Originally Posted by
mtnbke
It always amazes me that people want to convert bikes from 630 (27") to 622 (700c). The difference is only 8mm, and only 4mm functionally.
Tires.
Originally Posted by
mtnbke
In my book there is no legitimate reason to ever convert. I know many are brainwashed that 27" "sounds old" while 700c normatively represents new or modern. However, just use the appropriate ISO sizing terminology (622 and 630) and you strip away the power of that nonsense.
Tires.
Originally Posted by
mtnbke
You can get epically good tires in 630.
I'm not sure what "epically good" tires are, but the suggestion that the 630mm tires selection is anywhere near as good as 622m is patently false.
Originally Posted by
mtnbke
If you'll willing to just plan ahead a bit you can always have an extra set of rims and tires on hand, and higher quality stuff and at a lower price point than 622.
It's nice that you're on a "save the 27"" crusade, but don't spout this as if it actually has any merit. It doesn't.
Originally Posted by
mtnbke
In my book there is never a defensible reason to convert down from 630 to 622, other than "that is what everyone else is riding."
Tires.
Originally Posted by
mtnbke
Trying to figure out how the same rim and tire is considerably lighter and affords a better ride quality. Absurd.
Comparing apples to apples tire/rim and wheelbuild being identical except for 630 to 622 no cyclist could tell the difference.
Why would you compare apples to apples? The OP doesn't want to convert from 630 to 622 because he will need to lower the pads 4mm. If you read the original post well you would understand this.