Roller RR and tire section

email hidden said:

Due to my weight, I get more resistance than I need on rollers, so I
want to minimize RR.

Are they very small diameter rollers? I'm confused because many people
have the opposite problem... they are spun out in their highest gear
before they can achieve a high level of resistance.

Quoted message said:

The bike has tubulars, and I can run whatever
pressures I want to as comfort is a non issue. So what will offer the
least RR, a narrow tire, or a wider tire.

All else being equal, the wider tire will have less resistance. A good
clincher (say Mich Pro2) with a latex tube will have less than a
tubular, though. Pump them up as high as you can.

Deformation is greater on the roller, but whatever is good on a flat
surface should also be good on the rollers.

email hidden said:

I ordered some nice rollers, and I'm putting together some of my left
over parts into a bike that will sit out in the shed with the rollers.
Due to my weight, I get more resistance than I need on rollers, so I
want to minimize RR. The bike has tubulars, and I can run whatever
pressures I want to as comfort is a non issue. So what will offer the
least RR, a narrow tire, or a wider tire given that I can run whatever
pressure I want, and the fact that deformation around a roller is not
the same as on a flat surface.

The simple answer is that a wider tyre will have less RR, all other
things being equal.

Given that you'll want to run a cheap tubular, you probably won't have
a very wide choice of sizes (anyway, big tubs are usually for cross
use, so they'll have too much tread), and you'll be unlikely to have
something rated at more than 10bar. Of course, you could run Dugast
22mm Piste Latex Silks at 14 bar if you really have to have the lowest
RR, but it would be 10 times cheaper to buy a new chainset with an
appropriate size chainring to match your gearing to the RR of some
cheap tyres.

What pressures are you used to running on rollers? And for that
matter, what kind of gearing? And just how heavy are you? I'm about
210lb, and my current set up is Conti Ultrasport HomeTrainer at
120psi, Tacx 120mm rollers and 56/14 fixed. I can do just under 100rpm
on that at a time trialling level of effort, which is about 25% faster
than I go on the road (i.e. same cadence but higher gear)

Whatever your weight, and whatever bike you have, you'll be faster on
rollers than on the road, unless RR makes up the main part of your
drag on the road. In that case, the only question is how much to
increase your gearing for rollers; for me it's about 25%. If you're
300lb+ and ride at 10mph, you might need to reduce your gearing a bit.
Reducing gearing is cheaper and easier than trying to find a tyre
which matches your existing gearing.

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Kinky Cowboy said:

On 3 Mar 2007 13:19:03 -0800, "[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

I ordered some nice rollers, and I'm putting together some of my left
over parts into a bike that will sit out in the shed with the rollers.
Due to my weight, I get more resistance than I need on rollers, so I
want to minimize RR. The bike has tubulars, and I can run whatever
pressures I want to as comfort is a non issue. So what will offer the
least RR, a narrow tire, or a wider tire given that I can run whatever
pressure I want, and the fact that deformation around a roller is not
the same as on a flat surface.

The simple answer is that a wider tyre will have less RR, all other
things being equal.

That's what I wanted to know!

Quoted message said:

Given that you'll want to run a cheap tubular, you probably won't have
a very wide choice of sizes (anyway, big tubs are usually for cross
use, so they'll have too much tread), and you'll be unlikely to have
something rated at more than 10bar. Of course, you could run Dugast
22mm Piste Latex Silks at 14 bar if you really have to have the lowest
RR, but it would be 10 times cheaper to buy a new chainset with an
appropriate size chainring to match your gearing to the RR of some
cheap tyres.

This bike may see some use on the road so I don't want to go nuts with
the tires. I have some 24mm Challenge Strada's and a local source has
bags of miscellaneous old tires I can get semi-cheap. The wheels are
new and unglued, and the tires are too. So I want to make as wise a
choice first time around so I don't "waste" some tires I may unload on
eBay if I don't need them.

Quoted message said:

What pressures are you used to running on rollers? And for that
matter, what kind of gearing? And just how heavy are you? I'm about
210lb, and my current set up is Conti Ultrasport HomeTrainer at
120psi, Tacx 120mm rollers and 56/14 fixed. I can do just under 100rpm
on that at a time trialling level of effort, which is about 25% faster
than I go on the road (i.e. same cadence but higher gear)

Your results have always been interesting to me. I weigh about 225. I
had the cheapest Tacx rollers (which I gave to a friend because they
were no fun for me), and I tried a bunch of different tires. I had of
course no problem finding a speed good for high exertion, but it was
an on-or-off sort of thing. Either so fast as to be stable, but then
not maintainable, or so slow as to be maintainable, but nearly falling
over. 53x15 or 17 was what I ended up usually using.

Quoted message said:

Whatever your weight, and whatever bike you have, you'll be faster on
rollers than on the road, unless RR makes up the main part of your
drag on the road. In that case, the only question is how much to
increase your gearing for rollers; for me it's about 25%. If you're
300lb+ and ride at 10mph, you might need to reduce your gearing a bit.
Reducing gearing is cheaper and easier than trying to find a tyre
which matches your existing gearing.

I want to be able to have a less intense workout, but I want the wheel
speed to be as high as possible for stability. It is a track bike, but
I have a bunch of different chainrings and cogs, so I'll be able to
tune the setup when the rollers get here.

Joseph

On Mar 4, 3:03 am, "[email hidden]"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

(snipped)

Quoted message said:

I had of
course no problem finding a speed good for high exertion, but it was
an on-or-off sort of thing. Either so fast as to be stable, but then
not maintainable, or so slow as to be maintainable, but nearly falling
over. 53x15 or 17 was what I ended up usually using.

Quoted message said:

I want to be able to have a less intense workout, but I want the wheel
speed to be as high as possible for stability. It is a track bike, but
I have a bunch of different chainrings and cogs, so I'll be able to
tune the setup when the rollers get here.

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice, and getting a stationary trainer for "workout"-- modulating
effort on the trainer with its own adjustments, and/or using a geared
bike to fine-tune your effort/duration mix. You can blast a lot harder
when you don't have to worry about falling over <g>. Or popping a
tire. --D-y

email hidden said:

email hidden said:

I want to be able to have a less intense workout, but I want the wheel
speed to be as high as possible for stability.

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice,

With a little practice, I can ride my current set up anywhere from
5mph to 50mph without falling off, but the bike doesn't really ride
itself (i.e. let me ride no hands) until over 20mph. That's partly a
function of the low cadence which riding a 105" gear gives at those
speeds, and on lower gears I can ride no handed at whatever speed
gives me about 70rpm+

I'm using a road fork, so a track fork would increase stability by
increasing the trail, and on the rollers the relation between the
roller spacing and the wheelbase also affects trail and therefore
stability, and increased tyre pressure helps too. By getting all that
optimised, it should be possible to get a set up that's plenty stable
at 10mph

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Quoted post said:

On Mar 4, 3:03 am, "[email hidden]"

<[email hidden]> wrote:

(snipped)

Quoted message said:

I had of
course no problem finding a speed good for high exertion, but it was
an on-or-off sort of thing. Either so fast as to be stable, but then
not maintainable, or so slow as to be maintainable, but nearly falling
over. 53x15 or 17 was what I ended up usually using.
I want to be able to have a less intense workout, but I want the wheel
speed to be as high as possible for stability. It is a track bike, but
I have a bunch of different chainrings and cogs, so I'll be able to
tune the setup when the rollers get here.

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice, and getting a stationary trainer for "workout"-- modulating
effort on the trainer with its own adjustments, and/or using a geared
bike to fine-tune your effort/duration mix. You can blast a lot harder
when you don't have to worry about falling over <g>. Or popping a
tire. --D-y

That's just it. I want to use the rollers for skill and "muscle
memory" training. I find regular stationary trainers too boring, and I
have plenty of oppurtunity for off season intense cardio training with
XC skiing and speed skating. In other words, I want to ride rollers,
but I don't want to have to ride them hard.

What little roller riding I have done recently has been on my road
bike. This track bike I am putting together is still in the build
phase. When the rollers get here I will use my road bike and if I sort
out the gearing properly I'll use the semi-purpose-built track bike
too.

Joseph

Kinky Cowboy said:

On 4 Mar 2007 08:14:47 -0800, "[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

On Mar 4, 3:03 am, "[email hidden]"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I want to be able to have a less intense workout, but I want the wheel
speed to be as high as possible for stability.

Quoted message said:

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice,

With a little practice, I can ride my current set up anywhere from
5mph to 50mph without falling off, but the bike doesn't really ride
itself (i.e. let me ride no hands) until over 20mph. That's partly a
function of the low cadence which riding a 105" gear gives at those
speeds, and on lower gears I can ride no handed at whatever speed
gives me about 70rpm+

I'm using a road fork, so a track fork would increase stability by
increasing the trail, and on the rollers the relation between the
roller spacing and the wheelbase also affects trail and therefore
stability, and increased tyre pressure helps too. By getting all that
optimised, it should be possible to get a set up that's plenty stable
at 10mph

I spent a while getting the front roller placed properly (on my now
gone Tacx), and while I can do silly things like stop pedaling (road
bike) until the wheels come to a stop and then start again without
falling off, the low speed ride is too jerky to be any fun. It could
of course just be me pedaling squares! No hands for me also was at
20mph plus, which was a pretty hard effort level for me.

I ordered the TruTrainer rollers you mentioned in another thread. I'm
hoping the inertia will allow lower speed (ie lower intensity) efforts
to not be so jerky. When I said stability earlier, I think I meant
more lack of jerkiness.

Joseph

On Mar 4, 11:19 am, "[email hidden]"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

(I opined):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice, and getting a stationary trainer for "workout"-- modulating
effort on the trainer with its own adjustments, and/or using a geared
bike to fine-tune your effort/duration mix. You can blast a lot harder
when you don't have to worry about falling over <g>. Or popping a
tire.

(JS replied):

Quoted message said:

That's just it. I want to use the rollers for skill and "muscle
memory" training. I find regular stationary trainers too boring, and I
have plenty of oppurtunity for off season intense cardio training with
XC skiing and speed skating. In other words, I want to ride rollers,
but I don't want to have to ride them hard.

What little roller riding I have done recently has been on my road
bike. This track bike I am putting together is still in the build
phase. When the rollers get here I will use my road bike and if I sort
out the gearing properly I'll use the semi-purpose-built track bike
too.

If you're competing, the trainer could be used to do some needed bike-
specific "polishing" without exposure to traffic, etc., and without
having to spend hours on the thing. This is known to work, given the
right individual temperment <g>. The trainer is also better for pre-
race warmup IMHO. Whatever, too much rollers or trainer and you don't
want to get on them again, IME, especially if you live where year-
round riding is the norm. --D-y

Quoted post said:

On Mar 4, 11:19 am, "[email hidden]"

<[email hidden]> wrote:

(I opined):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe what would work better would be riding the rollers for skill
practice, and getting a stationary trainer for "workout"-- modulating
effort on the trainer with its own adjustments, and/or using a geared
bike to fine-tune your effort/duration mix. You can blast a lot harder
when you don't have to worry about falling over <g>. Or popping a
tire.

(JS replied):

Quoted message said:

That's just it. I want to use the rollers for skill and "muscle
memory" training. I find regular stationary trainers too boring, and I
have plenty of oppurtunity for off season intense cardio training with
XC skiing and speed skating. In other words, I want to ride rollers,
but I don't want to have to ride them hard.

Quoted message said:

What little roller riding I have done recently has been on my road
bike. This track bike I am putting together is still in the build
phase. When the rollers get here I will use my road bike and if I sort
out the gearing properly I'll use the semi-purpose-built track bike
too.

If you're competing, the trainer could be used to do some needed bike-
specific "polishing" without exposure to traffic, etc., and without
having to spend hours on the thing. This is known to work, given the
right individual temperment <g>. The trainer is also better for pre-
race warmup IMHO. Whatever, too much rollers or trainer and you don't
want to get on them again, IME, especially if you live where year-
round riding is the norm. --D-y

Problem is I don't have the temperament. On rollers I can concentrate
on riding a straight line between two strips of tape that I move
closer together as I progress (and graduate to one single strip I ride
on the whole time), but with a stationary trainer it becomes all about
the workout. If I weren't so heavy, and thus guaranteed a workout on
rollers I might bite the bullet and look into both. I know it is nice
to be able not worry about traffic, and I know of pros who do indoor
spinning for certain quality workouts, but if I were anyplace with
year-round riding I would just be out on the road. I live in Norway,
and year round riding isn't really ideal. My big problem is the long
wet and cold spring. Sometimes the weather is too lousy (warm) to ski,
and still too lousy (or dark) to ride for a long time in the spring
and I lose my winter fitness. I want to avoid that this year, so I
need some sort of indoor solution that I will actually use.

My competing consists of club races I ride to the start of, or long
century type rides that don't really need warm-up, so that isn't an
issue for me.

Joseph