Why am I not surprised?
carl...@comcast.net
http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2008/12/30/news/local/doc4959c54798189775879474.txt
year front rear total
flats flats flats
2008 15 38 53
2007 18 36 54
2006 9 16 25
2005 8 6 14
2004 17 12 29
2003 16 9 25
2002 36 17 53
2001 16 13 29
2000 18 15 33
---- ----- ----
tot 114 201 315
avg 12.67 22.33 35.00
Around 330 rides on the same 15 mile route each year.
Despite the number of flats, the Slime tubes are doing their job,
keeping the thorn and glass/rock punctures in check.
For example, the last three flats, all since Christmas, took ten
patches because the Slime tubes sealed 7 punctures well enough to last
until three larger punctures allowed me to stop and admire the
scenery.
(I patch a Slime tube and then pump it up the next day to pressure
test it. If I hear hissing, see a tiny spot of green, or notice a
little white wisp of fiber sticking out of a plugged hole, I add more
patches.)
One more ride tomorrow, but it's a leap year, so it hardly counts if I
get another flat.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
lime...@gmail.com
> Why am I not surprised by this front page photo?
>
Well, I have been happily riding on tires from AirFreetires.com for
about 10 years now so I don't have to suffer the misery of flats.
Just wait till Tom Sherman reads this. :-)
Lewis.
*****
Frank Krygowski
>
> year front rear total
> flats flats flats
> 2008 15 38 53
> 2007 18 36 54
> 2006 9 16 25
> 2005 8 6 14
> 2004 17 12 29
> 2003 16 9 25
> 2002 36 17 53
> 2001 16 13 29
> 2000 18 15 33
> ---- ----- ----
> tot 114 201 315
>
> avg 12.67 22.33 35.00
I'm still amazed you don't at least _try_ some sort of flint catcher
or tire saver - if only out of scientific curiosity!
- Frank Krygowski
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2008/12/30/news/local/doc4959c54798...
Tire savers are a drag because they only fill your shoes and cover you
legs qith road debris and don't prevent thorns that penetrate on
contact, while glass is sub surface readily. It's ineffective as like
wipinr tires after having ridden through sharp stuff.
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wiping.html
Jobst Brandt
Frank Krygowski
> On 31 Dec 2008 15:51:01 GMT, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
> >Tire savers are a drag because they only fill your shoes and cover you
> >legs qith road debris and don't prevent thorns that penetrate on
> >contact, while glass is sub surface readily. It's ineffective as like
> >wipinr tires after having ridden through sharp stuff.
>
> >http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wiping.html
>
> savers. The premise of the article is that the reaction time for hand
> wiping allows multiple revolutions. Ideally, a tire wiper would not
> have even one revolution of delay before the foreign matter was wiped
> from the tire. Additionally, there is a counterpoint posted to that
> article which contains valid considerations.
>
> More importantly: have there been any scientific studies in the lab of
> tires running over hazards with and without a static wiper in place?
We don't need studies in a lab! We need Fogel Labs to collect real
data in the real, goat-head world!
Seriously, Carl has such a rich opportunity to collect data, I remain
surprised he hasn't done so.
Dirty socks needn't be a terrible problem. At least, it wasn't when I
used to use those on my wife's bike. The advice years ago was to
mount the tire savers so they just missed the tire surface. ISTM the
gap could be adjusted so ordinary dust or road dirt would not be
touched, but a protruding goat head thorn would be snagged.
After a year of riding, Carl could certainly tell us if that worked.
- Frank Krygowski
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
>> Tire savers are a drag because they only fill your shoes and cover
>> you legs with road debris and don't prevent thorns that penetrate
>> on contact, while glass is sub surface readily. It's ineffective
>> as like wiping tires after having ridden through sharp stuff.
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wiping.html
> First, that article is about tire wiping, not using static tire
> savers. The premise of the article is that the reaction time for
> hand wiping allows multiple revolutions. Ideally, a tire wiper
> would not have even one revolution of delay before the foreign
> matter was wiped from the tire. Additionally, there is a
> counterpoint posted to that article which contains valid
> considerations.
As I said above, tire savers are about as useful as wiping tires.
> More importantly: have there been any scientific studies in the lab
> of tires running over hazards with and without a static wiper in
> place?
They were popular in the 50's and 60's and went away when the tire
saver guys noticed they had as many flats as the rest of us and the
guys I rode with also saw that their "saved" companions always had
dirt all over their legs when roads were moist. You might not find
that scientific enough for your standards, but it was a great sampling
at the time for me.
Observation of life's activities is a great scientific laboratory, that
if observed discerningly, often offers better data than artificially
constructed experiments.
Jobst Brandt
SMS
> More importantly: have there been any scientific studies in the lab of
> tires running over hazards with and without a static wiper in place?
Lab studies would be kind of pointless. The tire savers were pretty
effective on things like stones, stickers, and pieces of glass. No way
could you react fast enough with your hand to brush them off.
The estimate back when they were popular was that they cut down on flats
by about 70%.
You can still buy them:
"http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260336578186&ih=016&category=58099&ssPageName=STORE:PROMOBOX:NEWLIST#SLIDESHOW"
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Frank,
Fogel Labs stopped after a single test:
"I tried a home-made wiper on my front tire a while ago, modeled on a
pair that Frank Krygowski gave me for testing. I gave up after a
single ride because the road dust had me coughing my lungs out when I
tucked in on my daily downhill. Along similar lines, Jobst has
mentioned that riders who had tire wipers were easily identified on
his rides because they had so much more dirt on their legs."
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/dc54541520559ded
Asthma and allergies don't mix with tire wipers/thorn catchers/tire
scrapers.
I thought about trying just a rear scraper, but it's amazing how a
bicylist entrains and circulates dust and even scent in his wake. I
understand how it works, but it still startles me when I smell
cigarette smoke or perfume _after_ I pass someone walking on the
bicycle path.
The other problem is shown by those statistics:
year front rear total
flats flats flats
2008 15 38 53
2007 18 36 54
2006 9 16 25
2005 8 6 14 !!!
2004 17 12 29
2003 16 9 25
2002 36 17 53
2001 16 13 29
2000 18 15 33
If you didn't know that all years had ~330 rides with the same tires
on the same route, you'd think that I used some wonderful anti-flat
techniques in 2005, such as Slime tubes, thick tread, thorn catchers,
riding further from the edge of the road, or watching carefully for
tiny goatheads coming at me at 30 feet per second.
I attributed 2005 (or maybe even earlier good years) to the closing of
a gravel pit, which reduced rock chips and goatheads dragged out onto
the highway.
It was a nice theory, but it doesn't look too convincing after 2007
and 2008.
It's a good example of how normal variation and wishful thinking lead
to notions that won't hold up in large-scale studies. That's why I'm
unconvinced by claims of 70% flat reduction in another current thread
about the dangers of using a 19~23 mm tube in a 26 mm tire. Few
posters seem to get as many flats as I consider routine or ride the
same route 330+ times per year.
Modern epidemiology is the study of extremely rare diseases in
extremely large populations over extremely long periods--and
epidemiologists are always in danger of seeing patterns instead of
random variations that look like patterns--the endless small scale
studies that show that coffee is linked (or not linked) to toenail
cancer illustrate this. Flat tires are surprisingly rare and random,
but we tend to look for patterns.
To complicate things, I may even have had as many punctures as usual
in 2005, but only 14 showed up because the Slime happened to seal most
of them--whether a goathead causes a flat is a hit or miss business.
Of the last three tubes that I patched, one needed six patches and the
other two needed two patches each--the Slime had sealed 7 out of 10
holes until I reinflated the tubes on my workbench.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
[snip]
>They were popular in the 50's and 60's and went away when the tire
>saver guys noticed they had as many flats as the rest of us and the
>guys I rode with also saw that their "saved" companions always had
>dirt all over their legs when roads were moist. You might not find
>that scientific enough for your standards, but it was a great sampling
>at the time for me.
>
>Observation of life's activities is a great scientific laboratory, that
>if observed discerningly, often offers better data than artificially
>constructed experiments.
>
>Jobst Brandt
Dear Jobst,
Tire wipers/thorn catchers/tire scrapers were popular in the 1930s,
1940s, 1950s, and 1960s--and even earlier. They can be hard to spot in
old photos. A few examples . . .
1910:
http://flickr.com/photos/radlmax/1474735749/in/pool-611017@N23
1934:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/back_brake_1934.jpg.html
1935:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Leducqjpg.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1936:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Caminargent_full.jpg
1938:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Magne_position.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1941:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Aimar.JPG.html
1947:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Vietto_brake_1938.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1948:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Bar48.JPG.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1949:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Mahe_PR_49.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
wrote:
Dear Steven,
I'm agnostic about tire scrapers.
On the one hand, thorn catchers were de rigeur in the Tour de France
from at least 1930 through 1960.
On the other hand, tire savers have practically vanished, while
thorn-resistant tubes still sell.
Most people don't get enough flats on the same route over a year to
have even a hope of telling whether they're getting more flats or
fewer flats.
People like me can show that the same ~330 rides per year on the same
route with the same tires and tubes produce anywhere from 14 to 53
flats (plus lots and lots of sealed punctures that don't get counted).
The most effective anti-flat trick that I've found in this century is
riding in years that end with a "5":
year front rear total
flats flats flats
2008 15 38 53
2007 18 36 54
2006 9 16 25
2005 8 6 14 !
2004 17 12 29
2003 16 9 25
2002 36 17 53
2001 16 13 29
2000 18 15 33
---- ----- ----
tot 114 201 315
Choosing 2005 for the date reduced flats 50% to 74% when compared to
tests conducted in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, and 2008.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
John Forrest Tomlinson
>I'm agnostic about tire scrapers.
>
>On the one hand, thorn catchers were de rigeur in the Tour de France
>from at least 1930 through 1960.
> On the other hand, tire savers have practically vanished, while
> thorn-resistant tubes still sell.
What does this mean? Does it mean that you think something racers was
using back in the day was actually useful? Or are you saying because
racers at that time used it it was probably worthless?
In any case, it seems you're saying racers using something has some
effect on your view of that something...
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> Tire wipers/thorn catchers/tire scrapers were popular in the 1930s,
> 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s--and even earlier. They can be hard to spot
> in old photos. A few examples ...
> 1910:
http://flickr.com/photos/radlmax/1474735749/in/pool-611017@N23
> 1934:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/back_brake_1934.jpg.html
> 1935:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Leducqjpg.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
> 1936:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Caminargent_full.jpg
> 1938:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Magne_position.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
> 1941:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Aimar.JPG.html
> 1947:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Vietto_brake_1938.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
> 1948:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Bar48.JPG.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
> 1949:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Mahe_PR_49.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
Nice collection of memorabilia and proof that bicyclists including
both tourists and racers can be convinced to try odd things
substantiated with carefully chosen logic (as with helmets). I'm not
sure but I didn't find any front tire scrapers.
The ones I recall were held by a hand form-able springy wire with a
curved flat metal crossbar that slid on the tire under its own weight,
it being loosely held by the support wire. Some of these wore razor
thin on the leading edge from fine grit on the tread. Of course,
riding tubulars with tread patterns less than a millimeter deep, we
essentially rode slicks because tread wore smooth in a hundred miles
or so.
I guess front tire savers were even less desired because they spread
road dirt even more than just a rear one, and we are aware that rear
tires get more flats than front tires. Of course that's an entirely
different effect because nails lie flat on the road, so only rear
tires get punctured by nails upturned by a previous wheel. A close
pace line can do this for front tires.
Jobst Brandt
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Jobst,
Rear tires get more flats, due to debris flipped up by the front tire
and slightly more weight, so yes, rear thorn catchers may be more
common.
But as I said, thorn catchers can be _hard_ to spot in old photos.
Of the 9 original photos, 8 showed a front tire, and 6 of those had
tire savers.
1910 Hover the mouse over front tire and a box appears that says, "in
the full size picture you will see a little wire here that removes the
dirt from the wheel while driving :)" (It's their smiley, not mine).
The rear wire is also visible, forward of the chainstays:
http://flickr.com/photos/radlmax/1474735749/in/pool-611017@N23
1934: This is just the rear tire, so naturally no front thorn catcher
appears.
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/back_brake_1934.jpg.html
1935: Front and rear tire wires, nice and clear:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Leducqjpg.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1936: Front and rear tire scrapers, nice and clear. It's a modern
photo, so they _could_ be add-ons, but they're vintage plate-style
add-ons, not wires:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Caminargent_full.jpg
1938: Good example of hard-to-see, but both front and rear tire wires
are visible. Look at the tire and rim behind the fork--that white
streak is the wire. Look at the tire in front of the chainstay--the
wire shows nicely:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Magne_position.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1941: Here there's only the rear scraper, no front thorn catcher:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Aimar.JPG.html
1947: Front and rear scrapers on #50, behind the fork and in front of
the chainstay:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Vietto_brake_1938.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1948: Front and rear scrapers on Bartali's bike, the rear _behind_ the
chainstays:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Bar48.JPG.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1949: Rear only:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Mahe_PR_49.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
***
If you don't see the scrapers in these photos, look again at the tire
and rim on both sides of the fork or chainstay. The lighting is bad
and the scrapers are often dirty.
A nice example of why you may not "see" some front thorn
catchers--that damned thing can't be seen from the side because it's
hidden by the brake:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Legnano_HT.JPG
The rear tire scraper on the bike above has the same aggressive teeth,
but is exposed:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Legnano_Roma_Seat_cluster.JPG
The "standard" bike of the 1930s Tour de France was a generic bike
that everyone was supposed to ride. This one has front and rear tire
scrapers:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Standard+Bike.JPG.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1936, front and rear:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Chocque_CritNat36.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1950, Kubler, front and rear:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/Ferdi+Kubler+1950.JPG.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1950, front and rear vintage:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/1950_Helyett_Speciale.JPG
1951: Tough call--the rear wire is long and obvious, but the front is
just a bit of white visible below the handlebar grip and above the
brake pad (or else the rider has an odd white spot on his tire in just
the right spot):
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/biagioni51.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
1952, Kubler again, rear obvious, front harder to see--it's in front,
not in back, though the shadows can fool you:
http://www.wooljersey.com/gallery/v/aldoross/pd/kubler.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1
A 1970s Miyata with front and rear wire catchers:
http://www.classicrendezvous.com/Japan/miyata.htm
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear John,
Look up the word "agnostic".
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
Frank Krygowski
>
> Nice collection of memorabilia and proof that bicyclists including
> both tourists and racers can be convinced to try odd things
> substantiated with carefully chosen logic (as with helmets). I'm not
>
> I guess front tire savers were even less desired because they spread
> road dirt even more than just a rear one, and we are aware that rear
> tires get more flats than front tires. Of course that's an entirely
> different effect because nails lie flat on the road, so only rear
> tires get punctured by nails upturned by a previous wheel. A close
> pace line can do this for front tires.
Works for bits of glass and thorns, too, I think.
Back to the asthma issue: a rear tire saver probably doesn't cause
that problem if it's mounted behind the bottom bracket, at the
chainstays. Dust would go mostly down and back. Socks might still
get a bit dirtier, but I'm not that fussy about socks.
Being in the humid east, we never noticed dust problems from these
things. Also, I recall meeting folks who found ways to put them
inside fenders.
But I'll note that since we escaped the rural south, we haven't used
tire savers. Fewer broken beer bottles around here.
- Frank Krygowski
Chris
> year front rear total
> flats flats flats
> 2008 15 38 53
> 2007 18 36 54
> 2006 9 16 25
> 2005 8 6 14
> 2004 17 12 29
> 2003 16 9 25
> 2002 36 17 53
> 2001 16 13 29
> 2000 18 15 33
> ---- ----- ----
> tot 114 201 315
>
> avg 12.67 22.33 35.00
How does one get so many flats? I had a record high this year at about
five flats total (sorry, I wasn't collecting more precise data),
including one resulting from being hit by a trailer from behind, which
pinched my rear wheel and broke the rim into four pieces. I usually
get less than one flat a year as a rule with no special tryes. Hell, I
run $60 folding road racing tyres on my fixed gear bike in Seattle and
I don't have flats like your data shows that you have had. Not that I
am complaining mind you, just wondering how I have such great luck
running 23mm racing tyres with no flat protection at all compared to
yourself.
Chris
carl...@comcast.net
> Why am I not surprised by this front page photo?
>
Oh, for pity's sake!
I don't believe in the puncture fairy, but my disbelief was strained
about fourteen miles into my daily ride because the road began to seem
a little smoother than usual.
Fine, here's the updated version with today's flat rear tire.
year front rear total
flats flats flats
2008 15 39 54
^
2007 18 36 54
2006 9 16 25
2005 8 6 14
2004 17 12 29
2003 16 9 25
2002 36 17 53
2001 16 13 29
2000 18 15 33
---- ----- ----
tot 114 202 316
^ ^
avg 12.67 22.44 35.11
^^ ^^
The Slime tube held just enough air to get home. By the time I put the
bike away, stripped off my costume, and checked the rear tire, it was
down to about 10 psi.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Chris,
Goathead thorns are commonplace where I live and ride.
Here's a goathead sitting on a dime:
http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/Goathead.jpg
Other goatheads inserted into sidewalls in turns and discovered the
next day:
http://i34.tinypic.com/a2gmrn.jpg
http://i16.tinypic.com/44td0dx.jpg
The Slime tubes plugged those leaks. Some people use plastic Mr. Tuffy
strips and thorn resistant tubes, whose tread side is usually 4~5 mm
thick, instead of the typical 0.9 mm of normal inner tubes.
Goatheads are widespread in the US. The closest thing to a goathead in
Seattle, I think, is the blackberry bush.
"Widespread" isn't the same as "commonplace". A simple rule of thumb
is that if children go barefoot where you live, you haven't got a
goathead problem.
Not that I should complain. I don't ride in Pueblo West, where only
fools try to pick up the newspaper in the driveway while wearing
slippers.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
Chris
<carlfo...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Goathead thorns are commonplace where I live and ride.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I lived in Tucson for about ten years, so I know what they are, I just
never got any. Sorry to hear that you have been.
Cheers
Chris