Help with upgrades for speed?

"pinnah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

Some background on my riding might help....
+ I'm middle aged (when this happened, I don't know)
+ I get in 3 or so 1 hour rides a week with one several hour ride
every 2 weeks.
+ I may get in a century ride a year.
+ I live in New England, so hill climbing and rough roads are facts of
life.

Some background on my current ride might help...
+ Frame: mid 90's Trek Aluminum (1220) with steel forks
+ Components: Shimano RSX (sort of like Sora)
+ Wheels: Matrix rims with 32 spoke (14g)

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

It's time for a new bike!

As for increasing speed, the new bike will (hopefully) persuade you to spend
more time riding. That, and dropping any excess weight you may be carrying,
will make you faster.

GG

pinnah said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

Some background on my riding might help....
+ I'm middle aged (when this happened, I don't know)
+ I get in 3 or so 1 hour rides a week with one several hour ride
every 2 weeks.
+ I may get in a century ride a year.
+ I live in New England, so hill climbing and rough roads are facts

of

Quoted message said:

life.

Train for speed. Get one of those training books and try to do some of
the stuff they talk about. Intervals, rest days, etc. Also ride with
the fast people/groups in your area. Its hard to increase your speed
by yourself. Its nice to have someone pushing you. A goal to hang
onto the group when the pace goes beyond your comfort level.

Quoted message said:

Some background on my current ride might help...
+ Frame: mid 90's Trek Aluminum (1220) with steel forks
+ Components: Shimano RSX (sort of like Sora)
+ Wheels: Matrix rims with 32 spoke (14g)

Irrelevant.

Quoted message said:

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

Irrelevant.

pinnah said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

Some background on my riding might help....
+ I'm middle aged (when this happened, I don't know)
+ I get in 3 or so 1 hour rides a week with one several hour ride
every 2 weeks.
+ I may get in a century ride a year.
+ I live in New England, so hill climbing and rough roads are facts of
life.

Some background on my current ride might help...
+ Frame: mid 90's Trek Aluminum (1220) with steel forks
+ Components: Shimano RSX (sort of like Sora)
+ Wheels: Matrix rims with 32 spoke (14g)

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

Some suggestions from a guy that's a bit beyond middle-aged and based on
experiences often the hard way.

None of what you're thinking, in and of themselves, will increase your
speed. Speed, in my experiences, comes from 'horsepower' and comfort.

Increasing the output of your engine, through proper nutrition, proper
training/exercises will do more for you than anything you can buy.
Learning/training to go uphill fast, along with learning/training to ride at
higher speeds longer (endurance) will increase the distance you can ride in
a given period of time.

Increasing the comfort of the bike by having your fit scrutinized carefully
to ensure that you can develop the horsepower more easily and that you
remain comfortable and relaxed over the distance you want to ride. Not
having to stop as frequently to stretch, work out the kinks and soreness
will increase the distance you ride in a given period of time.

Basically, in my opinion, it really boils down to effort put out to get the
results that you desire. I ride several thousand miles a year during our six
month or so riding season. Lots of hills and climbs where I live. I've been
passed by guys older than I, riding rattier bikes than mine so I go back and
train/ride harder. You need to be motivated to do it. True story: I was
riding a 50 mile organized ride in Western Montana, pretty hilly country.
I'm chugging up a long hill, thinking about how hard and long the hill was
when I was passed by a fellow that had *two* artificial legs. My wallowing
in self-pity stopped right then and I started thinking about the ultimate
goal of the ride, finish well. I did.

Ride harder during you rides. Ride longer. Make sure that your bike is
fitted to you properly. Eat right and train hard. Wasn't it Greg LeMond that
said: "It doesn't get any easier, you just get faster."?

pinnah <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

What is your average speed? Unless you spend a lot of time above 20mph, aero
wheels aren't going to buy you much. Your best bet is to find ways to make
your bike fit you better.

Also, think about a more aero riding position. Lowering your head a couple of
inches will make a much bigger difference than aero wheels. Of course, the
motor makes a huge difference.

"pinnah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

Some background on my riding might help....
+ I'm middle aged (when this happened, I don't know)
+ I get in 3 or so 1 hour rides a week with one several hour ride
every 2 weeks.
+ I may get in a century ride a year.
+ I live in New England, so hill climbing and rough roads are facts of
life.

Some background on my current ride might help...
+ Frame: mid 90's Trek Aluminum (1220) with steel forks
+ Components: Shimano RSX (sort of like Sora)
+ Wheels: Matrix rims with 32 spoke (14g)

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

You didn't say anything about tires. Sounds like a basic ok road bike. If
you have heavy belted "puncture resistant" tires they can slow you down a
lot. If so, try some light weight 700x23 or if you are a large guy, 700x25
racing tires. I love my 700x28 gatorskins for comfort and occasional gravel
but if I want to sustain faster the 700x23 axial pros make an easy couple of
miles per hour difference.
Bill

pinnah said:

I get in 3 or so 1 hour rides a week with one
several hour ride every 2 weeks.

That's not much. I don't think the bike is holding you back. What speed
do you average now?

Why do you want to go faster anyway? It sounds like you ride mostly for
fun and fitness. So even if a new bike could suddenly make you 10
percent faster (which I doubt), what would it prove?

Concentrate on riding more often and enjoying it.

Art Harris

pinnah said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

Some background on my current ride might help...
+ Frame: mid 90's Trek Aluminum (1220) with steel forks
+ Components: Shimano RSX (sort of like Sora)
+ Wheels: Matrix rims with 32 spoke (14g)

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel
+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

Pinnah,
I have had only steel bikes until recently when I picked up your
exact same bike just to try it out. I hate it. Get rid of that
thing asap. It is not slowing you down - it is plenty fast enough.
It is just uncomfortable. The geometry is okay but the ride is
terrible. Get yourself a nice used lugged steel frame bike from
the same time period and riding will be much more pleasant.

Also:
Trek 1200 for sale - 14 speed w/downtube shifters
Mid-90s Aluminum with steel forks
Full RX-100 component group including dual pivot brakes
matrix rims with conti gatorskins
very few scratches - looks almost new - white/perl
$250 + shipping or local pickup in sf bay area

cheers,
Doug

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 18:02:46 GMT, "Bill"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

You didn't say anything about tires. Sounds like a basic ok road bike. If
you have heavy belted "puncture resistant" tires they can slow you down a
lot. If so, try some light weight 700x23 or if you are a large guy, 700x25
racing tires. I love my 700x28 gatorskins for comfort and occasional gravel
but if I want to sustain faster the 700x23 axial pros make an easy couple of
miles per hour difference.
Bill

Dear Bill,

Oh, what a beautiful morning . . .

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Hands-on-tops, two narrow-racing-tires, 233 watts . . .

20.0 mph

Let's try two robust-wide-touring-tires 233 watts . . .

18.9 mph, -1.1 mph.

Nice calculator--it even changes the frontal area to show
the fatter tires.

Do it all again with 350 watts for faster fellows . . .

Hands-on-tops, pair of narrow-racing-tires, 350 watts . . .

23.3 mph.

Two robust-wide-touring-tires, 350 watts . . .

22.0 mph, -1.3 mph.

Carl Fogel

Art Harris said:

Why do you want to go faster anyway? It sounds like you ride mostly for
fun and fitness. So even if a new bike could suddenly make you 10
percent faster (which I doubt), what would it prove?

Good question... with 2 answers.

Perhaps most fundementally, I'm trying to understand what difference,
if any, higher quality components would make for me. I am very
convinced that weight of the bike, in and of itself, doesn't mean
anything to me. I can think of only4 ways they might help
performance:
+ Increased speed
+ Increased durability
+ Better performance e.g. shifting, braking, etc
+ More comfort e.g. STI vs barcons, clipless versus toe straps

I've heard some claim that the cleaner inner workings of the Campy
freewheel/cassetts were so dramatic in limiting energy waste that they
allowed riders to ride one gear higher. Now, I don't put much credit
in that sort of claim, but this is the sort of stuff I'm looking for.
Do better bearings tranlate into detectable increases in speed? Do
aero front wheels?

If not, then I'll be more at peace with keeping with current level of
quality that I'm riding. The stuff is certainly durable enough
(except for the STI shifters long since replaced with barcons).

Quoted message said:

Concentrate on riding more often and enjoying it.

Well, yes. There is that!

pinnah said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

I don't want to get caught in the trap of upgrading just to cut grams
for its own sake. But, I am interested in covering more distance in
the same amount of time. So I the goal here is to increase speed.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

My current thinking is....
+ More aero friendly front wheel

Only if you're moving at time trial speeds, so probably not. If you are
happy using them on longer rides, tri-bars have a significant benefit at
more moderate speeds - the trade-off is that you have to be comfortable
in that TT position.

Quoted message said:

+ Better efficiency of moving bearings (hubs, bottom bracket, jockey
pulleys) [does this even matter with today's sealed bearings?]

Absolutely minimal difference, assuming that they're not full of sand.

Reducing weight will show some benefit on hilly rides. I'd look at
lighter tyres (folding) first, then possibly lighter wheels. Double
butted spokes save a little weight and make a more resilient wheel
that's less likely to go loose over time.

Apart from that, get in some more hilly rides or hit the turbo trainer...

Quoted message said:

Do it all again with 350 watts for faster fellows . . .

Hands-on-tops, pair of narrow-racing-tires, 350 watts . . .

23.3 mph.

I remember fondly when I could develop 350W...

pinnah said:

I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.

OK, I thought of another answer. Try riding fixed. Given a suitably
challenging gear, you'll get across country significantly faster - it
seems counter-intuitive but it works. Century rides might be a bit
masochistic though.

Quoted message said:

Dear Bill,

Oh, what a beautiful morning . . .

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Hands-on-tops, two narrow-racing-tires, 233 watts . . .

20.0 mph

Let's try two robust-wide-touring-tires 233 watts . . .

18.9 mph, -1.1 mph.

Nice calculator--it even changes the frontal area to show
the fatter tires.

Do it all again with 350 watts for faster fellows . . .

Hands-on-tops, pair of narrow-racing-tires, 350 watts . . .

23.3 mph.

Two robust-wide-touring-tires, 350 watts . . .

22.0 mph, -1.3 mph.

Carl Fogel

Carl, that's good work. You have established that those wider tires take at
least 5% more effort. And, I suspect that's calculated with a reasonable
supple touring tire. Now lets roll them up hill. If your working near your
limits the difference can feel rather substantial.

The OP was interested in buying parts that could make him go faster. If he
could get 5% from tires and maybe another 5% from refining his position that
would be a hell of a return on investment. Add a little training and it's
Tour time. 🙂
Bill
Bill

Pinnah wrote:

<I'm looking for help and suggestions on component upgrades that will
actually make a difference in *my* riding.>

Aero bars, aero front wheel-- Spinachi, other attachments ("not for use
in groups of riders"😉. Used front Shamals (deep rim section) are
available, sometimes pretty cheap. The rears on those have a rep for
breaking spokes, and they might not work well with your shifters
anyhow. The front wheel doesn't care what kind of bike it's on, of
course. TriSpokes (HED) are available used, also, but those seem to
have pretty flimsy tire flanges in the clincher version-- at least my
"middle era" wheel, with carbon weave but pre-HED decals, has very thin
flanges with not much of a groove for the tire bead to seat into. HED
has published "tire warnings" concerning tires known to commonly blow
off these rims (however many of those were overinflated, see below).

Shoes can make a difference, also (you didn't spec your shoes/pedals).
A "real" cycling shoe sole makes it possible to push harder with much
less discomfort than riding with running shoes or other halfway
measures.

Bearings? Clean, well-greased, and a chain that isn't squeaking, will
probably suffice.

Small tires pumped up hard is not the way for you to go (opinion). Not
worth the added discomfort, or risk of banging up rims on sharp-edged
holes. This in spite of all the people you will see running 20mm tires
pumped to 140lbs and beyond.

Yes, "the motor" is the most important part, but that isn't what you
asked. (However) chiming in, you can learn how to ride in a straight
line, and focus your efforts on rollers. A stationary trainer can save
"workout" time and be a useful tool for power building. Pacing behind a
motorcycle or scooter (safer than a car at least for being able to see
the road ahead) can be really effective for speed increase, also. You
might find the faster, more experienced riders spoken of in other
replies to your post on club or regular group rides e.g. "Wednesday
Nighters", etc.) --TP

Zog The Undeniable said:

Quoted message said:

Do it all again with 350 watts for faster fellows . . .

Hands-on-tops, pair of narrow-racing-tires, 350 watts . . .

23.3 mph.

I remember fondly when I could develop 350W...

I'm not even sure my *microwave* can do it any more.

Sigh.

Bill said:

Quoted message said:

Dear Bill,

Oh, what a beautiful morning . . .

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Hands-on-tops, two narrow-racing-tires, 233 watts . . .

20.0 mph

Let's try two robust-wide-touring-tires 233 watts . . .

18.9 mph, -1.1 mph.

Nice calculator--it even changes the frontal area to show
the fatter tires.

Do it all again with 350 watts for faster fellows . . .

Hands-on-tops, pair of narrow-racing-tires, 350 watts . . .

23.3 mph.

Two robust-wide-touring-tires, 350 watts . . .

22.0 mph, -1.3 mph.

Carl Fogel

Carl, that's good work. You have established that those wider tires take at
least 5% more effort. And, I suspect that's calculated with a reasonable
supple touring tire. Now lets roll them up hill. If your working near your
limits the difference can feel rather substantial.

[snip]

Dear Bill,

Just for fun . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 20.0 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 18.9 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 18.8 mph.

They may be reasonably supple imaginary mtb tires.

Rolling them uphill actually reduces the absolute speed
difference. Let's try a 3% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 13.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 12.8 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 12.9 mph.

Interesting--the offroad tire actually improves over the
touring, but that may be due to rounding error. Or because
at such lower speeds the mtb's greater wind drag becomes
less important.

Let's give 'em 350 watts and a 10% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 8.7 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, robust-wide touring, 8.5 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 8.6 mph.

Hmmm . . . we're down to 0.2 mph difference, but the fat
offroad tires are still beating the robust-wide touring
tires, though it could still be a rounding error. In any
case, the speed difference is down to about 1%.

Let's try my favorite exercise, coasting downhill, 0 watts
and a 7% hill . . .

Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 33.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, robust-wide touring, 30.6 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 30.2 mph.

There's your hoped-for couple of mph--2.8 mph. It's still
interesting how little difference the calculator predicts
between robust-wide-touring and for-heaven's-sake-mtb tires,
but at least at higher speeds the touring tire pulls ahead.

I wonder if this is an example of a slight calculator error
(0.1 mph climbing hills is probably tricky) or if the
calculator is trying to tell us something unexpected about
robust touring tires versus mtb tires, something to do with
areodynamic profile and rolling resistance. I remember being
surprised that the Fury Roadmaster rolled along so well on
pavement with its rhinoceros-like knobbies.

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carl, that's good work. You have established that those wider tires take

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

least 5% more effort. And, I suspect that's calculated with a reasonable
supple touring tire. Now lets roll them up hill. If your working near

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

limits the difference can feel rather substantial.

[snip]

Dear Bill,

Just for fun . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 20.0 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 18.9 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 18.8 mph.

They may be reasonably supple imaginary mtb tires.

Rolling them uphill actually reduces the absolute speed
difference. Let's try a 3% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 13.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 12.8 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 12.9 mph.

Interesting--the offroad tire actually improves over the
touring, but that may be due to rounding error. Or because
at such lower speeds the mtb's greater wind drag becomes
less important.

Let's give 'em 350 watts and a 10% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 8.7 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, robust-wide touring, 8.5 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 8.6 mph.

Hmmm . . . we're down to 0.2 mph difference, but the fat
offroad tires are still beating the robust-wide touring
tires, though it could still be a rounding error. In any
case, the speed difference is down to about 1%.

Let's try my favorite exercise, coasting downhill, 0 watts
and a 7% hill . . .

Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 33.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, robust-wide touring, 30.6 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 30.2 mph.

There's your hoped-for couple of mph--2.8 mph. It's still
interesting how little difference the calculator predicts
between robust-wide-touring and for-heaven's-sake-mtb tires,
but at least at higher speeds the touring tire pulls ahead.

I wonder if this is an example of a slight calculator error
(0.1 mph climbing hills is probably tricky) or if the
calculator is trying to tell us something unexpected about
robust touring tires versus mtb tires, something to do with
areodynamic profile and rolling resistance. I remember being
surprised that the Fury Roadmaster rolled along so well on
pavement with its rhinoceros-like knobbies.

Carl Fogel

Makes me wonder about the calculator; or, maybe the one in my head. About
the closest I can come to something objective would be to would be to do the
same exercise with different tires at a steady heart rate. I wonder if the
calculator includes the increase in weight of the tires. As the grade gets
steeper that is certainly an issue. I ride three bikes regularly. A very
good steel road bike. A Surly Cross Check with 700x28 touring tires and also
700x35 knobbies on the same rims and a hardtail mtb with 26x2.1 knobbies.
The Surly has a triple. I can comfortable do a 5 mile 8-10% climb in the
middle ring with the 700x28 Gator Skins but I have to use the granny with
the 700x35 Kenda Kross knobbies mounted on the same rims. I have also done
that climb with the mtb and the road bike. The mtb is not much different
from the Surly w/knobbies. The road bike (about 4 lbs lighter) is way easier
with a 39x27 than the Surly w/ Gator Skins and a 36 middle ring.
Bill

Bill said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carl, that's good work. You have established that those wider tires take

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

least 5% more effort. And, I suspect that's calculated with a reasonable
supple touring tire. Now lets roll them up hill. If your working near

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

limits the difference can feel rather substantial.

[snip]

Dear Bill,

Just for fun . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 20.0 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 18.9 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 18.8 mph.

They may be reasonably supple imaginary mtb tires.

Rolling them uphill actually reduces the absolute speed
difference. Let's try a 3% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 13.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 12.8 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 12.9 mph.

Interesting--the offroad tire actually improves over the
touring, but that may be due to rounding error. Or because
at such lower speeds the mtb's greater wind drag becomes
less important.

Let's give 'em 350 watts and a 10% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 8.7 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, robust-wide touring, 8.5 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 8.6 mph.

Hmmm . . . we're down to 0.2 mph difference, but the fat
offroad tires are still beating the robust-wide touring
tires, though it could still be a rounding error. In any
case, the speed difference is down to about 1%.

Let's try my favorite exercise, coasting downhill, 0 watts
and a 7% hill . . .

Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 33.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, robust-wide touring, 30.6 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 30.2 mph.

There's your hoped-for couple of mph--2.8 mph. It's still
interesting how little difference the calculator predicts
between robust-wide-touring and for-heaven's-sake-mtb tires,
but at least at higher speeds the touring tire pulls ahead.

I wonder if this is an example of a slight calculator error
(0.1 mph climbing hills is probably tricky) or if the
calculator is trying to tell us something unexpected about
robust touring tires versus mtb tires, something to do with
areodynamic profile and rolling resistance. I remember being
surprised that the Fury Roadmaster rolled along so well on
pavement with its rhinoceros-like knobbies.

Carl Fogel

Makes me wonder about the calculator; or, maybe the one in my head. About
the closest I can come to something objective would be to would be to do the
same exercise with different tires at a steady heart rate. I wonder if the
calculator includes the increase in weight of the tires. As the grade gets
steeper that is certainly an issue. I ride three bikes regularly. A very
good steel road bike. A Surly Cross Check with 700x28 touring tires and also
700x35 knobbies on the same rims and a hardtail mtb with 26x2.1 knobbies.
The Surly has a triple. I can comfortable do a 5 mile 8-10% climb in the
middle ring with the 700x28 Gator Skins but I have to use the granny with
the 700x35 Kenda Kross knobbies mounted on the same rims. I have also done
that climb with the mtb and the road bike. The mtb is not much different
from the Surly w/knobbies. The road bike (about 4 lbs lighter) is way easier
with a 39x27 than the Surly w/ Gator Skins and a 36 middle ring.
Bill

Dear Bill,

As far as I can see, the calculator has separate weights for
the bike and rider, but they don't change with any of the
six tire types offered, though the calculated frontal area
does.

However, I'd expect 1.75 inch off-road tires to be slightly
heavier than robust-wide-touring tires, so even adding their
extra weight shouldn't make the off-road tires climb that
tiny bit faster--it should slow them down.

On the flats, the same odd improvement shows up in the
off-road tire below 17.8 mph:

Hands-on-tops, 10 watts, robust-wide-touring, 3.3 mph
Hands-on-tops, 10 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 3.5 mph !

Hands-on-tops, 20 watts, robust-wide-touring, 5.6 mph
Hands-on-tops, 20 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 5.8 mph !

Hands-on-tops, 40 watts, robust-wide-touring, 8.5 mph
Hands-on-tops, 40 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 8.6 mph !

Hands-on-tops, 80 watts, robust-wide-touring, 12.0 mph
Hands-on-tops, 80 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 12.1 mph !

Hands-on-tops, 100 watts, robust-wide-touring, 13.3 mph
Hands-on-tops, 100 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 13.3 mph

Hands-on-tops, 160 watts, robust-wide-touring, 16.2 mph
Hands-on-tops, 160 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 16.2 mph

Hands-on-tops, 180 watts, robust-wide-touring, 17.0 mph
Hands-on-tops, 180 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 17.0 mph

Hands-on-tops, 200 watts, robust-wide-touring, 17.8 mph !
Hands-on-tops, 200 watts, 1.75" off-road tire, 17.7 mph

Weight shouldn't matter on the flats, so it's odd that such
a detailed calculator predicts that the off-road tire will
roll faster with the same power up to around 12 mph, stay
tied with the robust-wide-touring-tire up to around 17 mph,
and fall only 0.1 mph behind at that speed.

It could be a bug or mistaken assumption, it could be that
the touring tire was indeed "robust", or it could be that
what most of us assume about how such tires should roll just
ain't right.

A possibility is that the width of the off-road tire somehow
matters more at low speeds. The rolling-resistance table on
the bottom left of this page indicates that the wider the
high-pressure tire, the lower the rolling resistance, a
common observation--but the wider the tire, the greater the
wind drag, which is why narrow tires are prized for the
kinds of speeds that most of us expect.

That is, at speeds under 17 mph, the wider off-road tire may
out-roll or equal the narrower robust-touring tire' sspeed
because its width means that it actually offers less rolling
resistance (not what we expect). But above 17 mph, the
narrower (though robust) touring tire starts to pull ahead
because wind drag has become so important that the off-road
tire's 1.75" width is becoming a slow-motion drag chute.

Carl Fogel

Bill said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carl, that's good work. You have established that those wider tires take

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

least 5% more effort. And, I suspect that's calculated with a reasonable
supple touring tire. Now lets roll them up hill. If your working near

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

limits the difference can feel rather substantial.

[snip]

Dear Bill,

Just for fun . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 20.0 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 18.9 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 18.8 mph.

They may be reasonably supple imaginary mtb tires.

Rolling them uphill actually reduces the absolute speed
difference. Let's try a 3% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 13.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, robust-wide touring, 12.8 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 233 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 12.9 mph.

Interesting--the offroad tire actually improves over the
touring, but that may be due to rounding error. Or because
at such lower speeds the mtb's greater wind drag becomes
less important.

Let's give 'em 350 watts and a 10% grade . . .

Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 8.7 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, robust-wide touring, 8.5 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 350 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 8.6 mph.

Hmmm . . . we're down to 0.2 mph difference, but the fat
offroad tires are still beating the robust-wide touring
tires, though it could still be a rounding error. In any
case, the speed difference is down to about 1%.

Let's try my favorite exercise, coasting downhill, 0 watts
and a 7% hill . . .

Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, narrow-racing-tires, 33.4 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, robust-wide touring, 30.6 mph.
Hands-on-tops, 0 watts, offroad 1.75" tires, 30.2 mph.

There's your hoped-for couple of mph--2.8 mph. It's still
interesting how little difference the calculator predicts
between robust-wide-touring and for-heaven's-sake-mtb tires,
but at least at higher speeds the touring tire pulls ahead.

I wonder if this is an example of a slight calculator error
(0.1 mph climbing hills is probably tricky) or if the
calculator is trying to tell us something unexpected about
robust touring tires versus mtb tires, something to do with
areodynamic profile and rolling resistance. I remember being
surprised that the Fury Roadmaster rolled along so well on
pavement with its rhinoceros-like knobbies.

Carl Fogel

Makes me wonder about the calculator; or, maybe the one in my head. About
the closest I can come to something objective would be to would be to do the
same exercise with different tires at a steady heart rate. I wonder if the
calculator includes the increase in weight of the tires. As the grade gets
steeper that is certainly an issue. I ride three bikes regularly. A very
good steel road bike. A Surly Cross Check with 700x28 touring tires and also
700x35 knobbies on the same rims and a hardtail mtb with 26x2.1 knobbies.
The Surly has a triple. I can comfortable do a 5 mile 8-10% climb in the
middle ring with the 700x28 Gator Skins but I have to use the granny with
the 700x35 Kenda Kross knobbies mounted on the same rims. I have also done
that climb with the mtb and the road bike. The mtb is not much different
from the Surly w/knobbies. The road bike (about 4 lbs lighter) is way easier
with a 39x27 than the Surly w/ Gator Skins and a 36 middle ring.
Bill

Dear Bill,

An idle afternoon with Vivaldi Dresden Concerti Volume 1
produced this a table of speed results for the different
tires in the Kreuzotter bicycle speed calculator, showing
some of the odd results for speeds from 3.3 mph to 20.9 mph
and from 10 to 260 watts.

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

The imaginary tires are all mounted on the default bike and
rider with hands-on-drops and default values to isolate the
effect of the fight between the tire's wind drag and rolling
resistance.

Naturally, real tires will vary from brand to brand in width
and rolling resistance, but the exercise was interesting.

area 4.7879 5.3304 5.0463 5.3304 5.4854 5.6663
crr 0.0060 0.0030 0.0055 0.0050 0.0075 0.0070

narrow radial med wide robust mtb
watts mph mph mph mph mph mph
10 3.9 5.4 4.1 4.3 3.3 3.5
20 6.4 7.6 6.5 6.7 5.6 5.8
30 8.1 9.1 8.2 8.3 7.2 7.4
40 9.4 10.3 9.5 9.5 8.5 8.6
50 10.5 11.3 10.5* 10.5* 9.6 9.7
60 11.4 12.1 11.4* 11.4* 10.5 10.6
70 12.2 12.9 12.2* 12.2* 11.3 11.4
80 13.0 13.5 12.9*b 12.9*c 12.0 12.1
90 13.7 14.2 13.6 13.5 12.7 12.7*
100 14.3 14.7 14.2 14.1 13.3 13.3*
110 14.9 15.3 14.8 14.7 13.9 13.9*
120 15.4 15.8 15.3 15.2 14.4 14.4*
130 15.9 16.2 15.8 15.7 14.9 14.9*
140 16.4 16.7 16.3 16.1 15.4 15.3*
150 16.9 17.1 16.7 16.6 15.8 15.8*
160 17.3 17.5 17.2 17.0 16.2 16.2*
170 17.7 17.9 17.6 17.4 16.6 16.6*
180 18.1 18.3 18.0 17.8 17.0 17.0*
190 18.5 18.6 18.3 18.1 17.4 17.3*d
200 18.9 19.0 18.7 18.5 17.8 17.7
210 19.2 19.3 19.0 18.8 18.1 18.0
220 19.6 19.6* 19.4 19.2 18.4 18.4
230 19.9 19.9* 19.7 19.5 18.8 18.7
240 20.2 20.2* 20.0 19.8 19.1 19.0
250 20.6 20.5*a 20.3 20.1 19.4 19.3
260 20.9 20.8 20.6 20.4 19.7 19.6

a -- narrow beats radial around 240 watts 20.6 mph
b -- narrow beats medium around 80 watts 13.0 mph
c -- narrow beats wide around 80 watts 13.0 mph

d -- robust beats mtb around 190 watts 18.5 mph

Note that the robust touring tire is narrower than the mtb
tire, but has a slightly higher rolling resistance. The
imaginary mtb tire is faster or within 0.1 mph up to 260
watts and almost 20 mph.

Note that a wide high-pressure slick beats a medium at up to
30 watts. Again, the narrower tire has an initial
disadvantage until wind drag obscures rolling resistance.

Note how long it takes before the narrow traditional tire's
better aerodynamics let it beat the much lower rolling
resistance of the wider radial--it loses up until 19 mph.

Carl Fogel