Boonen uses great big fat tubular tire in Paris-Roubaix

On Apr 12, 4:10*pm, " wrote:

Club ride on a 'cross bike with noisy cantilevers? ...

No thanks. "Horses for courses", thank you very much.

Every club ride I've done for 25 years has been on a bike with
cantilevers. Noise has been rare.

- Frank Krygowski

On Apr 12, 5:31*pm, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Another part is still "what's the bitch with the
racers?" Can we hear a cogent account, maybe for once and for all?
"I don't like them because..." followed by some words that make sense.
"They make all bicycles more expensive" is dis-allowed, in front, as
being patently untrue.

Okay, how about "they make all bicycles more retarded", then?

When people make idiotic buying decisions that 1) result in grossly
inflated margins to manufacturers and merchants and 2) display just
how gullible and ego-driven they are, that has the effect of making
the whole industry pander to those easy marks.

Which is all well and good, until it results in people who need a real
bike getting a retarded marketing-driven ego-massage tool that isn't a
good bike instead. *And it happens more than a little. *When I have to
break out some weird spoke key, take a cassette off, and work with the
spoke key in one hand and a crescent wrench in the other hand to keep
bladed spokes from twisting up, *on a commuter bike that someone
bought on craigslist*, idiots have poisoned the market for real
bikes. *Department store bikes are coming with paired-spoke wheels
these days, and with drop bars that break in half so they can fit
their twist-grip shifters. *These are the results of retard juice
trickling all the way down into the cycling sewer.

In the meantime, useful items like thumbshifters and 48 spoke wheels
and drum brakes fall off the market because manufacturers are too busy
chasing idiot dollars to stick with their most boringly tried and true
designs.

Accept them or not, but these are reasons why I hate Walter Mitty
chump-assed bikes.

Thank you.
If you tell me you can set up cantilevers so they don't squeak or
squawk at least a little, right off the work stand even before they
get dirty or greasy, I'll even believe you, though in my limited
experience with a few 'crossers who attend a certain local ride or
two, and including a Houston ride of yore with a 'crosser or two, I
don't remember hearing cantilever brakes that can compare to modern
brakes with "tilt-able" brake shoe setups.

The market has certainly gone upscale, but then so has the technology.
The ante has gone way up in some respects. But "chump", speaking of a
person or their equipment, where the ante has been met-- what can I
say, my dad worked long hours for middling money, and only got that
later in his career.
Who's the "chump", one who figures out how to get rewarded for his
time, or someone who works for cheap? That gets complicated, so maybe
the pejoratives could be left out of the discussion?

The Walter Mitty thing is about as lame, in most cases, as the place
you're trying to assign to amateur racers. I mean, when I rode my
first TT many years ago, I sure "got" where I fit in amongst all the
rest of the guys at States that day, and even back then I had a pretty
good understanding of the difference between "local, district" guys,
"national guys", distance from them to the pros. Of course, Davis
Phinney and a few other guys changed that status within only a few
years (Baltimore, 1983) . By '84 I was watching the Tour of Texas,
which offered further demonstrations of Mr. Phinney's abilities,
notably a wet crit on 6th Street.
What I'm trying to say is, the locals might "indulge" in a little
fantasy-- "whatever gets you through the race"-- but judging by career
choice, they understand the "15k dream" very, very well. "Locals"
including a Tour de France rider or two besides Lance Armstrong, who,
as long as I'm 'splaining a point here, used to attend the Tuesday
Nighter (outlaw race, a ten-mile circuit, later reduced to 9 miles
approx. per lap, in some rolling hills) and show everyone, even back
when he was a mere Worlds Road Race Champion, well before the first of
the seven TdF wins, what level the pros ride at.
--D-y

On 4/12/2012 7:23 PM, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Club ride one day, cyclocross
the next, commute to work, overnight tour, and then hit the
singletrack.

When I work on race type bikes from Merckx's day, I note that most of
them can take 32 or even 35mm tires. And why not? It not only makes
them more versatile, but the extra clearance makes them more
serviceable and fault tolerant with skinny tires too.

All of my (5) road bikes are either modern touring frames or vintage
sports tourers. They all can take 35's.


Club ride on a 'cross bike with noisy cantilevers?

C'mon. Cantis are noisy like low spoke count wheels are out of true.
Reasonably likely, but not a necessary condition.

I've done lots of fast club rides with a canti equipped touring frame.
No noise, not slow. FWIW, I don't brake much in a pace line anyway.


Commute to work in
bad-weather slop on a nice (from whatever era) race bike? Race at the
Driveway on big fat knobby "single-track" tires?

You think it implausible to swap tires or wheels for different
activities?

I have a large collection of tires and spare wheels. I run anything from
23mm light slicks to 35mm knobby studs.

One $2000 bike is a lot nicer ride than four $500 ones.

I built my last bike for ~$500, all new components, it's pretty sweet.
I've never ridden a $2,000 bike, but I've ridden with many $6,000 ones,
and I wasn't jealous in the least.


Chalo

On Apr 12, 11:06*pm, Peter Cole wrote:

All of my (5) road bikes are either modern touring frames or vintage
sports tourers. They all can take 35's.

"Ride what you like", no problems here as I've said a time or two,
mean it.

Slight nit-pick: aren't you about 6'6", Peter? That kind of changes
"things" when talking about long chain stays and geometry in general,
compared to (at least) the 53.x-55 c-c bikes I ride.

I've done lots of fast club rides with a canti equipped touring frame.

I've done the same, minus the canti's. Sometimes centerpulls,
sometimes 27" wheels, maybe lightly filed brake caliper slots, and at
a very late date I finally found and mounted drop bolts f&r-- Dia
Compe? I'd have to go look. Anyhow, not Campy which to the best of my
knowledge didn't make a front (open to correction) and a matched pair.
Ebay score, those can be expensive when found.

No noise, not slow. FWIW, I don't brake much in a pace line anyway.

Good on the noise-lessness, I knew I would hear testimonials and more
power to you. Nope, I never said "slow", whatsoever. I said I strongly
preferred the handling of my road bikes (esp. the Merckx Corsa) to the
nice Holdsworth and very nice Roberts touring frames I rode on the
group rides of yore, 100+ mile dirt-road bonanzas taken at speed.

Hey, guess what? I don't brake much in a group whether it's 'lining or
not g. Geeze, Peter.
I think the worst I ever heard was on an old Alan alu 'cross bike.
Phew, I'm sure it was better with some glop in the works, but dry? Ow!

I will go and learn of cantilever brakes, I promise. Even though it
looks like discs are gonna rule before long.

(someone asked):
You think it implausible to swap tires or wheels for different
activities?

No. I think it's a real good idea, like when I used to have "race
wheels" (sewups) and "other wheels" (at least one set that could have
fattie clinchers mounted).
I did most riding, warming up and cooling down on the clinchers and
saved the sewups for events, meaning between the time they said "Go!"
and when we crossed the finish line, and then right back over to the
car for the bombers for cool-down. Impecunious racer reality.

I have a large collection of tires and spare wheels. I run anything from
23mm light slicks to 35mm knobby studs.

Amen. 23 slicks in the snow/ice, probably not so good. Ditto studs on
hot asphalt. Horses for courses.

One $2000 bike is a lot nicer ride than four $500 ones.

I built my last bike for ~$500, all new components, it's pretty sweet.
I've never ridden a $2,000 bike, but I've ridden with many $6,000 ones,
and I wasn't jealous in the least.

I rode one of the $6000 ones once. Really nice custom cf, from the guy
who won the Bicycling Editors' Shootout, with Dura Ace. I'd like two
in different colors, made for me, of course, with an extra set of
wheels for each, if less size/tire type than listed above, and some
variation in cassette options. One of them could be a triple,
actually.

Not real for me at this point in my life. Happy with my scrounger
bikes, 9sp Campy, Ti frames, one old 8sp Tommasini.
Life first, then bikes and I'd gladly bribe a builder to get on the
short list, no problem there.
--D-y

Before Armstrong, was the riding population segment demanding narrow race tires much larger than today when casual riding, silk road/cruiser continues growing with 2 or more hanging from every rec vehicle ? The producers are forced to buy more steel. More MTB steel. MTB steel for road bikes. Itsa visual thing, no think.

The new buyer subconsciously imposes an MTB image onto his new tailight road bike. Waht does he know of geometry ?

off course I have no cred here, a non racer, but miles on a Raleigh, a few on a Redline Monodog, differences in accuracy of body/frame movements communicating to tire contac patchs for straight line speed, is obvious. A total impression of frame spec's of which the rear triangle width is a part.

Were experiments done comparing race geometries with wide or narrow rear triangle as a variable ? You would think so trying in to find an advantage.

Wide was discarded. Beyond using more steel ?

I'd move for 35mm. There's a lot of patchy loose surfaces out there in the 'bike lane' and room for the rear to go out of line without cawsing excessive tooth grinding.

On Friday, April 13, 2012 8:02:01 AM UTC-6, datakoll wrote:
off course I have no cred here, a non racer, but miles on a Raleigh, a few on a Redline Monodog, differences in accuracy of body/frame movements communicating to tire contac patchs for straight line speed, is obvious. A total impression of frame spec's of which the rear triangle width is a part.

Were experiments done comparing race geometries with wide or narrow rear triangle as a variable ? You would think so trying in to find an advantage.

Wide was discarded. Beyond using more steel ?

I'd move for 35mm. There's a lot of patchy loose surfaces out there in the 'bike lane' and room for the rear to go out of line without cawsing excessive tooth grinding.

remebering post WW2 road surfaces were less than chip seal standards

On Apr 12, 4:23 pm, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Club ride one day, cyclocross
the next, commute to work, overnight tour, and then hit the
singletrack.

When I work on race type bikes from Merckx's day, I note that most of
them can take 32 or even 35mm tires. And why not? It not only makes
them more versatile, but the extra clearance makes them more
serviceable and fault tolerant with skinny tires too.

Club ride on a 'cross bike with noisy cantilevers?

C'mon. Cantis are noisy like low spoke count wheels are out of true.
Reasonably likely, but not a necessary condition.

Commute to work in
bad-weather slop on a nice (from whatever era) race bike? Race at the
Driveway on big fat knobby "single-track" tires?

You think it implausible to swap tires or wheels for different
activities?

One $2000 bike is a lot nicer ride than four $500 ones.


If I was racing I could see ending a ride if e.g. some spokes break
and the wheel can no longer be made straight enough to turn free
between the forks or stays; but if I'm commuting dozens of miles, I
want to be able to keep going even if it means opening the brakes all
the way.

Peter Cole wrote:
:23mm light slicks to 35mm knobby studs.

: One $2000 bike is a lot nicer ride than four $500 ones.

:I built my last bike for ~$500, all new components, it's pretty sweet.
:I've never ridden a $2,000 bike, but I've ridden with many $6,000 ones,
:and I wasn't jealous in the least.

I commute on a $2k bike. It's pretty sweat. It would probably make
Chalo's head explode though: clearance for 2" tires and fenders, disc
brakes, generator hub and lights, internal gear hub, drop bars and a
brifter.


--
sig 13

On Apr 13, 8:26*am, David Scheidt wrote:
Peter Cole wrote:

:23mm light slicks to 35mm knobby studs.

: One $2000 bike is a lot nicer ride than four $500 ones.

:I built my last bike for ~$500, all new components, it's pretty sweet.
:I've never ridden a $2,000 bike, but I've ridden with many $6,000 ones,
:and I wasn't jealous in the least.

I commute on a $2k bike. *It's pretty sweat. *It would probably make
Chalo's head explode though: clearance for 2" tires and fenders, disc
brakes, generator hub and lights, internal gear hub, drop bars and a
brifter.

You can spend $2,500 on a Schmidt dynamo hub and a Rohloff speed hub
wheelset with Chalo approved fatty rims and tires. You can spend
$2-3K on a custom steel frame with lots of tire clearance. In other
words, you can spend $6K on a commuter that climbs like a boat anchor.
That certainly does not make me jealous.

Nothing makes me jealous when it comes to bikes except the ability to
make them. If I were going to dump a bunch of money on a bike, it
would be to go to the UBI frame building class. I worked with a frame
builder a million years ago and know how to braze, but I've never
built a whole frame. -- Jay Beattie.