sufficient age. I kind of smiled and let them know that I'd like a refund and let them know that when a tire stretches that much - it's call casing failure. When I buy a tire with ISO measurements on the side, I expect it to meet specifications for its expected service lifetime. Anything beyond that is unsatisfactory and I'm sure not the intent of the carcass designers. But I'm sure they sold quite a few of those tires because they could advertise they had a 28c tire for just a bit over 300grams. But for us Clydes, wider provides more cushion and it helps protect the rim as well as the backside.
gyozadude is offline