| |
Main
Date: 31 Jul 2007 21:16:07
From: datakoll
Subject: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
rims for a WTB ExiWolf 2.3" 29er mountain tire
what manufacturer and where available?
are there available widths between 2.3" and 38c?
WTB have a rating?
is 29er, 650B territory?
|
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 19:43:46
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> A custom Seven frame built for a very tall rider (at least 6'6") in a
> nominal 70 cm frame size, to the extent that tells you anything:
>
> http://flickr.com/photos/rcousine/875510617/
>
> Notable features:
>
> Standover height is 1 m (yep, this is effectively a "Standard geometry"
> frame, with a horizontal TT and about 4" of exposed seatpost). Cranks
> are custom 210 mm units. The head tube is about the same length as the
> fork legs. The 700C wheels look lost beneath the bike.
>
> Sorry Chalo, the wheelbase is short,
Hey, that frame is obviously custom. Homeboy didn't have a clue what
he was doing ordering it that way, but at least he ordered it that
way. I can't object to someone getting what he asks for
specifically.
What baffles me is why folks who design and build bikes for their
entire careers don't seem to understand that rather than preserving
particular chainstay lengths or front centers as best for all bikes
regardless of size, what they should really be trying to preserve is
particular geometric relationships between the rider's center of mass,
steering axis, contact patches, and so forth. Some parameters, like
fork rake, should scale according to wheel diameter-- but most
parameters should scale with rider size.
A bike as ill-proportioned as the one in the picture makes as much
sense for its tall owner as a similarly proportioned bike with 20" or
24" wheels would for a shorter rider. Which is to say, it would make
no sense at all.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 14:11:21
From:
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:43:46 -0000, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com >
wrote:
>Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>
>> A custom Seven frame built for a very tall rider (at least 6'6") in a
>> nominal 70 cm frame size, to the extent that tells you anything:
>>
>> http://flickr.com/photos/rcousine/875510617/
>>
>> Notable features:
>>
>> Standover height is 1 m (yep, this is effectively a "Standard geometry"
>> frame, with a horizontal TT and about 4" of exposed seatpost). Cranks
>> are custom 210 mm units. The head tube is about the same length as the
>> fork legs. The 700C wheels look lost beneath the bike.
>>
>> Sorry Chalo, the wheelbase is short,
>
>Hey, that frame is obviously custom. Homeboy didn't have a clue what
>he was doing ordering it that way, but at least he ordered it that
>way. I can't object to someone getting what he asks for
>specifically.
>
>What baffles me is why folks who design and build bikes for their
>entire careers don't seem to understand that rather than preserving
>particular chainstay lengths or front centers as best for all bikes
>regardless of size, what they should really be trying to preserve is
>particular geometric relationships between the rider's center of mass,
>steering axis, contact patches, and so forth. Some parameters, like
>fork rake, should scale according to wheel diameter-- but most
>parameters should scale with rider size.
>
>A bike as ill-proportioned as the one in the picture makes as much
>sense for its tall owner as a similarly proportioned bike with 20" or
>24" wheels would for a shorter rider. Which is to say, it would make
>no sense at all.
>
>Chalo
Dear Chalo,
My allergy drugs are starting to kick in . . .
http://www.alexmoulton.co.uk/images/gallery/large/action1.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/tallside4.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/tallride4.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/tallride5.jpg
:)
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 15:00:20
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Living down here in Terminus 3, I don't see many long tube frames:
Aging Pre-boomer's are fairly short, the occasional athlete usually
rides an MTB with loooooong posts.
The first one I saw was a gift from the SalArmy to a fellow who had
his Fuji stolen. Same visual effect as Ryan's photo frame, asking the
question-IS THIS THE ANSWER?
But Ryan you say the frame is ridden competively sportwise? So, either
the tall rider has excellent reflexes or the height doesn't matter.
For us the ignorant what we see is not what it delivers.
Say, did the Redline Monodog's price go up during these posts?
|
| | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 17:50:46
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
In article <1187967620.222766.183420@q4g2000prc.googlegroups.com >,
datakoll <datakoll@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Living down here in Terminus 3, I don't see many long tube frames:
> Aging Pre-boomer's are fairly short, the occasional athlete usually
> rides an MTB with loooooong posts.
> The first one I saw was a gift from the SalArmy to a fellow who had
> his Fuji stolen. Same visual effect as Ryan's photo frame, asking the
> question-IS THIS THE ANSWER?
> But Ryan you say the frame is ridden competively sportwise? So, either
> the tall rider has excellent reflexes or the height doesn't matter.
> For us the ignorant what we see is not what it delivers.
> Say, did the Redline Monodog's price go up during these posts?
Yes. Well. The rider apparently does ride race locally (and at any rate,
having a custom Seven suggests a fair bit of commitment), but I suspect
the answer is that this bike doesn't have any really scary handling
issues.
The reason this frame was built may revolve around the very long crank
arms. Once you specify that and your basic measurements, I assume the
maker comes back and (in the case of Seven) builds up a fairly
conventional geometry that has the usual one-size-fits-all chainstays*.
Not that bikes on the other end don't look funny, too, or at least have
their own issues. As the rider of a smaller (52-53 cm) range of frame
sizes, I can tell you that wheel overlap is routine, and quite irksome
with fenders. It's so bad that I think the Surly philosophy of 26"
wheels for their 42-54 cm Long Haul Trucker frames is sensible, and I
keep waxing and waning on whether I should build up a rigid MTB as a
commuter: toe overlap issues actually matter a bit on the commuter bike,
because if you're like me, you do spend time doing trackstands and other
low-speed manoeuvres where your toe and your fender may meet.
*I suppose these are, in a way, an argument that chainstays would be
even shorter if there was a way to do that.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 01:38:32
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 23, 9:20 pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com > wrote:
> A Muzi wrote:
>
> > Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
>
> Despite this, he doesn't seem to understand the long chainstays for
> tall frames principle. He specs all his Lurch-sized frames with
> Cousin-Itt-sized chainstays. If 29" wheels force him to moderate this
> unfortunate tendency of his, so much the better.
>
> Chalo
right. the short chain stay theory has the camp divided. Shorts stays
give low polar moment ON weight shift while longer stay give greater
stability FOR weight shift ???????
I'm boggled by Surely's cheater seat tube.
the 1.6 is a huge pain. at 6'4" almost all specialized sports
equipment is to small: alas no Solomon approach boots in megamicrotech
chartruese with dayglo orange lugs. damn
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 01:20:35
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
A Muzi wrote:
>
> Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
Despite this, he doesn't seem to understand the long chainstays for
tall frames principle. He specs all his Lurch-sized frames with
Cousin-Itt-sized chainstays. If 29" wheels force him to moderate this
unfortunate tendency of his, so much the better.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 13:28:25
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
In article <1187918435.149181.299460@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com > wrote:
> A Muzi wrote:
> >
> > Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
>
> Despite this, he doesn't seem to understand the long chainstays for
> tall frames principle. He specs all his Lurch-sized frames with
> Cousin-Itt-sized chainstays. If 29" wheels force him to moderate this
> unfortunate tendency of his, so much the better.
>
> Chalo
I don't know that I posted this photo before, but it seems peripherally
related:
A custom Seven frame built for a very tall rider (at least 6'6") in a
nominal 70 cm frame size, to the extent that tells you anything:
http://flickr.com/photos/rcousine/875510617/
Notable features:
Standover height is 1 m (yep, this is effectively a "Standard geometry"
frame, with a horizontal TT and about 4" of exposed seatpost). Cranks
are custom 210 mm units. The head tube is about the same length as the
fork legs. The 700C wheels look lost beneath the bike.
Sorry Chalo, the wheelbase is short,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 06:46:27
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <1187918435.149181.299460@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A Muzi wrote:
>>> Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
>> Despite this, he doesn't seem to understand the long chainstays for
>> tall frames principle. He specs all his Lurch-sized frames with
>> Cousin-Itt-sized chainstays. If 29" wheels force him to moderate this
>> unfortunate tendency of his, so much the better.
>>
>> Chalo
>
> I don't know that I posted this photo before, but it seems peripherally
> related:
>
> A custom Seven frame built for a very tall rider (at least 6'6") in a
> nominal 70 cm frame size, to the extent that tells you anything:
>
> http://flickr.com/photos/rcousine/875510617/
>
> Notable features:
>
> Standover height is 1 m (yep, this is effectively a "Standard geometry"
> frame, with a horizontal TT and about 4" of exposed seatpost). Cranks
> are custom 210 mm units. The head tube is about the same length as the
> fork legs. The 700C wheels look lost beneath the bike.
>
> Sorry Chalo, the wheelbase is short,
>
i completely agree with ttcopley's comment that that frame is
excessively large - for all the reasons he cited. i think taking
advantage of a full length seat post is a much better strategy for
accommodating a larger rider.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 14:59:36
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
In article <ALCdnYo9sMOpfFPbnZ2dnUVZ_v2unZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <1187918435.149181.299460@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> A Muzi wrote:
> >>> Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
> >> Despite this, he doesn't seem to understand the long chainstays for
> >> tall frames principle. He specs all his Lurch-sized frames with
> >> Cousin-Itt-sized chainstays. If 29" wheels force him to moderate this
> >> unfortunate tendency of his, so much the better.
> >>
> >> Chalo
> >
> > I don't know that I posted this photo before, but it seems peripherally
> > related:
> >
> > A custom Seven frame built for a very tall rider (at least 6'6") in a
> > nominal 70 cm frame size, to the extent that tells you anything:
> >
> > http://flickr.com/photos/rcousine/875510617/
> >
> > Notable features:
> >
> > Standover height is 1 m (yep, this is effectively a "Standard geometry"
> > frame, with a horizontal TT and about 4" of exposed seatpost). Cranks
> > are custom 210 mm units. The head tube is about the same length as the
> > fork legs. The 700C wheels look lost beneath the bike.
> >
> > Sorry Chalo, the wheelbase is short,
> >
>
> i completely agree with ttcopley's comment that that frame is
> excessively large - for all the reasons he cited. i think taking
> advantage of a full length seat post is a much better strategy for
> accommodating a larger rider.
Tobin (ttcopley) knows of what he speaks: he's about 6'6" himself, and
rides bikes of that size. But his are bikes of the long seatpost
variety: they look like big bikes, not circus bikes.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 00:36:48
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
> http://www.bctrail.ca/maps.html
ZINN FLACKS 29er
http://www.zinncycles.com/wheels29.aspx
|
| | |
Date: 23 Aug 2007 19:49:59
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll wrote:
>> http://www.bctrail.ca/maps.html
> ZINN FLACKS 29er
> http://www.zinncycles.com/wheels29.aspx
He would.
Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe
Medium Italian Guys are not so excited. It's all about proportion IMHO.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Aug 2007 18:26:11
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Andrew Muzi mused:
> ...
> Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe...
Is not that equal to one (1) Chalo?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2007 09:40:04
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:26:11 -0500, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<sunsetss0003@iinvalid.com > wrote:
>Andrew Muzi mused:
>> ...
>> Mr Zinn's something like 1.6 Standard Humans tall I believe...
>
>Is not that equal to one (1) Chalo?
The Chalo has a width requirement.
Ron
|
| |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 02:29:52
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
DIN -
http://www.bctrail.ca/maps.html
|
| |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 00:24:06
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
OR: aso, aso, it's off to tour we go...
maybe it's a generational problem?
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 20:50:00
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
> Now if a fat 700C is a 29 inch, what is the old roadster 28 1 1/2 (ISO
> 635)?
a 635!
The captbike articles explain almost everything:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tires.html
as far as I can tell, ASPECT or height-width ratios define 700c from
700/29 inch so when 29 is commonly said, everyone hahahahaha knows the
tire goes on a 700 rim but is fat fat fat in ASPECT like an MTB tire.
However, taking a spare CONTI from the closet, the sidewall reads
32-622 (28 x 1=BC x 13/4)
When the ERTO number shows as 32-622, ignore the fractional sizes?
622 is the operative interface of rim and tire diameters. Best to
memorize the operative rim diameter numbers.
The LBS and MO's have to deal with a sizeable population who do not
use ERTO numbers? but say fat or skinney as qualitative words.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:47:03
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>> Now if a fat 700C is a 29 inch, what is the old roadster 28 1 1/2 (ISO
>> 635)?
>
> a 635!
>
> The captbike articles explain almost everything:
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tires.html
> as far as I can tell, ASPECT or height-width ratios define 700c from
> 700/29 inch so when 29 is commonly said, everyone hahahahaha knows the
> tire goes on a 700 rim but is fat fat fat in ASPECT like an MTB tire.
> However, taking a spare CONTI from the closet, the sidewall reads
> 32-622 (28 x 1¼ x 13/4)...
Continental is the one tire manufacturer I am aware of the violates
"Brown's Law Of Tire Sizing". [1] For example, they sell a "20x1-1/8"
tires, which we would expect to be an ISO 29-451, but is actually an ISO
28-406.
[1] If two tires are marked with sizes that are mathematically equal,
but one is expressed as a decimal and the other as a fraction,
these two tires will not be interchangeable.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 11:25:21
From:
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 3, 2:17 am, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Aug 2, 10:09 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > conti does not make a 29er
> > conti makes one 650B
> > ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?
> > no ready google.
>
> Conti is German. Germans call 700c "28 inch". Americans lately call
> fat 700c tires "29 inch".
Here in Canada 28" also means 700C. Most of the old CCM bikes I've
found use 700C, though some use 26 x 1 3/8 (ISO 590). Also, my Dutch
single-speed's tires are 700C and say 28".
I do find it funny that 700C gets called 28", when in terms of
diameter it is actually smaller (622) than 27" (630)!
Now if a fat 700C is a 29 inch, what is the old roadster 28 1 1/2 (ISO
635)?
Mark
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:44:49
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
>> datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> conti does not make a 29er
>>> conti makes one 650B
>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?
>>> no ready google.
> Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Conti is German. Germans call 700c "28 inch". Americans lately call
>> fat 700c tires "29 inch".
mark@drumbent.com wrote:
> Here in Canada 28" also means 700C. Most of the old CCM bikes I've
> found use 700C, though some use 26 x 1 3/8 (ISO 590). Also, my Dutch
> single-speed's tires are 700C and say 28".
>
> I do find it funny that 700C gets called 28", when in terms of
> diameter it is actually smaller (622) than 27" (630)!
>
> Now if a fat 700C is a 29 inch, what is the old roadster 28 1 1/2 (ISO
> 635)?
Sorta like dress sizes. Or 'horsepower'.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2007 15:50:48
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 25, 11:42 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca > wrote:
> In article <1188005622.908761.172...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > why do welders weld bike positions 10 feet off the ground? why do
> > billionaires want to support space travel when the spooted owl is in
> > serious environmental distress?
>
> In the former case, they're for facilitating burglaries. In the latter
> case, because it's cheaper than trying to win America's Cup.
>
> > not that I'm immune.
> > I rode on the bus with a ten foot rider. second time i saw him he was
> > substantially banged up and taped together. and limping, pushed the
> > bike when he got off.
> > said the SOP fat woman: "he's retarded"
>
> Yes, but was he wearing a helmet?
>
> While on vacation, I was gobbled at by a domestic turkey, and some very
> pretty domesticated gray geese. But it was my wife who had the temerity
> to eat chicken while a live canary was at the table. Bad form, I
> thought, and chose to have a little lamb.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@sfu.cahttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
> to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
thong. evryone's a star.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2007 01:33:42
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
why do welders weld bike positions 10 feet off the ground? why do
billionaires want to support space travel when the spooted owl is in
serious environmental distress?
not that I'm immune.
I rode on the bus with a ten foot rider. second time i saw him he was
substantially banged up and taped together. and limping, pushed the
bike when he got off.
said the SOP fat woman: "he's retarded"
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Aug 2007 15:42:25
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
In article <1188005622.908761.172440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
datakoll <datakoll@yahoo.com > wrote:
> why do welders weld bike positions 10 feet off the ground? why do
> billionaires want to support space travel when the spooted owl is in
> serious environmental distress?
In the former case, they're for facilitating burglaries. In the latter
case, because it's cheaper than trying to win America's Cup.
> not that I'm immune.
> I rode on the bus with a ten foot rider. second time i saw him he was
> substantially banged up and taped together. and limping, pushed the
> bike when he got off.
> said the SOP fat woman: "he's retarded"
Yes, but was he wearing a helmet?
While on vacation, I was gobbled at by a domestic turkey, and some very
pretty domesticated gray geese. But it was my wife who had the temerity
to eat chicken while a live canary was at the table. Bad form, I
thought, and chose to have a little lamb.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 02:50:14
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 3, 9:58 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me > wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> >>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
> >>>> ...
> >>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
> >>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>
> >> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo........................=
.=2E...=AD.................................
>
> > I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size, framed
> > picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
>
> And a new set of darts?!?
>
> Bill "you're allowed to say 'Christmas' nowadays?" S.
FRENCH BET!
ASO ASO ASS OIL THE WAY OOOHHHHHH WHAT FUN IS TO SAY ASS OIL THE WAY
HEY!
|
| | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 22:14:31
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll aka GENE DANIELS wrote:
> On Aug 3, 9:58 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>>>>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>>>> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
>>> I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size, framed
>>> picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
>> And a new set of darts?!?
>>
>> Bill "you're allowed to say 'Christmas' nowadays?" S.
>
> FRENCH BET!
>
> ASO ASO ASS OIL THE WAY OOOHHHHHH WHAT FUN IS TO SAY ASS OIL THE WAY
> HEY!
GENE FOUND THE CAPS LOCK KEY!
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 23:30:14
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
ID the rider?
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20070729/cx_nq_uc/nq20070729
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 20:32:38
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
BREATHE DEEP!
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 06:17:46
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 2, 10:09 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> conti does not make a 29er
> conti makes one 650B
> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?
> no ready google.
Conti is German. Germans call 700c "28 inch". Americans lately call
fat 700c tires "29 inch".
Conti City Contact (slick) is available in 700x54 (29x2.1"):
http://www.contitire.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/bicycle/themes/tires/city/citycontact/citycontact_en.html
Conti Vapor (knobby) is available in 700x54 (29x2.1"):
http://www.contitire.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/bicycle/themes/tires/mtb/vapor/vapor_en.html
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 03:09:31
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
conti does not make a 29er
conti makes one 650B
ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?
no ready google.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 23:00:59
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> ...
> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
<http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg >
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 08:51:26
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>
> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
|
| | | | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 20:36:38
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>> ...
>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>
> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size, framed
picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 18:58:41
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>>
>> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
>
> I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size, framed
> picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
And a new set of darts?!?
Bill "you're allowed to say 'Christmas' nowadays?" S.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 22:35:15
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>>>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>>> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
>> I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size, framed
>> picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
>
> And a new set of darts?!?
How about a "Stanford Alumnus" hat?
> Bill "you're allowed to say 'Christmas' nowadays?" S.
"Winter Seasonal Holiday of your choice".
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 21:06:24
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>> datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> ok. what "famous yellow bicycle" ?...
>>>>> <http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg>
>>>> NNNNnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..............................................................
>>> I know what to get Bill Sornson for Christmas - a poster size,
>>> framed picture of... JOBST LEANING! ;)
>>
>> And a new set of darts?!?
>
> How about a "Stanford Alumnus" hat?
Only if they can embroider the '@'.
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 01:34:04
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Carl Fogel wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
>
> >>From what I can tell, my 700x60 Schwalbe Big Apples at 35psi have
> >close to the same RR as her 700x28 Conti Ultra Sports at 90psi. I'm
> >sure there is some difference, but based on my observation the
> >advantage could belong to either tire.
>
> I _think_ that you need to borrow your wife's bike and see if you
> coast as far from the same speed on her 700x28's as you do on your
> 700x60's.
>
> At the same 10 mph, you have considerably more mass and momentum than
> she does, but I don't know whether rolling resistance scales up in a
> linear fashion as load increases.
It's a worthy question. I know the coefficient of rolling resistance
is generalized as a ratio of the force of drag to the load carried by
the tire, but in the real world it could be a variable ratio according
to load.
I know that simple measurements of tire drag on rollers don't take
into account the mostly unrecoverable losses due to shock and
vibration dissipated in the rider. A compliant tire can store more of
these inputs and largely return them to the bike's forward momentum.
Since the streets around where I live vary from reasonably okay to
terrible, this may be a factor.
I think you're right that some kind of a rollout test is in order.
I'll look for a shallow downhill into a flat section, where the total
distance to a stop can serve as the as the point of comparison. With
any luck, my wife will agree to serve as my accomplice in science.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 20:48:21
From:
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:34:04 -0000, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com >
wrote:
>Carl Fogel wrote:
>>
>> Chalo wrote:
>>
>> >>From what I can tell, my 700x60 Schwalbe Big Apples at 35psi have
>> >close to the same RR as her 700x28 Conti Ultra Sports at 90psi. I'm
>> >sure there is some difference, but based on my observation the
>> >advantage could belong to either tire.
>>
>> I _think_ that you need to borrow your wife's bike and see if you
>> coast as far from the same speed on her 700x28's as you do on your
>> 700x60's.
>>
>> At the same 10 mph, you have considerably more mass and momentum than
>> she does, but I don't know whether rolling resistance scales up in a
>> linear fashion as load increases.
>
>It's a worthy question. I know the coefficient of rolling resistance
>is generalized as a ratio of the force of drag to the load carried by
>the tire, but in the real world it could be a variable ratio according
>to load.
>
>I know that simple measurements of tire drag on rollers don't take
>into account the mostly unrecoverable losses due to shock and
>vibration dissipated in the rider. A compliant tire can store more of
>these inputs and largely return them to the bike's forward momentum.
>Since the streets around where I live vary from reasonably okay to
>terrible, this may be a factor.
>
>I think you're right that some kind of a rollout test is in order.
>I'll look for a shallow downhill into a flat section, where the total
>distance to a stop can serve as the as the point of comparison. With
>any luck, my wife will agree to serve as my accomplice in science.
>
>Chalo
Dear Chalo,
Like you, I'm not sure how well real-world tires, inflations, loads,
and surfaces correspond to simplified theory. The common notion that
contact patch area must equal load divided by psi doesn't hold up very
well, with measured contact patches being much smaller than expected
below about 70 psi on 700x25's and much larger than expected above it.
You might be able to pedal gently next to each other, start coasting,
and see if one rider slowly pulls ahead, then swap bikes and see if
things change.
But your wife may be unable to reach the pedals on your bike.
If so, you might be able to ride each bike yourself on different days.
Find a fair stretch of level road and pedal up to 10.0 mph on a
reasonably well-calibrated speedometer (a bit tricky, given the
increased load), and start coasting at some sign post. After a few
rides, you might be able to see a difference between the two bikes.
This would have the advantage of roughly equal wind drag.
But your wife may be unwilling to let you squash her bike.
If so, you might be able to mount a 700x28 front wheel on your bike
and see if there's a difference large enough to notice with just one
tire, doing the same sort of thing.
A hill might magnify any difference. That is, from the same starting
point, a bike whose tires have less rolling resistance will be going
faster at the bottom and will therefore coast even farther than if two
riders simply matched speeds on the level. Unfortunately, a coasting
match against your wife is likely to be trickier than separate runs
with you on different bikes because of the wind-drag-versus-inertia
differences.
Another trick might be to inflate your tires more, say up from 35 to
45 psi, and see if you start to outroll your wife in casual coasting
at 10 mph. If there's no discernable difference with 28% more
pressure, then the differences are probably too small (or the other
factors too variable) to measure easily.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 23:55:23
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Michael Press wrote:
>
> Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I just rambled all over town with my wife on my 29" city bike with
> > 700x60 slicks. I love it-- I actually aim for small potholes just to
> > check it out. Yet I coast just as fast as my wife on her skinny tire
> > road bike.
>
> Mass to frontal area advantage.
What are you trying to say about my wife's frontal area? ;^)
Downhill, sure-- I roll right away from her. But at the speeds we
usually ride together, aerodynamics are not a big part of the
equation. Below 10mph, I doubt frontal area comes into play as a
significant factor. Besides, she's on a flat bar road bike, and I'm
on a big ol' 29er with 8" high, 28" wide BMX bars-- hardly placing
myself at a pronounced aero advantage.
>From what I can tell, my 700x60 Schwalbe Big Apples at 35psi have
close to the same RR as her 700x28 Conti Ultra Sports at 90psi. I'm
sure there is some difference, but based on my observation the
advantage could belong to either tire.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 18:17:37
From:
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:55:23 -0000, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com >
wrote:
>Michael Press wrote:
>>
>> Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I just rambled all over town with my wife on my 29" city bike with
>> > 700x60 slicks. I love it-- I actually aim for small potholes just to
>> > check it out. Yet I coast just as fast as my wife on her skinny tire
>> > road bike.
>>
>> Mass to frontal area advantage.
>
>What are you trying to say about my wife's frontal area? ;^)
>
>Downhill, sure-- I roll right away from her. But at the speeds we
>usually ride together, aerodynamics are not a big part of the
>equation. Below 10mph, I doubt frontal area comes into play as a
>significant factor. Besides, she's on a flat bar road bike, and I'm
>on a big ol' 29er with 8" high, 28" wide BMX bars-- hardly placing
>myself at a pronounced aero advantage.
>
>>From what I can tell, my 700x60 Schwalbe Big Apples at 35psi have
>close to the same RR as her 700x28 Conti Ultra Sports at 90psi. I'm
>sure there is some difference, but based on my observation the
>advantage could belong to either tire.
>
>Chalo
Dear Chalo,
I _think_ that you need to borrow your wife's bike and see if you
coast as far from the same speed on her 700x28's as you do on your
700x60's.
At the same 10 mph, you have considerably more mass and momentum than
she does, but I don't know whether rolling resistance scales up in a
linear fashion as load increases.
That is, your greater mass may outweigh (sorry) the drag of your
tires.
If so, you might you coast about as far and fast on your tires as she
does on hers, but you'd leave her far behind if you were using her
thinner, higher-pressure tires.
In other words, the real test may be how well each tire rolls under
the same load.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 07:09:50
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll wrote:
>
> is the 29er here to stay or will wide 29er tires disappear out from
> under me like 27" conti TT did?
> WTB's website has a impermanent ambience totally opposite Conti's in
> your face.
29ers are here to stay. Here in Austin you can't swing a dead cat
without knocking someone off a 29" MTB or a 29" single speed. Since
the only thing that makes a 29er is the fat 700c tire and the frame to
hold it, I reckon that they already have all the toehold they will
ever need. The question remains whether the phenomenon will be a
perpetual niche market, with half a dozen tires and half a dozen major
brand bikes forever, or whether it will grow to rival the predominance
of 26" off-road equipment. Something in between is my bet.
I just rambled all over town with my wife on my 29" city bike with
700x60 slicks. I love it-- I actually aim for small potholes just to
check it out. Yet I coast just as fast as my wife on her skinny tire
road bike.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 18:56:05
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
> datakoll wrote:
>> is the 29er here to stay or will wide 29er tires disappear out from
>> under me like 27" conti TT did?
>> WTB's website has a impermanent ambience totally opposite Conti's in
>> your face.
Chalo wrote:
> 29ers are here to stay. Here in Austin you can't swing a dead cat
> without knocking someone off a 29" MTB or a 29" single speed. Since
> the only thing that makes a 29er is the fat 700c tire and the frame to
> hold it, I reckon that they already have all the toehold they will
> ever need. The question remains whether the phenomenon will be a
> perpetual niche market, with half a dozen tires and half a dozen major
> brand bikes forever, or whether it will grow to rival the predominance
> of 26" off-road equipment. Something in between is my bet.
>
> I just rambled all over town with my wife on my 29" city bike with
> 700x60 slicks. I love it-- I actually aim for small potholes just to
> check it out. Yet I coast just as fast as my wife on her skinny tire
> road bike.
I was cool to them at first but I've come to believe they are an
excellent and proportional solution for big riders. The bike just 'looks
right' under a tall rider.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 21:32:25
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Andrew Muzi wrote:
>
> I was cool to them at first ["29er" bicycles] but I've come to believe they are an
> excellent and proportional solution for big riders. The bike just 'looks
> right' under a tall rider.
Just like the wheels on the Famous Yellow Bicycle look too small?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 02:58:02
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
so I bellied up to the bar with a wad of cash, some brazing rod, a bag
pf parts and MF, the 21" Monodog sold out over the weekend. SOB! IMHO.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 17:33:18
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
In article
<1186038590.591000.130730@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com >
,
Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com > wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> >
> > is the 29er here to stay or will wide 29er tires disappear out from
> > under me like 27" conti TT did?
> > WTB's website has a impermanent ambience totally opposite Conti's in
> > your face.
>
> 29ers are here to stay. Here in Austin you can't swing a dead cat
> without knocking someone off a 29" MTB or a 29" single speed. Since
> the only thing that makes a 29er is the fat 700c tire and the frame to
> hold it, I reckon that they already have all the toehold they will
> ever need. The question remains whether the phenomenon will be a
> perpetual niche market, with half a dozen tires and half a dozen major
> brand bikes forever, or whether it will grow to rival the predominance
> of 26" off-road equipment. Something in between is my bet.
>
> I just rambled all over town with my wife on my 29" city bike with
> 700x60 slicks. I love it-- I actually aim for small potholes just to
> check it out. Yet I coast just as fast as my wife on her skinny tire
> road bike.
Mass to frontal area advantage.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 04:57:07
From: landotter
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 1, 9:53 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> is the 29er here to stay or will wide 29er tires disappear out from
> under me like 27" conti TT did?
> WTB's website has a impermanent ambience totally opposite Conti's in
> your face.
622 will be here for a long time as it's an established rim diameter.
I think it will stick for mtb's, especially large sizes where it looks
more proportional. I like 27" as well. Just remounted a 1 1/4" x 27"
Zaffiro a few minutes ago--it's an elegant and masculine size. I
regret converting my other 27" bike to 700c, as I should have just
rerimmed with 27s. Tires aren't scarce, and often nice ones that'll
look good hanging in the garage go on sale for stupid cheap. Nashbar's
got Paselas in 1 1/8" and 1 1/4" widths on sale now for a tenner (700c
too)
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 02:53:57
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Aug 1, 5:22 pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com > wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
>
> > rims for a WTB ExiWolf 2.3" 29er mountain tire
> > what manufacturer and where available?
> > are there available widths between 2.3" and 38c?
> > WTB have a rating?
>
> > is 29er, 650B territory?
>
> 29" = fat 700c, as Andy Muzi pointed out. There are lots of good
> tires in between 700x38 and 700x60. The WTB Nanoraptor 29 x 2.1" is a
> better all-purpose tire than the ExiWolf. I like slicks like the
> Schwalbe Big Apple 700x50 and 700x60 more useful yet.
>
> Schwalbe, Conti, Michelin all have 700x47 street/touring tires.
>
> Any rim that's at least 22mm outside width should do an adequate job
> for a 29" tire. The Alex DM18 is probably the best one for the money,
> about $20 last I checked. The Sun Rhyno Lite is the widest rim that
> every bike shop will know how to get, and the Kris Holm 29" mountain
> unicycle rim is the widest 700c rim of any kind, useless for any tire
> under 40mm wide:
>
> http://aebike.com/page.cfm?action=details&PageID=30&SKU=RM6000
>
> Chalo
does Holm supply first aid?
yeah. dawrf plus posterior nerve incoherence: like there's no go
forth, it's all sit and wonder what's next butbutbut like i'm not
screaming downhill thru the MTB magic forest.
so i searched into the 29er space and wondered what tires then rims
only to find narrower rims than seems reasonable. but there i have it
from the horse's mouths.
is the 29er here to stay or will wide 29er tires disappear out from
under me like 27" conti TT did?
WTB's website has a impermanent ambience totally opposite Conti's in
your face.
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 21:22:15
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll wrote:
>
> rims for a WTB ExiWolf 2.3" 29er mountain tire
> what manufacturer and where available?
> are there available widths between 2.3" and 38c?
> WTB have a rating?
>
> is 29er, 650B territory?
29" = fat 700c, as Andy Muzi pointed out. There are lots of good
tires in between 700x38 and 700x60. The WTB Nanoraptor 29 x 2.1" is a
better all-purpose tire than the ExiWolf. I like slicks like the
Schwalbe Big Apple 700x50 and 700x60 more useful yet.
Schwalbe, Conti, Michelin all have 700x47 street/touring tires.
Any rim that's at least 22mm outside width should do an adequate job
for a 29" tire. The Alex DM18 is probably the best one for the money,
about $20 last I checked. The Sun Rhyno Lite is the widest rim that
every bike shop will know how to get, and the Kris Holm 29" mountain
unicycle rim is the widest 700c rim of any kind, useless for any tire
under 40mm wide:
http://aebike.com/page.cfm?action=details&PageID=30&SKU=RM6000
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 10:18:41
From: DirtRoadie
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Jul 31, 4:33 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> > "Twenty Nine Inch" is a 700 x 50, 700-52, 700-54 etc, ISO 622mm
>
> > Yes a 700-38 will mount on that rim.
>
> > --
> > Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> yes a 700-38 will mount on what rim? there's a rim mounts both 2.3"
> and 38C? if so, which tire gets the advantage?
A 29er uses standard old 700C rims. I built up my 29er using a set of
old road wheels with narrow rims (19mm), but use 2.1" tires. Works
fine even @< 30 psi. Even if a wider rim for wider tires might have
advantages, it is not absolutely necessary.
DR
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 20:44:23
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
"G.T." aka Greg Thomas who? wrote:
> "datakoll" aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> > Is WTB's 58.42mm tire mounted optimal on a WTB 28mm bead/rim width?
> > Are there wider 29er rims than 28mm?
>
> I don't know but I run 55mm wide tires on 23mm wide rims with no troubles
> except for some tire rub on my fork.
butbutbut, do you feel like a dwarf with broken knees and
constipation?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 23:55:16
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> "G.T." aka Greg Thomas who? wrote:
>> "datakoll" aka gene daniels wrote:
>>
>>> Is WTB's 58.42mm tire mounted optimal on a WTB 28mm bead/rim width?
>>> Are there wider 29er rims than 28mm?
>> I don't know but I run 55mm wide tires on 23mm wide rims with no troubles
>> except for some tire rub on my fork.
>
> butbutbut, do you feel like a dwarf with broken knees and
> constipation?
>
Broken knees? Sometimes. Constipated dwarf? Never.
Greg who?
--
The ticketbastard Tax Tracker:
http://www.ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html
Dethink to survive - Mclusky
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 18:48:42
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Jul 31, 8:28 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> 38 millimeter =3D 1.496062992 inch
> Fits on a rim meant for a 2.3" tire? This I gotta see to believe.
> 2.3 inches =3D 58.42 mm!
> WTB EXIWOLF 29X2.3 622X55 FOLDING BEAD 29er TIRE
> But WTB's 622 rim is 28mm wide at the bead or 6mm wider than a CR-18
> meant for a 32c not a 58.42c
> speedgoat Item Number: 129210
> WTB Dual Duty FR 29er Rim (2007)
> Black 32h
>
> =B7 Heat-treated 6061-T6 aluminum
> =B7 Disc and rim brake compatible with rim wear indicator on braking
> surface
> =B7 28mm width
> =B7 596mm ERD
> =B7 622 ISO
>
> Is WTB's 58.42mm tire mounted optimal on a WTB 28mm bead/rim width?
> Are there wider 29er rims than 28mm?
>
> Excellent cataloguery:http://www.speedgoat.com/catalog.asp?cat=3D260
>
But high prices; for example, Alex Adventurer 700C rims are commonly
available online for under $25ea, not the $35 these guys want. Maybe
they should fly the Jolly Roger.
> I discovered 29er frames this afternoon so the figures look kinda
> weird not running an MTB just borrowing long enough to feel like a
> dwarf with broken knees and constipation.
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 01:28:27
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
38 millimeter =3D 1.496062992 inch
Fits on a rim meant for a 2.3" tire? This I gotta see to believe.
2.3 inches =3D 58.42 mm!
WTB EXIWOLF 29X2.3 622X55 FOLDING BEAD 29er TIRE
But WTB's 622 rim is 28mm wide at the bead or 6mm wider than a CR-18
meant for a 32c not a 58.42c
speedgoat Item Number: 129210
WTB Dual Duty FR 29er Rim (2007)
Black 32h
=B7 Heat-treated 6061-T6 aluminum
=B7 Disc and rim brake compatible with rim wear indicator on braking
surface
=B7 28mm width
=B7 596mm ERD
=B7 622 ISO
Is WTB's 58.42mm tire mounted optimal on a WTB 28mm bead/rim width?
Are there wider 29er rims than 28mm?
Excellent cataloguery:
http://www.speedgoat.com/catalog.asp?cat=3D260
I discovered 29er frames this afternoon so the figures look kinda
weird not running an MTB just borrowing long enough to feel like a
dwarf with broken knees and constipation.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 19:31:03
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
"datakoll" <datakoll@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1185931707.838106.307070@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> Is WTB's 58.42mm tire mounted optimal on a WTB 28mm bead/rim width?
> Are there wider 29er rims than 28mm?
I don't know but I run 55mm wide tires on 23mm wide rims with no troubles
except for some tire rub on my fork.
Greg
--
Ticketmaster and Ticketweb suck, but everyone knows that:
http://ticketmastersucks.org
"Ya gotta stop riding the brakes,
ya gotta stop robbing the cradle" - Chris D
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 22:33:55
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
> "Twenty Nine Inch" is a 700 x 50, 700-52, 700-54 etc, ISO 622mm
>
> Yes a 700-38 will mount on that rim.
>
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
yes a 700-38 will mount on what rim? there's a rim mounts both 2.3"
and 38C? if so, which tire gets the advantage?
guessing at this seems like if the 38c got the advantage you could
come out ahead as the fat tire wobbles along anyways.
or does the fat tire need stability for general noodlin around
but if your camping with a load i guess you'd wanna go with a wide rim
and a frim 2.3" sidewall.
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 17:07:40
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
datakoll wrote:
> rims for a WTB ExiWolf 2.3" 29er mountain tire
> what manufacturer and where available?
> are there available widths between 2.3" and 38c?
> WTB have a rating?
>
> is 29er, 650B territory?
>
"Twenty Nine Inch" is a 700 x 50, 700-52, 700-54 etc, ISO 622mm
Yes a 700-38 will mount on that rim.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 14:42:55
From: landotter
Subject: Re: 29er mountain tire rims?
|
On Jul 31, 4:16 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> rims for a WTB ExiWolf 2.3" 29er mountain tire
> what manufacturer and where available?
> are there available widths between 2.3" and 38c?
The Alex Adventurer should be just wide enough according to Sheldon's
recommendations. 24.5mm inside diameter.
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
SS eyelets, strong, and cheap.
|
|
