Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 34 of 34
  1. #26
    Senior Member donheff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Capitol Hill, Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tricross Comp
    Posts
    1,238
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess I am an anomaly. I use the optimal tire pressure chart shown in a biking magazine article that several years ago introduced this topic. I weigh 162 and run my 28s at 60 psi. If I was more anal the front would be a few pounds less. My ride feels great. To understand the graphic, you need to break up your total weight - 55% back and 45% front. Then find your mark on the proper tire size and move left to see pressure.

    tirepressure.jpg
    Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson

  2. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    No Va but ride also in So Md
    My Bikes
    Cervelo SLC-SL, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
    Posts
    8,494
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by camelopardalis View Post
    Scientific testing does confirm that wider tires roll faster. Can you argue with this analysis?

    Bicycle tires - puncturing the myths - BikeRadar
    Velonews produced similar results. But rolling resistance is only part of the equation. The aero benefits of narrower tires aren't considered here. When they are, it's just about a wash. Also there was a long thread of the comfot between 23 and 25 and most people admitted they couldn't tell any difference. For those that sad they could, it generally was because they used less pressure.
    You're just trying to start an argument to show how smart you are.

  3. #28
    What??? Only 2 wheels? jimmuller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Boston-ish, MA
    My Bikes
    '73 Raleigh Carlton Gran Sport, '72 Peugeot UO-8, '82 Peugeot TH8, '87 Bianchi Brava, '76? Masi Grand Criterium, '72 Bertin C32, '87 Centurion Ironman Expert, '74 Motobecane Champion Team, and lots of uncertainty on some
    Posts
    7,198
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by donheff View Post
    I use the optimal tire pressure chart shown in a biking magazine article that several years ago introduced this topic. I weigh 162 and run my 28s at 60 psi. ... To understand the graphic, you need to break up your total weight - 55% back and 45% front.
    The trouble is, a bike magazine may run a chart like this and so it is accepted as "truth". Personal experience: I weigh 160 and use 28's on one of my bikes set up specifically for commuting. I keep them at 100 to 105psi. Trying a new route on the return home once this past spring with the sun in my eyes, a traffic light ahead, and traffic around me so I couldn't pay enough attention I hit a hole with my rear wheel (but somehow not the front). I hit it so hard it flat-spotted a perfectly great vintage MA2 rim, but it did not flat the tire. Had I been running 60psi it would most certainly have caused a snake-bite puncture too, and probably have bulged out the rim sidewalls too. The rim was toast anyway but at least I could ride the rest of the way home.

    FWIW, I can feel the difference in weight between it and my lighter, skinnier wheels and tires. More often than not I'm on 23s or 25s. Had I been on 23s that bump might have ruined that rim too, but I keep them pumped up higher in accordance with the smaller contact patch so as to provide greater cushioning distance between rim and road.

    That pressure chart makes no sense to me.

    But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
    Last edited by jimmuller; 07-28-14 at 06:58 AM.
    Real cyclists use toe clips.
    jimmuller

  4. #29
    Senior Member kingfishr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    My Bikes
    Ridley Noah, Specialized Tarmac, Colnago Master X-Lite, 1980 Colnago Super, 2002 Mercx Alucarb, 1989 CF Specialized Allez
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmuller View Post
    But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
    You're right those three factors are tiny compared to everything else, and you could always run a 23mm on the front, where there is less weight to support and use a 25 or 28mm back since there is much less aerodynamic cost of a wide tire in back. As far as moment of inertia, Continental GP4000S have the following weights:
    approx. 205 gram (23-622)
    approx. 225 gram (25-622)
    approx. 235 gram (28-622)

    I certainly can't feel the 30 gram difference on my 1600g wheelset...

    Actually the most important feature of the Panaracer Grand Bois is the tan sidewall for that retro look on my steel frame

  5. #30
    feros ferio John E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
    My Bikes
    1959 Capo; 1980 Peugeot PKN-10; 1981 Bianchi; 1988 Schwinn KOM-10;
    Posts
    14,944
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A couple of you have mentioned that a tire's labeled callout size does not necessarily match its actual width. I have been very pleased with 700Cx28 Continentals on the Bianchi, 90 PSI front, 100 rear, but these tires are actually only about 25mm wide on my rims. Other "28mm" tires I have owned, such as Specialized Armadillos, run enough taller and wider that they won't clear my fork crown and chainstays. I suppose we should consider sidewall height and actual tire width in this discussion.

    I remember the early 1970s race to smaller and smaller clincher tires, which seemed to start right after the Michelan Elan broke through the traditional 27x1-1/8 barrier. Over the years I have migrated back toward somewhat wider tires, as have several of you.
    "Early to bed, early to rise. Work like hell, and advertise." -- George Stahlman
    Capo [dschaw'-poe]: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger, S/N 42624
    Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
    Bianchi: 1981 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
    Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069

  6. #31
    Senior Member BlazingPedals's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Middle of da Mitten
    My Bikes
    Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent
    Posts
    7,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd be perfectly happy running 28s. Running 25s is almost the same. The difference between 23 and 25 is almost theoretical - I sure can't tell the difference.

  7. #32
    Senior Member donheff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Capitol Hill, Washington, DC
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tricross Comp
    Posts
    1,238
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmuller View Post
    The trouble is, a bike magazine may run a chart like this and so it is accepted as "truth". Personal experience: I weigh 160 and use 28's on one of my bikes set up specifically for commuting. I keep them at 100 to 105psi. Trying a new route on the return home once this past spring with the sun in my eyes, a traffic light ahead, and traffic around me so I couldn't pay enough attention I hit a hole with my rear wheel (but somehow not the front). I hit it so hard it flat-spotted a perfectly great vintage MA2 rim, but it did not flat the tire. Had I been running 60psi it would most certainly have caused a snake-bite puncture too, and probably have bulged out the rim sidewalls too. The rim was toast anyway but at least I could ride the rest of the way home.

    FWIW, I can feel the difference in weight between it and my lighter, skinnier wheels and tires. More often than not I'm on 23s or 25s. Had I been on 23s that bump might have ruined that rim too, but I keep them pumped up higher in accordance with the smaller contact patch so as to provide greater cushioning distance between rim and road.

    That pressure chart makes no sense to me.

    But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
    I no longer have the link but the article I got the chart from detailed a technical test protocol done in a lab, along the lines of some of the studies reference here. It was pretty compelling that the standard recommended tire pressures are far higher than needed for comfort and good rolling. I followed the directions for my wife and my cyclocross bikes running 32s. We never got a snake bite and we hit some rough stuff over the years. You may be correct that your bump would have caused a snake bite at 60 psi but then maybe not. And maybe the more cushioned impact might have better protected your rim. Or maybe not.
    Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson

  8. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,388
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wonder how many times this subject has been discussed? I know I looked at a bunch when a couple months ago I was deciding what size tires to put on my road bike. The conclusions I came to are:
    -A few mm difference in tire width makes little or no difference for all but the most competitive riders.
    -Tires are not very precisely sized. Armadillo 23's actually measured 25. A Gatorskin that was labeled 28 rubbed the bike frame where another did not.
    -Lots of snake oil about tire pressure. Manufacturers aren't very forthcoming about actual strengths and recommendations. I found a manufacturer chart which I used.
    -Tire quality as compared to airplanes, cars and motorcycles is very low. Manufacturers use weight requirements as an excuse not to make quality tires. Yet, in airplanes where weight has a direct effect on profits they can build tires that do not need to be pumped up frequently and are not prone to flatting.
    -Lacking actual, meaningful operational testing and data each person arrives at a tire size and pressure they are comfortable with. But, this is really accepting a role as a test pilot. They may stoutly defend their decision because it seems to work. But, they haven't a clue why it works.

    Seems to me customers ought to act less like sheep in demanding the manufacturers produce quality tires that are labeled with their operating parameters.
    It is better to smell the flowers than taste the roots.

  9. #34
    Trek 500 Kid Zinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Spokane WA
    My Bikes
    '83 Trek 970 road --- '86 Trek 500 road
    Posts
    2,349
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kingfishr View Post
    Actually the most important feature of the Panaracer (or) Grand Bois is the tan sidewall for that retro look on my steel frame
    +1
    "I never lost a race because my bike was too heavy".......George Mount

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •