Personally I like that it comes down to a personal preference. What doesn't work for me may be perfect for you. Your tight size 12 shoe may be like a slipper on my feet.
The numbers game is the perfect, scientific way to measure, say, the rolling resistance of tires. That doesn't mean you can't still prefer the "less than optimal" tire. For example, Ruffy Tuffy's, until they are a bit broken in, feel like Velcro to me-they just feel like they are glued to the road. OTOH, the JB's are a great rolling, comfy tire. I love the way they whistle down the road. Go figure. Sent from my iPad On Aug 6, 2012, at 8:41 PM, ted <ted.ke...@comcast.net> wrote: > I keep thinking how nice if would be if folks would use numbers (and > units if course) more often. > You know, like how many mm wider, or how many mph faster etc. > Even better folks could also state a base state they are comparing to. > Like 1 mph faster at 20 mph. > > On a related note, with curves of optimal tire pressure vs. weight > being out there, does anybody else wonder when somebody is going to > put forward an "optimal" tire width vs. weight curve to go with it? > Maybe with different curves for different surfaces? > > On Aug 6, 5:16 pm, robert zeidler <zeidler.rob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Not talking about a few centimeters. That's never even been suggested. I'm >> talking about 12 or 20 mm bigger. >> >> You're not going to determine what rolls faster by rolling down a hill and >> measuring with a stop watch. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Monday, August 6, 2012, Steve Palincsar wrote: >>> On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 11:51 -0400, robert zeidler wrote: >>>> Or the endless opinion that fatter tires are every bit as fast as >>>> skinny tires. No way. More comfortable? Absolutely. Better on dirt? >>>> For sure. Not faster. If that were the case, does anyone believe >>>> that the entire bicycle, and tire industry would not jump at the task >>>> to supply the entire racing/fast recreational community with new >>>> frames and rubber? Come on all you anti-corporate people out there, >>>> of course they would! >> >>> This sounds like yet another iteration of the old "if wide tires were >>> better than 700x23 clinchers the racers would use them." However, it >>> turns out, those 700x23 clinchers you've been seeing the racers use are >>> nothing of the sort: they are tubulars disguised to make them look like >>> clinchers. (And it's well known, due to their construction and the >>> shape of the rims for them, tubulars of a given size ride like clinchers >>> that are several mm wider.) >> >>> Do you see anybody actively marketing sew-ups to the recreational >>> make-believe-they-are-racers community? Of course not. They simply >>> perpetuate the lie that those narrow clinchers are what the racers are >>> using. >> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to >>> rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com<javascript:;> >>> . >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <javascript:;>. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
