rims and tyres
10-07-14, 09:07 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: cairo,Egypt
Posts: 32
Bikes: orbea sport 2620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
rims and tyres
hello
i would like to know if a 1.25 tire fit my rim it has ertro 559*19c written on it and already running knobby 1.95 tires
also will the difference (on roads) will be significant or it isnt worth it ....
thanks
i would like to know if a 1.25 tire fit my rim it has ertro 559*19c written on it and already running knobby 1.95 tires
also will the difference (on roads) will be significant or it isnt worth it ....
thanks
10-07-14, 10:08 AM
#2
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,347
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 97 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3748 Post(s)
Liked 2,308 Times
in
1,447 Posts
If that 1.25" tire is smooth and also marked with a 559 bead size (it should say 32-559 somewhere on it), then it will work and probably roll a lot better for you. 
__________________
RUSA #7498
Originally Posted by chandltp
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
10-07-14, 01:08 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 37,183
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5031 Post(s)
Liked 1,163 Times
in
676 Posts
I'm not a fan of ultra narrow tires on wider rims not made for them. This isn't to say they won't fit or hold air, but with a correctly matched tire/rim combination, the tire will assume an Omega profile with the tire widest halfway up, and pinched back at the rim. This provides a nice flex zone and ensures the tire handles as designed. If the rim is too wide, the tie has an inverted U profile, and it's vertical flexing suffers, causing reduced traction on bumpy roads.
My guideline is that the tire width should be one and a half times the rim's inside width or more. There's fudge room so close is OK.
As for rolling efficiency, the narrower tire may roll easier than the wider one depending on tread, but IMO might be too far to the other extreme. Consider a 1.5 or 1.6" wide tire for better balance in handling characteristics.
My guideline is that the tire width should be one and a half times the rim's inside width or more. There's fudge room so close is OK.
As for rolling efficiency, the narrower tire may roll easier than the wider one depending on tread, but IMO might be too far to the other extreme. Consider a 1.5 or 1.6" wide tire for better balance in handling characteristics.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
10-07-14, 01:15 PM
#4
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,347
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 97 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3748 Post(s)
Liked 2,308 Times
in
1,447 Posts
I'm not a fan of ultra narrow tires on wider rims not made for them. This isn't to say they won't fit or hold air, but with a correctly matched tire/rim combination, the tire will assume an Omega profile with the tire widest halfway up, and pinched back at the rim. This provides a nice flex zone and ensures the tire handles as designed. If the rim is too wide, the tie has an inverted U profile, and it's vertical flexing suffers, causing reduced traction on bumpy roads.
My guideline is that the tire width should be one and a half times the rim's inside width or more. There's fudge room so close is OK.
As for rolling efficiency, the narrower tire may roll easier than the wider one depending on tread, but IMO might be too far to the other extreme. Consider a 1.5 or 1.6" wide tire for better balance in handling characteristics.
My guideline is that the tire width should be one and a half times the rim's inside width or more. There's fudge room so close is OK.
As for rolling efficiency, the narrower tire may roll easier than the wider one depending on tread, but IMO might be too far to the other extreme. Consider a 1.5 or 1.6" wide tire for better balance in handling characteristics.
__________________
RUSA #7498
Originally Posted by chandltp
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
10-07-14, 04:34 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 37,183
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5031 Post(s)
Liked 1,163 Times
in
676 Posts
Either way, keep in mind that tire nominal and actual widths aren't always the same.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
10-08-14, 04:03 AM
#6
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: cairo,Egypt
Posts: 32
Bikes: orbea sport 2620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
thanks for response will the difference between 1.5 and 1.25 be noticable in terms of speed / handling
10-08-14, 05:01 AM
#7
Mostly harmless ™
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Novi Sad
Posts: 4,295
Bikes: Custom made on Scott Speedster frame, Custom made on a 1996. steel MTB frame (all but frame changed at least once in the past 20 years).
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1037 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times
in
81 Posts
Your wheels can fit tyres from 28 mm to 62 mm wide - no problems.
Speed and handling mostly depend on tyre quality, type. Fatter tyres for small 559 wheels should be even quicker. I'd go with 1.5.
Speed and handling mostly depend on tyre quality, type. Fatter tyres for small 559 wheels should be even quicker. I'd go with 1.5.
10-09-14, 03:41 AM
#8
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: cairo,Egypt
Posts: 32
Bikes: orbea sport 2620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Wouldnt thinner tires result low air resistance?
10-09-14, 03:47 AM
#9
Mostly harmless ™
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Novi Sad
Posts: 4,295
Bikes: Custom made on Scott Speedster frame, Custom made on a 1996. steel MTB frame (all but frame changed at least once in the past 20 years).
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1037 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times
in
81 Posts
Thin tyres do provide slightly lower resistance, and lower weight. Fatter tyres roll better on imperfect pavement. They will hold your weight with lower pressure, so ride will be less bumpy, wheels will be more robust. The bumpier terain you ride, the faster are thicker tyres. 1.5 to 1.25 is minimal gain in weight and air resistance, but significant increase in air volume.
10-09-14, 06:23 AM
#10
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: cairo,Egypt
Posts: 32
Bikes: orbea sport 2620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thin tyres do provide slightly lower resistance, and lower weight. Fatter tyres roll better on imperfect pavement. They will hold your weight with lower pressure, so ride will be less bumpy, wheels will be more robust. The bumpier terain you ride, the faster are thicker tyres. 1.5 to 1.25 is minimal gain in weight and air resistance, but significant increase in air volume.
thanks for ur response and thanks to everyone responded to my question
10-09-14, 06:58 AM
#11
aka Tom Reingold
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 40,274
Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem
Mentioned: 499 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7068 Post(s)
Liked 1,921 Times
in
1,161 Posts
Actually, all things being equal, the fatter tire has lower rolling resistance.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
10-09-14, 10:47 AM
#12
Really Old Senior Member
Why do people always say "if all things are equal", when trying to justify fatter tires?
They aren't!
10-09-14, 10:49 AM
#13
aka Tom Reingold
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 40,274
Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem
Mentioned: 499 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7068 Post(s)
Liked 1,921 Times
in
1,161 Posts
That is exactly the point. You can't make all things equal except in theory. But if your main goal is to lower rolling resistance, going to narrower tires is misguided. In practice, there are tradeoffs, and it is rarely a good idea to get the narrowest or widest tire made.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
