Steel Frames and Tire Wear

On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 12:14:46 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 11:37, Doug Landau wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 10:43, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 9:29:09 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-05 08:51, wrote:
Hey, remember that this is a bicycle group? We don't need
Lieberman telling us that rounding off isn't close enough or
Frank who is a good engineer telling us about global warming that
he doesn't understand or DATATROLL telling us the liberal lines
over and over.

One of the things I'm been noticing and the thing that you people
are more likely to know something about is the following:

On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round.
Would you suppose because the steel frames give you more
confidence in cornering so that the tires are banked over a good
deal of the time going through turns?

Yesterday I did a quick (relatively) 32 miles ride with about
1/3rd of that climbing over 6% - 13% climbing. As I was returning
home I started wondering how long before my tires wore out and
much to my surprise the tires are round still. And I have to have
1,500 miles on them which is about as much as I've gotten out of
them (Gatorskins) since I came-to in 2012. The only thing I
remember from before my injury concerning tire wear was that
Specialized Armadillos were much better because they wore
slightly better but they cornered a hell of a lot better.

So can anyone explain this?


I can't, unless you ride a lot of curvy roads out there. I have a
Gazelle Trim Trophy frame made of good old Reynolds 531 steel tubes
and I use Gatorskin wire bead tires since about two years. They
always wear flat in back. The front doesn't wear but the sidewall
weakness in those Gatorskins takes its toll.

If my road bike ever fails on me I'd replace it with a titanium
cyclocross bike.

Joerge - I just went out to the garage and checked again. With 1,500
miles on the Gatorskins they are JUST getting a mild flat spot in
them on the rear.


Mine start flattening around 1000mi and then at 2500mi they are finished.


... And these roads are rotten and I weight 185 lbs
naked. (And believe me you wouldn't want to see a picture of me on
the scale.)


I weigh around 220lbs but don't ride naked :-)

With toolkit, the occasional growler, water, battery and all that the
total load on the bike is around 240lbs and most of it on the rear axle.


One the CF and aluminum frames the tires were worn out at that
mileage. I would get flats from pebbles.


After only 1500mi? For that Gatorskins are way too expensive. Their
price slightly irks me even for 2500mi. I paid $45-50 per tire so far.

Gatorskins are $20 on sale


Where?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Mars.The best prices I find are normally about $38 for folding. I'm sure he's talking about the lower grade Continentals and not Gatorskins. Those sell at about that price but don't have any life on my roads.

On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 12:14:46 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 11:37, Doug Landau wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 10:43, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 9:29:09 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-05 08:51, wrote:
Hey, remember that this is a bicycle group? We don't need
Lieberman telling us that rounding off isn't close enough or
Frank who is a good engineer telling us about global warming that
he doesn't understand or DATATROLL telling us the liberal lines
over and over.

One of the things I'm been noticing and the thing that you people
are more likely to know something about is the following:

On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round.
Would you suppose because the steel frames give you more
confidence in cornering so that the tires are banked over a good
deal of the time going through turns?

Yesterday I did a quick (relatively) 32 miles ride with about
1/3rd of that climbing over 6% - 13% climbing. As I was returning
home I started wondering how long before my tires wore out and
much to my surprise the tires are round still. And I have to have
1,500 miles on them which is about as much as I've gotten out of
them (Gatorskins) since I came-to in 2012. The only thing I
remember from before my injury concerning tire wear was that
Specialized Armadillos were much better because they wore
slightly better but they cornered a hell of a lot better.

So can anyone explain this?


I can't, unless you ride a lot of curvy roads out there. I have a
Gazelle Trim Trophy frame made of good old Reynolds 531 steel tubes
and I use Gatorskin wire bead tires since about two years. They
always wear flat in back. The front doesn't wear but the sidewall
weakness in those Gatorskins takes its toll.

If my road bike ever fails on me I'd replace it with a titanium
cyclocross bike.

Joerge - I just went out to the garage and checked again. With 1,500
miles on the Gatorskins they are JUST getting a mild flat spot in
them on the rear.


Mine start flattening around 1000mi and then at 2500mi they are finished.


... And these roads are rotten and I weight 185 lbs
naked. (And believe me you wouldn't want to see a picture of me on
the scale.)


I weigh around 220lbs but don't ride naked :-)

With toolkit, the occasional growler, water, battery and all that the
total load on the bike is around 240lbs and most of it on the rear axle.


One the CF and aluminum frames the tires were worn out at that
mileage. I would get flats from pebbles.


After only 1500mi? For that Gatorskins are way too expensive. Their
price slightly irks me even for 2500mi. I paid $45-50 per tire so far.

Gatorskins are $20 on sale


Where?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

At performance. I admit not every day-

Actually the best deal around on tires, AFAICT, is the performance metro. They seem to grip well and last forever to me. Thought I used to get them in a smaller width than 35 tho.

On 06/12/16 16:21, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/5/2016 4:21 PM, James wrote:
On 06/12/16 05:10, Duane wrote:
On 05/12/2016 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 10:51:20 AM UTC-6,
wrote:
On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round. Would
you suppose because the steel frames give you more confidence in
cornering so that the tires are banked over a good deal of the time
going through turns?

For the last 25 years or so all professional bike riders have been
using carbon bikes. Steel has not been used since the 1980s I think.
All the pros go 50 mph down the mountains cornering through the
switchbacks. If you go watch a local criterium in your town you will
see all the riders using carbon bikes. Maybe one aluminum too. Never
any steel bikes, ever. How can they get around all the turns in a
criterium race if their bikes corner so poorly?

You are just making up, imagining nonsense.


Yeah, I sort of missed that part. I thought he was saying it was
something to do with cornering that made the tire wear flat not that the
CF bikes were so poor in cornering that people didn't use them the same.
This bike corners better than any bike I've had including the steel one
I just sold.

My "guess" would be the wheels and tire choices have more to do with how
a bike corners than what the frame material is.

They are all connected. Frame material and how it's used, design angles
and such, wheels, spokes, tyres, pressure - everything.

Brings me to a slightly off topic point. We recently finished an
extension to our house. The original building is built on a concrete
slab. The new kitchen/dining room has brick piers, hardwood bearers,
joists and hardwood floor boards. The last few floorboards overlap the
concrete slab and are glued to the concrete. As you walk from the
concrete slab supported floor boards to the bearer & joist supported
floor boards, there is an obvious perceivable difference in give or
bounce in the floor. I'm sure if you could measure the deflection of
the floor boards over joists and bearers that it would be lucky to reach
1mm. More likely fractions of a mm.

I think you're likely wrong about the deflections of standard
construction. We could run some numbers, but:


I'd like to run some numbers. The floor boards are Australian hardwood,
a mix of Red Gum and similar timbers, 19mm thick & tongue & groove. The
joists and bearers are also hardwood. Joists F27 120x45mm at 450mm cc.
Bearers F27 2/140x35mm at ~2.5m cc.

The bearer at the slab end is actually a ledger bolted to the concrete
slab. I doubt that has any contributing give. The other end bearer is
supported on brick piers on a concrete strip footing. The middle bearer
is supported at its ends on brick piers and in the middle by a 75x75
steel post in a 450mm dia. x 1m deep concrete footing.

The give in the flooring can be noticed in the first foot strike past
the edge of the concrete slab. That is, 1m of the ledger bolted to
the slab. It's not like you have to jump in the middle of the joist
span between bearers to feel some give.

I weight about 75kg.

We had a new furnace installed some years ago. Not long after, we
noticed mysterious rumblings coming from the basement - very low
frequency noise, sounding vaguely like thunder. It came at odd times,
and while not really loud, it was pretty hard to ignore. I remember
hurrying to the basement (from where the sound seemed to emanate) trying
to find the source.

It turned out that some new sheet metal "panning" had been added between
the joists, as part of a cold air return. When my wife slid her rocking
chair closer to the TV, she was over those joists. If she rocked in
just the right way, the sheet metal flexed and produced at "thunder" sound.

Note, the difference in deflection wasn't from zero weight to her full
body weight (which is not very much, I'll add). It was just from her
leaning forward or back in that rocking chair.


--
JS

On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 1:21:32 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
On 06/12/16 05:10, Duane wrote:
On 05/12/2016 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 10:51:20 AM UTC-6,
wrote:
On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round. Would
you suppose because the steel frames give you more confidence in
cornering so that the tires are banked over a good deal of the time
going through turns?

For the last 25 years or so all professional bike riders have been
using carbon bikes. Steel has not been used since the 1980s I think.
All the pros go 50 mph down the mountains cornering through the
switchbacks. If you go watch a local criterium in your town you will
see all the riders using carbon bikes. Maybe one aluminum too. Never
any steel bikes, ever. How can they get around all the turns in a
criterium race if their bikes corner so poorly?

You are just making up, imagining nonsense.


Yeah, I sort of missed that part. I thought he was saying it was
something to do with cornering that made the tire wear flat not that the
CF bikes were so poor in cornering that people didn't use them the same.
This bike corners better than any bike I've had including the steel one
I just sold.

My "guess" would be the wheels and tire choices have more to do with how
a bike corners than what the frame material is.

They are all connected. Frame material and how it's used, design angles
and such, wheels, spokes, tyres, pressure - everything.

Brings me to a slightly off topic point. We recently finished an
extension to our house. The original building is built on a concrete
slab. The new kitchen/dining room has brick piers, hardwood bearers,
joists and hardwood floor boards. The last few floorboards overlap the
concrete slab and are glued to the concrete. As you walk from the
concrete slab supported floor boards to the bearer & joist supported
floor boards, there is an obvious perceivable difference in give or
bounce in the floor. I'm sure if you could measure the deflection of
the floor boards over joists and bearers that it would be lucky to reach
1mm. More likely fractions of a mm.

Makes me wonder about the "stiff but compliant" frame claims and how
much riders can feel through their hands and butt.

All of it! :-)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...tre-thick.html

On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 1:21:32 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
On 06/12/16 05:10, Duane wrote:
On 05/12/2016 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 10:51:20 AM UTC-6,
wrote:
On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round. Would
you suppose because the steel frames give you more confidence in
cornering so that the tires are banked over a good deal of the time
going through turns?

For the last 25 years or so all professional bike riders have been
using carbon bikes. Steel has not been used since the 1980s I think.
All the pros go 50 mph down the mountains cornering through the
switchbacks. If you go watch a local criterium in your town you will
see all the riders using carbon bikes. Maybe one aluminum too. Never
any steel bikes, ever. How can they get around all the turns in a
criterium race if their bikes corner so poorly?

You are just making up, imagining nonsense.


Yeah, I sort of missed that part. I thought he was saying it was
something to do with cornering that made the tire wear flat not that the
CF bikes were so poor in cornering that people didn't use them the same.
This bike corners better than any bike I've had including the steel one
I just sold.

My "guess" would be the wheels and tire choices have more to do with how
a bike corners than what the frame material is.

They are all connected. Frame material and how it's used, design angles
and such, wheels, spokes, tyres, pressure - everything.

Brings me to a slightly off topic point. We recently finished an
extension to our house. The original building is built on a concrete
slab. The new kitchen/dining room has brick piers, hardwood bearers,
joists and hardwood floor boards. The last few floorboards overlap the
concrete slab and are glued to the concrete. As you walk from the
concrete slab supported floor boards to the bearer & joist supported
floor boards, there is an obvious perceivable difference in give or
bounce in the floor. I'm sure if you could measure the deflection of
the floor boards over joists and bearers that it would be lucky to reach
1mm. More likely fractions of a mm.

Makes me wonder about the "stiff but compliant" frame claims and how
much riders can feel through their hands and butt.

--
JS

Can you feel a human hair brushing your skin?
What you can feel is highly context-sensitive.

Uh....The Injury.

Fall on your head ?

Question stays in limbo with many variables. Throw in "armadilla corner." of course so did 27"TT ...the time periods'rubber ?.

What your spewing is your individual response to CF vs Steel ( sametire/rim ?)

You're cooking corners on CF, stroking as always on steel. May have wong tire pressures on CF or going too deep steering in not enough counter steer...scrubbing off rubber scrubbing speed maintaining road position. Went in wrong ...

?

Bad attitude visa vee the group. Suggests you r too fast on the CF for ? reasons.

Generally, but not exclusively, the common railbird opinion is your too slow for the CF ... which is true but not constructive.

Too fast over the ground too slow for this physically..

not 'instructive'...

I doahno what CF is

Using stereotypes, a Mustang driver may have serious problems with a Beetle. This is prob a question of approach attitude n lastly, intelligence.

I would not know if steel/CF. poses a similar dilemma.

Do they ?

On 07/12/16 10:38, Doug Landau wrote:
On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 1:21:32 PM UTC-8, James wrote:
On 06/12/16 05:10, Duane wrote:
On 05/12/2016 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 5, 2016 at 10:51:20 AM UTC-6,
wrote:
On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on the road
surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to wear round. Would
you suppose because the steel frames give you more confidence in
cornering so that the tires are banked over a good deal of the time
going through turns?

For the last 25 years or so all professional bike riders have been
using carbon bikes. Steel has not been used since the 1980s I think.
All the pros go 50 mph down the mountains cornering through the
switchbacks. If you go watch a local criterium in your town you will
see all the riders using carbon bikes. Maybe one aluminum too. Never
any steel bikes, ever. How can they get around all the turns in a
criterium race if their bikes corner so poorly?

You are just making up, imagining nonsense.


Yeah, I sort of missed that part. I thought he was saying it was
something to do with cornering that made the tire wear flat not that the
CF bikes were so poor in cornering that people didn't use them the same.
This bike corners better than any bike I've had including the steel one
I just sold.

My "guess" would be the wheels and tire choices have more to do with how
a bike corners than what the frame material is.

They are all connected. Frame material and how it's used, design angles
and such, wheels, spokes, tyres, pressure - everything.

Brings me to a slightly off topic point. We recently finished an
extension to our house. The original building is built on a concrete
slab. The new kitchen/dining room has brick piers, hardwood bearers,
joists and hardwood floor boards. The last few floorboards overlap the
concrete slab and are glued to the concrete. As you walk from the
concrete slab supported floor boards to the bearer & joist supported
floor boards, there is an obvious perceivable difference in give or
bounce in the floor. I'm sure if you could measure the deflection of
the floor boards over joists and bearers that it would be lucky to reach
1mm. More likely fractions of a mm.

Makes me wonder about the "stiff but compliant" frame claims and how
much riders can feel through their hands and butt.

--
JS

Can you feel a human hair brushing your skin?
What you can feel is highly context-sensitive.


Yes, well, feeling a hair brush your skin is a bit different from
feeling the difference between two vibration sources akin to that from
riding a bicycle over a sealed road.

--
JS

On 2016-12-06 12:45, Doug Landau wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 12:14:46 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 11:37, Doug Landau wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-12-06 10:43, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 9:29:09 AM UTC-8, Joerg
wrote:
On 2016-12-05 08:51, wrote:
Hey, remember that this is a bicycle group? We don't
need Lieberman telling us that rounding off isn't close
enough or Frank who is a good engineer telling us about
global warming that he doesn't understand or DATATROLL
telling us the liberal lines over and over.

One of the things I'm been noticing and the thing that
you people are more likely to know something about is the
following:

On my carbon fiber frames the tires would wear flat on
the road surfaces. But on the steel frames they appear to
wear round. Would you suppose because the steel frames
give you more confidence in cornering so that the tires
are banked over a good deal of the time going through
turns?

Yesterday I did a quick (relatively) 32 miles ride with
about 1/3rd of that climbing over 6% - 13% climbing. As I
was returning home I started wondering how long before my
tires wore out and much to my surprise the tires are
round still. And I have to have 1,500 miles on them which
is about as much as I've gotten out of them (Gatorskins)
since I came-to in 2012. The only thing I remember from
before my injury concerning tire wear was that
Specialized Armadillos were much better because they
wore slightly better but they cornered a hell of a lot
better.

So can anyone explain this?


I can't, unless you ride a lot of curvy roads out there. I
have a Gazelle Trim Trophy frame made of good old Reynolds
531 steel tubes and I use Gatorskin wire bead tires since
about two years. They always wear flat in back. The front
doesn't wear but the sidewall weakness in those Gatorskins
takes its toll.

If my road bike ever fails on me I'd replace it with a
titanium cyclocross bike.

Joerge - I just went out to the garage and checked again.
With 1,500 miles on the Gatorskins they are JUST getting a
mild flat spot in them on the rear.


Mine start flattening around 1000mi and then at 2500mi they are
finished.


... And these roads are rotten and I weight 185 lbs naked.
(And believe me you wouldn't want to see a picture of me on
the scale.)


I weigh around 220lbs but don't ride naked :-)

With toolkit, the occasional growler, water, battery and all
that the total load on the bike is around 240lbs and most of it
on the rear axle.


One the CF and aluminum frames the tires were worn out at
that mileage. I would get flats from pebbles.


After only 1500mi? For that Gatorskins are way too expensive.
Their price slightly irks me even for 2500mi. I paid $45-50 per
tire so far.

Gatorskins are $20 on sale


Where?

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

At performance. I admit not every day-

Actually the best deal around on tires, AFAICT, is the performance
metro. They seem to grip well and last forever to me. Thought I used
to get them in a smaller width than 35 tho.


I never saw Gatorskins for that price there. Usually $40 when on sale.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-12-06 12:28, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 11:05:40 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:


I weigh around 220lbs but don't ride naked :-)

https://www.google.com/search?q=nake...-D3dOA2TlxM%3A



With toolkit, the occasional growler, water, battery and all that
the total load on the bike is around 240lbs and most of it on the
rear axle.


One the CF and aluminum frames the tires were worn out at that
mileage. I would get flats from pebbles.


After only 1500mi? For that Gatorskins are way too expensive.
Their price slightly irks me even for 2500mi. I paid $45-50 per
tire so far.

Apparently you don't have glass and gravel for a road surface. Though
they are beginning to repave the roads.


Not sure what they use in California but the stuff is pretty rough in
the surface. Often also micro-groved for traction. It does have gravel
in it. Segragated bike paths are very smooth though.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/