Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Apr 12 2012 4:49 pm
Subject: Re: Boonen uses great big fat tubular tire in Paris-Roubaix
On Apr 12, 3:02 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Again, "what's the bitch with 'the racers'"?Oh my God, Frank. You've known a few guys who believed ad hype, going
> The bitch isn't with the racers, except perhaps their credulity. It's
back how many years?
And "bad design"? Oh my God, Part Deux (or would that be "Dieu"). Bad
in what way? Functioning well for the purpose intended is "bad
design"? Get real.
No no no, I never said anything about 25's being too wide. If you did
> Yes, I'm sure that in your area, and many others, there are plenty of
ask, in order to find out what people really think instead of
guessing, you might well find that a "25" might not be a popular size.
I'd suggest the reason might not be some kind of "credulity" but
experience, perhaps parallel to my own, and others in my cohort, that
a 23mm "nominal" tire, especially a top-quality sew-up, is plenty of
tire for even rough roads-- short of the cobbles of Paris-Roubaix--
and that there is a "feel" associated with tires popular in "racing"--
which of course is one of the reasons that such certain tires are
popular-- which feel is lacking in, from my experience, the larger
Clement "Paris-Roubaix" cotton and Del Mondo silk tires.
You keep on trying to establish that racers are stupid. That's part of
> I don't doubt that there are many racers who feel they won a raceThe only place I've ever seen people get really picky about tires is
> specifically because they were on 23s instead of 25s; or 19s instead
> of 23s, or whatever. I'm not going to address whether or not those
> impressions are correct.
on the velodrome and there are damn good reasons for that.
I think you might find any number of TT or TTT results, from amateur
to the professional ranks, where fractions of a seconds made the
difference in placings. When you can measure the drag difference
between a skinny front tire compared to a fatter one, and do a pretty
good mathematical model of a time difference that shows even a
second's advantage for the skinny front tire, all by itself, you need
to come out from hiding behind "it's all in the wash" and other
> What I'm addressing is whether anyone ever won a non-time-trial raceYou can believe as you wish on the first count; and sure, races have
> _because_ it was impossible to put, say, a 28 mm tire plus a fender on
> their bike. Not only do I think it's never happened, I think races
> have been lost because a bike lacked clearance.
been lost because of "lack of clearance", which goes back to the days
of break-a-delic spokes and tin-foil rims, even in bikes with huge
If you're arguing that a couple of mm's would have made a difference?
Maybe so, on occasion, but that's some pretty fine splitting of hairs
regarding tire rub from an out-of-round wheel.
> How? Here's how. A broke young racer can afford only one bike. HeI did some of my best, most helpful training on rollers-- that's one
> buys a carbon fiber wonder with just a whisker of fork clearance.
> Then comes the cold and rain. Wide tires and fenders would mean he'd
> be able to do a lot more training, but wide tires and fenders just
> don't fit his bike. So he "trains" by sitting in front of the TV (or
> spinning, or riding rollers, which is _not_ as helpful) and he loses
> to a guy who put more miles on the actual road.
"builder"-- and stationary trainers, which are another distinct "area"
Rollers for learning control, balance, riding that proverbial
"straight line", which all BS aside, is one of the most important
skills a newbie racer-- or any rider, for that matter-- can learn.
Stationary trainer for max output sessions (among others) where it's
best not to have to balance, and where effort over time can be much
more closely controlled than in most "road" situations, save doing
"laps" and potentially lots and lots of very short little laps over
the same piece of pavement <g>. IOW, a trainer is great for doing
"intervals", which in one way or another can not be replaced by "road
miles" as usually thought of. You need both, not one or the other.
"Versatility" again, and ignoring the "whisker-thin" exaggeration at
> The disadvantage of whisker-thin clearance is a lack of versatility.
least for the moment <g>. Instead: "Horses for courses". Including a
"rain bike" for many racers (and non-racers, for that matter), whether
they are "broke" or not. And, in the way many people "roll", a fixed-
gear bike for the fixed-gear stuff, and maybe a casual bike, or an
"errand" bike, a dedicated bike the kid trailer or "trail-a-bke" hooks
up to, a tandem to ride with the kids or the spouse, so on and so
Then you get into the world of using a tool designed for the job at
Ride what you like, as you do, and be happy! Others are doing the same
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.