Wheel Energy

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

....you know I read and re-read your post several times to make some sense of it and unfortunately its a hodgepodge of stuff that really doesn't coalesce into much of anything...sorry but that is how it doesn't read...

Then stop responding to my posts, everybody else here understands what I write, if you can't make any sense of what I'm saying then move along.

...so rather than go at this line by line I thought I'd ask you one question....you state that HED made some claims about the performance of a certain wheel and subsequently removed the claims....well I just checked the HED site and guess what...the performance figures are still there, as in not removed, so what is up with that?...and what is weird is that those performance figures roughly correspond to performance figures of wheels by other makers that are of similar construction ...so they actually have what is sometimes called cross-referential validation...as similar things share similar traits...

No, what I'm referring to is not there anymore, was taken down within a month of posting. You're wasting your time trying to prove everything I say wrong, really.

...so what could this mean?...that all the wheel makers are secretly conspiring to be on the same page in this aero scam?...like do they meet regularly in some coffee shop to compare notes so they can keep their stories straight?...are all the wind tunnel people also in on this?....or is it just the marketing guys that are in those coffee shop meetings laughing at the marks ( that be us ) and weaving fanciful tales about performance...

Pfft, yes just like that.

...those inquiring minds still want to know....and so far all we really know is that you admittedly made a living telling lies...your responses would get an F in any class in which I ever taught...and you are a super moderator here...I'm guessing there is sense to be made here but for the world of me I can't see it...awaiting elucidation...because if this conspiracy of which you speak is as pervasive as what you claim it could as big as the drug problems that are currently plaguing the sport...

You're just mad because I called bs on your 23/25 set up is more aero at the beginning of this thread, and for some reason you think advertising and big business is full of truths, that's your malfunction, not mine. If my posts are that unreadable stop trying to make sense from them and responding. I've been in just about every facet of the bike industry for 20 years and I'm not making any of this up, if you can't handle what I have to say ignore me and stop responding to every single post of mine. And yes, I do volunteer to keep this forum clean from people like you, 2 years I've been here and never has anyone come after me like this, do it again and you won't be coming back here anytime soon.

 

[blutto]

do it again and you won't be coming back here anytime soon.[/QUOTE]

...so let me get this straight...the lying that you were paid for is just part and parcel for the bike industry and we should get used to it and not get upset when someone such as yourself who not only invents the lies but calls the people who fell for them fools is rubbing it in our faces...

...and then you have the gall to threaten me with a ban because I call you on that...well frankly if CN, which placed you in a position to bully me this way and is OK with your behaviour, maybe it is a good idea to get banned from this place...

...or put another way...why don't you wade into The Clinic and start telling the anti-doping brigade that they are fools for actually hoping for a level playing field in cycling...as in, one free of lies...

...and by the way it wasn't the 23/25 mm thing I was responding to..it was the cynical commentator talking down his nose at all the marks he has hoodwinked in his career in the bike business...and who then sits as a moderator in a forum and dispenses justice from some supposed higher moral ground...I mean, do you actually know what cynical means, or does inclusion into the august ranks of the marketing fraternity wipe that from your memory banks and leaving you perfectly feckless when dealing with truth...

...so if you, using your esteemed position here at CN, want to punish me for calling you on what you have been and what you still are...well... bring it on, and if you do, shame on you, and if CN allows it to stand, then it will be shame on them as well...

Cheers

blutto

PS...the tongue is officially out of my cheek and its sticking out at you...

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

B-bye, see you in a month. Hopefully you've changed your attitude by then, I'm betting not, but I have to at least give you a chance.

P.S. I see you've racked up more infractions on this forum than most people combined, it will be no surprise to anyone that you've been banned.

 

[Indurain]

I was just starting to enjoy that debate. Will have to come back in a month for the next episode.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

No, there's going to be no debate with people like this.

 

[TexPat]

Yes, that was beginning to be a rather entertaining exchange, like a train wreck. And one all too familiar from blutto. But, I digress.
Back in the day...
In the 48hrs before the final tt in the TdF, there was some concern that Ullrich might take some time out of LA (if Jan could keep the bike upright). One of the theories posited (by Steve Hed, I think) was that a thinner fron tire should be used in order to gain some speed; so at the eleventh hour I was sent to retreive a 19mm tubular and mount it to a wheel so that one local fellow whose opinion was respected could test this set up. frankly, I don't remember what was ultimately used, but as was often the case Jan cracked under pressure and crashed on what seemed to be every corner losing valuable time and the TdF.
That same year, as I recall, Continental introduced the Attack/Force combination.

 

[runninboy]

Useful aerodynamics (and there are some, but no way with a tire) are the least of your worries if you're not racing for fun, or getting paid to do it, while the majority of people who buy aerodynamic or light 'things' for their bikes don't even race. Anyway, so back to the OP. If you win a race on a set of 23's, you would've done the same thing on 25's, clincher or tubular and visa versa. None of these ever so slight 2-3mm here, 10-20g there don't really mean a thing. I'm usually riding 25's and 28's because more air volume feels better for putting in the junk miles, now I find out that they actually roll better than smaller tires. Great!

I agree and i also enjoy riding a slightly larger tire. For me the number one issue is that aerodynamics, lightweight, rolling resistance mean nothing if you don't finish the race because of a breakdown or flat.
Larger tires for me are have a better ride. But in practice for me have been more resiliant .
Now lets say 19's are the most aero and lightest. If you compromise handling and have to back off in high speed corner you are now less efficient than a larger tire. When you hit a bump the smaller tire will deflect at a greater percentage to its size i would imagine similar pressure than a larger tire. So rolling resistance would be less with the larger tire as you would have better adhesion. At least thats the way it looks to me. Lets put it this way when you are 200 lbs do you think you will get more pinch flats with a 19mm clincher or a 25 mm clincher at the same pressure?

My favorite example of marketing vs application in the real world. Coors were using those "superior" tri spokes at the tour de trump over some rough roads. Wind tunnel testing showed how great they were.What kind of idiots would ride any other wheel? Except in the real world the roads cracked almost all the tri spokes, if not for the generosity of competitors mechanics Coors would not have been able to finish the race they ruined all their wheels and the other teams gave them their spares.

Funny at the time no publications mentioned the utter failure of the product, but usage of the wheels was mocked by most pro's the rest of the year. "those puppies are nice, just don't hit a bump"

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Yes, that was beginning to be a rather entertaining exchange, like a train wreck. And one all too familiar from blutto. But, I digress.
Back in the day...
In the 48hrs before the final tt in the TdF, there was some concern that Ullrich might take some time out of LA (if Jan could keep the bike upright). One of the theories posited (by Steve Hed, I think) was that a thinner fron tire should be used in order to gain some speed; so at the eleventh hour I was sent to retreive a 19mm tubular and mount it to a wheel so that one local fellow whose opinion was respected could test this set up. frankly, I don't remember what was ultimately used, but as was often the case Jan cracked under pressure and crashed on what seemed to be every corner losing valuable time and the TdF.
That same year, as I recall, Continental introduced the Attack/Force combination.

Oh Jan, poor kid. Maybe it should have been this much ballyhooed 23/25 set up he would've won that day, hell, everyday. Only if, because as we all know 2mm difference in tire size wins and loses races, or gets us to the coffee shop faster due to less drag on the front.

 

[BroDeal]

So to bring this back to the real world without blutto's shock that companies hype their products with less than truthful marketing, does anyone have specific recommendations for the following situation:

Ironman tri, 112 miles, hilly difficult course (St. George), pretty good road surface, rider weight 150 lbs, clinchers (404 on front and 808 on back if wind permits).

A third of a percent decrease in time would still be worth a minute, and a Kona spot beckons.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Lets put it this way when you are 200 lbs do you think you will get more pinch flats with a 19mm clincher or a 25 mm clincher at the same pressure?

Depends on the width of the rim, the closer your tire size is in relation to the rim size the less likely you'd get a pinch because there's less deformation of the sidewall. I don't know anyone that rides anything less than a 23mm clincher anymore, this is why the 23mm wide rims from HED and Velocity are so in demand. Not to say this totally eliminates pinch flats, I've got them on the wider rims, but I was on a rough gravel road at the time and running extremely low pressures, my fault. Most people who race seriously aren't riding clinchers anyway, majority are on 21-23mm tubulars, where pinch flats are almost non-existent.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

So to bring this back to the real world without blutto's shock that companies hype their products with less than truthful marketing, does anyone have specific recommendations for the following situation:

Ironman tri, 112 miles, hilly difficult course (St. George), pretty good road surface, rider weight 150 lbs, clinchers (404 on front and 808 on back if wind permits).

A third of a percent decrease in time would still be worth a minute, and a Kona spot beckons.

Vittoria Open Corsa Evo Slick 23c, with butyl tubes if you swim slow, latex if you swim fast.

 

[runninboy]

Depends on the width of the rim, the closer your tire size is in relation to the rim size the less likely you'd get a pinch because there's less deformation of the sidewall. I don't know anyone that rides anything less than a 23mm clincher anymore, this is why the 23mm wide rims from HED and Velocity are so in demand. Not to say this totally eliminates pinch flats, I've got them on the wider rims, but I was on a rough gravel road at the time and running extremely low pressures, my fault. Most people who race seriously aren't riding clinchers anyway, majority are on 21-23mm tubulars, where pinch flats are almost non-existent.

Yup you are correct it is more complicated than what i alluded to and you are spot on. I run almost exclusively tubulars in races. However once i was on a team that was sponsored by IRC. We also had ritchey wheels. So we were on the same setups. we used the IRC 25mm wire bead triathlons for training they hardly ever flatted and then used 23mm kevlar beaded tire for our race wheels. We had a rain tire that was red & cornered on a dime so we used those primarily. They wore out quick and we had alot so basically we mounted new tires every weekend.
Flats galore, you travel hours to a race spend money for hotel and then flat a half hour into your race and have to chase all day.
Eventually we switched to racing on the triathlons. the feel was roughly the same but we never flatted. they were heavier but we couldnt tell.
Out team went through most of the season training and racing on these cheap tires and between all of us had a total of six flats, all during a training ride in the rain.
Conversely i have been in situations where i am hanging on by the skin of my teeth in a race . Barely able to hold a wheel and losing the draft. My first thoughts i run a quick efficiency checklist. bring my elbows in, get lower, flatten my back , run my legs closer to the top tube shift gears and spin a little faster, turn smaller circles etc etc. When i do this i see measurable results immediately. I would imagine people could find greater efficiency on the day by being more diligent in postion than the aero effect of their tires. Look at Lemond winning tt into Paris. A record setting ride, a tremendously efficient rider, but if he saw the film i bet he would say"what was i doing looking down? the tail of the helmet in the air probably cost me, i can go faster"

 

[Black Dog]

It all seems to point in one direction. That a bit more tire is faster. There has been scattered bits of data that have shown this but it seems that this is the 1st comprehensive look at the issue using empirical evidence. The talk about increased wind resistance from a wider tire is a red herring. It may matter a bit in a TT but when rolling with a group makes zero difference. However, lower rolling resistance matters in all situations on a bike. The side benifits of a more comfortable ride and better traction in corners seals the deal. The issue of mass is a complete non-starter because 20 or 50 grams does not matter in any situation with any rider; Pro or Fred.

Getting past the marketing BS and the preconceived notions of riders is not easy. There are many many riders that will stick with 23mm because they look fast and they are what "should" be on a bike or that is what a race bike "should" look like. We all feel this way to some degree but there is only one version of the facts and our biases must yield to the evidence.

 

[Martin318is]

Speaking of - does anyone else remember when we used to be on 19s or 21s and some heretics were saying we should move to 23s because they rolled faster?

 

[BroDeal]

Speaking of - does anyone else remember when we used to be on 19s or 21s and some heretics were saying we should move to 23s because they rolled faster?

Back in the day, I used a 19mm Michelin clincher. I cannot remember the model name. They had little aero "wings" that were supposed to smoothly transition from tire to the rim, but at the pressure required to not pinch flat the wings pulled away from the rim, leaving a gap. Wow, those suckers were harsh.

 

[ElChingon]

Then we also have the Zipp 101 tech story with no real numbers:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/product-review-zipp-101-road-wheelset

But wider is better! Being the only stressed feature.

I still find it hard to reason, believe! the Wheel Energy story without any real numbers. That whole facility is setup yet not one number other than wider is better.

Can't they release some numbers based on width and leave out the brand of tires to not offend those/that company? Otherwise its all a smoke and mirrors article.

Again, my typo before, I was also looking for the Tech Story CyclingNews ran on 20mm tires improving Aerodynamics, I had incorrectly listed 20mm wheels (aka rims).

I'm still riding my 20mm front tires till I hear otherwise or run out of my batch of 20mm tires. Harder, rougher just keeps me in line with Rule #5. Also, if its such a great aero advantage shouldn't the wheel industry be converting to wider rims en-mass? Nope, just three wheels I know of, the Hed Ardens, Zipp 101 and 303 (I think).

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Also, if its such a great aero advantage shouldn't the wheel industry be converting to wider rims en-mass? Nope, just three wheels I know of, the Hed Ardens, Zipp 101 and 303 (I think).

The wider rims aren't so much about aerodynamics as they are handling. The selection of 20mm clincher tires is becoming less and less, you just named two of the biggest names in wheels, HED and Zipp, Velocity also mfg's the A23. Some are going with a 22mm wide rim like Easton and C-4. Who was that auto mfg that advertised wider is better? Dodge? As much as I hate snake oil salesmen of the ad world there is some actual truth to this claim, and it does relate to our wild wacky world of cycling.

 

[Polyarmour]

The article focused on the findings relating to improved speed performance of tyres, considering the the first two section headings:
Wider tyres roll faster than narrower ones
Larger diameter wheels roll faster than smaller ones
and the summary which was all about why tyre performance matters:
Why it matters

Then it seems to me that the intended audience was people interested assessment of a tyre's speed performance.

If it was an educational/interest item for the recreational rider audience, then it might have helped to indicate that rolling resistance is not the only factor that determines how fast a tyre is.

It's cool that such testing is done (they are certainly not the first or unique in doing so) but when assessing performance, all factors need to be considered.

It looks like Wheel Energy are geared up to test for rolling resistance only, which is fair enough. I guess it is up to others to take their data and determine whether 23mm or 25mm is faster overall after taking into account the aerodynamic effects. As I understand it the relationship between drag and frontal area is linear so you would expect a 23mm wheel to be about 8-9% better than a 25mm wheel (all other things equal). Where this all ends up after adjusting for the decreased rolling resistance who knows, but given that areodynamics is usually the dominant force, it's hard to believe this will cause a major change in thinking on race tyres.

 

[The Gnome]

Going with my gut here...but via the wider the tire the more puncture resistant claim...wouldn't my skinny 20 mm conti's be less puncture resistant as there is less tire to puncture...

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Going with my gut here...but via the wider the tire the more puncture resistant claim...wouldn't my skinny 20 mm conti's be less puncture resistant as there is less tire to puncture...

The "puncture" claim relates to pinch flats when you have a 23mm wide rim capped with a 23mm tire. The sidewall is less apt to deform in this configuration because the wider rims are spreading out the tire and the sidewall isn't hanging over the rim edge, the result is less pinch flats and better handling.

Suppose if you're rolling 20's you have a 3mm buffer over a 23mm tire. That's a small margin if there ever was one. No matter what width tire you're riding, if you run over something sharp enough you're going to flat.

 

[TexPat]

Back in the day, I used a 19mm Michelin clincher. I cannot remember the model name. They had little aero "wings" that were supposed to smoothly transition from tire to the rim, but at the pressure required to not pinch flat the wings pulled away from the rim, leaving a gap. Wow, those suckers were harsh.

Those were rough tires!
Now Bontrager is re-introducing the idea.

 

[Boeing]

Does wider mean less tire pressure is faster?

 

[Aapjes]

Does wider mean less tire pressure is faster?

Wider with equal pressure is faster on smooth roads, since the tire stays more round lengthwise, which costs less energy than a more flatted (thinner) tire. The worse the roads are, the lower the optimal pressure is (bouncing costs a lot of energy). On cobbles, the pro's tend to ride with fairly wide tires at low pressures (the pressure is a compromise between the optimum for the cobble sections and the optimum for the road sections). Wider & less pressure allows for faster cornering and gives less fatigue to the rider, so on a technical course, you'd want wider with lower pressure.

Rider weight hugely influences the appropriate width & pressure. A 50 kilo rider on 20mm tires with sufficient pressure (100 psi or so) would have a different riding experience when compared to a 100 kilo rider on the same tires (with 130 psi or so, as not to pinch flat).

There is no perfect width & pressure for all circumstances, it depends on rider weight, riding surface, desired comfort, desired levels of acceleration, etc. In short, your question is a little simplistic

 

[Vince@HED]

It makes me laugh at all the bashing on the wide rims (buy 1 person). If it is such a fad then how come it changed the entire bike industry in 2007?

The same people/companies that mocked us going wide miraculously "re-invented" their entire wheel line shortly after we did .......ie, wider rims. Now this is all you see. Numerous magazines have data showing how much faster wider rims are compared to the narrow rims. VeloNews Sept 10 mag. The fastest wheels were wide rim wheels.

Numerous teams are getting provisions in their contracts to ride wide rim wheels from other companies because their wheel sponsors do make wide rims yet. There must be a reason for that. Oh yeah, they are fast!

Just because you (again, talking to 1 person) dont believe in something doesn't give you the authority to bash/ban people or bad mouth companies that support this design ...... a design that is going to be here for a long time.

Have a great weekend

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

It makes me laugh at all the bashing on the wide rims (buy 1 person). If it is such a fad then how come it changed the entire bike industry in 2007?

The same people/companies that mocked us going wide miraculously "re-invented" their entire wheel line shortly after we did .......ie, wider rims. Now this is all you see. Numerous magazines have data showing how much faster wider rims are compared to the narrow rims. VeloNews Sept 10 mag. The fastest wheels were wide rim wheels.

Numerous teams are getting provisions in their contracts to ride wide rim wheels from other companies because their wheel sponsors do make wide rims yet. There must be a reason for that. Oh yeah, they are fast!

Just because you (again, talking to 1 person) dont believe in something doesn't give you the authority to bash/ban people or bad mouth companies that support this design ...... a design that is going to be here for a long time.

Have a great weekend

You seem to have misunderstood everything, I mean everything. Wasn't bashing wide rims, I build with them for all get out, and I'm also a huge proponent of wider rims, have been since you released the Ardennes. What I'm concerned about is posting modified or even false aero data, which every company does to one degree or another that a 3mm wider rims improve aero performance as much as HED or any other company claims. I understand you're in a position that you have to stand by what your employers say, but everyone knows that performance data on just about everything is extremely skewed in the bike industry, it's not a secret. Not just the bike industry, but every last one that deals in performance products or equipment. Wide rims are great! Ride 'em almost everyday!

Say hi to Andy, Reed, and Tim for me. Have an awesome weekend!