...and chances are, , those 27"-equipped Paramounts ended up in touring duty.

-Kurt

Its true that i havent tried performance rated 27" tires as my lbs doesnt offer it. but I have tried 700c walmartish tires and 27" tires on aluminum rims on the same bike. The 700c offered a better more responsive ride considering the equally crappy tires that were mounted. Only variables not held equal were sidewall size which probably affected the responsiveness as well. Although not experimental, that is my experience.

Which two tires did you test? Wal-Mart's Chen Shing 700C's aren't that bad; they're about on par with the Nashbar Prima 2. A bit heavy, but they perform. On the flip side, the gumwall Kendas generally sold in these same chains are some of the spongiest pieces of crap you'll find available in any tire size; ditto for the bottom-end IRC blackwalls for the EA3 size - those come pre-dryrotted for you.

-Kurt

1984 Lemans RS, 27" wheels, Tange Infinity frame, Mangalloy fork.
1985 Elite RS, 700c wheels, Tange Infinity frame, Mangalloy fork.
1987 Lemans RS, 700c wheels, Tange 2 frame, Mangalloy fork.
They all ride about the same, if you can get a 1" tire for the '84.

Nailed it right there. 'Giant' 27 inch wheels look great.

If I could get vintage 27 inch wheelsets to be as light as tubulars, I would consider going back - if only for touring.

This thread reads like an outdated Beta vs. VHS debate, when everyone moved to DVDs.
I'd like to clarify (or add to) what's already been posted regarding 27" was never intended for anything more than touring. Not true. In it's heyday, 27" was offered as a performance clincher option. Just look at some of the race bikes that came equipped with 27x1" wheels as standard equipment. Cannondale's initial road race bikes were spec-ed with 27x1 wheels.
Specialized Turbo/R and S, Avocet 27x 7/8", were not aimed at the touring market. My Ambrosio Elite 19 Durex clinchers, my brother's Mavic MA40's, were narrow performance oriented rims. 27 loss the performance clincher war to 700C due to momentum from the 700C tubular market. To this day, high(est) performance comes down to tubular tires when race results are on the line.
Back in their day, the 27" and 700C performance clinchers were of equal quality and performance. That was then, now it's modern 700C. Can't generalize a comparison. It's like listening in to a debate between Porsche 944 and Mazda RX-7 owners, and then lob a grenade into it by stating neither would keep up with your Subaru WRX STi.
;)

ftfy.

On dry pavement it might be a contest, on damp, not even close :)

Very true but if I hadn't put that in there some smart alec would have brought it up ;)

*Draws line in sky*

One for you ;)

-Kurt

I just weighed my 27" wheels (alloy - one Weinmann rim, another Araya) outfitted with Cheng Shin 630X28 blackwalls against my Shimano 105/wolber rim wheels outfitted with Continental Ultra Sport 700X23's. Both wire rim, both cheaper tires (CS's were $13/each, CUS's were $21 each). There isn't a whole lot of difference between the two, and the difference that IS there could be equated to the tires and/or larger rim size. Were they the same size with the same size tire, I doubt I'd find much difference.

Actually, a good test would be to get an alloy 700 and an alloy 630, both wearing the same sized tire, and see what the difference would be. I'd bet a set of 700X32 paselas and a set of 630X32 paselas on the same wheels would make the weight difference negligible for all but the most die hard crit riding.

Also, realize that when doing distance cycling events where the only acceleration would be from going around sweeping corners and the like, you would be hard pressed to find a difference in speed between two similar wheels. The difference would be in standing acceleration, or in steep-turn acceleration, and even then, assuming the same quality, and identical tires (again, pasela vs. pasela, or what have you), you wouldn't find anything that would keep you too much slower.

I certainly don't feel any slower while riding my 27" wheeled Fuji with the local club full of aluminum and carbon wonder bikes. Then again, they're all middle aged, and I'm not...

Threads like this are always better when people provide real content instead of just bashing each other. So picking up on this measurement idea, lets look at some numbers.

The radius difference between 27" and 700C is only 4mm, or .1575". Compared to the 13.5" radius of a 27" wheel, that's only 1.167%. Now circumference is proportional to the radius. So for the same rim design and thickness and with comparable tires the total weight would be only 1.167% higher for the 27" wheel. If the total of rim and tire was, say, 500g, the total for a 27" rim would be only 505.8g, or 5.8g higher.

Now that extra weight would be out at the ends of the rotating wheel where the moment of inertia would be m * r. So the increase in moment of inertia would be 3.37% (i.e. 1.0167 squared). Compared to a 700C wheel, if that extra mass were kept at the 700C's radius that nominal 500g 27" rim and tire would feel like it was 17g heavier on acceleration.

Any way you look at it, the difference is nowhere near as great as between, say, a 300g rim and a 450g rim. They just aren't that different due to the radius difference alone.

4mm = 0.1575", not 1.575"

Math fail :)

I can do the maht, I just can't tpye.

The difference honestly was about 100g. This, realize, is with decent quality 23c tires compared to low-end 28c tires. Chances are, most of that 100g is the tire.

...

Oh, dear.

I started a **** storm.

I can't find this. Have you got a link?

Yeah, but a pretty funny one, don't you think? And, best of all, I think almost none of it addresses your original point. Well done, I say!:thumb:

Ah, rhm, you're just holding out for those 26 x 1 1/4"/597mm wheels to make a comeback. ;)

Neal

What can you expect when you engage with 'clincher' people - no matter what their size?

If you would like mature, reasoned discussion, then I recommend the 'totally tubular' thread. We are much more civil over there.

I think they're rated 110 psi, but I could be wrong about that. I've never had a problem with them blowing off or out when inflated to 120-ish.

They're also regularly on sale for $8.00 at Performance.

...I've read this thread from a distance with varying degrees of interest and occasional amusement. I cannot offer an actual opinion one way or the other because I've never ridden 700c. I eventually want to build up a set to see how well they work on a bike that originally came with 27s (I don't see that 4mm difference in reach being much of a problem). And I'm not, and never have been, a professional/competitive/performance rider, for whom wheel builds, tire sizes/weights, etc., are obviously critical...for the recreational kind of riding I do, I wonder if there would actually be much of a noticeable difference. What I am taking into serious consideration is how the roles of 27 and 700c have almost completely reversed from what they were when our C&V bikes were new: 27 was the 'standard' and 700c was the 'niche' size...now it's more or less the other way around and future availability of 27 rims and tires is getting limited compared to 700c...from a practical standpoint, I'm looking at 700c for a future wheel build simply because I'm thinking 700c rims, tires, etc. are going to be easier to get than 27 as time goes on...
...of course, I'd be looking at 700c clinchers...I also have zero experience with tubulars...

:) Yes, it is funny. In the bad kind of way that can eventually grow into a trolling habit. :/

But funny, this time.

I sure like those 27"s, but I like 700c's too.

Yes, I distinctly remember deciding between the two sizes when I last got rims for our tandem. Never planned to get tubulars for the bike so that potential advantage for the 700c size was not a consideration. But I figured that I could get 27" tires in any small town whereas I might need to find a decent bike shop to get 700c ones. So I went with 27" as the more versatile size. Needless to say, that wouldn't be my choice today.

Trolling?:eek: Oh, no, none of us would ever do that. Nosirree, not on this forum.

Actually, the last pair of rims I bought was 27", and though I'm not particularly happy with them --not cheap, not hooked, look kinda flimsy-- I was happy enough to find them at all. I would jump at a chance to buy a pair of 700c's, but they don't exist in the 32/40 drilling. I know a bunch of people have been pestering Velo Orange to get some rims drilled with 40 holes, but no luck so far.