[net.bicycle] Tire Pressure, etc..... & Turbo R's

peters@cubsvax.UUCP (Peter S. Shenkin) (09/28/85)

In article <> leimkuhl@uiucdcsp.UUCP writes:
>
>There's a real myth around right now that these smoothies are
>less durable or more slippery than there treaded cousins.  All
>tests seem to say the opposite. ....
>
>Face it, we've probably all been hoodwinked
>by Specialized's tire tread ads, and the only reason they're
>not recommending turbo/rs for all surfaces is because they would
>be admitting that they've been selling us extra rubber for years.
>
>-Ben Leimkuhler

Ever tried them in the rain?  (I haven't, but I suspect that's where they'd
lose it.  Just like smooth automobile tires, which have been around for 
years, and which do hold the track better than treaded tires when it's dry.)
-Peter S. Shenkin

wagner@uw-june (Dave Wagner) (10/04/85)

> From peters@cubsvax.UUCP (Peter S. Shenkin) Sat Feb  5 22:28:16 206
<< regarding Turbo-R's >>
> Ever tried them in the rain?  (I haven't, but I suspect that's where they'd
> lose it.  Just like smooth automobile tires, which have been around for 
> years, and which do hold the track better than treaded tires when it's dry.)
> -Peter S. Shenkin
> 
> 
Supposedly, (and this is just something I picked up from the advertisements)
the reason treadless auto tires fail in wet conditions is that they have a
very wide, flat profile, and so there is no way for water to get out from
underneath them.  Bike tires, on the other hand, have a round profile
and are considerably narrower - which tends to sqeeze the water out on
either side.  Seems reasonable.

			Dave Wagner
			University of Washington Comp Sci Department
			wagner@washington.arpa
			{ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!uw-beaver!uw-wally!wagner

"The surest thing there is is we are riders,
 And though none too successful at it, guiders,
 Through everything presented, land and tide
 And now the very air, of what we ride."
	- Frost

fred@varian.UUCP (Fred Klink) (10/04/85)

> >Face it, we've probably all been hoodwinked
> >by Specialized's tire tread ads, and the only reason they're
> >not recommending turbo/rs for all surfaces is because they would
> >be admitting that they've been selling us extra rubber for years.
> >
> >-Ben Leimkuhler
> 
> Ever tried them in the rain?  (I haven't, but I suspect that's where they'd
> lose it.  Just like smooth automobile tires, which have been around for 
> years, and which do hold the track better than treaded tires when it's dry.)
> -Peter S. Shenkin

It interesting to compare the Avocet and Specialized ads for smooth tires.
Avocet summarizes a magazine-conducted test of smoothies on wet pavement
that showed they are *superior* to treaded tires.  (They claim) a car tire has
a relatively large, flat surface which can hydroplane unless grooves are
provided to remove the film of water between the tire and the road.  The
bicycle tire, on the other hand, has a very small contact patch and a rounded
surface.  These combine to displace water from under the tire, therefore
its dry where tire and road are in contact.  Theory is then, a smooth tire
puts more rubber on the road than a treaded tire and is safer in the wet.
The tests seem to back them up.  Specialized doesn't show any wet weather
tests, just rolling resistance, but assert that you should *never* use 
smooth tires in wet conditions.  Who ya gonna believe?

diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) (10/07/85)

> >. . . Face it, we've probably all been hoodwinked
> >by Specialized's tire tread ads, and the only reason they're
> >not recommending turbo/rs for all surfaces is because they would
> >be admitting that they've been selling us extra rubber for years.
> >
> >-Ben Leimkuhler
> 
> Ever tried them in the rain?  (I haven't, but I suspect that's where
> they'd lose it.  Just like smooth automobile tires, which have been  
> around for years, and which do hold the track better than treaded
> tires when it's dry.) 
> -Peter S. Shenkin

Hi.  The smooth tires?  I'm one of those people who may be influenced
by effective advertising.  I saw the ads for the new Avocet FasGrips but
have been riding regularly on Specialized Ultralights and Turbo/Ss.

I had a major ride coming up and was very concerned with performance
(more of the speed kind and less of the puncture resistant variety).  I
ordered a set of Turbo/Rs because I figured this way:  if they performed
as advertised, I'd get a great ride and an edge on speed.  If they
didn't, they probably wouldn't be any worse than the Turbo/Ss that were
already mounted.  (I ruled out sew-ups, as I had a flat during training
in the previous week and didn't want to be bothered with the expense
and hassles of those repairs/replacements.)  So it was the 'Rs.

Well, you should have seen me trying to mount those suckers.  I mean
blister village, really.  The Kevlar doesn't stretch much, and it's
extra tight anyhow to hold the 115 psi.  But I would say it was worth
it.  They sing!  No puncture problems, they seat straight, and run on
rough pavement or dirt.  And they did just fine on wet roads, too.  I
weigh 185 and have been riding skinny wheels and tires for years.  These
are definitely the best yet.

As for the Reynolds 531 tubes, it's about equal to Colombus SL.
Critically formulated Chrome-manganese steel tubes are tempered and
cold-rolled to high standards.  They have excellent tensile strength and
rigidity and are usually selected by skilled builders.  My road-racing
frame is a Japanese-built 531 D-B Raleigh.  It's twitchy and responsive.
Outer tube dimensions of these tube sets give a very attractive
appearance.  According to tests performed on the tubes of different
manufacturers by Bicycling Magazine a few years back, the top grade
tubes of Reynolds (English), Colombus (Italian), Ishiwata and Tange
(Japanese), and Vitus (French) had similar characteristics (as affect
frame performance) but different alloy content.  A truly high-tech
tubing from Reynolds, 753, has even greater strength to weight
characteristics than the more popular 531.  One thing in all this
discussion is that while the metal formulations are the same for any
manufacturer's tube series, the tube sets may vary in type.  For
example, Reynolds 531 can have all, some, or no double-butted members.
The tubes are labelled with decals that specify the type of members used
in the frame.  It is worth the effort to look for these decals and know
what they indicate on any frame you contemplate purchasing.  My touring
frame is made of "Tange Special Series Touring Champion Cr-Moly Double
Butted" tubing. It was a bargain frame and I didn't really worry what
that meant.  If you're going for a "big" bike purchase, though, you
should care. 

The Reynolds 531 is going to make you very happy.

usenet@ucbvax.ARPA (USENET News Administration) (10/09/85)

I may be missing the point here, but I can't help but think of the
baldies that have been around for years--that is sew-ups for track, 
etc.  Of course, no one would ride those on the street in the rain.
What is it that has changed that clinchers can do that sew-ups
couldn't?  Is this new rubber compounding or what?  It seems that all
the advantages that going smooth on a clincher brings you would be
just as advantageous (if not more so) on a sew-up.  Can sew-ups answer
this challenge with some heavy-duty, yet flexible, baldies???

Remember: fixing flats is an important part of total body fitness, so
often overlooked in the leggy sport of cycling. (:-)

Pedal free,
Eric pederson@ucbcogsci.ARPA