Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Seth Vidal]

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:23 PM, msrw  wrote:
> I live in Santa Fe.  That loop, just outside of the city on the
> Northwest side, has multiple iterations that can be extended for
> miles, outstanding road surfaces, 360 degree mountain views, rolling
> terrain and few cars.  Everyone around here rides there.


I'm sending you waves of jealousy from the east coast. :)


sounds nice.
-sv

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Seth Vidal]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 6:32 PM, msrw  wrote:
>
> There's an 18 mile loop near my house that can be ridden with no
> traffic stops or other interruptions.

hmmm. Where do you live? B/c an 18 mile loop w/o traffic stops sounds LOVELY.

-sv

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Tim McNamara]

On Aug 18, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Steve Palincsar wrote:


On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 18:24 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:

To me, the real question is, other than styling and the whole

fantasy

wannabee pro racer let's play pretend, what real advantage does
something like a Madone give you for precisely that kind of riding
over a racing bike that Eddy Merckx might have ridden?


Similar questions can be fairly asked about mountain bikes,
randonneur bikes, fixed gear bikes, 29ers, country bikes, etc.  It's
just a matter of preferences.


Not quite sure what you mean, but I would have no difficulty finding a
real advantage for certain kinds of riding comparing a mountain bike
with a 1972 road racer, never mind a Madone; and I could easily  
show you

how a randonneur bike might provide you with advantages in certain
situations compared to a Madone.

It's not just preferences, it is also a matter of some tools being  
more

suitable for certain jobs and certain users than others.  For the
particular users in the original discussion, I'm not sure I would find
many, or even any, meaningful advantage in a Madone vs a 1972 road
racer, and I could easily find some situations where the 1972 road  
racer
would be superior due to its greater versatility (because of its  
greater

clearances and its ability to mount fenders)


And some find a real advantage in the Madone- you might not, but they  
do.  Horses for courses.  It's not really any business of mine what  
someone else wants to ride, I figure.  My choices in bikes are what I  
think is best for me (and, given the mailing list in which I  
participate, you can guess pretty accurately what my preferences  
are.  I got no Madones.).



You will recall, in the original posting, bfd's friends wanted Madones
so they could be "just like the pros" because whatever the pros use  
must

be best for them.  My point has been all along that "it ain't
necessarily so."


And it ain't necessarily so that it ain't necessarily so.  ;-)

--
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Ken Mattina]

maybe they broke their ankles or something

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:33 PM, cyclotourist wrote:

> Did it just become February all of a sudden?
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Earl Grey  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 19, 3:47 am, bfd  wrote:
>> > On Aug 18, 1:10 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>> >
>> > But, as Patrick stated if it gets someone out on a bike than what's
>> > not to like?!
>>
>> I am not sure it's all that fabulous getting a person on a bike that
>> cannot serve as functional transportation (functional meaning even
>> when it rains or it's dark or you need to carry stuff), especially if
>> it reinforces the perception (in his/her mind, and in folks watching
>> him/her zip down the road) that a bike is nothing more than an
>> expensive toy for a rich person's sport, who is frivolously taking
>> road space away from people who *need* to go somewhere in their cars.
>> Maybe that road racer will eventually realize that a bike can be used
>> for transportation, and will go out of his/her way (as s/he must
>> today) to find a bike that fulfills those needs. But unfortunately I
>> think it is equally likely that the limitations of the bike they own
>> (and the bikes they see on the road) will lead them to believe that
>> all bikes are toys.
>>
>> Granted, I see little problem with having a few racing bikes on the
>> road. But when that is the vast majority of the road bikes out there,
>> and the vast majority of the road bikes in the shops, then not only is
>> bicycling the poorer for it, but we as a society are.
>>
>> Imagine for a moment that the car industry offered us nothing but
>> trunk- and top-less Formula 1 cars (racing bikes), military spec
>> Hummers (mtn bikes) oh, and a few Yugos (today's standard hybrids) and
>> a few Jeep Wranglers (low-end mountain bikes). A ludicrous proposition
>> (though sensible cars *are* few and far between), yet that is what the
>> mainstream bike industry looks like today.
>>
>> So, thanks, Grant and everyone who is dedicated to showing there is an
>> alternative.
>>
>> Gernot
>>
>>
>> The bad thing is that because racing style bikes are so
>> > prevalent, they dominate the market and make it harder for good,
>> > reliable equipment to be available at a reasonable price. The big
>> > example of that is Mavic removing its MA2 rim from the market.
>> > Arguably one of the best clincher rims ever made.
>> >
>> > Similarly, back in 2008, when  I was building up my steel cross/
>> > commuter bike, Paul Taylor breakaway, I wanted silver parts to match
>> > my black with gold paneled frameset. It may sound funny, but silver
>> > parts were not that easy to find! On my own, I was able to find most
>> > parts used or NOS and my LBS luckily sold Nitto bars and threadless
>> > stem. Of course, this was before VO started carrying more silver
>> > parts. Still, it was harder than sourcing black components which seem
>> > to be abundant in all price ranges. Good Luck!
>>
>> --
>> 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-bu...@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.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> David
> Redlands, CA
>
> "One man's religion is another man's belly laugh."
> --Robert A. Heinlein
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>



-- 
Where did the spring go?
Where did my hormones go?
Where did my energy go?
Where did my go go?
Where did the pleasure go?
Where did my hair go?

-- Ray Davies

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[cyclotourist]

Did it just become February all of a sudden?


On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Earl Grey  wrote:

>
>
> On Aug 19, 3:47 am, bfd  wrote:
> > On Aug 18, 1:10 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> >
> > But, as Patrick stated if it gets someone out on a bike than what's
> > not to like?!
>
> I am not sure it's all that fabulous getting a person on a bike that
> cannot serve as functional transportation (functional meaning even
> when it rains or it's dark or you need to carry stuff), especially if
> it reinforces the perception (in his/her mind, and in folks watching
> him/her zip down the road) that a bike is nothing more than an
> expensive toy for a rich person's sport, who is frivolously taking
> road space away from people who *need* to go somewhere in their cars.
> Maybe that road racer will eventually realize that a bike can be used
> for transportation, and will go out of his/her way (as s/he must
> today) to find a bike that fulfills those needs. But unfortunately I
> think it is equally likely that the limitations of the bike they own
> (and the bikes they see on the road) will lead them to believe that
> all bikes are toys.
>
> Granted, I see little problem with having a few racing bikes on the
> road. But when that is the vast majority of the road bikes out there,
> and the vast majority of the road bikes in the shops, then not only is
> bicycling the poorer for it, but we as a society are.
>
> Imagine for a moment that the car industry offered us nothing but
> trunk- and top-less Formula 1 cars (racing bikes), military spec
> Hummers (mtn bikes) oh, and a few Yugos (today's standard hybrids) and
> a few Jeep Wranglers (low-end mountain bikes). A ludicrous proposition
> (though sensible cars *are* few and far between), yet that is what the
> mainstream bike industry looks like today.
>
> So, thanks, Grant and everyone who is dedicated to showing there is an
> alternative.
>
> Gernot
>
>
> The bad thing is that because racing style bikes are so
> > prevalent, they dominate the market and make it harder for good,
> > reliable equipment to be available at a reasonable price. The big
> > example of that is Mavic removing its MA2 rim from the market.
> > Arguably one of the best clincher rims ever made.
> >
> > Similarly, back in 2008, when  I was building up my steel cross/
> > commuter bike, Paul Taylor breakaway, I wanted silver parts to match
> > my black with gold paneled frameset. It may sound funny, but silver
> > parts were not that easy to find! On my own, I was able to find most
> > parts used or NOS and my LBS luckily sold Nitto bars and threadless
> > stem. Of course, this was before VO started carrying more silver
> > parts. Still, it was harder than sourcing black components which seem
> > to be abundant in all price ranges. Good Luck!
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"One man's religion is another man's belly laugh."
--Robert A. Heinlein

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 18:24 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
> >> To me, the real question is, other than styling and the whole
> fantasy
> >> wannabee pro racer let's play pretend, what real advantage does
> >> something like a Madone give you for precisely that kind of
> riding  
> >> over
> >> a racing bike that Eddy Merckx might have ridden?
> 
> Similar questions can be fairly asked about mountain bikes,  
> randonneur bikes, fixed gear bikes, 29ers, country bikes, etc.  It's  
> just a matter of preferences.

Not quite sure what you mean, but I would have no difficulty finding a
real advantage for certain kinds of riding comparing a mountain bike
with a 1972 road racer, never mind a Madone; and I could easily show you
how a randonneur bike might provide you with advantages in certain
situations compared to a Madone.  

It's not just preferences, it is also a matter of some tools being more
suitable for certain jobs and certain users than others.  For the
particular users in the original discussion, I'm not sure I would find
many, or even any, meaningful advantage in a Madone vs a 1972 road
racer, and I could easily find some situations where the 1972 road racer
would be superior due to its greater versatility (because of its greater
clearances and its ability to mount fenders).

You will recall, in the original posting, bfd's friends wanted Madones
so they could be "just like the pros" because whatever the pros use must
be best for them.  My point has been all along that "it ain't
necessarily so."


-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Tim McNamara]

On Aug 18, 2010, at 3:47 PM, bfd wrote:


On Aug 18, 1:10 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:59 -0700, Patrick in VT wrote:

On Aug 18, 3:01 pm, JoelMatthews  wrote:



Unless you and your friends actually race, why do you need a race
style bike at all?


just like it's fun to go bombing around on a country bike, some  
folks
find it fun to go fast on a road bike whether they race or not.   
light

bikes are fun to ride, and if people are having fun - why not have a
race style bike?  for the some, the "occasional short fun ride"  
is 50

miles at 20+mph - a road bike seems like a good choice there.


To me, the real question is, other than styling and the whole fantasy
wannabee pro racer let's play pretend, what real advantage does
something like a Madone give you for precisely that kind of riding  
over

a racing bike that Eddy Merckx might have ridden?


Similar questions can be fairly asked about mountain bikes,  
randonneur bikes, fixed gear bikes, 29ers, country bikes, etc.  It's  
just a matter of preferences.





But, as Patrick stated if it gets someone out on a bike than what's
not to like?!


Bingo!

--
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 13:47 -0700, bfd wrote:
> 
> > > just like it's fun to go bombing around on a country bike, some folks
> > > find it fun to go fast on a road bike whether they race or not.  light
> > > bikes are fun to ride, and if people are having fun - why not have a
> > > race style bike?  for the some, the "occasional short fun ride" is 50
> > > miles at 20+mph - a road bike seems like a good choice there.
> >
> > To me, the real question is, other than styling and the whole fantasy
> > wannabee pro racer let's play pretend, what real advantage does
> > something like a Madone give you for precisely that kind of riding over
> > a racing bike that Eddy Merckx might have ridden?
> 
> Well, if you look at today's Eddy Merckx bikes, probably not much.

No, I'm not talking about the Merckx brand, I'm talking about bikes he
might have actually raced on back in the 1970s.


> Compared to the bikes he used when he raced, quite a bit of
> difference. For example, Madone are carbon, use integrated shifters
> and clipless pedals. The bikes definitely weigh a lot less too.

And I'm not talking about what are the differences between today's race
bikes and those of the early 1970s.

The question is, what REAL ADVANTAGE does a bike like a Madone give you,
the rider, over a racing bike of the 1970s?  Differences in frame
materials do not constitute an advantage in and of themselves. 


> Assuming Eddy used a bike that weighed 18-20lbs, today's bikes are
> limited to something like 6.8kg or about 14.9lbs. That 3 to 5 lb
> difference is pretty big. It may mean more to a racer than an average
> overweight weekend warrior.

OK, let's say a five pounds lighter bike for a rider who might well be
10 KG overweight or more.  How much of an actual advantage is that?
What does it translate to in terms of performance, as opposed to
bragging rights?  If you and your pals ride primarily for fun and
fitness, do those missing 3-5 pounds enhance your enjoyment?  (It's
certainly hard to see how they enhance your fitness -- that would be
improved by adding weight, not subtracting it.)  Will you go faster?  If
so, how much faster?  And how much difference would that make?


> But, as Patrick stated if it gets someone out on a bike than what's
> not to like?! The bad thing is that because racing style bikes are so
> prevalent, they dominate the market and make it harder for good,
> reliable equipment to be available at a reasonable price. 

So you're saying racing equipment is less expensive?  Balderdash.  

Let's just pick on wheels, shall we?  Two thousand for a set of low
spoke count racing wheels, and if you break a spoke you're done, the
wheel isn't turning in the rear triangle.  Compare that with a handmade
wheel like what Rich at Riv builds, or what Peter White builds - let's
say, Dura Ace hubs and Open Pro rims, 32 or 36 spokes.  Dead reliable
wheels that would still turn if you did break a spoke.

Racing brakes, perhaps?  $875 or more for a set of brakes?  Yeah, you
shave a few grams.  What's a set of Shimano brakes go for?  Or Tektros?

Or maybe let's talk cranks.  A thousand bucks for a crankset that maybe
(or maybe not) includes the bottom bracket bearings.  How's that compare
with the Sugino Alpina, for example?

I was at a rest stop at our club century 2 years ago and I overheard a
guy behind me talking about the upgrade he'd just made to his bike:
carbon handlebars and a carbon stem.  It cost him a thousand bucks, but
man, look at how many grams he saved!  A thousand bucks for a handlebar
and a stem?  As they say in Dublin, "Jesus wept."





-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:59 -0700, Patrick in VT wrote:
> On Aug 18, 3:01 pm, JoelMatthews  wrote:
> 
> > Unless you and your friends actually race, why do you need a race
> > style bike at all?
> 
> just like it's fun to go bombing around on a country bike, some folks
> find it fun to go fast on a road bike whether they race or not.  light
> bikes are fun to ride, and if people are having fun - why not have a
> race style bike?  for the some, the "occasional short fun ride" is 50
> miles at 20+mph - a road bike seems like a good choice there.

To me, the real question is, other than styling and the whole fantasy
wannabee pro racer let's play pretend, what real advantage does
something like a Madone give you for precisely that kind of riding over
a racing bike that Eddy Merckx might have ridden?





-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:47 -0700, bfd wrote:
> 
> On Aug 18, 12:01 pm, JoelMatthews  wrote:

> > Unless you and your friends actually race, why do you need a race
> > style bike at all?  If your primary reason to have a bike is to get
> > around with the occasional short fun ride, general use wide tire
> > comfort bike seems a whole lot more appropriate than a bike designed
> > for the sole purpose of getting from point a to point b as fast as
> > possible.  Although I do acknowledge that many in your state appear to
> > view BMW 3-series as shopping carts,
> >
> Good question. Around here there are alot of hills. The "belief" that
> a lighter bike will climb better is paramount. Further, many riders,
> my friends included (but not necessarily me), make very good money, so
> buying what the *pros* use is also important because if they can climb
> fast using those types of bikes, so can we

Even though they weigh a lot less and produce a lot more power?  

> Finally, there's also a
> preception that fat tires, i.e., anything wider than say 32mm is going
> to slow you down. This may not necessarily be the case, but most
> people are going to watch Lance, Alberto and Andy and say they ride
> fast uphill on skinny tire racing bikes, so can we! Let's not consider
> things like fitness, fit (bike) and training. Racers or racing-style
> bikes go up hill fast, that's what I got to get!!!

Chicks look good in bras.  You should get one, too!

> 
> Reality, wide tire comfort bikes are not in, so it is going to be a
> hard sell. You can see this with 650b. Many here swear by it and won't
> ride anything else. Yet, the general public, my friends included,
> would just laugh and consider those bikes for those "old, slow, fat
> guys." Of course, many also need to look in the mirror.

I'd say your friends are uninformed and immature, and to be honest, I'm
not even slightly interested in attempting to educate them or to change
their minds.



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 10:55 -0700, bfd wrote:
> 
> On Aug 16, 1:46 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 13:04 -0700, bfd wrote:
> > > I don't get it what's with all the randonneur worshipping? I know
> > > people here consider "racing" to be a bad word as it represents all
> > > that is supposedly wrong with bicycling. Yet, randonneur is consider
> > > good?!
> >
> > Yes.  There's very little resemblance between racing and the riding most
> > of us do, and almost no correspondence between the values of racing and
> > ours.  
> >
> > Racing, remember, is a sport where there is one winner and everyone else
> > is a loser, and a sport where it seems to be well known that the top
> > performers -- elite athletes who have no resemblance to us at all -- all
> > cheat.  Randonneuring is done by people just like us, sometimes in fact
> > us.  It's riding like we do, taken out to the limits.  It rewards self
> > reliance, and everybody's a winner.
> >
> 
> > So, which of those two extremes is more worthy of respect?
> >
> >
> >
> > > What I don't understand is both racing and randonneuring require
> > > massive amount of time, commitment and training.  You can't do either
> > > well without putting in the time.
> >
> > Yes, but if you put in the time, it's possible for an ordinary rider
> > like me (as opposed to naturally gifted athletes) to do it.  In fact,
> > I've done it.  I'll do it again.  But on club rides, I ride with the
> > CCs.  Faster than the CCs are the Bs, the BBs, and the As.  And this
> > isn't a racing club; most of the A riders aren't fast enough or trained
> > enough to race, even at the lowest levels.
> >
> > Put it another way: anybody here who can do a 100 mile ride could do a
> > 200K brevet, if they were interested.
> >

> Thanks Steve. I think the issue is more of what use and what people
> consider "comfortable."  Unlike you or many others here, my friends
> and I don't do long distance riding. Due to various time constraints,
> i.e., family, work, other obligations, we only do "short" rides of
> 40-70 miles, and then only on weekends or holidays (if we can get
> out.  So, doing a 200K "brevet" or longer is out.

If you regularly do 60-70 mile rides, a September century is probably a
nice stretch ride but not an insurmountable obstacle.  I'm not saying
you should or you must, but many club cyclists enjoy doing September
centuries and find them the highlight of the cycling year.

And if you've done 4 or 5 centuries in September, as many of us will do,
an additional 25%, bring the ride up to 200K is not out of the question.
It does bring some additional features or complications, which may be
attractions or detractions, depending on your state of mind, such as a
few hours of riding at night -- which, believe it or not, many of us
have found enjoyable -- and the whole structure around controles and
brevet cards.

Note, I'm absolutely NOT saying you must or you should do so.  All I am
saying is, many club cyclists who enjoy doing September centuries may
find the additional distance and different structure of a brevet
interesting -- especially as an answer to the question "now that I've
done centuries, what's next?"


> > A bike that's designed to be comfortable and easily controllable when
> > you're very tired is a very pleasant bike to ride on a century.  
> >

> I guess that comes down to how you define "comfortable."  For many,
> like my friends and I, a "racing-style" bike is all we need. Since we
> only do rides under 100 miles, actually closer to 40-60 miles, racing-
> style bikes with 700x23/25 sized tires is all we need. I ride 700x25
> pumped up to about 80-90psi and find them really comfortable. I do
> ride a carbon bike, but we all know frameset material is never a
> factor in making a bike comfortable. ;)

Do you stop riding in November?  I find some of the most sublime riding
I do all year happens in the winter, especially very shortly after it
snows.  Around here, snow seldom lingers very long (last year's
blizzards were a strong exception) so 2 days after a snow you'll find a
sunny, bright day with temperatures in the low 40s, golden sun sparking
on the white snow, and you feel as though you're riding through a
Currier and Ives lithograph or a New England picture postcard.

Trouble is, those 40 degree temps are causing that crisp white snow to
melt and rivulets of snow melt run across the road everywhere.  To ride
down such a road without fenders invites a brown stripe up the back,
specks of dirt on your glasses, and a filthy bike.

No bfd, right?  Just put fenders on the bike.  Hell, racing bikes used
to have plenty of clearance for fenders, and eyelets, too.  But not any
more.  Now, with some carbon racing frames there isn't even clearance
for a 25mm tire, never mind for full coverage fenders.  So what do you
do, give up riding when the roads - oh my god - are WET?  

As for the rest, comfort isn't a huge issue if all you ride are 40-60
miles.  Back whe

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Bill Connell]

Pffftt. Kids these days. Pull up those pants! Stand up straight! Comb
your hair! Match those wheels! What, were you raised in a barn? And
get off my lawn!


On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:27 PM, PATRICK MOORE  wrote:
> The wisest amongst us yearn instead for conspicuous minimalist consumption:
>
> http://taticycles.com/p/396
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wb8bAl1PN0/TGlE5XPP6nI/QNM/z1VA1Tug9po/s1600/Another+TATI+White+Label+Build.jpeg
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:04 PM, bfd  wrote:
>>
>>
>> I don't get it what's with all the randonneur worshipping? I know
>> people here consider "racing" to be a bad word as it represents all
>> that is supposedly wrong with bicycling. Yet, randonneur is consider
>> good?!
>>
>> What I don't understand is both racing and randonneuring require
>> massive amount of time, commitment and training.  You can't do either
>> well without putting in the time.
>>
>> Further, it also appears to require bikes that can be costly. *True*
>> racing bikes can cost in excess of $5K to 10K or more, i.e., think top
>> of the line Trek Madone, Specialized S-Work Tarmac or even something
>> like a Pegoretti Love #3...OK, the last is suppose to be a joke as I
>> know there's a bunch of controversy about it :_P. Similarly, a *true*
>> rando bike can be just as costly, especially if you ache for something
>> French like a Herse or Singer.
>>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Moore
> Albuquerque, NM
> For professional resumes, contact
> Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>



-- 
Bill Connell
St. Paul, MN

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 13:04 -0700, bfd wrote:

> I don't get it what's with all the randonneur worshipping? I know
> people here consider "racing" to be a bad word as it represents all
> that is supposedly wrong with bicycling. Yet, randonneur is consider
> good?!

Yes.  There's very little resemblance between racing and the riding most
of us do, and almost no correspondence between the values of racing and
ours.  

Racing, remember, is a sport where there is one winner and everyone else
is a loser, and a sport where it seems to be well known that the top
performers -- elite athletes who have no resemblance to us at all -- all
cheat.  Randonneuring is done by people just like us, sometimes in fact
us.  It's riding like we do, taken out to the limits.  It rewards self
reliance, and everybody's a winner.

So, which of those two extremes is more worthy of respect?

> 
> What I don't understand is both racing and randonneuring require
> massive amount of time, commitment and training.  You can't do either
> well without putting in the time.

Yes, but if you put in the time, it's possible for an ordinary rider
like me (as opposed to naturally gifted athletes) to do it.  In fact,
I've done it.  I'll do it again.  But on club rides, I ride with the
CCs.  Faster than the CCs are the Bs, the BBs, and the As.  And this
isn't a racing club; most of the A riders aren't fast enough or trained
enough to race, even at the lowest levels.

Put it another way: anybody here who can do a 100 mile ride could do a
200K brevet, if they were interested.

But in the context of this discussion, you're confusing the sport with
the equipment.  When we're discussing bikes, we're discussing the
equipment.  

Why the interest in this type of bicycle?  For one thing, bikes of this
type make it much more comfortable and much easier to do the sort of
rides we do.  

A bike that's designed to be comfortable and easily controllable when
you're very tired is a very pleasant bike to ride on a century.  

A bike that's designed to be ridden in severe weather is a pleasure to
ride in the rain.  

A bike that's designed to be able to carry enough to sustain a rider on
a brevet is equally capable of carrying everything I need to carry on a
winter's day, when it might be 28 degrees at ride start time but it
might get up to 45-50 before we're done.

What is there to not like about all that?

And for another, these bikes actually look like a bicycle.  Unlike just
about everything you find in a LBS today.  

> 
> Further, it also appears to require bikes that can be costly. 

There are quite a few Kogswell P/Rs - configured with drop bars, the "R"
in the name means "Randonneur" - that have been ridden on brevets.  Even
fully tricked out with a top of the line lighting system and the best
handmade wheels money can buy, a P/R cost less to outfit than the
cheapest Madone.  So too will a hand-made custom from most of the
builders you see over at the VSalon.  


> *True*
> racing bikes can cost in excess of $5K to 10K or more, i.e., think top
> of the line Trek Madone, Specialized S-Work Tarmac or even something
> like a Pegoretti Love #3...OK, the last is suppose to be a joke as I
> know there's a bunch of controversy about it :_P. Similarly, a *true*
> rando bike can be just as costly, especially if you ache for something
> French like a Herse or Singer.

You can spend as much as you like on a bike, that's certainly true.  It
doesn't mean you have to.  These days, a crankset on a high-end racing
bike is a thousand bucks, and I'm not sure that includes the bottom
bracket bearings.  I've seen ultra-lightweight racing brakes that cost
more than five hundred bucks a pair.  Wheels go for upwards of a couple
of thousand dollars.  So by your standards, shouldn't you be griping
about club riding bikes, the sort of thing you see posted on the Serotta
forum every day?

By contrast, randonneuring equipment is dirt cheap, even top of the line
equipment. A top of the line randonneur wheel set will be more than a
thousand dollars less expensive than a racing wheel set -- and it will
be far more durable.  You probably won't find carbon bars and carbon
stems and carbon seatposts on a randonneur.  Spending big bucks to shave
grams doesn't make much sense when you're planning to carry a 10 lb load
of clothes and tools and supplies.

> Is the attraction that you can ride a bike that is custom fitted for
> things like racks, lights, fat tires and fenders? Couldn't a cross
> style bike with fenders, lights and racks work just as well? After
> all, you can race/train/rando on just about anything, right? Thanks!

Why would I want a bike intended for cyclocross racing when I don't do
that type of riding, and nothing that makes a bike especially suited for
cyclocross makes it specially suited for anything I do?  And what's
wrong with a custom frame?

I ride centuries, sometimes even 200K brevets.  And on those long rides,
I get plenty tired.  I'm sure there have been centuries w

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[PATRICK MOORE]

The wisest amongst us yearn instead for conspicuous minimalist
consumption
:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_wb8bAl1PN0/TGlE5XPP6nI/QNM/z1VA1Tug9po/s1600/Another+TATI+White+Label+Build.jpeg

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:04 PM, bfd  wrote:

>
>
> I don't get it what's with all the randonneur worshipping? I know
> people here consider "racing" to be a bad word as it represents all
> that is supposedly wrong with bicycling. Yet, randonneur is consider
> good?!
>
> What I don't understand is both racing and randonneuring require
> massive amount of time, commitment and training.  You can't do either
> well without putting in the time.
>
> Further, it also appears to require bikes that can be costly. *True*
> racing bikes can cost in excess of $5K to 10K or more, i.e., think top
> of the line Trek Madone, Specialized S-Work Tarmac or even something
> like a Pegoretti Love #3...OK, the last is suppose to be a joke as I
> know there's a bunch of controversy about it :_P. Similarly, a *true*
> rando bike can be just as costly, especially if you ache for something
> French like a Herse or Singer.
>
>

-- 
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW at resumespecialt...@gmail.com

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Bill Connell]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 3:04 PM, bfd  wrote:
> Is the attraction that you can ride a bike that is custom fitted for
> things like racks, lights, fat tires and fenders? Couldn't a cross
> style bike with fenders, lights and racks work just as well? After
> all, you can race/train/rando on just about anything, right? Thanks!


I don't know that i'd call it 'worship', but if you're doing very
long, often mixed-terrain rides, the rando bike is the ultimate tool.
Basically the randonneuse is to the all-rounder/light tourer as the
racing bike is to the average road bike. Like with many things, as you
do more of it, the tools you use get more sophisticated and
purpose-built. In the rando world, that generally means designing and
building the bike to reduce the number of fasteners that can loosen,
parts that break or wear to quickly and permanent solutions such as
dyno wheels rather than battery lights. Since these bikes are
generally built on custom frames, they can go with the details as the
owner wants to, often building the frame to fit a specific set of
parts. The framebuilders i've talked to often say that a really
complete randonneuse frame will end up costing more than one of their
top racing frames simply because of the time it takes to fabricate and
add those details.

I've done many on- and off-road century rides on a standard road bike
or my cross bike with the necessary equipment added, and didn't feel
the bike lacking, but i could certainly see getting a custom if i were
riding more and the budget allowed.

-- 
Bill Connell
St. Paul, MN

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 08:27 -0700, james black wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 05:06, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> > So where's the champion?
> 
> Did I say there was a champion?

Well, exactly.  

It seems as though you have two choices here: explore the niche market,
where you find champions and dedicated bretheren willing to put up their
money in advance on a hope and a promise; or the mass market, where you
benefit from and are at the mercy of large impersonal forces and big
companies.


> >> I ordered a pair of 700x37mm non-TG Paselas for the build I'm
> >> currently working on, and expect they will be pretty good, so the
> >> situation isn't totally dire for us poor saps who have to use 700c.
> 
> > Then why are the fans of wide 700C tires gnashing their teeth with envy?
> 
> The situation isn't totally dire, but it is half-dire.

Those 37mm Paselas aren't that bad, not even half-dire I think.



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[james black]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 05:06, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> So where's the champion?

Did I say there was a champion?

>> I ordered a pair of 700x37mm non-TG Paselas for the build I'm
>> currently working on, and expect they will be pretty good, so the
>> situation isn't totally dire for us poor saps who have to use 700c.

> Then why are the fans of wide 700C tires gnashing their teeth with envy?

The situation isn't totally dire, but it is half-dire.

James Black

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 21:17 -0700, james black wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 20:44, cyclotourist  wrote:
> > While I think that sounds like the perfect tire, how many non touring or
> > hybrid bikers are out there that can accommodate that size?  Even among
> > Rivendell's lineup, the lighter weight bikes (Roadeo, Rambouillet) wouldn't
> > be able to run that size.  You would need to get a Sam or an Atlantis.  Not
> > sure about the AHH, but it would be close, and probably not with fenders.
> 
> If somebody did come out with a really nice 700c x 38mm tire similar
> to a Pari-Moto or Hetre, there would be plenty of interest in it, and
> lots of people would want their (larger-sized) Rivendells to
> accommodate it, I suspect. There are many existing Rivendells that
> won't fit such a tire, but if the tire existed, I think that designers
> like Rivendell would be compelled to design around it.

So where's the champion?


> 
> I ordered a pair of 700x37mm non-TG Paselas for the build I'm
> currently working on, and expect they will be pretty good, so the
> situation isn't totally dire for us poor saps who have to use 700c.

Then why are the fans of wide 700C tires gnashing their teeth with envy?



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 21:18 -0700, Jim Cloud wrote:
> I'm sure that we're not going to find an agreement on the RBW Owner's
> Group site..  I think, however, that this snip I took from Sheldon
> Brown's site pertaining to various sizes of tires that are available
> relates to my statement about the 650B tire size.
> 
> "584 mm, 650B, is the focus of this article. This size, also known as
> 26 x 1 1/2", is most popular in France, where it was the traditional
> size for loaded touring bikes and tandems, as well as general utility
> bikes."
> 
> I stand by my comment that the traditional 650B size tire, as it was
> used by the French was generally for "loaded touring bikes" - which
> they often referred to as the "Camping" model.  

Certainly it was the traditional size for tandems and loaded touring
bikes.  Nobody's disputing that.  But you went a lot farther than that:
you said it was not a randonneuring size, and that is just plain wrong.

Consider this Rene Herse randonneur:
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/herse52-whole2.jpg
I imagine you are familiar with this bike.   You might also recall that
the Technical Trials /mandated/ a 650B wheel.  Then, you might look at
the Herse and Goeland catalogs reproduced in BQ, where you will find
650B randonneurs as well as campeurs.  Or, you could look at The Golden
Age of Handbuilt Bicycles, where again you will find many 650B
randonneurs represented.


> If some today are
> using the size for a Randonneur, so be it, I really am not trying to
> state that the 650B cannot be used on a Randonneur (nor that it wasn't
> ever used on a French Randonneur model, but it wasn't the norm).
> 
> As far as the wider type of 700C tire that I'm suggesting it certainly
> would be better suited to a bicycle of my size (65-66cm) than the
> 650B.

Why stop at 622?  I'm sure that on as large a frame as yours, a 700C
wheel appears as every bit as "tiny and out of proportion" as a 584
wheel would do on a 60 cm frame.  



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[cyclotourist]

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:17 PM, james black  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 20:44, cyclotourist 
> wrote:
> > While I think that sounds like the perfect tire, how many non touring or
> > hybrid bikers are out there that can accommodate that size?  Even among
> > Rivendell's lineup, the lighter weight bikes (Roadeo, Rambouillet)
> wouldn't
> > be able to run that size.  You would need to get a Sam or an Atlantis.
> Not
> > sure about the AHH, but it would be close, and probably not with fenders.
>
> If somebody did come out with a really nice 700c x 38mm tire similar
> to a Pari-Moto or Hetre, there would be plenty of interest in it, and
> lots of people would want their (larger-sized) Rivendells to
> accommodate it, I suspect. There are many existing Rivendells that
> won't fit such a tire, but if the tire existed, I think that designers
> like Rivendell would be compelled to design around it.
>
> I ordered a pair of 700x37mm non-TG Paselas for the build I'm
> currently working on, and expect they will be pretty good, so the
> situation isn't totally dire for us poor saps who have to use 700c.
>
> Incidentally, this bike I'm putting together is the one I would use
> for an epic fire road venture up into the Santa Ana Mountains, and I
> hope I can do that ride this autumn.
>
> James Black
> Los Angeles, CA
>
> --
>
>
I'm kinda' married to 700C based on the bikes and wheelsets I have.  Would
love to have a nine light tire in the 40mm range.  A 700C version of the
Hetre would be PERFECT.  And I would love to see Rivendell, Surly, et al
build bikes that could accommodate it.  Luckily I already have just such a
bike!!!  :-)

-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"One man's religion is another man's belly laugh."
--Robert A. Heinlein

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Bill Gibson]

When Beth speaks, I listen. Times are hard. New product development
expensive, risky. RBW recognized a way to revive frames with narrow
clearances, to be used with fenders and bigger tires, and championed
the 650B wheel diameter. And, tiny but savvy groups of connoisseurs in
France, Japan, and a few spots in North America wanted a revival. Not
to mention the Country Bike concept. But then it became clear that
big, supple tires are fast and good, which I suspected, but never
appreciated that much until...the past few years...but this knowledge
can be transmitted to the future, when conditions may change. Supple
has meant somewhat delicate in the past, and big tires don't fit all
sizes and styles of frame as well as narrow... still: imagine a tough
puncture proof gossamer membrane, a pneumatic suspension of minimal
mass and high friction, yet with no rolling resistance... I don't
think, for the right size frame, the diameter is so critical, subject
to experiment, of course. The small folks will find small diameters
sympatique, the big folks will find the wide wheels simpatico, don't
give up the dream just yet. I still hope for custom cottage
manufacturing in the USA with the aid of the electronic computer and
robots. And some hand crafting by local crafters. How do folks make
tires by hand? I've seen a youtube of the Panaracer machines.

I wrote all that before Jim chimed in, and now I wonder if Sheldon
would agree...

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Jim Cloud  wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 15, 3:19 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>>
>
>> There's no Consumer Reports of bike tires, either.  So if there was a
>> diamond out there amongst all the hybrid tires, who would ever know it?
>
> Well, I think that Jan Heine has done a pretty good job of testing
> bicycle tires and this has certainly led to a greater demand for 700C
> tires like the Gran Bois Cypres 30mm (which Vintage Bicycles also
> sells).
>
>> Then there's pricing.  The cheap wide 700C tires basically set the price
>> the market's willing to pay.  Could you sell a tire that costs 2-3 times
>> as much as the competition?
>
> Again, the Gran Bois 700C Cypres tires are selling for $58.00 from
> Vintage Bicycle and others.  The demand for these tires, while
> limited, certainly exists.  I know several dedicated cyclists who ride
> these tires and they definitely attribute almost magical qualities to
> the Cypres (I haven't tried them myself, but I'm considering them in
> lieu of the Jack Browns).
>
>
>> There is no 700C bike that's built like a 650B
>> randonneur, why should there be a tire for one?
>
> The Boulder Bicycle randonneur bicycle is produced in sizes from 51cm
> to 61cm for either 650B or 700C tire sizes.  I believe, from any of my
> reference material (which included some Rene Herse brochures) that
> 650B tire size wasn't traditionally the size of tire that was used by
> French Randonneurs, they were generally 700C size.  The 650B was the
> size that French constructeur builders primarily used for "Camping"
> models.
>
>> Why should they?  Those passionate about wonderful supple fast wide
>> tires are in the 650B arena.
>
> I suspect that the availability of the 650B size tire in the wide
> sizes has something to do with their origin in Japan, and the Japanese
> infatuation with French bicycles.  This demand is geared to
> domestically produced cycles in a range of frame sizes that would
> rarely exceed 56cm that are ideally suited for a 650B tire size.
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>
>



-- 
Bill Gibson
Tempe, Arizona, USA

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[james black]

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 21:18, Jim Cloud  wrote:
> I stand by my comment that the traditional 650B size tire, as it was
> used by the French was generally for "loaded touring bikes" - which
> they often referred to as the "Camping" model.  If some today are
> using the size for a Randonneur, so be it, I really am not trying to
> state that the 650B cannot be used on a Randonneur (nor that it wasn't
> ever used on a French Randonneur model, but it wasn't the norm).

In Jan Heine's book, there are a bunch of Randonneur-type bikes with
650b tires, although there may be more that had 700c - it seemed like
Alex Singer preferred to build around 700c for this type of bike, but
a lot of the other builders were using 650b. I could believe that 700c
was the majority preference, but my impression (and I'm no authority)
is that 650b was not out of the norm, that both sizes were common.

> As far as the wider type of 700C tire that I'm suggesting it certainly
> would be better suited to a bicycle of my size (65-66cm) than the
> 650B.

I would agree. For bikes in the size I prefer (61cm), I think it can
go both ways, although I've never had the privilege of trying out a
bike with 650b wheels. I do generally subscribe to the principle that
the biggest wheel diameter that you can fit will give best
performance. How big you can fit depends on frame size as well as
usage (tire width, fenders, chainstay length, etc.). I found the
article in BQ arguing that there is an optimal gyroscopic force that
limits optimal diameter to be pretty unconvincing.

James Black

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[james black]

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 20:44, cyclotourist  wrote:
> While I think that sounds like the perfect tire, how many non touring or
> hybrid bikers are out there that can accommodate that size?  Even among
> Rivendell's lineup, the lighter weight bikes (Roadeo, Rambouillet) wouldn't
> be able to run that size.  You would need to get a Sam or an Atlantis.  Not
> sure about the AHH, but it would be close, and probably not with fenders.

If somebody did come out with a really nice 700c x 38mm tire similar
to a Pari-Moto or Hetre, there would be plenty of interest in it, and
lots of people would want their (larger-sized) Rivendells to
accommodate it, I suspect. There are many existing Rivendells that
won't fit such a tire, but if the tire existed, I think that designers
like Rivendell would be compelled to design around it.

I ordered a pair of 700x37mm non-TG Paselas for the build I'm
currently working on, and expect they will be pretty good, so the
situation isn't totally dire for us poor saps who have to use 700c.

Incidentally, this bike I'm putting together is the one I would use
for an epic fire road venture up into the Santa Ana Mountains, and I
hope I can do that ride this autumn.

James Black
Los Angeles, CA

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[cyclotourist]

While I think that sounds like the perfect tire, how many non touring or
hybrid bikers are out there that can accommodate that size?  Even among
Rivendell's lineup, the lighter weight bikes (Roadeo, Rambouillet) wouldn't
be able to run that size.  You would need to get a Sam or an Atlantis.  Not
sure about the AHH, but it would be close, and probably not with fenders.

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Earl Grey  wrote:

> I would guess that even in the tiny niche of riders who love combined
> road/dirt rides, there are more 700C bikes than 650B out there. While
> Jan Heine claims that tires in the 33-44mm range or so handle best in
> a 650B size (see BQ Spring 2010, p. 19), I would love to see a light,
> supple 38-40/700C tire. Panaracer could come close to this with very
> low cost by issuing folding non-TG versions of the 35 and 37mm
> Paselas. Anyone here have influence at Panaracer? :) Anyone know if
> indeed they sell those versions in Japan?
>
> Gernot
>
> On Aug 16, 5:19 am, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 15:08 -0700, Jim Cloud wrote:
> > > Steve,
> > > I guess this discussion merits another on the subject of the
> > > availability of 700C size tires that are designed around the
> > > parameters of the Gran Bois Hetre or Pacenti Pari-Moto (wide
> > > [38-42mm], supple sidewalls, lightweight and with fine herringbone
> > > tread patterns).  Why doesn't anyone make a tire like this?  Looking
> > > at the availability of 650B tires that have these characteristics is
> > > quite enough to make a 700C bike owner jealous!
> >
> > I don't think there's a market for it.
> >
> > In the first place, the Hetre and the Pari Moto exist because
> > individuals who care ("I" of I's Bicycle, the owner of Grand Bois, and
> > Kirk Pacenti) brought them into existence.  Nothing like that in 700C.
> >
> > There's a market of dedicated 650B fans who bought in advance to fund
> > the development of the Pari Moto (and, come to mention it, the Saluki,
> > Riv's first 650B offering, as well).  You don't have that core of
> > enthusiasts in the 700C market.
> >
> > What's more, with 650B it's easy to know and identify the available
> > tires.  There's no forest of similar looking competitors to navigate
> > your way through, as is the case with 700C.  There are plenty of wide
> > 700s, and no individual could ever make their way through that tangle.
> > There's no Consumer Reports of bike tires, either.  So if there was a
> > diamond out there amongst all the hybrid tires, who would ever know it?
> >
> > Then there's pricing.  The cheap wide 700C tires basically set the price
> > the market's willing to pay.  Could you sell a tire that costs 2-3 times
> > as much as the competition?
> >
> > Finally, I think the 700C market has the wide sizes pigeonholed as being
> > cheap tires for cheap hybrids or super heavy duty tires for heavy duty
> > utility bikes.  There is no 700C bike that's built like a 650B
> > randonneur, why should there be a tire for one?
> >
> > > Maybe Jan Heine or someone else (Rivendell?) should approach Panaracer
> > > or Gran Bois about making a 700C tire with these characteristics.  I'm
> > > sure there would be a market for this type of tire.
> >
> > Why should they?  Those passionate about wonderful supple fast wide
> > tires are in the 650B arena.
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"One man's religion is another man's belly laugh."
--Robert A. Heinlein

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 18:42 -0700, Jim Cloud wrote:
> 
> On Aug 15, 3:19 pm, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> >
> 
> > There's no Consumer Reports of bike tires, either.  So if there was a
> > diamond out there amongst all the hybrid tires, who would ever know it?
> 
> Well, I think that Jan Heine has done a pretty good job of testing
> bicycle tires and this has certainly led to a greater demand for 700C
> tires like the Gran Bois Cypres 30mm (which Vintage Bicycles also
> sells).
> 
> > Then there's pricing.  The cheap wide 700C tires basically set the price
> > the market's willing to pay.  Could you sell a tire that costs 2-3 times
> > as much as the competition?
> 
> Again, the Gran Bois 700C Cypres tires are selling for $58.00 from
> Vintage Bicycle and others.  The demand for these tires, while
> limited, certainly exists.  I know several dedicated cyclists who ride
> these tires and they definitely attribute almost magical qualities to
> the Cypres (I haven't tried them myself, but I'm considering them in
> lieu of the Jack Browns).

Let's not forget, the Cypres is a 30mm (true 31-32) NOT a 38-42mm tire.
It's targeted at a different demographic, and there's no way to confuse
it with a hybrid tire.



> 
> 
> > There is no 700C bike that's built like a 650B
> > randonneur, why should there be a tire for one?
> 
> The Boulder Bicycle randonneur bicycle is produced in sizes from 51cm
> to 61cm for either 650B or 700C tire sizes.  I believe, from any of my
> reference material (which included some Rene Herse brochures) that
> 650B tire size wasn't traditionally the size of tire that was used by
> French Randonneurs, they were generally 700C size.  The 650B was the
> size that French constructeur builders primarily used for "Camping"
> models.

BQ has published enough material from old French catalogs to disprove
your statement.  


> 
> > Why should they?  Those passionate about wonderful supple fast wide
> > tires are in the 650B arena.
> 
> I suspect that the availability of the 650B size tire in the wide
> sizes has something to do with their origin in Japan, and the Japanese
> infatuation with French bicycles.  This demand is geared to
> domestically produced cycles in a range of frame sizes that would
> rarely exceed 56cm that are ideally suited for a 650B tire size.


And why would a 59 or 60 cm frame be any less ideally suited to the 650B
size?  Because some people think the wheels look too small?  Funny how
those same people will often recommend a 559 wheel instead, and that's
even smaller.



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 15:08 -0700, Jim Cloud wrote:
> Steve,
> I guess this discussion merits another on the subject of the
> availability of 700C size tires that are designed around the
> parameters of the Gran Bois Hetre or Pacenti Pari-Moto (wide
> [38-42mm], supple sidewalls, lightweight and with fine herringbone
> tread patterns).  Why doesn't anyone make a tire like this?  Looking
> at the availability of 650B tires that have these characteristics is
> quite enough to make a 700C bike owner jealous!

I don't think there's a market for it.  

In the first place, the Hetre and the Pari Moto exist because
individuals who care ("I" of I's Bicycle, the owner of Grand Bois, and
Kirk Pacenti) brought them into existence.  Nothing like that in 700C.

There's a market of dedicated 650B fans who bought in advance to fund
the development of the Pari Moto (and, come to mention it, the Saluki,
Riv's first 650B offering, as well).  You don't have that core of
enthusiasts in the 700C market.  

What's more, with 650B it's easy to know and identify the available
tires.  There's no forest of similar looking competitors to navigate
your way through, as is the case with 700C.  There are plenty of wide
700s, and no individual could ever make their way through that tangle.
There's no Consumer Reports of bike tires, either.  So if there was a
diamond out there amongst all the hybrid tires, who would ever know it?

Then there's pricing.  The cheap wide 700C tires basically set the price
the market's willing to pay.  Could you sell a tire that costs 2-3 times
as much as the competition?

Finally, I think the 700C market has the wide sizes pigeonholed as being
cheap tires for cheap hybrids or super heavy duty tires for heavy duty
utility bikes.  There is no 700C bike that's built like a 650B
randonneur, why should there be a tire for one?



> Maybe Jan Heine or someone else (Rivendell?) should approach Panaracer
> or Gran Bois about making a 700C tire with these characteristics.  I'm
> sure there would be a market for this type of tire.

Why should they?  Those passionate about wonderful supple fast wide
tires are in the 650B arena.



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 05:05 -0700, JoelMatthews wrote:
> > I always thought of 584/650B as a way to get more tire in the right
> > frame size with all the right clearances for fenders, etc. more than
> > any other reason.
> 
> Most likely the case.  Combination of the market that makes up the
> 650b owners being overall more aware of what makes a good tire and
> willing to spend plus sheer good luck means there are several very
> good 650b tires on the market that currently do not have a 700
> equivalent.  At least in wider tries.  There are many good 700 race
> tires if that is your thing - and up to the mid thirties.  After that
> you have tires such as the Schwalbe BA which are wonderfully
> comfortable but definitely add a good deal of weight.

I think it's more than "currently".  I don't foresee there ever being a
Pari Moto or a Hetre for 700C, and I especially don't see the sort of
spirit on the part of dedicated individuals like Kirk and "I" (the man
behind Grand Bois) working in the 700C arena to produce such tires.   



-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 06:47 -0700, MichaelH wrote:
> I think this is right.  I don't think Grant has "retreated" from 650B
> for larger sizes.  He has always argued in favor of wider road tires,
> 28-35 mm, and that it is easier to achieve that on small frames with a
> 584 rim diameter because the 622 size forces unwanted compromises on
> the frame design.  This isn't true in larger sizes, as shown by the
> AHH, my Ebisu and SOMA dbl. cross.

So how is this not a "retreat from 650B in larger sizes"?  The Sam is
available in 650b only in 52 cm and below.  If you want to use a 38 or a
42 mm tire (yes, it's fine that some never feel the need for a tire that
wide, but there are those of us who do want them) what do you have in
700C that is even remotely comparable to a Hetre or a Pari Moto?  I
believe the answer to that question is a resounding "nothing".




-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Steve Palincsar]

Two distinct but complementary phenomena.  The "larger sizes" I was
speaking of in the context of Riv retreating from 650B in larger sizes
are sizes above 52 cm (e.g., the Hillborne comes in 650B only in 48 and
52 cm).  54-60 cm don't constitute "large" sizes for outlier huge
people, these constitute the most popular sizes.  

Basically it seems Riv has taken the position that 650B is a way to get
a 32mm tire on a tiny frame, and "full-sized" frames should use a
700Cx33.3 for a "wide" tire.

On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 11:31 -0700, MichaelH wrote:
> Over the years, Rivendell has trimmed its offering of larger sizes,
> independent of tire size. They don't offer anything equivalent to the
> Redwood, which went to 68, and have stopped offering the Atlantis in
> even a 64.  I don't own an Atlantis but if it came in a 64, I would be
> tempted.
> 
> michael
> 
> On Aug 15, 1:29 pm, RoadieRyan  wrote:
> > Is it possible the "retreat" from larger sized 650b is simply a
> > business decision?  I get the impression, no hard facts, that there is
> > less demand for larger sizes, especially over say 62 cm, than the mid-
> > range, so it would follow that demand larger sizes spec'd for a "non
> > traditional" wheel size is pretty niche.
> >
> > With a tough economy, constraints  on manpower and financial resources
> > it would make sense to me that Rivendell would build to meet the
> > greatest demand in order  to maximize sales and revenue.  Not that the
> > bottom-line drives their business but it is a big consideration.  And
> > for those folks who really want a larger size designed around 650b
> > there is always a Riv custom, so its not like they are left with no
> > options.
> >
> > just my uninformed 2 cents
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > On Aug 15, 6:47 am, MichaelH  wrote:
> >
> > > I think this is right.  I don't think Grant has "retreated" from 650B
> > > for larger sizes.  He has always argued in favor of wider road tires,
> > > 28-35 mm, and that it is easier to achieve that on small frames with a
> > > 584 rim diameter because the 622 size forces unwanted compromises on
> > > the frame design.  This isn't true in larger sizes, as shown by the
> > > AHH, my Ebisu and SOMA dbl. cross.
> >
> > >  I have never felt the need for anything larger than 38 on dirt or
> > > even gravel roads  However, it is also true that smaller rims are
> > > stronger. Our road tandem runs on 559 rims with 1.6 Marathon Racers
> > > and carries 380 lbs over dirt roads with remarkable strength and
> > > comfort.   If you are riding trails, than you are essentially talking
> > > mountain bike design for tires that are bigger yet.  Grant's focus has
> > > traditionally been road bikes that handle trails as well, only
> > > recently has he offered a "pure" mountain bike.
> >
> > > michael
> >
> > > On Aug 15, 2:01 am, Bill Gibson  wrote:
> >
> > > > I always thought of 584/650B as a way to get more tire in the right
> > > > frame size with all the right clearances for fenders, etc. more than
> > > > any other reason. And that especially for smaller sizes that even
> > > > smaller wheels - 559/mountain bike size or - in my wife's case, for
> > > > her mountain bike, 507/24" (she is 4' 10"), are required for
> > > > stand-over heights, etc. Seeking optimums in moments of inertia,
> > > > various hysterises (is that a word? what is the plural of hysteresis?
> > > > hysterii?), aerodynamic resistance, rolling resistance, pneumatic
> > > > trail, contact patch shape, and so on has to be a matter of...personal
> > > > taste and much further research? Maybe matching to load and road
> > > > surface, too...
> >
> > > > Amazing how little changes have such strong real or placebo effects
> >
> > > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 9:16 PM, PATRICK MOORE  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Rob Perks wrote:
> >
> > > > >> The volume of air that affects rolling resistance is the cross 
> > > > >> section
> > > > >> of air directly above the area of deformation.  Therefore it stands 
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> reason that wheel diameter should not play into that.
> >
> > > > >  It is, so they say -- I am not an engineer -- the contact patch (a 
> > > > > sign of
> > > > > which is that tire suppleness affects rolling resistance greatly, 
> > > > > indicating
> > > > > that it is the contact patch and not just air volume) that, all else 
> > > > > equal,
> > > > > determines rolling resistance, and that is certainly affected by wheel
> > > > > diameter.
> > > > > Snip.
> > > > >>WRT to smaller wheels and faster acceleration, I have ridden 26" - 29"
> > > > >>with all sorts of tires and still feel that the greates factor
> > > > >>affecting acceleration is the weight not as much the diameter.  e..
> > > > > Not quite, I think. First, it is indeed the smaller size that makes 
> > > > > smaller
> > > > > wheels so light. You save 100 grams or so at the circumference on the 
> > > > > rim
> > > > > and 50 more  on the tire, ceteris paribus -- my Sun M14A 559s weigh 
> > > > > 360

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[Bill Gibson]

I always thought of 584/650B as a way to get more tire in the right
frame size with all the right clearances for fenders, etc. more than
any other reason. And that especially for smaller sizes that even
smaller wheels - 559/mountain bike size or - in my wife's case, for
her mountain bike, 507/24" (she is 4' 10"), are required for
stand-over heights, etc. Seeking optimums in moments of inertia,
various hysterises (is that a word? what is the plural of hysteresis?
hysterii?), aerodynamic resistance, rolling resistance, pneumatic
trail, contact patch shape, and so on has to be a matter of...personal
taste and much further research? Maybe matching to load and road
surface, too...

Amazing how little changes have such strong real or placebo effects...



On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 9:16 PM, PATRICK MOORE  wrote:
> Rob Perks wrote:
>>
>> The volume of air that affects rolling resistance is the cross section
>> of air directly above the area of deformation.  Therefore it stands to
>> reason that wheel diameter should not play into that.
>>
>
>  It is, so they say -- I am not an engineer -- the contact patch (a sign of
> which is that tire suppleness affects rolling resistance greatly, indicating
> that it is the contact patch and not just air volume) that, all else equal,
> determines rolling resistance, and that is certainly affected by wheel
> diameter.
> Snip.
>>WRT to smaller wheels and faster acceleration, I have ridden 26" - 29"
>>with all sorts of tires and still feel that the greates factor
>>affecting acceleration is the weight not as much the diameter.  e.
> Not quite, I think. First, it is indeed the smaller size that makes smaller
> wheels so light. You save 100 grams or so at the circumference on the rim
> and 50 more  on the tire, ceteris paribus -- my Sun M14A 559s weigh 360 gr
> (and are strong enough that I had no problems at all off road) and the 559
> Turbos and Conti GPs weigh just under 200 gr. And then add the cumulative
> effect of taking a bit over an inch off each spoke. My old Ultegra/nothing
> special 8-9 sp 559 wheelset weighed about 1500 grams with rim tape, no
> skewers or cassette.
> Second, most of that weight is at the circumference and we all remember the
> Law of Moments.
> Again, riding fixed, you can certainly feel the difference.
>
>
> --
> 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-bu...@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.
>



-- 
Bill Gibson
Tempe, Arizona, USA

-- 
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-bu...@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.

Re: [RBW] Re: Riv's Retreat from 650B in Larger Sizes, & Optimum Tire Pressures/Sizes

[PATRICK MOORE]

Rob Perks wrote:

>
> The volume of air that affects rolling resistance is the cross section
> of air directly above the area of deformation.  Therefore it stands to
> reason that wheel diameter should not play into that.
>
>
 It is, so they say -- I am not an engineer -- the contact patch (a sign of
which is that tire suppleness affects rolling resistance greatly, indicating
that it is the contact patch and not just air volume) that, all else equal,
determines rolling resistance, and that is certainly affected by wheel
diameter.

Snip.
>WRT to smaller wheels and faster acceleration, I have ridden 26" - 29"
>with all sorts of tires and still feel that the greates factor
>affecting acceleration is the weight not as much the diameter.  e.

Not quite, I think. First, it is indeed the smaller size that makes smaller
wheels so light. You save 100 grams or so at the circumference on the rim
and 50 more  on the tire, ceteris paribus -- my Sun M14A 559s weigh 360 gr
(and are strong enough that I had no problems at all off road) and the 559
Turbos and Conti GPs weigh just under 200 gr. And then add the cumulative
effect of taking a bit over an inch off each spoke. My old Ultegra/nothing
special 8-9 sp 559 wheelset weighed about 1500 grams with rim tape, no
skewers or cassette.

Second, most of that weight is at the circumference and we all remember the
Law of Moments.

Again, riding fixed, you can certainly feel the difference.

-- 
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-bu...@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.