Real world distance/speed difference between two circumference wheel sizes?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,314 Times
in
707 Posts
Real world distance/speed difference between two circumference wheel sizes?
I'm not a math whiz so I though I'd ask the question.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
#2
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,633
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4731 Post(s)
Liked 1,531 Times
in
1,002 Posts
This is an interesting question, but waging not an easy or quick answer.
#3
Perceptual Dullard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,414
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 915 Post(s)
Liked 1,139 Times
in
489 Posts
I'm not a math whiz so I though I'd ask the question.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
If you don't want to change the wheel circumference setting every time you switch, set it for 2127mm. That will make each off by about 1%.
Likes For RChung:
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,314 Times
in
707 Posts
I didn't think of that.
And, just to be sure, that would mean about 1 km/100km deviation, yes? And less than 1/2kph if doing 50kph.
I meant it when I said I wasn't a math mensa.
#5
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,633
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4731 Post(s)
Liked 1,531 Times
in
1,002 Posts
Are the tables assuming a specific inflation/tire drop percentage?
#7
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,902
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4802 Post(s)
Liked 3,922 Times
in
2,551 Posts
There's a non-math way to compare any two wheels. (Old as the hills. It's called a roll-out.) Get your bike. Put it on any flat surface with the tire valve worn down . Put a piece of tape on the surface at the valve. Now roll the bike until the valve comes down again. Measure valve to valve. Repeat for your other wheels. The percent difference is your percent difference in recorded speed.
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
Last edited by 79pmooney; 01-23-21 at 10:48 AM.
Likes For 79pmooney:
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,314 Times
in
707 Posts
There's a non-math way to compare any two wheels. (Old as the hills. It's called a roll-out.) Get your bike. Put it on any flat surface with the tire valve worn. Put a piece of tape on the surface at the valve. Now roll the bike until the valve comes down again. Measure valve to valve. Repeat for your other wheels. The percent difference is your percent difference in recorded speed.
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
I like the idea of splitting the difference between the two sizes. That means there is a 27.5mm difference between what the computer reads and what is actually being covered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did some math using those numbers converted to cm's.
I think...
One revolution is 2100mm = 210cm's.
1km = 100000cm's.
100000/210 = 476 revolutions.
27.5mm = 2.7cm's deviation per revolution.
476 revolutions x 2.75cm's = 1285cm's
1285cm's = 12.85m
So... if my thinking is correct, I would have a discrepancy of 12.85 metres for every 1 km travelled.
or.. 12.85 meters x 100km's = 1.285 km's per 100 km's traveled.
If that is correct, would it also stand to reason that if I were travelling at 25km's per hour I would have a speed discrepancy of .32 km's per hour?
1.285 meters per 100km's / 4 = .32.
Last edited by Happy Feet; 01-23-21 at 12:25 AM.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,060
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 529 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 255 Times
in
185 Posts
There's a non-math way to compare any two wheels. (Old as the hills. It's called a roll-out.) Get your bike. Put it on any flat surface with the tire valve worn. Put a piece of tape on the surface at the valve. Now roll the bike until the valve comes down again. Measure valve to valve. Repeat for your other wheels. The percent difference is your percent difference in recorded speed.
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
(Edit: this takes into account that tires are often not actually "42c" as labeled on the sidewall.)
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,060
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 529 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 255 Times
in
185 Posts
If the numbers you gave in the first post are correct, one is approximately 2.6% different to the other. So at 38 kph it is out by 1 kph.
I would just leave it as it is, and allow for the difference with the other wheel in my head.
I would just leave it as it is, and allow for the difference with the other wheel in my head.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,520
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20810 Post(s)
Liked 9,456 Times
in
4,672 Posts
#15
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,314 Times
in
707 Posts
Well yes, technically I see the point. It's a basic bicycle computer though so I am going by the charts. When you are talking millimeters one can also be off in the the roll out measurement.
I think setting the computer half way between the two measurements will do for now, for the way I use such data, until I get a different computer with two settings. Then I'll delegate this one to a different bike.
I'm not really into stats and only use it as a rough guide when riding. On tours in my region turn offs or crossroads are pretty far apart so I only need to know approximate distances, km's not meters.
I think setting the computer half way between the two measurements will do for now, for the way I use such data, until I get a different computer with two settings. Then I'll delegate this one to a different bike.
I'm not really into stats and only use it as a rough guide when riding. On tours in my region turn offs or crossroads are pretty far apart so I only need to know approximate distances, km's not meters.
Last edited by Happy Feet; 01-23-21 at 10:48 AM.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Chapel Hill NC
Posts: 1,683
Bikes: 2000 Litespeed Vortex Chorus 10, 1995 DeBernardi Cromor S/S
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 645 Post(s)
Liked 797 Times
in
446 Posts
I'm not a math whiz so I though I'd ask the question.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
I have a bike with two wheelsets and currently only one computer. Just basic functions, distance, speed, time.
I am trying to decide whether I should buy a different/second computer for each wheelset or whether the difference in sizing will be negligible enough not to bother. I don't need super great accuracy, within a Km over 100km or so would be acceptable. I am not a data nerd.
The wheels (according to the charts):
1. 700cx32mm for road - 2155mm circumference.
2. 650bx42 for gravel - 2100mm circumference.
The computer is currently set for the road set, 2155mm. How much will it differ if used for the gravel set?
Thanks in advance.
Last edited by Litespud; 01-23-21 at 10:56 AM.
#17
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,314 Times
in
707 Posts
2155/2100 = 1.026. That’s the conversion factor. If you leave the computer set for the 700c wheelset, your actual speed when using the 650b wheelset will be the computer readout divided by 1.026 (ballparking, computer reads 40 kph, actual speed will be 39 kph). Similarly for distance travelled - when the computer tells you you’ve travelled 100 km, you will have travelled an actual 97.5 km (ie. 100/1.026). As you can see, the differences are inconsequential, and both possibly within the margin of error when using what are likely estimates of tire circumference to calibrate the computer. The numbers you cite (2155 mm and 2100 mm) likely don’t account for variances in tire manufacture, inflation pressure or rider/bike weight, all of which will affect the distance the wheel covers on one full revolution, the distance that the 2155 mm and 2100 mm are supposed to represent. Which is why some folks are recommending that you take an actual measurement.