Difficulty in tire changing

[Paul Cassel]

It seems to me that if there is a problem possible in my new hobby of
bicycle riding, I’ll hit it. Here’s one that I haven’t seen addressed
either here or in other fora or in any archives that I can find. Maybe
I’m searching on the wrong criteria.

I wore out a set of inexpensive ($10 each) road tires very quickly. They
also punctured often. I decided that it’d be cheaper in the long run to
buy better tires which I hoped, would be less susceptible to puncturing.
I live in an area where flats are a part of bicycle riding - so I’m
told by the experienced riders here. That is, unless I’m willing to
install plastic liners and very heavy tubes which will pull the life out
of my road bike, I'm going to flat so I may as well get used to the
idea. I’d rather carry a spare tube, inflator and patch kid than ruin
the road bicycling experience by excessive defenses against flat tires.

So I bought, based on some ads, a set of Continental 4000 tires at a
brutal $50 apiece. The problem with these otherwise excellent tires is
that I can’t get them on and off in the field. I can barely get them on
or off in my garage using my 40 cm long tire irons. There is no way I
can do anything for them in the field with my portable tools including
my Crank Bros sliding tire iron. The old tires flatted often, but came
on and off easily using the Crank Bros tool or the shorty plastic levers
which came in my kit. After wrestling the first Conti 4000 tire on, I
took the second with the wheel to an LBS where the wrench agreed with me
that getting these tires on and off was extremely difficult. It's not
just my technique causing the difficulty.

So I think the Conti’s are useless for me. Before I buy another set of
tires and do (???) with these almost new Conti 4000’s, I’d like to know
what tires I can get on and off easily. I have heavily hooked rims which
make the job even tougher, but it was easily doable using the cheap
tires. Is there some sort of way I can infer ease in changing while
shopping? I’m now looking at Michelin Carbons, but sure don’t want to
spend real money again on a tire I can’t mount / dismount in the field.

How do you determine this tire characteristic? Thanks.

[David L. Johnson]

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 16:31:08 -0600, Paul Cassel wrote:

> So I bought, based on some ads, a set of Continental 4000 tires at a
> brutal $50 apiece. The problem with these otherwise excellent tires is
> that I can’t get them on and off in the field. I can barely get them on
> or off in my garage using my 40 cm long tire irons. There is no way I
> can do anything for them in the field with my portable tools including
> my Crank Bros sliding tire iron.

This can be a problem. When I first started using clincher (normal)
tires, I had an awful experience with one ride, 5 flats, and tires that I
could just barely get off and on. I broke a couple of plastic levers
on that ride.

Basically, tire fit is a function of three things: the tires themselves,
the rims, and the base tape. The rim I had trouble with on the ride from
hell was a Matrix rim. I find Mavics to be much, much better. Tires?
Avocets work well, but I don't have any experience with Conti's.
Currently I use Hutchinson, since I got a great deal on them. They are
reasonably easy to mount.

OK, you don't want to replace your tires, and rims are even more
expensive. Your one hope is to replace the base tape. If you use Velox
or other cloth tape, switching to a plastic one (get a stiff one with some
fiber reinforcement) will give you more room.

> How do you determine this tire characteristic? Thanks.

Experience.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster." --Greg LeMond
_`\(,_ |
(_)/ (_) |

[Jeff Starr]

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 16:31:08 -0600, Paul Cassel

<pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote:

Hi, I had a set of the Continental Attack/Force tires that were really
hard to mount the first time, but they do get easier after the first
time.
There are two tools that might work, the one, only if you are using
700x23, the Kool Stop, with all sizes.
Here, take a look:
http://www.thebiketool.com/en/

I just posted the first place I found with them, so no endorsement for
Airbomb, I got mine at my LBS:
http://store.airbomb.com/Itemdesc.asp?ic=TL4022

A tire to consider is the Continental Ultra Gatorskin, it has a wire
bead, goes on reasonably well and has good flat resistance. I've got
almost 5000 flat free miles, on a set.

Those Conti 4000 look interesting, but are definitely on the pricey
side.

Life is Good!
Jeff

[Ron Ruff]

Paul Cassel wrote:
> How do you determine this tire characteristic? Thanks.

Check:
http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/wheels/tires-clincher/PLS_2489crx.aspx

If a tire is hard to mount, it will usually get mentioned a few times.

[Arthur Harris]

"Paul Cassel" wrote:

> So I bought, based on some ads, a set of Continental 4000 tires at a
> brutal $50 apiece. The problem with these otherwise excellent tires is
> that I can’t get them on and off in the field.

> I’d like to know what tires I can get on and off easily. I have heavily

> hooked rims which make the job even tougher, but it was easily doable
> using the cheap tires.

Since your previous tires went on and off easily, I suspect the problem has
more to do with the tire than the rim. Kevlar bead tires will get easier to
mount over time. Putting talcum powder on the bead can also help. In
general, wider tires are easier to get on/off. My inexpensive IRC Road
Winners (700 x 25mm actual width) with wire bead and kevlar belt are much
easier to install than the 700 x 23 Michelins (kevlar bead) I used
previously, and very flat resistant.

Art Harris

[Roger Moss]

"Paul Cassel" <pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:e7udndzOEdg...@comcast.com...

. It's not
> just my technique causing the difficulty.
>
>

This may be stating the obvious, but are you seating the rest of the tyre
bead right down in the well of the wheel when you attempt to lift a section
over the rim to get things started? I try to avoid tyre levers altogether,
as they can all too easily pinch the tube - mostly I can remove/replace a
tyre without resorting to them. Takes a little practice, but eventually the
technique comes.

Watch the guys in the car tyre shops and if they know their craft you'll see
them popping the bead down into the well as far around the wheel as
possible, just leaving the section they'll be lifting over the rim. Since
most car tyres are tubeless. levers generally don't pose too much of a
threat, but if the rest of the bead isn't seated in the well then brute
force on a long lever can wreck the bead...

Good luck, and watch out for your thumbs :-)

RM

[Peter Cole]

Paul Cassel wrote:
>
> I wore out a set of inexpensive ($10 each) road tires very quickly. They
> also punctured often. I decided that it’d be cheaper in the long run to
> buy better tires which I hoped, would be less susceptible to puncturing.
> I live in an area where flats are a part of bicycle riding - so I’m
> told by the experienced riders here.
>

> So I bought, based on some ads, a set of Continental 4000 tires at a
> brutal $50 apiece. The problem with these otherwise excellent tires is
> that I can’t get them on and off in the field.

Expensive tires offer no additional protection against punctures. I'd
take the $50 tires back, demand a refund, and use it to buy some $10
tires (personally, I'd splurge on some $12-15 tires, but I'm crazy that
way).

They're not "excellent" tires if you can't use them.

[Gooserider]

I have changed lots of tires, and the only ones that were difficult are
Conti Ultra 3000s. I got one mounted with great difficulty, and the other
just wouldn't go. I had to bring the wheel to the LBS and they broke out
their giant tire lever. I think it's a function of the wire bead more than
anything. I recently mounted a pair of Conti Top Touring 2000s with Kevlar
bead, and they went on in about 5 minutes. No sore fingertips, and not even
a lever to put them on.

[Paul Cassel]

David L. Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 16:31:08 -0600, Paul Cassel wrote:
>
>
>>So I bought, based on some ads, a set of Continental 4000 tires at a
>>brutal $50 apiece. The problem with these otherwise excellent tires is
>>that I can’t get them on and off in the field. I can barely get them on
>>or off in my garage using my 40 cm long tire irons. There is no way I
>>can do anything for them in the field with my portable tools including
>>my Crank Bros sliding tire iron.
>
>
> This can be a problem. When I first started using clincher (normal)
> tires, I had an awful experience with one ride, 5 flats, and tires that I
> could just barely get off and on. I broke a couple of plastic levers
> on that ride.
>
> Basically, tire fit is a function of three things: the tires themselves,
> the rims, and the base tape. The rim I had trouble with on the ride from
> hell was a Matrix rim. I find Mavics to be much, much better. Tires?
> Avocets work well, but I don't have any experience with Conti's.
> Currently I use Hutchinson, since I got a great deal on them. They are
> reasonably easy to mount.
>
> OK, you don't want to replace your tires, and rims are even more
> expensive. Your one hope is to replace the base tape. If you use Velox
> or other cloth tape, switching to a plastic one (get a stiff one with some
> fiber reinforcement) will give you more room.
>

The cheap tires which I could get on and off were Huchtinsons. I really
liked those tires for costing $10 and then easy to use, but they did
wear our very fast.

I do wish to replace my tires. My rims are those over the top expensive
types which came on my used bike. I also do have plastic tape. The
problem getting the tool under the tire is that it feels as if the tire
is a mm or two too small in diameter. I know that's silly, but it feels
that way.

I despair about these tires stretching as they have some sort of super
better than Kevlar bead which is part of why they cost so much. I'm sure
these are wonderful tires for guys with sag wagons along, but me, I'm a
loner out there in the desert and 100% on my own as far as getting back.

These rims are Campy.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

I've given them an order. If this works well, so much the better, but it
still leaves getting the tire off a bit of a go. I can't even come close
to removing these tires using plastic levers or my Crank Bros tool.

>
> A tire to consider is the Continental Ultra Gatorskin, it has a wire
> bead, goes on reasonably well and has good flat resistance. I've got
> almost 5000 flat free miles, on a set.

I asked here about tires before I bought those & was recommended the
Conti Gatorskins. The LBS which had them said they'd ruin the ride of my
pricey bike with its ultra modern wheels.

Here I've landed in a strange problem area where many on this board will
have a good shot at laughing at my predicament. I boubht a used bike
with excellent high end gruppos and wheels for what I could buy a new
bike which would be appropriate to my being a new guy riding.

The fancy components sort of have me trapped. I'd feel bad strapping on
heavy tubes and tires onto my exquisitely lightweight aero wheels thus
negating the value of these wheels. The irony is that I lose the benefit
of heavy duty practice tires but retain the demerit of fragile wheels.
Yes, it's all in my head, but I can't bring myself to 'ruin' the bike by
using pedestrian tires / tubes on it. So instead I bought a cheap set of
slicks for my mountain bike, mounted them, and am riding that while I
ponder how to get my road bike back on the road.

>
> Those Conti 4000 look interesting, but are definitely on the pricey
> side.
>

My friend had a set of Conti's of a previous generation. He got 4k
miles. If these had worked for me for that long, they'd have been cheap,
but it seems that they won't have a chance.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

<sigh> I did check there but the tire wasn't even listed. I really am
much too inexperienced to go roaming off onto the cutting edge of things
bicycle, but I did. Now it looks like I'm going to pay the $100 price
for having gone into new territory.

I guess there is an entry cost to every sport. I'm paying mine. At its
worst, it won't be nearly as close to what I've paid for sailing
experience.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

Thanks Art. These new tires boast having some sort of bead and carcass
material which is even stronger / stiffer than Kevlar. That was what got
me the idea that it's combine the flat resistance of the Armadillo with
decent riding performance. Per my other post, and probably to your
amusement, I'm trapped by my overpriced wheels into using fairly light
tires / tubes.

My optimism was supported for the first few rides, but then I got a flat
and then a second flat on the same ride. The second flat was more than
the sealant could handle necessitating a new tube which I couldn't do in
the field. Thus I walked back again.

I'll check the roadbikereview and look to wire beads next time. I
thought wire beads would be tougher than aramid. I also have a 20 front
23 rear tire which makes things even tougher, it seems. I did that
because the original owner used that so I figured there must be a reason.

Live and learn. I hope this is the last expensive lesson I need to
learn. Previously I learned my chain has a huge owner's manual and I
better learn to maintain it because the cassette costs over $300 to
replace if I don't get it right. <sigh>

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

Roger Moss wrote:
> "Paul Cassel" <pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:e7udndzOEdg...@comcast.com...
> . It's not
>
>>just my technique causing the difficulty.
>>
>>
>
> This may be stating the obvious, but are you seating the rest of the tyre
> bead right down in the well of the wheel when you attempt to lift a section
> over the rim to get things started? I try to avoid tyre levers altogether,
> as they can all too easily pinch the tube - mostly I can remove/replace a
> tyre without resorting to them. Takes a little practice, but eventually the
> technique comes.

I doubt one can do this with these tires. I was almost able to do that
with other road tires can can on my wider slicks I put on the mountain
bike. The LBS which mounted the 20 mm tire used some sort of
commerercial device mounted to the floor.

I will check my technique carefully to make sure the opposing bead is
all the way down in the well which may make mounting easier. However, I
can't dismount these tires with the smaller levers appropriate to
carrying with me nor can I do it with the Crank tool. Perhaps moving the
bead down will help here. I can only try later on. Thanks for the tip.
BTW, I'm terrible at tires both here and in motorcycles. There is
something about tires and me which doesn't click.

>
> Watch the guys in the car tyre shops and if they know their craft you'll see
> them popping the bead down into the well as far around the wheel as
> possible, just leaving the section they'll be lifting over the rim. Since
> most car tyres are tubeless. levers generally don't pose too much of a
> threat, but if the rest of the bead isn't seated in the well then brute
> force on a long lever can wreck the bead...
>
> Good luck, and watch out for your thumbs :-)
>

All the tire shops I've seen use motorized tools which work like the
Crank tool. They spin around an axis forcing the bead onto the rim. I
can't remember seeing a commercial shop using anything but these tools.
Perhaps your area of the world is different.

I sure like the idea that I can do this w/o tools. I suspect I'd have
fewer pinched tubes if I could.

-paul

[dvt]

Paul Cassel wrote:
> Live and learn. I hope this is the last expensive lesson I need to
> learn. Previously I learned my chain has a huge owner's manual and I
> better learn to maintain it because the cassette costs over $300 to
> replace if I don't get it right. <sigh>

$300 cassette???

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

[Paul Cassel]

These tires boasted a belt stronger than Aramid which is why I thought
they'd be less punctured. Carbons say the same thing, almost.

I'd love to return them, but I can't in good conscious. They have over
100 miles on them, don't look new any more and after all, it's not the
vendor's negligence that I bought tires I can't get on or off. It's my
responsibility. The vendor made no representations whatsoever about that.

I may put a disclosure on them, then try to sell them at the local bike
swap we have each spring. My friend, the ex bike racer, can get these on
and off, I'm sure, but he won't use tires narrower than 28's any more.
His racing days are over & he's into utility and comfort now. He thinks
my light bike a laugh riot.

-paul

[Antti Salonen]

Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote:

> I asked here about tires before I bought those & was recommended the
> Conti Gatorskins. The LBS which had them said they'd ruin the ride of my
> pricey bike with its ultra modern wheels.

The Continental Ultra GatorSkin rolls and feels pretty much like
high-performance clinchers. It may be cheaper and slightly heavier than
the light-weight "racing" tyres, but it doesn't make any real difference
in performance. In the latest issue of the German magazine "Tour" there's
a test of 23-mm clinchers, and reportedly the Ultra GatorSkin had a
reasonably low rolling resistance - Lower than for example Continental
Grand Prix 3000 (!). I haven't read the issue myself yet, but
supposedly the Grand Prix 3000 had pretty high rolling resistance
compared to most other tyres in the test.

The Ultra GatorSkin is an excellent deal for a training tyre.

-as

[Paul Cassel]

Yep. The LBS I went to had some huge machine which it used to get the
front 20 mm tire on after the guy struggled with the normal mounting
technique and also blew a tube or two in the process.

So I guess Conti Ultra 4000's follow in the tradition. Well, per this
thread, I'm eating $100 in tires and ordering some new ones. What a
*#&*#& deal. Owell.

-paul

[Lou Holtman]

They did. They excel in puncture resistance and.... ease of mounting.

>
> The Ultra GatorSkin is an excellent deal for a training tyre.

Agree they are excellent (training) tyres, but they are not all that
cheap though (32 euro according to TOUR magazine).

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

[Paul Cassel]

Yeah. It's Ti.

[Paul Cassel]

How tough is it to mount / dismount? I sure don't want to repeat my
previous experience and the Conti name has a bit of a stink on it to me.
I'm not willing to bet these tires will never flat.

IMO, any bicycle tire needs to be fairly easy to get on and off or what
the heck good is it? Until these Conti's, I never had an issue with
bicycle tires so I never thought to ask.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

The LBS has them for U$34. I'm willing to pay that and am encouraged
that they roll well. HOw tough are they to mount / dismount? I'm not
believing that they'll never flat.

-paul

[Arthur Harris]

"Paul Cassel" wrote:
> Conti Gatorskins. The LBS which had them said they'd ruin the ride of my
> pricey bike with its ultra modern wheels.

They didn't really say that, did they? BTW, how much performance difference
did you notice between the $10 cheapies you had originally, and the $50
Contis?

> I bought a used bike with excellent high end gruppos and wheels

> The fancy components sort of have me trapped. I'd feel bad strapping on
> heavy tubes and tires onto my exquisitely lightweight aero wheels thus
> negating the value of these wheels.

Ah, now I remember. You're the guy who liked the look of your boutique
wheels even if they weren't durable. I suggest you get some practical tires
that you can at least remove if you get a flat. I really don't see the point
of the 20mm front tire. What do you think that's doing for you?

Art Harris

[pwa...@gmail.com]

I usually think it's easier to unstick the bead from the rim for the
entire circumference of the tire before trying to insert a lever. Is
this the opposite of what you (Roger) are saying to do?

While the o.p. says it isn't just his technique that is causing
difficulty, perhaps he could detail his technique, and we could
critique it.

Also, I recently bought some plastic-covered steel levers (by Soma)
which seem to be pretty good - I had broken a few short plastic levers
recently, which might indicate that my own technique may be a problem.

PW

[Paul Cassel]

Arthur Harris wrote:
> "Paul Cassel" wrote:
>
>>Conti Gatorskins. The LBS which had them said they'd ruin the ride of my
>>pricey bike with its ultra modern wheels.
>
>
> They didn't really say that, did they? BTW, how much performance difference
> did you notice between the $10 cheapies you had originally, and the $50
> Contis?

Yes that's EXACTLY what they said. I think the new tires turn better
than the old tires, but I'm comparing worn tires to new ones. They may
roll a bit better, but I have them at 130 psi compared to 100 psi for
the old cheap ones. Also the new ones are 20 mm on front so those two
factors may account for the diff.

>
>
>>I bought a used bike with excellent high end gruppos and wheels
>
>
>>The fancy components sort of have me trapped. I'd feel bad strapping on
>>heavy tubes and tires onto my exquisitely lightweight aero wheels thus
>>negating the value of these wheels.
>
>
> Ah, now I remember. You're the guy who liked the look of your boutique
> wheels even if they weren't durable. I suggest you get some practical tires
> that you can at least remove if you get a flat. I really don't see the point
> of the 20mm front tire. What do you think that's doing for you?
>

Yeah, I'm that guy. I'm unsure if my wheels will really be all that
evanescent, but I did say that I thought 36 spoke three cross wheels
would look, at best, odd on this particular bike. So I'll stick with the
wheels which came on the bike (no marginal cost there either) and live
with it if they wear out in 5k miles. I can afford new wheels every 5k
miles.

I bought this bike from a guy in FL who rides 500 miles a week. He was
paring his bike collection down to 18 (!). It came with the 20/23 combo
in tires. I figure this guy must know his stuff and he clearly puts me
to shame in experience so I imitated his setup when buying the tires.
The older cheap tires came off of my borrowed ride. The guy I borrowed
it from won't ride tires thinner than 28's so I bought a set of 28's for
him when I returned the bike.

When I got the current tires, it never occured to me that I'd have the
difficulty. Yes, I need some practical tires which don't assume a SAG
wagon. Live and learn.

-paul

[russell...@yahoo.com]

As already mentioned, rim size, tire bead size, and rim strip thickness
determine how easy or difficult it is to mount tires. In another post
you mentioned having Campagnolo rims. You will always have difficulty
mounting any tire on earth on Campagnolo wheels. Even with the
thinnest rim strip. Get used to it. And get a thinner rim strip than
you already have. It helps a little. My Ventos wheels now use one
layer of 3M strapping tape around the rim and 3 short, small sections
of tape over the spoke holes as rim tape. Tires are Vredestein
Fortezza Tricomp. Tire levers are needed to get them off and lots of
thumb strength is needed to get them on. But its a vast improvement
over the original green Michelin rim strip tape. Continental Grand
Prix 3000 tires were just as difficult to mount on these wheels.

For your next set of tires, take your wheels to the local bike shop and
tell them you want to buy tires that easily fit on the wheels. You
won't find any. But you can try to find some in the shop that are
easier than others. Try this right there in the store. Then buy the
tires. If the shop says no, go to a good bike shop.

On this morning's ride I had a flat on the rear wheel. Continental
Ultra 3000 tires. Mavic Open Pro rims. Velox cloth rim strip. A
blind, 100 year old arthritic woman could have gotten the tire on and
off with only her hands it was so easy.

[Paul Cassel]

pwa...@gmail.com wrote:
> I usually think it's easier to unstick the bead from the rim for the
> entire circumference of the tire before trying to insert a lever. Is
> this the opposite of what you (Roger) are saying to do?
>
> While the o.p. says it isn't just his technique that is causing
> difficulty, perhaps he could detail his technique, and we could
> critique it.
>
> Also, I recently bought some plastic-covered steel levers (by Soma)
> which seem to be pretty good - I had broken a few short plastic levers
> recently, which might indicate that my own technique may be a problem.
>
> PW
>

'Unstick' the bead all around both sides, push the off bead into the
center of the wheel well (I may not be doing this 100% per another
poster) and then lever off a part of the tire. Then, on the old tires, I
slid the lever around to pull off one side of the tire bead from the
wheel. The new tires are so tight I can't, using the portable levers,
even pull the bead open enough to start the procedure. The levers just
bend while the tire isn't even affected. I am unsure if I have the hand
strength to use short levers on the 4000's anyway. It takes some effort
using the 40 cm steel levers.

With the Crank tool, I'd stick it under the bead, then circle it around
the tire. I never had a pinched tube using the Crank.

To remount, I'd hand / thumb the entire tire onto the rim until the very
last section which I'd pop with a lever. Using the Crank tool, I'd just
run that all around the tire.

[Paul Cassel]

Thanks. I'll try the Gatorskins at my LBS. At least if I say I want easy
to mount tires and they aren't, I can have a basis to complain.

I took a lot of static here as a newbie with fancy wheels. I guess I was
lucky in having VERY easy to mount tires before with these Campy rims
and now have to live with them for the style they're affording me.

Lesson #2 learned - all rims aren't equal in mounting ease. According to
the experts here, my wheels aren't long for this world so I may, like it
or not, get to buy new rims sooner than I'd thought. I'll consider tire
mounting ease when I buy.

I read a bunch of beginner type books on bike riding. None of them seem
to address ANY of the actual issues I hit. Even Jobst's book, as I
remember, didn't mention tire mounting. Maybe I missed it.

-paul

[Antti Salonen]

Lou Holtman <lholrem...@planet.nl> wrote:

> Agree they are excellent (training) tyres, but they are not all that
> cheap though (32 euro according to TOUR magazine).

They are a lot cheaper than that in mail order. The mail order company
which I often use lists them at 16.7 euros - http://www.bike-components.de .

-as

[Ron Ruff]

Antti Salonen wrote:
> In the latest issue of the German magazine "Tour" there's
> a test of 23-mm clinchers, and reportedly the Ultra GatorSkin had a
> reasonably low rolling resistance - Lower than for example Continental
> Grand Prix 3000 (!).

Any chance we could get a translation of the test results?

[Ron Ruff]

Paul Cassel wrote:
>
> The fancy components sort of have me trapped.
>

Not necessarily. You could sell your fancy bits on ebay and get
something that makes more sense... and end up money ahead.

Or, where the wheels are concerned you could buy another set that is
more practical (with a steel cassette!), put some durable tires on
them, and use the fancy ones only when you are in the mood to "show
off". If you find that you are never in that mood, then you could sell
them. It's nice to have an extra set of wheels anyway.

[pwa...@gmail.com]

With the short levers, have you ever tried using two or three at a
time? I often do it this way: After unsticking the bead from the rim
around the entire circumference, stick three levers withing about four
inches of each other, then simultaneously push all three down. Then I
hook two of the levers to the spokes, and start sliding the third
around the circumference of the tire.

PW

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 08:47:03 -0600, Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>I guess there is an entry cost to every sport. I'm paying mine. At its

>worst, it won't be nearly as close to what I've paid for sailing
>experience.

Bikes are pretty minor money pits compared to boats, yeah.

Jasper

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:53:13 -0600, Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Dura Ace titanium cassettes are about $150 mail order. Campy record
200-250. $300 is a ripoff for DA but reasonable LBS price for Record. But,
seriously, unlike the wheels, *nobody*'s gonna be able to spot from more
than a few inches off whether or not your cassette is a $150 DA or a
$40-50 Ultegra/105 10sp. On the minus side, of course, it'd be a *real
damn shame* to ruin a DA cassette, even if your replacement cost isn't
$300.

Jasper

[Paul Cassel]

That's a thought, but then I'd still have a bike with what I consider
odd looking wheels which don't go with the package. I've taken guff here
on this board for being concerned with such things so don't think you
need to add to the pile on here.

The steel cassette is something like 80% cheaper. It's stuff like this
which I find sort of trapping me. I can buy the steel cassette when my
Ti one wears out, but then I'm losing whatever I am gaining by having
other very light components. Maybe this is a stage we pass through in
equipment oriented activities.

For example, in photography, we have 'measurebators' who are concerned
with every little measurement and rating. These guys sell their 6 mp
cameras when they can get an 8 mp one. Then they envy the guys with the
12's or higher. Meanwhile, ex pros like myself run around with the
equivalent of Instamatics or Brownies and we seem to do ok. I'm enjoying
the new digital revolution in photography mostly because it's made great
cameras like the original Nikons almost worthless.

Just like in bicycles, you can't buy speed - in photography you can't
buy art.

My friend, who is an ex pro racer and ex LBS wrench, just smiles at my
interest in fancy wheels and carbon stem cap. His idea of an ideal ride
is his single speed which probably masses almost double my 20 speed.

Some guys never emerge from being photography measurebators. They are
always chasing the latest equipment thinking that the perfect shot is
there if only they had that right lens or the right meter or the right
body or something. Some come out of it and then realize that the art of
photography is not in the equipment, but in you.

OTOH, I enjoy my overly done excessively light probably very fragile
bike because I do enjoy fine machinery. I find great enjoyment in riding
a bike so light yet so precise and rugged in the sense that I can pedal
as hard as I can yet it will not bend or break. Maybe as my experience
grows, I'll become like my friend who also appreciates fine machinery,
but has a more catholic idea of what fine may be. His includes a 28 lb
single speed road bike just as in photography mine includes a 1960's era
Nikon.

Maybe I'll never emerge, but whatever the future, I'm there now.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

Bikes are cheap compared to most any activity. I currently have three
motorcycles the cheapest of which would be the most expensive bicycle -
or close to it. Folks here may talk about throwing money away on a $4k
or even $8k bike, but gee, that's nothing compared to other things not
just brutally expensive items like boats or airplanes.

Also bicycling doesn't cost much to do. For all my whining about these
tires, it's only $100. I'm not a poor student who will have to dumpster
dive to make up that money - I have a decent job. Take skiing which my
daughter does. I'd love it to only cost me $100 each time she goes.
Meanwhile, we've been riding all over this summer for a total cost of a
few inner tubes.

A friend of mine is about to start building his new hot rod. That'll
cost him a quarter million before he's done yet be worth maybe $30k
after he gets tired of it and wants to build a new one.

I could have spent $5k for me and my daughter to spend a week at
Disneyworld or a tiny fraction of that to spend the same time spread
over a summer riding together. Even if I bought us both $2.5k bikes, the
cost would be the same. Yet at the end of the summer, we'd still have
our bikes and a lot of good times (and strong legs) where that same
money spent at Disney would just be a waste.

No, bikes really aren't expenisve - even the expensive ones.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

Jasper Janssen wrote:

>
> Dura Ace titanium cassettes are about $150 mail order. Campy record
> 200-250. $300 is a ripoff for DA but reasonable LBS price for Record. But,
> seriously, unlike the wheels, *nobody*'s gonna be able to spot from more
> than a few inches off whether or not your cassette is a $150 DA or a
> $40-50 Ultegra/105 10sp. On the minus side, of course, it'd be a *real
> damn shame* to ruin a DA cassette, even if your replacement cost isn't
> $300.
>

It's a Record C10 gruppo (2005 model). The price I saw was $339
somewhere. The previous owner threw in a spare Ti cassette so I own't
need to face this for some time.

As far as anybody spotting me, I don't give a *#&&# about anybody. That
includes my comments about the wheels. I don't care even a slight fig if
every fancy guy in his sponsor shirt get up thinks I look like an idiot.
What I do care about is aesthetics for my own satisfication. *I'd* know
it's not real and I'd not be happy.

It's like if I could buy a fake Rolex which 100% could not be detected.
I'd still not because I care about my internal image to myself. As far
as the public, I don't even care 1% if I"m laughed at or made fun of.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

pwa...@gmail.com wrote:
> With the short levers, have you ever tried using two or three at a
> time? I often do it this way: After unsticking the bead from the rim
> around the entire circumference, stick three levers withing about four
> inches of each other, then simultaneously push all three down. Then I
> hook two of the levers to the spokes, and start sliding the third
> around the circumference of the tire.
>

No, I never tried that. I will give it a shot, but am not thinking that
this will solve the issues I have with the 4000's. Thanks for the tip.

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:22:23 -0600, Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>My friend, who is an ex pro racer and ex LBS wrench, just smiles at my

>interest in fancy wheels and carbon stem cap. His idea of an ideal ride
>is his single speed which probably masses almost double my 20 speed.

A single speed, even a 'heavy' one, ought to be a bit lighter tha a
derailer-equipped bike. Certainly not a factor of two.

Jasper

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:38:06 -0600, Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>Jasper Janssen wrote:
>>
>> Dura Ace titanium cassettes are about $150 mail order. Campy record
>> 200-250. $300 is a ripoff for DA but reasonable LBS price for Record. But,
>> seriously, unlike the wheels, *nobody*'s gonna be able to spot from more
>> than a few inches off whether or not your cassette is a $150 DA or a
>> $40-50 Ultegra/105 10sp. On the minus side, of course, it'd be a *real
>> damn shame* to ruin a DA cassette, even if your replacement cost isn't
>> $300.
>>
>It's a Record C10 gruppo (2005 model). The price I saw was $339
>somewhere. The previous owner threw in a spare Ti cassette so I own't
>need to face this for some time.

Would you mind if I asked you how much you paid for this bike? With things
like Record cassettes thrown in, it sounds like you got a good deal
indeed.

>As far as anybody spotting me, I don't give a *#&&# about anybody. That
>includes my comments about the wheels. I don't care even a slight fig if
>every fancy guy in his sponsor shirt get up thinks I look like an idiot.
>What I do care about is aesthetics for my own satisfication. *I'd* know
>it's not real and I'd not be happy.

Well, think of it this way: You are the equivalent of the glass, the
road's the equivalent of the film, and the bike is merely the equivalent
of the camera body. Would you prefer an F3 over a Nikkormat FTn, sure.
Does it help you take better pictures? Not so much. But if you got a
really good deal on an F5, you'd need to pay the Big Bucks to maintain and
repair it, which is mainly a case of 'suck it up and deal'. And you're
right, even the Big Bucks bikes aren't *that* expensive to maintain
compared to a car or motorcycle habit.

Jasper

[41]

Paul Cassel wrote:
> These new tires boa st having some sort of bead and carcass
> material which is even stronger / stiffer than Kevlar. That was what got
> me the idea that it's combine the flat resistance of the Armadillo with
> decent riding performance. Per my other post, and probably to your
> amusement, I'm trapped by my overpriced wheels into using fairly light
> tires / tubes.
>
> My optimism was supported for the first few rides, but then I got a flat
> and then a second flat on the same ride. The second flat was more than
> th e sealant could handle necessitating a new tube which I couldn't do in
> the field. Thus I walked back again.

Hmmm... if you are using lightweight tires for the increased
performance, you are sort of defeating that with the use of sealant.

The new material is Vectran. It's used only as a puncture resistant
belt, not for either the beads or the casing:
http://tinyurl.com/ahvco
http://tinyurl.com/cuc44
While the material may be stronger than Kevlar, that won't help much
with puncture resistance. Steel isn't as strong for the weight, but it
is more cut resistant. And nothing matters if a sharp object penetrates
an open weave. I certainly hope it isn't stiffer or more energy
absorbing as Kevlar, because if it is, Continental wasted its money
developing it.

Thanks for coughing up the dough to do the puncture testing. What are
the objects that are causing all the trouble in your area? Thorns? In
any case, don't throw the tires away: Vectran is a "liquid crystal
polymer", so you can use them to read rbt while you are riding and
listen to us tell you how you are going about everything wrong.

The lightweight tires I've seen with the thickest, hardest rubber seem
to be the Michelin Carbons. They're a little spendy ($35 range at
Nashbar), but you might consider giving them a try. Or spend a little
more of your ride examining the road in front of you.

Try taking a thorn to the remains of your previous tires and see how
easy or not it is to get it through them.

[data...@yahoo.com]

search tech archives for: DIY tire removal

[Paul Cassel]

He prefers heavy, steel frames such as would work on an offroad bike. He
has no interest in 'fragile' frames such as usually seen on road bikes.
It sure doesn't seem to slow him down.

[Paul Cassel]

Jasper Janssen wrote:

>>
>>It's a Record C10 gruppo (2005 model). The price I saw was $339
>>somewhere. The previous owner threw in a spare Ti cassette so I own't
>>need to face this for some time.
>
>
> Would you mind if I asked you how much you paid for this bike? With things
> like Record cassettes thrown in, it sounds like you got a good deal
> indeed.
>

OK, I spent a lot for someone who is a crummy rider, but felt it was a
good deal. This is a Specialized S-Works frame a C4 fork, with all C10
Record gruppo (brakes and shifting mechanism) with Campy Eurus wheels. I
paid $1,700. I thought it a good deal. There are other things such as a
matched Deda carbon handlebar & matching ultra light stem, etc. My
friend estimated the weight at 15 lbs including my very heavy steel spd
pedals. It also has a USE Alien seatpost, and you can imagine the few
other parts.

The frame is 2003 while the components 2004 or 2005.

My logic was that the bikes I saw at the LBS cost within a few hundred
of this bike and had 105 gruppo. I felt for a few bucks more, I'd have a
bike I can't outgrow even if I become very good. Also the Campy C10
Record would, I hope, hold value and work a long time.
>

>
> Well, think of it this way: You are the equivalent of the glass, the
> road's the equivalent of the film, and the bike is merely the equivalent
> of the camera body. Would you prefer an F3 over a Nikkormat FTn, sure.
> Does it help you take better pictures? Not so much. But if you got a
> really good deal on an F5, you'd need to pay the Big Bucks to maintain and
> repair it, which is mainly a case of 'suck it up and deal'. And you're
> right, even the Big Bucks bikes aren't *that* expensive to maintain
> compared to a car or motorcycle habit.
>

Big bucks for a bicycle aren't even chump change for most hobbies
including my lifelong one of motorcycling.

[Paul Cassel]

Yes, it's all thorns from puncture weed or goatheads. This business I'm
told to watch where I'm going it getting my goat - to make a point here.
Of course I watch where I'm going and I don't run over the plants when I
see them. In fact, my flats haven't come at all near these plant
patches, but elsewhere. I think they spread their thorns around.

Thanks for the update on the material in the Conti's. Now can you tell
me how hard or easy is the mounting / dismounting of those Mich Carbons?
BTW, I read somewhere that Michelin has a new tire out which supplants
the Carbons, but I don't have any info on them.

I only used sealant when I realized that I can't get these tires on and
off in the field so I needed to rely on Plan B. I'd rather not use the
stuff as it also fouls my valves. For example, I can't fill the front
tire now because the sealant has ruined the valve in that tire.

This thing is a mess. Oh, as far as the cost of the new tires, I'm
willing to spend what it takes. What I'm not willing to do is to buy
another set of tires I can't easily get on and off in the field. I'll
take the flats if I can change the tire.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

data...@yahoo.com wrote:
> search tech archives for: DIY tire removal
>

Can you please give me the URL for these archives? Thanks.

[41]

Paul Cassel wrote:

> Thanks for the update on the material in the Conti's. Now can you tell
> me how hard or easy is the mounting / dismounting of those Mich Carbons?

Sorry, no luck there. I haven't used either them or the Euros rims. My
analysis comes from handling them in the store and comparing the
thickness and hardness of the rubber as felt, with many other tires.
For what it's worth, Michelins are usually described as easy to fit; on
the other hand, they are Kevlar bead, and people often say Kevlar beads
are harder to fit. On the other hand, some people say the reverse. Any
chance you could try them in the store? I.e. tell the LBS guy you'll
buy them if they go on easy. If your rims are clean when you bring them
in perhaps he'll give it a go.

But then, I'm not sure they'd stop a thorn. Since money is no object...
you could buy one, and try pushing a thorn through both it and your
Conti 4000s and see if it is any more difficult with one than the
other.

> BTW, I read somewhere that Michelin has a new tire out which supplants

> the Ca rbons, but I don't have any info on them.

They used to be called Axial Carbon, maybe that's what you are thinking
of.
à

[dvt]

groups.google.com. Then, for datakoll's posts, you'll need Babelfish
from world.altavista.com. I'm not sure which language you should assign
to his posts....

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

[data...@yahoo.com]

whatsa url??

[data...@yahoo.com]

often wonder i this about for above top left lays a box sez SEARCH THIS
GROUP. now what could this be for? funnelcake?

[Paul Cassel]

41 wrote:

> Sorry, no luck there. I haven't used either them or the Euros rims. My
> analysis comes from handling them in the store and comparing the
> thickness and hardness of the rubber as felt, with many other tires.
> For what it's worth, Michelins are usually described as easy to fit; on
> the other hand, they are Kevlar bead, and people often say Kevlar beads
> are harder to fit. On the other hand, some people say the reverse. Any
> chance you could try them in the store? I.e. tell the LBS guy you'll
> buy them if they go on easy. If your rims are clean when you bring them
> in perhaps he'll give it a go.
>
> But then, I'm not sure they'd stop a thorn. Since money is no object...
> you could buy one, and try pushing a thorn through both it and your
> Conti 4000s and see if it is any more difficult with one than the
> other.

Our LBS's seem very thin on tires. I think they've given up mostly to
mail order. There is no way I'll find a Carbon in stock - I looked. Also
I'm not willing to say money is no object here. I'm only saying that
compared to other sports out there some of which I do, bicycles are
cheap. Losing the $100 on the Conti's makes me plenty sore, but it won't
affect my life in the sense that I'll miss meals or my kid will go w/o
clothes.

One LBS stocks only Gatorskins so I will surely chat that place up. If
it says mounting is easy, I'll buy and then gripe if I can't do it. I
can't gripe at the Conti 4000 seller because I didn't think to ask that
question this issue never coming up before.

At this point, if I could 100% be sure of buying my old cheapies again,
I'd do it. I'd rather buy a half dozen tires and replace them every 800
miles than go through buying expensive tires and then having no use for
them. I thought the Conti's would save money in the long run and be more
resistant to punctures.

>
>
>>BTW, I read somewhere that Michelin has a new tire out which supplants
>>the Ca rbons, but I don't have any info on them.
>
>
> They used to be called Axial Carbon, maybe that's what you are thinking
> of.

Maybe. Well, each thread I learn a lot. Someday maybe I'll know enough
to be dangerous.

-paul

[Paul Cassel]

data...@yahoo.com wrote:
> whatsa url??
>
Universal Resource Locator. An Internet World Wide Web Address.
www.orafaq.com/glossary/faqglosu.htm

[Jeff Starr]

A couple of things come to mind, just because you can't use the Conti
4000s now, doesn't mean they are total waste. Just put them on the
shelf and try them with your next wheelset. If you really get into it,
you will want a second set of wheels.

The other thing is convincing yourself that because the bike came with
a 700x20 on the front, that it is the best choice. Any guy with 18
bikes will experiment or use what is cheap and/or available. I believe
everyone here has told you to go with a minimum of 700x23 and
preferably 700x25.
The Conti Ultra Gatorskins in 700x25, can be run with 100-105psi,
making it a decent riding tire.

Like I told you, I struggled with Conti Attack/Force tires, while the
Gatorskins are easy to mount.

Life is Good!
Jeff

[Gregory Sutter]

On 2005-10-17, Paul Cassel <pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Jasper Janssen wrote:
>>

>> Would you mind if I asked you how much you paid for this bike? With things
>> like Record cassettes thrown in, it sounds like you got a good deal
>> indeed.
>>
> OK, I spent a lot for someone who is a crummy rider, but felt it was a
> good deal. This is a Specialized S-Works frame a C4 fork, with all C10
> Record gruppo (brakes and shifting mechanism) with Campy Eurus wheels. I
> paid $1,700. I thought it a good deal. There are other things such as a
> matched Deda carbon handlebar & matching ultra light stem, etc. My
> friend estimated the weight at 15 lbs including my very heavy steel spd
> pedals. It also has a USE Alien seatpost, and you can imagine the few
> other parts.
>
> The frame is 2003 while the components 2004 or 2005.

You lucky bastard!

--
Gregory S. Sutter "How do I read this file?"
mailto:gsu...@zer0.org "You uudecode it."
http://zer0.org/~gsutter/ "I I I decode it?"

[Paul Cassel]

Jeff Starr wrote:

>
> A couple of things come to mind, just because you can't use the Conti
> 4000s now, doesn't mean they are total waste. Just put them on the
> shelf and try them with your next wheelset. If you really get into it,
> you will want a second set of wheels.
>
> The other thing is convincing yourself that because the bike came with
> a 700x20 on the front, that it is the best choice. Any guy with 18
> bikes will experiment or use what is cheap and/or available. I believe
> everyone here has told you to go with a minimum of 700x23 and
> preferably 700x25.
> The Conti Ultra Gatorskins in 700x25, can be run with 100-105psi,
> making it a decent riding tire.
>
> Like I told you, I struggled with Conti Attack/Force tires, while the
> Gatorskins are easy to mount.
>

Do you mean a second wheelset when these fail or do those who pursue the
hobbby seriously have two wheelsets to use at the same time? I've heard
some refer to what I suppose is a training set of wheels / tires and a
racing set. I'd have to get a LOT more serious before I'd consider a
racing anything.

Also I'm somewhat skeptical about racing tires. While I'm all for less
rolling resistance, my take is that most of the resistance above about 8
mph is wind, not road. Second, a single flat, even if I can fix it very
quickly, would cost me more time in a race than the racing tire could
possibly gain me.

My friend at work told me his special water bottle gives him X seconds
edge over a 40 km TT course. While I'm sure he's right, these sorts of
concerns aren't mine.

Not only have folks said that the way to go is 23 mm or more, but I read
on a link provided here that even going to 28 won't affect performance
in any way I can detect. My reason for going 20 on front had nothing to
do with performance gains. I figured the guy who screwed together this
bike for himself did this for some reason. Not knowing the reason, I
figured to follow him until I learned enough to reason the issues out
for myself.

Curiously, I've personally not noted some of the concerns which seem
high to others. For example, I didn't feel a harsh ride moving from my
borrowed steel framed bike ot my current aluminum one. Also I didn't
note a worse ride moving from 25's to 23 / 20's. I guess folks are
differentially sensitive to some things.

I'll probably give the Gators a try. Thanks.

-paul

[Jeff Starr]

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 05:48:34 -0600, Paul Cassel
<pcasse...@comcast.net> wrote:

>Jeff Starr wrote:
>
>>
>> A couple of things come to mind, just because you can't use the Conti
>> 4000s now, doesn't mean they are total waste. Just put them on the
>> shelf and try them with your next wheelset. If you really get into it,
>> you will want a second set of wheels.
>>
>> The other thing is convincing yourself that because the bike came with
>> a 700x20 on the front, that it is the best choice. Any guy with 18
>> bikes will experiment or use what is cheap and/or available. I believe
>> everyone here has told you to go with a minimum of 700x23 and
>> preferably 700x25.
>> The Conti Ultra Gatorskins in 700x25, can be run with 100-105psi,
>> making it a decent riding tire.
>>
>> Like I told you, I struggled with Conti Attack/Force tires, while the
>> Gatorskins are easy to mount.
>>
>Do you mean a second wheelset when these fail or do those who pursue the
>hobbby seriously have two wheelsets to use at the same time? I've heard
>some refer to what I suppose is a training set of wheels / tires and a
>racing set. I'd have to get a LOT more serious before I'd consider a
>racing anything.

I mean a second set now. Have Peter at Vecchios build you a set. If
you aren't real heavy, have him build you a set using Record or Chorus
hubs with Velocity rims, either Deep Vs or if less aero, less weight
is desired Aeroheads. Go 28h front, 32 hole rear. Velocity rims come
in a variety of colors, get something that looks good, I know that is
important to you;-) I've got DA hubs with red Aerohead rims and black
spokes, they look good with the red tape.

The idea is to never have to miss a ride, due to a damaged wheel/tire.
The other day, I was getting ready to go, I was going to top off my
tires, always do, and I had a flat. Rather than screw around and be
late, I just swapped out the wheel. Then I fixed the flat later, when
I had time.

Life is Good!
Jeff

[Paul Cassel]

Jeff Starr wrote:

>
> I mean a second set now. Have Peter at Vecchios build you a set. If
> you aren't real heavy, have him build you a set using Record or Chorus
> hubs with Velocity rims, either Deep Vs or if less aero, less weight
> is desired Aeroheads. Go 28h front, 32 hole rear. Velocity rims come
> in a variety of colors, get something that looks good, I know that is
> important to you;-) I've got DA hubs with red Aerohead rims and black
> spokes, they look good with the red tape.
>
> The idea is to never have to miss a ride, due to a damaged wheel/tire.
> The other day, I was getting ready to go, I was going to top off my
> tires, always do, and I had a flat. Rather than screw around and be
> late, I just swapped out the wheel. Then I fixed the flat later, when
> I had time.
>
>

I can see in an ideal world why I'd have two sets, but I wonder. Is
breaking a wheel so common that I would need a second set of wheels? I
figured if I ever did break a wheel I'd just take the thing to my local
LBS and have them fix it in a day or so. Or I'd go to my buddy and use
his stand to fix it myself.

Right now I'm on my mtn bike which I've hybridized with slicks because I
can't inflate the front tire of my road bike. I'm unmotivated to fix it
until I have new tires and then anyway, we've been wet lately. I don't
like taking my over expensive super bike out in the wet.

I will definitely consider asking Peter to build me a set of wheels (may
as well use that cassette) next spring, but for the winter, I'll
probably be mostly on the mtn bike.

I'm curious to hear how much those wheels will cost. I need to call
Peter on another issue Campy anyway.

-paul

[Antti Salonen]

Ron Ruff <rruff...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Antti Salonen wrote:
>
> > In the latest issue of the German magazine "Tour" there's
> > a test of 23-mm clinchers, and reportedly the Ultra GatorSkin had a
> > reasonably low rolling resistance - Lower than for example Continental
> > Grand Prix 3000 (!).
>
> Any chance we could get a translation of the test results?

The test results are in the October issue of the magazine, and I'm not
going to translate all of it here, if only because my German is pretty
bad. A brief summary however follows.

Rolling resistance was measured with a 85-kg load on two tyres, 56 % on
the rear tyre and 44 % on the front tyre. Tyre pressure was 7.0 bar.
A rolling friction coefficient is given for each tyre, and also the
corresponding wattage at 30, 40 and 50 km/h. The differences were not
insignificant (as often claimed here), especially if you ride
competetively. For example at 30 km/h speed, the wattage for some
popular choices:

Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 27.1 W
Michelin Pro2 Race 29.2 W
Michelin Carbon 34.7 W
Panaracer Stradius Pro 35.4 W
Hutchinson Fusion 39.6 W
Continental Ultra GatorSkin 40.3 W
Continental Grand Prix 3000 46.6 W

For example, the 17.4-watt difference between Pro2 Race and GP 3000 is
more than enough to give you a real boost in speed.

They also measured mileage (significant differences), adhesion and
puncture resistance (significant differences).

-as

[C]

In article <dk8c6r$hfb$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>,

Antti Salonen <antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote:
>Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 27.1 W
>Michelin Pro2 Race 29.2 W
>Michelin Carbon 34.7 W
>Panaracer Stradius Pro 35.4 W
>Hutchinson Fusion 39.6 W
>Continental Ultra GatorSkin 40.3 W
>Continental Grand Prix 3000 46.6 W

Are they claiming you need almost double the energy to push the worst tire
compared to the best tire? That's kind of hard to believe unless these
numbers are extremely small compared to other forces (like aerodynamics).
How do these tire differences translate into actual speed differences?

[jobst....@stanfordalumni.org]

someone writes:

We could compare these results with the ones often discussed here:

http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/imgs/rolres.gif

where such differences become more palpable.

Jobst Brandt

[Lou Holtman]

C wrote:
> In article <dk8c6r$hfb$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>,
> Antti Salonen <antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 27.1 W
>>Michelin Pro2 Race 29.2 W
>>Michelin Carbon 34.7 W
>>Panaracer Stradius Pro 35.4 W
>>Hutchinson Fusion 39.6 W
>>Continental Ultra GatorSkin 40.3 W
>>Continental Grand Prix 3000 46.6 W
>
>
> Are they claiming you need almost double the energy to push the worst tire
> compared to the best tire?

Yes they do.

That's kind of hard to believe unless these
> numbers are extremely small compared to other forces (like aerodynamics).

I can output about 220 Watts in a lactate steady mode. A 20 Watt
difference is a LOT. No Grand Prix 3000 for me ;-)

> How do these tire differences translate into actual speed differences?

It depends.

Lou

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

[Ron Ruff]

Thanks for those numbers...

This is a huge range of Crr... and it has a big effect on speed.

Crr= Prr/(W*V) = Prr/ (85kg*9.81m*35km/hr*.2778) = Prr*.0001233

Tire Prr Crr Speed*
Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 27.1 W .00334 23.22
Michelin Pro2 Race 29.2 W .00360 23.14
Michelin Carbon 34.7 W .00428 22.94
Panaracer Stradius Pro 35.4 W .00436 22.91
Hutchinson Fusion 39.6 W .00488 22.76
Continental Ultra GatorSkin 40.3 W .00497 22.73
Continental Grand Prix 3000 46.6 W .00575 22.50

*
185lb rider + bike
250W rider output
CdA = .32m^2 (racing crouch, normal road bike)
Transmission efficiency = 96%

So... they tested these in a lab, on a big drum? Continental must be
very unhappy about this...

[Jens]

The numbers I got on rollers for the Cx, & pro race 2 pretty much
match these. No surprise on the GP3000 either. The ultra-thin
"race only" Conti Supersonic was one of the slowest tires I tested.

BTW, the Veloflex master (clincher) was slow too.

-jens

[Antti Salonen]

Ron Ruff <rruff...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> So... they tested these in a lab, on a big drum? Continental must be
> very unhappy about this...

Yes, the tyres were tested on what looks like a steel drum. The wheel
and inner tube were the same for all tyres and the pressure always 7.0
bar. The equipment was actually Continental's so the result probably
didn't come as a surprise to them.

Of course their tyres also had strong points like excellent puncture
resistance and a combination of low weight and good mileage. They just
aren't very fast. I don't know if it's an exaggeration to say that they
are not suitable for competition.

The rolling friction coefficients in your post were a bit off, but here
are all coefficients from the mag, lowest first. All tyres were
foldable 23-mm clinchers.

Deda Tre Giro d'Italia 0.0038
Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 0.0039
Michelin Pro 2 Race 0.0042
Vittoria Diamante Pro Rain 0.0044
Michelin Megamium 2 0.0047
Pariba Revolution 0.0048
Michelin Carbon 0.0050
Panaracer Stradius Pro 0.0051
Schwalbe Stelvio Plus 0.0052
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Front 0.0056
Continental GP Force (rear specific) 0.0057
Hutchinson Fusion 0.0057
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Rear 0.0057
Continental Ultra GatorSkin 0.0058
Ritchey Pro Race Slick WCS 0.0058
Schwalbe Stelvio 0.0059
Specialized S-Works Mondo 0.0061
Continental GP 3000 0.0067
Hutchinson Top Speed 0.0069
Continental GP Attack (front specific) 0.0073

The test also included a calculation that on a flat 40 km time trial, a
rider with a 300 W power output would finish 2 minutes and 18 seconds
faster with the Deda Tre tyres than with Hutchinson Top Speed.

-as

[Ron Ruff]

Antti Salonen wrote:
> The rolling friction coefficients in your post were a bit off

Ah! The problem is that I put 35 rather than 30 in the equation. This
is how it should have read:

Crr= Prr/(W*V) = Prr/ (85kg*9.81m*30km/hr*.2778) = Prr*.0001233

But, with the Crr values there is no need to convert. Here is the speed
and differentials for all of the tires:

Tire Crr Speed* Delta

Deda Tre Giro d'Italia 0.0038 23.08
Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 0.0039 23.05 0.03
Michelin Pro 2 Race 0.0042 22.96 0.12
Vittoria Diamante Pro Rain 0.0044 22.90 0.18
Michelin Megamium 2 0.0047 22.81 0.27
Pariba Revolution 0.0048 22.78 0.30
Michelin Carbon 0.0050 22.72 0.36
Panaracer Stradius Pro 0.0051 22.69 0.39
Schwalbe Stelvio Plus 0.0052 22.66 0.42
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Front 0.0056 22.54 0.54
Continental GP Force (rear) 0.0057 22.51 0.57
Hutchinson Fusion 0.0057 22.51 0.57
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Rear 0.0057 22.51 0.57
Continental Ultra GatorSkin 0.0058 22.48 0.60
Ritchey Pro Race Slick WCS 0.0058 22.48 0.60
Schwalbe Stelvio 0.0059 22.45 0.63
Specialized S-Works Mondo 0.0061 22.39 0.69
Continental GP 3000 0.0067 22.21 0.87
Hutchinson Top Speed 0.0069 22.15 0.93
Continental GP Attack (front) 0.0073 22.04 1.04

*
in MPH

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 1 Nov 2005 18:29:47 GMT, Antti Salonen
<antti....@helsinki.if.invalid> wrote:

>Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 27.1 W
>Michelin Pro2 Race 29.2 W
>Michelin Carbon 34.7 W
>Panaracer Stradius Pro 35.4 W
>Hutchinson Fusion 39.6 W
>Continental Ultra GatorSkin 40.3 W
>Continental Grand Prix 3000 46.6 W
>

Any Schwalbe tires in the test?

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************