Tim, I am even bigger than you at 6'7" and 270lbs. All my best times at each brevet distance were done on wide, supple tires. In fact when I quit running 25 and 28mm Gatorskins in favor of 32mm Grand Bois, it was a revelation, even with the Grand Bois pumped up to max pressure, they were way more comfortable. I have always run the wide supple tires more closely to max PSI than some of the folks on here, and they're still more comfortable than race-ish tires aired up near their max PSI.
On my Paul Taylor custom I ride Michelin Pro4 Race, which is a fairly light and supple tire in it's own right. It's fine for 30-50 mile rides but past that it beats me up way more than my Rivendell on 650Bx38. Granted, I would probably not have converted to 650B if my Riv had room for fat 700c tires with fenders, but it doesn't, so I'm rolling on 650B. Happily. On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote: > On Thursday, April 17, 2014 2:08:22 AM UTC-4, Michael wrote: > > > Anyone here own a low-trail/ lightest tubing bike? > > Like the Herses and Singers and the new MAP S&P, Boulder bikes, etc.? > > Do you find them really that much better performing (faster, flexier, > planier, efficient) than your "oversized" steel tubing bikes, as I have > read about in reviews of them? > > No. I find many reports about wide tired, low trail, skinny tubed, > flexible flyer bikes to be completely opposite of my cycling experiences > for the past almost-50 years. > > My experience with wider/softer tires is that they are significantly > slower and more work to ride. My average speeds are measurably slower at > the same level of perceived work. I greatly prefer 700 x 25s to 28s, which > for me seems to be the sweet spot, than 26" or 650B. My fastest brevet was > on my old race bike with 700 x 25s, over 40 minutes faster on a 200K than a > different bike with 700 x 28s- and I finished a lot less fatigued. I > greatly prefer the handling feel of 55-60 mm trail bikes with those tires. > > My bike without fenders, lights, bar bag, etc., is easier to ride and > faster than my bike with all that stuff. Lighter is faster, except > downhill. > > Stiffer frames are faster for me and in terms of road feel not much > different. Wheelbase and in particular chain stay length are bigger > factors in comfort than supposed tubing flex (not much flex in a > triangulated structure). Tire pressure and width are the biggest factors > in isolating the rider from small amplitude road bumps, which is one area > where my experience lines up with the magazine articles. Flexier frames > are slower up hill, result in wonky handling when riding out of the saddle > and result in auto-shifting and chain grind on the front derailleur which > is annoying. > > My explanation for this is that I am 6'4" and 230 lbs (200-205 in my > racing days). Many of the folks doing those road tests and writing the > articles are not bears on a bike like. They are normal sized, strong > riders who do benefit from those lighter frames- they don't flex them out > as badly as someone my size does and so they don't run into the downsides > as much. 650B x 42 at 40 psi is a different situation for them than for > me; to avoid having spongy slow tires I have to pump them up enough where > there's not much difference in comfort than with my 700 x 25s at 115 psi. > And those tires are heavier with typically thicker rubber and heavier > fabric (there is a very good mechanical reason for wider tires using lower > TPI count casings). > > OTOH, I find that using small rings (46 x 34 on my fastest bike) up front > is a good idea- I don't race any more and don't need a 120" top gear. I > didn't even use the 53 x 11 when I *was* racing unless it was down hill and > at that point we were going fast enough to coast at 50 mph. Pedaling > wasn't helpful. A widish range set of chainrings and a tighter set of cogs > in back is a good combination for me and I credit Grant and Jan with > sticking that idea in my head. It's helped a lot in making riding more > fun. All my bikes have relatively small big rings now. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
