rec.sport.unicycling · Public discussion

specifically roads only big wheel?

Started by abbabibble · · Last activity · 24 posts · 638 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
rec.sport.unicycling
Published
3 December 2005
Last activity
5 December 2005
Original author
abbabibble
Posts
24
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
638
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 24
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. well, i was wondering...
    you know them b*kes with the really skinny tires made for roads and
    roads only?

    well... has anyone made a big(ish) wheel like that?
    and what is the biggest skinny road tire size that is currently made
    today? the largest i've found is a 28...
    I've been curious about it... it'd dramatically reduce the wieght for
    long distance rides...

    --
    abbabibble

    Cheers, Mat.
    -----------------------
    SUPER AWEXOME SUPER-UNI SHIRTS! PREORDER YOURS
    TODAY!!!http://unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44230
    --"to maxis: STOP. GRAMMAR TIME." -Fwgen0moB?
    "abababilbel" - General Dibbles
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    abbabibble's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/10751
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  2. abbabibble said:

    well, i was wondering...
    you know them b*kes with the really skinny tires made for roads and
    roads only?

    well... has anyone made a big(ish) wheel like that?
    and what is the biggest skinny road tire size that is currently made
    today?

    I put a skinny road tyre on my 28" to see how it would handle. I
    didn't like it all. It was incredibly light but the weight savings
    were outweighed by some big disadvantages.

    The road tyre was significantly harder to balance on, probably because
    the contact patch had been substantially reduced. Also when riding I
    felt absolutely every bump and road camber was very noticeable. I
    spent a lot of time feeling very unstable and the lack of friction was
    very noticeable. After losing traction on several corners I gave it up
    as a bad idea and wrote off the tyre as lost money.

    I have seen people race unicycles with very skinny tyres and that is
    probably the only good use for them. I imagine they could confer an
    advantage on a smooth level surface while riding in a straight line or
    a gentle curve. They are not at all suited for general road riding.

    --
    peter.bier

    -Peter Bier
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    peter.bier's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1506
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  3. The standard European size for a bicycle road wheel is 700c, which is
    what we often refer to as a 28.

    Although a few older bicycles had slightly larger wheels, there isn't
    much real difference - an inch or so. Above that size, ther is only
    the 36 (Coker).

    I have a 700c to which I have fitted a 700c x 28mm tyre. I use 102mm
    cranks. It is a joy to ride. It's a little tempramental, a little
    twitchy, but so light that it accelerates, brakes and idles nicely. I
    did a 50 mile ride on it earlier this year.

    To be honest, a fatter tyre would be faster and more comfortable, and
    easier to ride. But that's not the point. When funds allow, I will
    probably get an even skinnier wheel built and take the tyre down to 24
    mm, or maybe even less - not for any genuine speed improvement, but for
    the purity of the riding experience.

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  4. Mikefule, do you have any comment on the road camber experience that
    peter.bier referred to?

    --
    goldenchicken
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    goldenchicken's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8149
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  5. Yes.

    The road camber problem is less noticeable with a good quality skinny
    tyre.

    "Road camber problems" are the sort of problems you get when you ride
    across a slope, rather than up or down it. Many roads have a "camber"
    which means the centre of the road is slightly higher than the edges.
    This is for drainage. other roads are deliberately cambered in the
    direction of a corner, like a banked race track, to help motor vehicles
    travelling at normal traffic speeds.

    If you are riding across a slope (e.g. along a cambered road) and you
    are trying to keep your unicycle vertical, then the width of the
    contact patch is critical.

    The theoretically perfect wheel would have no width at all, but this
    could never exist in reality. A skinny tyre might have a contact patch
    10 mm wide, and a fat tyre might have one 20mm wide. (These are not
    accurate figures, but simply to illustrate a point.) The width of the
    contact patch will depend on the shape of the tyre, the pressure in the
    tyre, and the steepness of the camber.

    Along the central axis of the tyre, the rolling circumference is at its
    greatest. the further you move to one side, the smaller the rolling
    circumference.

    Thus, when you are riding across a camber, one edge of your contact
    patch (down slope) is where the wheel is largest, and the other side
    (up slope) is where the wheel is smallest.

    So, instead of riding on a nice round tyre, you are effectively riding
    on a truncated cone. You can all visualise what would happen if you
    rolled a cone: it would turn one way. So, the tyre that is being
    ridden across a slope will tend to turn up the slope. This effect is
    sometimes called "coning".

    It follows that, all other things being equal, the narrower tyre will
    have less coning effect than the wider one.

    A secondary effect is that a narrow tyre will tend to be shallower
    (lower profile) so you need a higher air pressure to be sure of keeping
    the rim from "dinging" if you hit a pebble, kerb, etc. The higher
    pressure will contribute further to keeping the contact patch narrow
    and reducing the coning effect.

    Some of the same factors contribute to making a (good) skinny tyre much
    easier to steer. The ideal tyre for steering has a rounded cross
    section.

    However, the sensitivity to bumps and sudden changes in the rolling
    resistance of the surface on which you are riding is more noticeable on
    a skinny high pressure tyre. This is partly due to the higher momentum
    of the fatter tyre (it can ignore minor variations) and partly due to
    the reduced air pressure in the fatter tyre, which can soak up the
    small bumps.

    So, riding a skinny high pressure tyre is great fun, and feels precise
    and controllable when steering, but it can be hard work over a long
    ride on uneven ground because it requires much more concentration and
    adjustment of speed and pedal-force.

    On my 700c X 28mm tyre, with 102 mm cranks, I have done some light
    cross country. With 110s, it is surprisingly nimble. The tyre becomes
    a limiting factor only when traction is poor, or when the ground is
    yielding, or when the ground has sudden changes in contour (e.g. tree
    roots etc.).

    I haven't ridden much recently, mainly due to old age, bad weather and
    other commitments. However, writing about it is making me miss the
    700c - it is the purest form of unicycling that I have tried, because
    the tyre has no built in margin for error on uneven ground.

    Also, it is good for drops of up to about 5 feet.

    Too keep the interest of the reader, I have included one factual
    statement in this post that is not actually strictly true.

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  6. Mikefule said:

    (snipped)

    That was one interesting read Mikefule, and most of it was strictly
    true. My Nimbus II 700c was delivered with a 35 mm tyre, and now has a
    Big Apple. The BA is much better for general road riding.

    I'd like to add two points:

    Surprisingly, the rolling resistance of a wide tyre is SMALLER than
    that of a narrow tyre, if tread pattern and pressure are the same.

    There is one more thing than 'coning' that contributes to adverse
    camber effects. The following is my theory. The tyre starts hitting
    the road while it is relaxed and located in the symmetry plane of the
    wheel. In the middle of the contact patch however, the tyre is
    load-bearing and since you're on a cross-slope, this will cause it to
    'fold' somewhat. That makes the wheel travel in a direction that is
    different from the plane in which it is rotating.

    1. The effect is larger when tyre pressure is low.
    2. The effect is larger with a wider tyre which has more height to
    fold.
    (1 and 2 often -but not necessarily- go together.)
    3. And obviously, the effect is larger with more camber.

    Klaas Bil - Newsgroup Addict
    --
    "erectile function trumps public image - David Stone, commenting on the importance of seat comfort"

  7. Interesting, Mikefule. The cone theory was new to me but I had no
    problem swallowing it. However, we all know that a 700c wheel can be
    dropped at least 10 feet. Actually, I think you can even throw it out
    from an airplane.

    --
    goldenchicken
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    goldenchicken's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8149
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  8. Klaas Bil said:


    My Nimbus II 700c was delivered with a 35 mm tyre, and now has a
    Big Apple. The BA is much better for general road riding.

    An experienced road unicyclist here in Sweden was appalled by the
    effect that BA had on his riding after buying a 29er. The wide contact
    path made him very sensitive to the slightest angle of the road. He
    quickly sold the 29er and went back to his old 28 frame with a narrow
    tyre.

    But! some months later he bought a Coker and almost went lyrical about
    it. Now, why doesn't that fat monster tyre pull him into 'coning'?

    This is also my own experience, on the Coker I seldom have any 'camber
    problems'. Only wind & ass problems.

    --
    goldenchicken
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    goldenchicken's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8149
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  9. goldenchicken said:


    But! some months later he bought a Coker and almost went lyrical about
    it. Now, why doesn't that fat monster tyre pull him into 'coning'?

    This is also my own experience, on the Coker I seldom have any 'camber
    problems'. Only wind & ass problems.

    Given a similar tyre section and profile, the Coker will cone less than
    a 29.

    The difference in radius between each side of the contact patch will be
    the same in millimetres - but as a proportion, it will be different.

    To illustrate, assume that the radius of the upslope edge of the
    contact patch is 5 mm less than the radius of the downslope edge of the
    contact patch.

    Now, to take an extreme (and physically impossible) example: a 10mm
    diameter wheel would become a perfect cone, rather than a truncated
    cone. On the other hand, a 5mm difference would be completely lost on
    a 10 metre wheel.

    A Coker is 36/29 as big as a 29. That's almost a quarter bigger. That
    is enough for the proportional effect of the coning to be significantly
    reduced.

    Moving back to Klaas Bil's points:

    Yes, the rolling resistance of a fatter tyre should be less - at the
    same pressure. The contact patch will be a bit wider, and therefore a
    bit "shorter" (front to rear along the direction of travel). Therefore
    the angle of the front edge of the deformation of the tyre, relative to
    the vertical, will be nearer to 90 degrees. With no deformation of the
    tyre at all, along the direction of travel, and given a perfectly
    smooth surface there would be no energy lost to the rolling resistance
    of the tyre.

    In practice, I suspect most fat tyres are run at lower pressure than
    most thin tyres. Most fat tyres have a knobblier tread. These two
    things would tend to reduce the effect Klaas Bil describes.

    Also, the offset thing: given a hard tyre with no deformation at all,
    when riding across a slope (or along a cambered road) then the central
    plane of the tyre would be out of contact with the road altogether and
    that would introduce some interesting handling quirks.

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  10. The yellow uni in the middle of this pic has a very skinny tire. I have
    no idea what size it is. It's hanging in Darren's shop. (I inverted the
    pic.) Any ideas?

    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |Filename: IMG_1672-2.jpg |
    |Download: http://www.unicyclist.com/attachment/10864 |
    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+

    --
    spyder

    tyler says:

    sorry about my obtuse post. i'll try not to anymore but this is jc

    i'm the one that looks like pam anderson

    don't worry i'm not a nerd

    if you had the mental capacity to ignore me you'd have never had this
    little turd in your life's toilet

    this again is going to sound like asking forgiveness
    but i really will stop this and i get the picture.i definitely
    understand and i will think before posting from now on

    sorry for the pointless thread but it's kind of a trend now
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    spyder's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4190
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  11. The yellow uni in the middle of this pic has a very narrow tire. I have
    no idea what size it is. It's hanging in Darren's shop. (I inverted the
    pic.) Any ideas?

    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |Filename: IMG_1672-2.jpg |
    |Download: http://www.unicyclist.com/attachment/10865 |
    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+

    --
    spyder

    tyler says:

    sorry about my obtuse post. i'll try not to anymore but this is jc

    i'm the one that looks like pam anderson

    don't worry i'm not a nerd

    if you had the mental capacity to ignore me you'd have never had this
    little turd in your life's toilet

    this again is going to sound like asking forgiveness
    but i really will stop this and i get the picture.i definitely
    understand and i will think before posting from now on

    sorry for the pointless thread but it's kind of a trend now
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    spyder's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4190
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  12. Martin Phillips said:


    I wouldn't dispute your logic, and I'm a rather inexperienced uni
    rider,
    but my impression is that my cycle wants to veer downhill when riding
    on
    a camber. Is this others' experience or have I interpreted what's
    happening wrong?
    QUOTE]

    I'm sure about the basic logic of what I am saying about coning. It is
    a recognised phenomenon. It comes up from time time in motorcycle
    magazines along with a phenomenon called "white lining" when the
    motorcycle "squirms" as the tyres catch the edge of the white painted
    lines in the road. This is because the paint is sometimes quite thick
    - thick enough to create a coning effect that is noticeable at
    motorcycling speeds. On my Vespa scooter (modern with 13 inch wheels)
    the effect can be most unpleasant.

    But if you are a relatively inexperienced unicyclist, two things might
    be happening:

    1) Simply your perception might be wrong because "common sense" would
    suggest that you would tend to drift down the slope because of gravity.
    You perceive what you expect to perceive because you're not yet able
    to interpet the feedback accurately.

    2) If you are still at the stage where your tyre track is more of a
    sine wave than a straight line (ahem😉 ) then the coning effect might
    be less obvious than the tendency for the unicycle to roll down the
    hill on that part of the sine wave, and the slightly increased
    resistance to pedalling on the part of the wave where you are going
    back up the slope.

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  13. spyder said:

    The yellow uni in the middle of this pic has a very narrow tire. I have
    no idea what size it is. It's hanging in Darren's shop. (I inverted the
    pic.) Any ideas?

    Wow, that's a beauty. It will say on the side of the tyre if you're
    really interested. It'll say something like 700c x 28, or 700c x 32.
    (Or an imperial (inches) size like 27 x 1 1/4 .

    At a guess, I'd say it's probably around 28 mm, same as mine. Coul dbe
    a touch narrower. Nice looking machine.😎

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  14. On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 22:15:53 +0000, Martin Phillips <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    my impression is that my cycle wants to veer downhill when riding on
    a camber. Is this others' experience or have I interpreted what's
    happening wrong?

    The effect that I described (the tyre partially folding at the contact
    point) would move the unicycle downhill. I'm not sure if it would
    'veer' downhill, in the sense that the heading changes. But I agree,
    when I ride on a camber, it feels as if I constantly must attempt to
    turn uphill a bit, or else I would drift downhill.

    As a remedy, increase your tyre pressure. (As an alternative remedy,
    relocate laterally on the road/path/whatever where there is less or no
    camber. Watch out for other traffic though.)

    Klaas Bil - Newsgroup Addict
    --
    "erectile function trumps public image - David Stone, commenting on the importance of seat comfort"

  15. Martin Phillips said:


    I suspect that the situation isn't quite as simple as Mike's geometric
    interpretation, and almost certainly complicated by knobbly tires (I'm
    riding on a 2.5" x 20" tyre at the moment, until the Nimbus 26" that
    I've just ordered arrives :-) I seem to cycle on cambers with
    "shoulders
    to the mountain", as ski instructors say, so my hips are twisting
    round
    in the uphill direction.
    QUOTE]

    I agree. There are many variables. Introducing too many of them into
    my earlier explanation would have made a complex post even more so.

    The tread of the tyre is indeed critical, as is the profile of the
    ttre.

    On my 26 Pashley MUni, the original tyre was almost unrideable on a
    hard surface. It had a central row of knobbles in a soft compound.
    These would "smear" randomly, but once the direction of smear had been
    established, it would stick until a change of camber overcame it. the
    tyre therefore had a constant drag one way or the other.

    I replaced it with a slightly better tyre (Michelin Wildgripper) and
    later replaced that with a Gazzaloddi 2.3". the Gazz was virtually
    unrideable on hard surfaces and across slopes, and it steered like a
    pig on ice skates.

    I now have Maxxis Holy Roller which has the right combination of
    profile (very rounded) and knobbles to make steering predictable, and
    it hardly cones.

    As for the upper body thing: you're right. There's a lower body thing
    too. Most people are lopsided when they stand still, never mind when
    they're unicycling. My dad went to one of those back specialists, who
    made him stand with one foot on one set of scales and his other foot on
    another set. (Fortunately the two sets of scales were near to each
    other.) One set of scales read about 10 pounds higher than the other
    because even when he waas trying to stand straight, he wasn't.

    --
    Mikefule

    Did you hear about the computer programmer conspiracy theorist who put
    10 and 10 together and made 101?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mikefule's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/879
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  16. - - -
    The effect that I described (the tyre partially folding at the contact
    point) would move the unicycle downhill.
    - - -

    A soft tyre ridden along a sloped road would be compressed so that most
    of it (looking at a cross section) would reside on the up slope side of
    the rim. I can't see how this can affect the direction you are going
    unless you count in the cone effect.

    Mikefule, you have convinced me that the size of the wheel to some
    degree lessens the coning effect. I wish there was a 20 mm wide tyre
    for the airfoil rim so I could really try the theory.

    I wrote earlier that I hardly ever have problems on sloped roads. I
    should have written I can hardly -remember- having this problem. My
    memory is very short you see. Today was an exception. Making my regular
    Coker ride I discovered that a portion of it comprises a sloped bike
    lane. I guess looking from behind you would see the Coker pointing at
    eleven o'clock while my upper body aims for one o'clock. Must look
    silly. Makes it impossible to tell whether it is tea time or not. And
    it is bloody uncomfortable.

    Thanks to this enlightening discussion I now remember my suffering.

    --
    goldenchicken
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    goldenchicken's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8149
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  17. goldenchicken said:

    A soft tyre ridden along a sloped road would be compressed so that most
    of it (looking at a cross section) would reside on the up slope side of
    the rim. I can't see how this can affect the direction you are going
    unless you count in the cone effect.

    Let's assume a wheel rolls across (perpendicular to) a slope, with the
    downhill side to the right. (I don't mean that the wheel is
    off-vertical, just that the direction of maximum downslope is exactly
    to the right of the rider.) Let's further assume that the plane of the
    wheel is in the same direction as its movement. Now take a point A
    along the circumference of the rim, being somewhere in mid-air. There
    is a point on the outer circumference of the tyre corresponding to A,
    let's call it B. Now at some point in time while the wheel rolls
    forward, B hits the road. At that moment, the tyre sits in first
    approximation symmetrically on the rim at that point. (For sake of
    simplicity, I forget that the tyre will hit the road first with a
    point somewhat beside the centre line of the tyre due to the cross
    slope. I also forget that the tyre has some elasticity and will 'feel'
    the road coming even though it hasn't touched it yet.) Let the point
    on the road where B hits it be called C.

    Now consider the wheel rolling further forward so much that that A and
    B are at the bottom of the wheel, i.e. in the longitudinal centre of
    the contact patch. The cross section of the tyre at A and B will be
    deformed by now. The tyre has folded such that most of the tyre
    contact patch will reside on the up slope side of the rim. I assume
    that the tyre has not slipped along the road surface. Therefore, B is
    still touching C. However, A has moved to the right of B (i.e.
    downslope) because of the deformation of the tyre. Assuming that the
    plane of the wheel still is perpendicular to the slope, that means
    that the wheel has undergone a lateral translation, in the downslope
    direction.

    And this process is ongoing continuously, so that the direction in
    which the wheel travels is not perpendicular to the slope, but
    somewhat more downhill. To counteract this tendency, you need to
    constantly steer upslope.

    QED.

    But could probably have been done less wordy.

    Klaas Bil - Newsgroup Addict
    --
    "erectile function trumps public image - David Stone, commenting on the importance of seat comfort"

  18. Klaas Bil said:

    And this process is ongoing continuously, so that the direction in
    which the wheel travels is not perpendicular to the slope, but
    somewhat more downhill. To counteract this tendency, you need to
    constantly steer upslope.

    Soft tyre wants to go down slope (deformation)
    Hard tyre wants to go up slope (coning)
    With the ideal pressure the wheel would go straight?

    --
    goldenchicken
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    goldenchicken's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8149
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  19. goldenchicken said:

    An experienced road unicyclist here in Sweden was appalled by the effect
    that BA had on his riding after buying a 29er. The wide contact path
    made him very sensitive to the slightest angle of the road. He quickly
    sold the 29er and went back to his old 28 frame with a narrow tyre.

    But! some months later he bought a Coker and almost went lyrical about
    it. Now, why doesn't that fat monster tyre pull him into 'coning'?

    This is also my own experience, on the Coker I seldom have any 'camber
    problems'. Only wind & ass problems.

    It's probably because he didn't pump it up enough.

    The big apple doesn't have as firm sidewalls as a coker, so needs lots
    of pressure.

    He may have pumped it up using a hand pump without a pressure guage,
    with those you usually don't get more than about 30 psi in a fat tyre
    like that, the BA is rubbish at that pressure and likes more like 60 to
    65 PSI. Loads of people get caught out by that one.

    Once I discovered that, I've been able to ride 50 miles plus on the Big
    Apple no problems, although for 100 miles I'd choose a coker.

    Riding super long distances is mostly about being able to stay on and
    not crash when you're really tired, with an aching [censored] and wired up on
    sugar and energy foods. Coker and Big Apples are much less likely to
    buck you off randomly if you lose concentration. A narrower tyre may or
    may not be theoretically good for long rides, but you're a whole lot
    more likely to be thrown onto the tarmac hard off one, which is likely
    to end your ride, or at least make you ride much slower.

    Joe
    (who rode 100 miles in 10 hours today with no UPDs or falls except for
    one steep hill that I just couldn't ride up - on a coker with 110s).

    --
    joemarshall

    my pics http://gallery.unicyclist.com/albuq44
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    joemarshall's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1545
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

  20. goldenchicken said:

    An experienced road unicyclist here in Sweden was appalled by the effect
    that BA had on his riding after buying a 29er. The wide contact path
    made him very sensitive to the slightest angle of the road. He quickly
    sold the 29er and went back to his old 28 frame with a narrow tyre.

    But! some months later he bought a Coker and almost went lyrical about
    it. Now, why doesn't that fat monster tyre pull him into 'coning'?

    This is also my own experience, on the Coker I seldom have any 'camber
    problems'. Only wind & ass problems.

    It's probably because he didn't pump it up enough.

    The big apple doesn't have as firm sidewalls as a coker, so needs lots
    of pressure.

    He may have pumped it up using a hand pump without a pressure guage,
    with those you usually don't get more than about 30 psi in a fat tyre
    like that, the BA is rubbish at that pressure and likes more like 60 to
    65 PSI. Loads of people get caught out by that one.

    Once I discovered that, I've been able to ride 50 miles plus on the Big
    Apple no problems, although for 100 miles I'd choose a coker.

    Riding super long distances is mostly about being able to stay on and
    not crash when you're really tired, with an aching [censored] and wired up on
    sugar and energy foods. Coker and Big Apples are much less likely to
    buck you off randomly if you lose concentration. A narrower tyre may or
    may not be theoretically good for long rides, but you're a whole lot
    more likely to be thrown onto the tarmac hard off one, which is likely
    to end your ride, or at least make you ride much slower.

    Joe
    (who rode 100 miles in 10 hours today with no UPDs or falls except for
    one steep hill that I just couldn't ride up - on a coker with 110s).

    --
    joemarshall

    my pics http://gallery.unicyclist.com/albuq44
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    joemarshall's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/1545
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/45154

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.