Difficulty in tire changing

Jasper Janssen said:

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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.

41 said:

Paul Cassel said:

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.

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

Quoted message said:

search tech archives for: DIY tire removal

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

Paul Cassel said:

Quoted message said:

search tech archives for: DIY tire removal

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

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

whatsa url??

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

Quoted message said:

whatsa url??

Universal Resource Locator. An Internet World Wide Web Address.
www.orafaq.com/glossary/faqglosu.htm

Paul Cassel said:

Quoted message said:

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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

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

Paul Cassel said:

Jasper Janssen said:

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 [censored]!

--
Gregory S. Sutter "How do I read this file?"
[email hidden] "You uudecode it."
http://zer0.org/~gsutter/ "I I I decode it?"

Jeff Starr said:

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

Paul Cassel said:

Jeff Starr said:

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

Quoted message said:

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 said:

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

Ron Ruff said:

Antti Salonen said:

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

Ron Ruff said:

Antti Salonen said:

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

Ron Ruff said:

Antti Salonen said:

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

In article <[email hidden]>,

Antti Salonen said:

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?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Antti Salonen said:

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?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Antti Salonen said:

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?

someone said:

Antti Salonen said:

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

Quoted message said:

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?

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

someone said:

Antti Salonen said:

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

Quoted message said:

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?

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