View Single Post
Old 01-09-20, 06:25 AM
  #11  
Paul Barnard
For The Fun of It
 
Paul Barnard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 5,852

Bikes: Lynskey GR300, Lynskey Backroad, Litespeed T6, Lynskey MT29, Burley Duet

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2135 Post(s)
Liked 1,647 Times in 829 Posts
Originally Posted by base2
Yeah, the Youtube kept shoving this in my face. Eventually, I watched it. It doesn't have anything new.

He does gloss over the nuance of larger tires have lower rolling resistance for a given pressure. (The reason is the more circular contact patch) But his point of the extra volume & lower pressure making for a smoother roll over rougher terrain does often end up being faster than the same wide tire at high pressure tire deflecting the forward inertia to the vertical plane as is the case with not smooth surfaces is not missed.

Yeah, we're balancing competing nominals. Smooth vs rough. Fat vs skinny. High pressure vs low. Light vs heavy. Supple vs not. That's 20 possible choice vectors to approximate a nominal pressure.

Our infrastructure is terrible. Wider tires at lower pressures is the response...Nothing new there.

FWIW: At 200 pounds, I run 23's at 110 rear, 100 front. I'd run 25's a bit less. By way of experiment: My 41's are noticably faster at 45-50psi than they are at 80psi. So he is right.

I never knew I had a single "choice vector" let alone 20. As soon as I figure out if a "choice vector" is good or bad I'll come back either really happy or seriously pissed.
Paul Barnard is offline