Tire clearance problem with new bike
07-26-15, 02:40 PM
#26
Super Moderator
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott
Man, that's a bummer. Just when you thought bike manufacturers were starting to get more sensible about tire clearance...
So many gimmicks and tight specs. Turns me off thinking about a new frame.
Nothing to be gained with such tight clearances.
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Last edited by Homebrew01; 07-26-15 at 07:21 PM.
07-26-15, 03:13 PM
#27
don't try this at home.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N. KY
Posts: 5,636
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 859 Post(s)
Liked 291 Times
in
210 Posts
That looks really tight. And tires can get slightly bigger after a few hundred miles as they stretch out.
It seems very strange that it's that tight. Even a 23c tire wouldn't be much smaller.
To protect the frame, perhaps a piece of that sturdy clear tape that used for protecting expensive car hoods from stones would work. But the tape would quickly wear through from grit. It probably needs something like a very thin stainless steel sheet--how would it be attached, and where would you find such a thing?
My Orbea fork and brake bridge had only a little more clearance than that when I ran 25c--maybe 3mm. The frame itself has about 6mm clearance.
I've gotten a few scratches on the inside of the fork top from tiny dirt and gravel bits picked up from the road. The frame was never scratched.
...
I think that many frames would have trouble fitting 28c, with not enough width between the chainstays. And the brake clearance might be really tight, too. Brake clearance also depends on exactly where the brake mounting hole is located on the frame. I moved the same brakes from an older frame to a new frame, and the clearance was much less on the the new frame.
But some new frames are designed for larger tires. For instance, the (expensive) Bianchi Infinito should handle 28c easily.
It seems very strange that it's that tight. Even a 23c tire wouldn't be much smaller.
To protect the frame, perhaps a piece of that sturdy clear tape that used for protecting expensive car hoods from stones would work. But the tape would quickly wear through from grit. It probably needs something like a very thin stainless steel sheet--how would it be attached, and where would you find such a thing?
My Orbea fork and brake bridge had only a little more clearance than that when I ran 25c--maybe 3mm. The frame itself has about 6mm clearance.
I've gotten a few scratches on the inside of the fork top from tiny dirt and gravel bits picked up from the road. The frame was never scratched.
...
I think that many frames would have trouble fitting 28c, with not enough width between the chainstays. And the brake clearance might be really tight, too. Brake clearance also depends on exactly where the brake mounting hole is located on the frame. I moved the same brakes from an older frame to a new frame, and the clearance was much less on the the new frame.
But some new frames are designed for larger tires. For instance, the (expensive) Bianchi Infinito should handle 28c easily.
07-26-15, 07:21 PM
#28
Super Moderator
I say "design flaw" for a road bike not to have room for 25mm tires.
You can mount your tire on a wheel and take it shopping with you to test bikes for clearance before buying.
You can mount your tire on a wheel and take it shopping with you to test bikes for clearance before buying.
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
07-27-15, 07:39 AM
#30
aka Phil Jungels
My gosh - it's a SPRINT bike, made for skinny tires, and aerodynamics...... are you sure you want a sprint bike?
07-27-15, 08:04 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wanderer
My gosh - it's a SPRINT bike, made for skinny tires, and aerodynamics...... are you sure you want a sprint bike?
07-27-15, 08:26 AM
#32
aka Phil Jungels
With a short wheelbase, and the rear tire tucked up almost inside the seat tube, I sure don't see any "endurance" geometry...... Like I said, a sprint bike, almost TT.
07-27-15, 08:28 AM
#33
Old Fart
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Bumpkinsville
Posts: 3,348
Bikes: '97 Klein Quantum '16 Gravity Knockout
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
For goodness sakes! Road bikes are SUPPOSED to have skinny tires! 28's? 32's?! When ya start putting such wide tires on a road bike, it essentially becomes a cross bike- or at least an endurance bike. If one wants a cross bike, or endurance bike, etc. then buy that kiind of bike!
Now, the trend is towards fatter tires.....so everyone will be getting rid of their old bikes which don't take wider tires.... Then, next, the trend will swing back to narrow tires, and the bikes with extra clearance will look stupid with 20mm tires....so everyone will rush out and buy a new bike again. It's all marketing BS!
23mm is a very practical medium for comfort and performance. I'm 170 lbs now- and was 228 when I started riding. I've tried out 23's; 25's and 28's. I noticed virtually no difference in ride comfort between them all. The 28's were slower. No discernable difference whatsoever between 23's and 25's. Obsessing over 2mm's of rubber is RIDICULOUS!
Now, the trend is towards fatter tires.....so everyone will be getting rid of their old bikes which don't take wider tires.... Then, next, the trend will swing back to narrow tires, and the bikes with extra clearance will look stupid with 20mm tires....so everyone will rush out and buy a new bike again. It's all marketing BS!
23mm is a very practical medium for comfort and performance. I'm 170 lbs now- and was 228 when I started riding. I've tried out 23's; 25's and 28's. I noticed virtually no difference in ride comfort between them all. The 28's were slower. No discernable difference whatsoever between 23's and 25's. Obsessing over 2mm's of rubber is RIDICULOUS!
09-26-16, 03:48 PM
#34
Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have the same issue with my Ridley Fenix. Purchased it brand new from Competitive Cyclist back in May of this year. I installed Reynolds Assault SLG clinchers and the Conti GP4000S II tires (700 X 25) and am seeing this clearance issue as well. Although, I don't believe mine is as severe as yours. What did your LBS say about this?
09-26-16, 04:31 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 791
Bikes: Many bikes in three states and two countries, mainly riding Moots Vamoots, Lynskey R265 disc and a Spot Denver Zephyr nowadays
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lighthearted
I just got home with my brand new Ridley Fenix! The bike looks and rides awesome! It's a little stiff, but I'm a big guy at 225lbs, and a little extra stiffness never hurt me anyway. I just swapped out the stock 25c tires (Conti Grandsport Race) for my current favorite tire (Conti GP 4000S II 25c) and I noticed that there is a problem with tire clearance. With the stock tires there was a few mm of clearance between the seat tube and the tire. Now, there is a little less than 1mm. I measured it. I double checked to make sure that the bead is set properly around the rim. It is. I thought that the stock tires looked a little small to be considered a "25c" tire. Anyway, I'm pretty bummed now. I don't feel that this is safe to ride with such little clearance. Does anyone else ride with such minimal tire clearance? I was really hoping to be able to go up to a 28c tire, but it looks like 25 is even pushing it. Funny thing is, I think I've seen pics of team riders riding this exact frame on the Paris Roubaix. Did they ride the cobblestones with 25c or smaller tires? I always thought the "Pave" bikes by definition were supposed to accept bigger tires. It's too bad. This bike is perfect for me in every other way. The guy at Performance Bike shop told me I had a 30 days "no buyer's remorse" return policy. I really hope I don't have to take him up on that. 
Challenge Strada 25's fit my Moots when Schwalbe 25's did not, and would be another option. Clement Strada 25's as well might be worth checking out.
One other thing you might try at Performance before returning it is seeing if wider rimmed wheels make a difference.
The newer wheels with 21-24mm internal width as opposed to 17-19mm allow larger tires to spread out more and so they don't run as "high" hence you should get more clearance at the seat tube.
Can't tell what wheels those are on there but they might do a take off on those and replace them with wider "cyclocross" wheels and that might be just enough to give you the clearance you need there.
09-26-16, 04:32 PM
#36
Optically Corrected
That's really tight... personally, I'd return the bike. Not being able to put my favorite brand and size of tire on it would be a deal breaker. But that's just me.
09-26-16, 04:45 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Zang's Spur, CO
Posts: 9,060
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3069 Post(s)
Liked 4,530 Times
in
2,304 Posts
Originally Posted by ShortLegCyclist
I'm pretty sure the Schwalbe One line is just the opposite, their 25's tend to look more like 28's when mounted.
(external rim measurement).
I have examples of both right now in my garage.
So I would be skeptical of the 25mm Schwalbe One measuring 28mm.
09-26-16, 04:57 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,319
Mentioned: 216 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17217 Post(s)
Liked 3,962 Times
in
2,942 Posts
Originally Posted by lighthearted
I just got home with my brand new Ridley Fenix! The bike looks and rides awesome! It's a little stiff, but I'm a big guy at 225lbs, and a little extra stiffness never hurt me anyway. I just swapped out the stock 25c tires (Conti Grandsport Race) for my current favorite tire (Conti GP 4000S II 25c) and I noticed that there is a problem with tire clearance.
Originally Posted by Wildwing
I have the same issue with my Ridley Fenix. Purchased it brand new from Competitive Cyclist back in May of this year. I installed Reynolds Assault SLG clinchers and the Conti GP4000S II tires (700 X 25) and am seeing this clearance issue as well. Although, I don't believe mine is as severe as yours. What did your LBS say about this?
Originally Posted by FBinNY
I've ridden with zero clearance tires, but usually in the fork. I'd have no issue riding that bike, but I'd use a piece of muffler tape, or at lease electrical tape as a chafe patch on the back of the seat tube. The tire won't touch but it will carry adhered sand and fine stones and take the paint off the tube otherwise.
3M POLYURETHANE PROTECTIVE TAPE 8672 from Aircraft Spruce
I have yet to get some, but it sounds like good stuff.
The tire carcass may stretch some over time, but as it wears flat, it should also increase clearance.
Not all rims are created equal, so a wider or narrower rim may also improve tire clearance. Any chance you could just try a couple of different rims?
09-27-16, 07:59 AM
#39
Senior Member
It's a road bike? Get a cross, adventure or other to fit the 30-40 mm tires.
09-27-16, 10:17 AM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In The Middle Of "Out There" / Downtown "Lost Angels"
Posts: 259
Bikes: 2001 Trek 520 - Hvy Hauler, Epic Adventure Bike / 2011 Fuji Newest 1.0 - Sporty Quick Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"POPPED" Spoke = Un-rideable bike?
At 225# I would say that OP is solidly in "Clydesdale" territory.
Unfortunately "clydes" and broken spokes are not uncommon. A broken spoke not only causes a rim to go 'out of true' (as earlier respondent suggested, easily adjusted for by 'opening up' brake caliper to get you home) but also 'out of round' (not so easy to adjust for with minimum clearance frame).
Unfortunately "clydes" and broken spokes are not uncommon. A broken spoke not only causes a rim to go 'out of true' (as earlier respondent suggested, easily adjusted for by 'opening up' brake caliper to get you home) but also 'out of round' (not so easy to adjust for with minimum clearance frame).
09-27-16, 03:10 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Upper Michigan USA
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
For a 225 lb rider I would not get a road bike that would not fit 28mm tires. If an endurance bike 32mm minimum, and really recommend riding on 35mm. The required tire pressures too high at your weight when on skinny tires. So, I would recommend returning bike and getting another bike to enable the larger tires. My opinion.
09-28-16, 08:25 AM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Bozeman
Posts: 4,094
Bikes: 199? Landshark Roadshark, 198? Mondonico Diamond, 1987 Panasonic DX-5000, 1987 Bianchi Limited, Univega... Chrome..., 1989 Schwinn Woodlands, Motobecane USA Record, Raleigh Tokul 2
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1131 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Buys high performance bike, complains when he can't fit fat tires on it.
That's like buying a modern ferrari and complaining you can't put cushy 65mm (sidewall) whitewall tires on it.
Dear general public who buys bikes (and by that I mean mostly the men in their 40s). You don't need a carbon fiber race bike to do your once or twice a week rides on. Sure, go ahead, spend your money, but don't complain when you try (and fail) to make it more "comfortable." Race bikes aren't meant to be comfortable, they're meant to be fast.
That's like buying a modern ferrari and complaining you can't put cushy 65mm (sidewall) whitewall tires on it.
Dear general public who buys bikes (and by that I mean mostly the men in their 40s). You don't need a carbon fiber race bike to do your once or twice a week rides on. Sure, go ahead, spend your money, but don't complain when you try (and fail) to make it more "comfortable." Race bikes aren't meant to be comfortable, they're meant to be fast.
09-28-16, 08:51 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Zang's Spur, CO
Posts: 9,060
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3069 Post(s)
Liked 4,530 Times
in
2,304 Posts
Originally Posted by corrado33
Buys high performance bike, complains when he can't fit fat tires on it.
That's like buying a modern ferrari and complaining you can't put cushy 65mm (sidewall) whitewall tires on it.
Dear general public who buys bikes (and by that I mean mostly the men in their 40s). You don't need a carbon fiber race bike to do your once or twice a week rides on. Sure, go ahead, spend your money, but don't complain when you try (and fail) to make it more "comfortable." Race bikes aren't meant to be comfortable, they're meant to be fast.
That's like buying a modern ferrari and complaining you can't put cushy 65mm (sidewall) whitewall tires on it.
Dear general public who buys bikes (and by that I mean mostly the men in their 40s). You don't need a carbon fiber race bike to do your once or twice a week rides on. Sure, go ahead, spend your money, but don't complain when you try (and fail) to make it more "comfortable." Race bikes aren't meant to be comfortable, they're meant to be fast.
Read part 4A & 4B: https://silca.cc/blogs/journal
09-28-16, 09:32 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Bozeman
Posts: 4,094
Bikes: 199? Landshark Roadshark, 198? Mondonico Diamond, 1987 Panasonic DX-5000, 1987 Bianchi Limited, Univega... Chrome..., 1989 Schwinn Woodlands, Motobecane USA Record, Raleigh Tokul 2
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1131 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shimagnolo
Looks like someone still thinks rougher ride means faster.
Read part 4A & 4B: https://silca.cc/blogs/journal
Read part 4A & 4B: https://silca.cc/blogs/journal
I also know that the specific tires in the OP tend to run tall and wide for a specific size.
(Only because I also run those tires.)
09-28-16, 10:28 AM
#45
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,188
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: 96 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3690 Post(s)
Liked 2,177 Times
in
1,372 Posts
Originally Posted by corrado33
Oh I'm perfectly aware of that "wider tires can be faster". There's no way in hell I'd ride anything less than a 23. However, I'm also perfectly aware that aerodynamics are a MUCH larger part of overall speed above 15 MPH. Aero bikes (and newer bikes pretending to be aero bikes for the sake of "marketing") will put the back tire as close to the seat tube as possible for a few reasons. 1: It's more aero. 2: It makes the handling of the bike a bit more snappier (shorter wheelbase). Therefore a more "aero" bike that has the rear tire closer to the seat tube will be faster than a similar bike with the rear tire a bit further from the seat tube. Aka the bike was build to go fast, not for comfort. My above comments still apply.
I also know that the specific tires in the OP tend to run tall and wide for a specific size. (Only because I also run those tires.)
I also know that the specific tires in the OP tend to run tall and wide for a specific size.
(Only because I also run those tires.)
__________________
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.
09-28-16, 11:51 AM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 28,749
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4980 Post(s)
Liked 3,104 Times
in
2,058 Posts
good thing OP isn't interested in fenders
09-28-16, 03:32 PM
#47
Senior Member
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott
Man, that's a bummer. Just when you thought bike manufacturers were starting to get more sensible about tire clearance...
09-28-16, 04:07 PM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,943
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: 4888 Post(s)
Liked 942 Times
in
563 Posts
Originally Posted by Hiro11
Yeah, I don't get it. I'm hopeful that in a few years every bike no matter how racy will be able to run at least 32s.
There's no reason that EVERY bike should meet your personal standard of what a bike should be. Bikes are purpose built so suit various needs and preferences and people are free to choose.
I don't get the objections of casual, utility and sport riders to bikes that are built for people with different needs.
__________________
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.
09-28-16, 04:29 PM
#49
Advocatus Diaboli
Originally Posted by FBinNY
You mean that Formula V cars should be equipped to haul plywood?
09-29-16, 08:27 AM
#50
Senior Member
Originally Posted by FBinNY
You mean that Formula V cars should be equipped to haul plywood?
There's no reason that EVERY bike should meet your personal standard of what a bike should be. Bikes are purpose built so suit various needs and preferences and people are free to choose.
I don't get the objections of casual, utility and sport riders to bikes that are built for people with different needs.
There's no reason that EVERY bike should meet your personal standard of what a bike should be. Bikes are purpose built so suit various needs and preferences and people are free to choose.
I don't get the objections of casual, utility and sport riders to bikes that are built for people with different needs.
There's no downside at all to bikes that can fit wider tires. There are many upsides to bikes that can fit wider tires, even for racing. Some aero specific frames actual give more room around wheels so the idea that a frame with tight clearances is "more aero" is at best debatable. Also, many pros are already cramming 25-28 tires into their frames.
Regardless, the vast majority of cyclists don't race and would benefit from more tire clearance. Still, the majority of performance road bikes sold these days have very tight clearances.
