Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Help me not hate tubulars!

Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Help me not hate tubulars!

Old 10-19-19, 11:29 AM
  #126  
Classtime 
Senior Member
 
Classtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,714

Bikes: 81 Medici, 84 Turbo, 86 IM, 2010 Milwaukee Road, 2011 RS

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 618 Post(s)
Liked 40 Times in 35 Posts
I just got a can of Mastic after using nothing but Continental for 9 years. I can't tell the difference but the price of a can of Mastic is so much less than all those tubes. What we is interesting, is the directions provided with each product. Vitoria only asks for two coats on the rim and one on the tire. Continental basically has you permanently bonding the tire to the rim.
Classtime is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 12:19 PM
  #127  
BFisher
Senior Member
 
BFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NEPA
Posts: 633

Bikes: '61 Schwinn Klunker, '68 Hercules Klapprad, '71 Peugeot UO8, '78 Motobecane Grand Jubile, '79 Motobecane Grand Sprint, '87 Ironman Expert, '89 Puch Mistral Leader, '92 Trek 930

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked 143 Times in 102 Posts
Maybe it was discussed in detail here and I missed it, but what is the actual weight savings of a good tubular setup vs a good clincher setup.

Let's say two wheelsets, same freewheel hubs, same spoke/nipple type, one with Mavic Open Pro clinchers, the other with Mavic Open Pro tubulars (or any similar comparison), both with light, supple, high-end tires - how much lighter is the tubular setup?
BFisher is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 01:34 PM
  #128  
repechage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,620
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1060 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 98 Times in 79 Posts
Originally Posted by BFisher View Post
Maybe it was discussed in detail here and I missed it, but what is the actual weight savings of a good tubular setup vs a good clincher setup.

Let's say two wheelsets, same freewheel hubs, same spoke/nipple type, one with Mavic Open Pro clinchers, the other with Mavic Open Pro tubulars (or any similar comparison), both with light, supple, high-end tires - how much lighter is the tubular setup?
About 100 grams per rim or more and 80-120 grams per tire/ tube, rim strip vs tire/ glue.
repechage is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 01:35 PM
  #129  
repechage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,620
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1060 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 98 Times in 79 Posts
Originally Posted by Classtime View Post
I just got a can of Mastic after using nothing but Continental for 9 years. I can't tell the difference but the price of a can of Mastic is so much less than all those tubes. What we is interesting, is the directions provided with each product. Vitoria only asks for two coats on the rim and one on the tire. Continental basically has you permanently bonding the tire to the rim.
Which one was approved by the lawyers?
repechage is offline  
Likes For repechage:
Old 10-19-19, 01:47 PM
  #130  
obuckler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dallas
Posts: 208

Bikes: 71 Lygie—72 Raleigh Grand Prix—76 Raleigh Super Course—76 Bruce Gordon—74 Raleigh International(2)—2005 Specialized Roubaix Pro

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
I have used conti glue but lately Vittoria. I also bought a bunch conti glue when performance went belly up. I now follow the 2 coats on rim and one on tire no matter which glue I use. I found with the extra coats I always had glue (after 100s of miles) squeeze out as little rubber cement noogies. Did not like that look.
obuckler is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 02:05 PM
  #131  
ThermionicScott 
hungry
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,397

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2468 Post(s)
Liked 363 Times in 265 Posts
Originally Posted by BFisher View Post
Maybe it was discussed in detail here and I missed it, but what is the actual weight savings of a good tubular setup vs a good clincher setup.

Let's say two wheelsets, same freewheel hubs, same spoke/nipple type, one with Mavic Open Pro clinchers, the other with Mavic Open Pro tubulars (or any similar comparison), both with light, supple, high-end tires - how much lighter is the tubular setup?
Originally Posted by repechage View Post
About 100 grams per rim or more and 80-120 grams per tire/ tube, rim strip vs tire/ glue.
Mavic specs a weight of 435g for the clincher Open Pro, 360g for the tubular Open Pro, so I get a difference of 75g each in this case. Lighter tubular rims would not be hard to find, at that...

Comparing Challenge's Paris-Roubaix variants, 285g for the clincher version, 330g for tubular. Figuring that a latex tube would be about 75g, you are still coming out 30g ahead with the tubular. The tire I wish I could go back in time and try was the Clement Campionato del Mondo, which was fat but only 290g altogether. So you pretty much get the tube for free compared to the Challenge Paris-Roubaix clincher!
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498

Last edited by ThermionicScott; 10-19-19 at 02:08 PM.
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 07:45 PM
  #132  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked 72 Times in 57 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
Mavic specs a weight of 435g for the clincher Open Pro, 360g for the tubular Open Pro, so I get a difference of 75g each in this case. Lighter tubular rims would not be hard to find, at that...

Comparing Challenge's Paris-Roubaix variants, 285g for the clincher version, 330g for tubular. Figuring that a latex tube would be about 75g, you are still coming out 30g ahead with the tubular. The tire I wish I could go back in time and try was the Clement Campionato del Mondo, which was fat but only 290g altogether. So you pretty much get the tube for free compared to the Challenge Paris-Roubaix clincher!
Del Mondos never weighed as little as catalog spec. Always over 300 and 330 could happen. Just weighed a very well worn Challenge P-R. Missing tread weight probably much more than weight of glue residue. 346grams. Weighed a well worn clincher P-R and got 310grams.

Mavic rims always always weigh just a lot more than spec. Not unusual to see weights more than 100 above spec. Weighing tires is a waste of time, nothing you can do about it. Rims, well, you can at least avoid Mavic rims over 500g. Or just avoid Mavic. Who owns the company now? Are they going to continue? A 360 gram rim will just plain feel light, a Mavic will not.
63rickert is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 07:53 PM
  #133  
ThermionicScott 
hungry
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,397

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2468 Post(s)
Liked 363 Times in 265 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post
Del Mondos never weighed as little as catalog spec. Always over 300 and 330 could happen. Just weighed a very well worn Challenge P-R. Missing tread weight probably much more than weight of glue residue. 346grams. Weighed a well worn clincher P-R and got 310grams.

Mavic rims always always weigh just a lot more than spec. Not unusual to see weights more than 100 above spec. Weighing tires is a waste of time, nothing you can do about it. Rims, well, you can at least avoid Mavic rims over 500g. Or just avoid Mavic. Who owns the company now? Are they going to continue? A 360 gram rim will just plain feel light, a Mavic will not.
Yeah, I've got a spare unworn Open Pro downstairs that weighs 10g over spec. The extrusion die must have been pretty fresh at the time!

Always appreciate your contributions, @63rickert.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 08:11 PM
  #134  
iab
Senior Member
 
iab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Posts: 9,934
Mentioned: 120 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1502 Post(s)
Liked 202 Times in 131 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
Mavic specs a weight of 435g for the clincher Open Pro, 360g for the tubular Open Pro, so I get a difference of 75g each in this case. Lighter tubular rims would not be hard to find, at that...
You won't find a lighter rim than a tubular. Just a fact of the closed-wall structure, no matter the brand.
iab is offline  
Likes For iab:
Old 10-19-19, 08:29 PM
  #135  
Chombi1 
Senior Member
 
Chombi1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,965
Mentioned: 93 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1041 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 53 Times in 47 Posts
Want a good lightweight C&V tubular rimset that is still quite durable, try out Mavic's GL 330s.
They were a staple in the race scene for non-time trial events. You go over to Mavic's GEL 280's for those events.
The 330's generally came in close to their quoted 330 gram per rim weight +/- 10 grams.
Chombi1 is offline  
Old 10-19-19, 09:49 PM
  #136  
BFisher
Senior Member
 
BFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NEPA
Posts: 633

Bikes: '61 Schwinn Klunker, '68 Hercules Klapprad, '71 Peugeot UO8, '78 Motobecane Grand Jubile, '79 Motobecane Grand Sprint, '87 Ironman Expert, '89 Puch Mistral Leader, '92 Trek 930

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked 143 Times in 102 Posts
Originally Posted by repechage View Post
About 100 grams per rim or more and 80-120 grams per tire/ tube, rim strip vs tire/ glue.
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
Mavic specs a weight of 435g for the clincher Open Pro, 360g for the tubular Open Pro, so I get a difference of 75g each in this case. Lighter tubular rims would not be hard to find, at that...

Comparing Challenge's Paris-Roubaix variants, 285g for the clincher version, 330g for tubular. Figuring that a latex tube would be about 75g, you are still coming out 30g ahead with the tubular. The tire I wish I could go back in time and try was the Clement Campionato del Mondo, which was fat but only 290g altogether. So you pretty much get the tube for free compared to the Challenge Paris-Roubaix clincher!
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post
Del Mondos never weighed as little as catalog spec. Always over 300 and 330 could happen. Just weighed a very well worn Challenge P-R. Missing tread weight probably much more than weight of glue residue. 346grams. Weighed a well worn clincher P-R and got 310grams.

Mavic rims always always weigh just a lot more than spec. Not unusual to see weights more than 100 above spec. Weighing tires is a waste of time, nothing you can do about it. Rims, well, you can at least avoid Mavic rims over 500g. Or just avoid Mavic. Who owns the company now? Are they going to continue? A 360 gram rim will just plain feel light, a Mavic will not.
Originally Posted by iab View Post
You won't find a lighter rim than a tubular. Just a fact of the closed-wall structure, no matter the brand.
Conservatively , a half pound or more? Good to know. I get the design lending to weight savings. I thank all contributors for offering knowledge.

I may do a winter wheel build project. It may involve tubulars. This thread is very helpful.

Ride what you like.
BFisher is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 11:30 AM
  #137  
Johno59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 472

Bikes: 1903 24 spd Sunbeam, 1927 Humber, 3 1930 Raleighs, 2 1940s Sunbeams, 2 1940s Raleighs, Rudge, 1950s Robin Hood, 1958 Claud Butler, 2 1973 Colnago Supers, Eddie Merckx, 2 1980 Holdsworth, EG Bates funny TT bike, another 6 or so 1990s bikes

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 61 Times in 56 Posts
Tub pressure

Originally Posted by Johno59 View Post
"It's about what Scott was saying: it's the satisfaction of doing it the old way — of re-living a former age of cycling."

I apologise, it was Scott who you were quoting regards BITD. My point was clinchers have as much tradition as tubs - they just don't have, and never did have, the performance of a tub.
My 4 best bikes have tubulars and they all 1970s. It would be weird to change them to clinchers but I don't do many miles on them any more.
I do about 7 to 8 thousand miles a year and I just couldn't manage the cost using tubs. My final trip on tubs cost me 300 dollars as I punctured both my front and back. Clinchers would have reduced that cost to a dime.
Admittedly I no longer have to traverse a city center wherein there are all sorts of tub unfriendly debris on the road but I don't try and average 25 mph anymore so for me the low performing clincher makes more sense all round.
Having said that for my Colnago Supers and Eddie Merckx, what modern sealant do you recommend for a tub, how do you get it past the valve and will the sealant hold 120 psi?
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post
Take a close look at your valve. You will see that it is made in two pieces. Two piece valves have been around at least since the 1990s and are now almost the only kind. Find the two small wrench flats. Remove the valve core with a pair of pliers, a 4 inch adjustable wrench, a dedicated valve core tool, or sometimes it can be done with your fingers. It's a big opening. You can figure how to get the sealant in.

Panaracer Smart Seal. Orange Seal. Orange Seal Endurance. It is now cold outside. Sealant will not fix your tire while riding below 50 degrees F. Bring it inside and pump it up. In warm weather you could flat and never know it. Sealant does not last forever, it will dry out. Lasts longer inside a tube, could last a year, do not plan on more than 6 months. For bikes that spend lots of time on display and not many miles ridden, wait until you flat before using sealant.

Of course sealant holds pressure. 120 psi could be why you are flatting. If you are a large rider and need that much air in a skinny tire, replace with a wider tire. Excessive pressure was always a reason for repetitive flats. Rock hard tire slamming into sharp objects punctures more readily than a tire that flows over.

Shake well before using. 1 ounce does a skinny. Two ounces does a CX tire. One and a half ounces for 28mm tires.
I run clinchers at 110 psi. Do you recommend tubs at a lower pressure than a clincher, say 100 or even less?
I have use numerous tubs with one piece valves but shall seek out the two piece ones for the good reasons you have pointed out.

Last edited by Johno59; 10-20-19 at 11:33 AM.
Johno59 is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 11:39 AM
  #138  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked 72 Times in 57 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
Yeah, I've got a spare unworn Open Pro downstairs that weighs 10g over spec. The extrusion die must have been pretty fresh at the time!

Always appreciate your contributions, @63rickert.
Mavic was the only rim brand that owned their own dies and made their own extrusions. Everyone else jobbed out the extrusions. So when the extrusions did not meet spec they'd tell their supplier to shape up. Mavic was all in-house and it was harder to swallow the cost of getting new dies. They made a lot of good rims anyway, they also made a lot of heavy ones. And when the extrusion gets sloppy there are stress risers.
63rickert is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 11:52 AM
  #139  
masi61
Senior Member
 
masi61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 2,308

Bikes: Puch Marco Polo, Saint Tropez, Masi Gran Criterium

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 484 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 29 Posts
I would not want to put sealant in my tubulars. A couple of my tubular riding friends have had very good luck running Continental Sprinters (not the Gatorskin version), going almost 2 years on a set of tires with no flats at all for one person and only one flat for the other person.

110 psi is maybe more psi than you need for clinchers or tubulars on ordinary roads. I’ve come to really enjoy the ride I get with my 25mm open tubulars on my Velocity A23 wheels running like 82psi front & 88 or 90 psi rear.
masi61 is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 05:21 PM
  #140  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked 72 Times in 57 Posts
Originally Posted by Johno59 View Post
I run clinchers at 110 psi. Do you recommend tubs at a lower pressure than a clincher, say 100 or even less?
I have use numerous tubs with one piece valves but shall seek out the two piece ones for the good reasons you have pointed out.
As you seem to be asking me specifically....

I can't recommend a pressure. To make a first guess would need to know how much you and bike weigh and which tire you have. And how wide it is if it is not one where I'm real sure what current production is like.

Best and almost only place to find a pressure chart that means anything is the Berto pressure chart. Google that. Everyone has an opinion about that chart. There is plenty of information for how the data was compiled and why he took the readings he did. Basically if you want to argue with the chart you are arguing with the engineers who designed your tires.

So first step is measure your tires with a caliper. Size printed on sidewall is unlikely to mean much. Always remember your pressure gauge is not that accurate. Approximations are more than good enough. And seat of pants is a good enough reason to depart from the chart.

I can tell you that the chart has never directed me to an unworkable value. I can tell you many pros are riding at less pressure than given in chart. Some things I don't know, such as how pros can sprint on so little air. In principle I can understand why CX tires are inflated so low but cannot myself ride a CX bike with 20psi. For myself do not wish to ever again to inflate so high as 100psi. If there were some classic 80s/90s bike that for some reason had my name on it imaginably it would be skinnies and that much pressure, in most circumstances would avoid that.
63rickert is offline  
Likes For 63rickert:
Old 10-20-19, 06:45 PM
  #141  
Classtime 
Senior Member
 
Classtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,714

Bikes: 81 Medici, 84 Turbo, 86 IM, 2010 Milwaukee Road, 2011 RS

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 618 Post(s)
Liked 40 Times in 35 Posts
At 160 lbs., I can ride hard, fast, and careless with tubular 25s at 90psi without flatting on a rough mixed surface course. When I did the same course in a similarly reckless fashion using 25mm clinchers at 90psi, I pinch flatted. I am safer at 100 with clinchers. (The tires in this experience were Gatorskins and Sprinter Gatorskins--my go-to mixed surface event tire.)
Classtime is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 07:05 PM
  #142  
jackbombay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked 65 Times in 48 Posts
Originally Posted by Johno59 View Post
I run clinchers at 110 psi. Do you recommend tubs at a lower pressure than a clincher, say 100 or even less?
I have use numerous tubs with one piece valves but shall seek out the two piece ones for the good reasons you have pointed out.
Originally Posted by masi61 View Post
I would not want to put sealant in my tubulars. A couple of my tubular riding friends have had very good luck running Continental Sprinters (not the Gatorskin version), going almost 2 years on a set of tires with no flats at all for one person and only one flat for the other person.

110 psi is maybe more psi than you need for clinchers or tubulars on ordinary roads. I’ve come to really enjoy the ride I get with my 25mm open tubulars on my Velocity A23 wheels running like 82psi front & 88 or 90 psi rear.
I'm not claiming this tire pressure calculator is irrefutable, but I have found it interesting to drop pressure a fair bit as this calculator reccomends,

Bicycle tire pressure calculator

For me at 165 pounds ready to ride with a 20 pound bike and 25c tires it says 62 PSI up front and 98 in the rear, and it does work quite well! I have upped the front to 70-75 though to get more pinch flat protection. One thing that is interesting is that with 62 and 98 I have the same sized contact patch for both tires. I live on a gravel road, so when I ride from home the tires get light colored dust on them, and then I get on pavement and ride in a straight line for a mile plus which wears the dust off the tires and the front and rear have the same sized clean strip down the center of the tire when I do this.
jackbombay is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 07:52 PM
  #143  
ThermionicScott 
hungry
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,397

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2468 Post(s)
Liked 363 Times in 265 Posts
^ For what it's worth, that calculator is built from the Frank Berto charts referenced above. My suggestion would be not to use the 40%/60% setting unless you ride an upright bike in a flat city. 45%/55% puts a bit more of the air in front to avoid pinch flats and wallowing, and your butt may appreciate having only 89 psi in the back.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Likes For ThermionicScott:
Old 10-20-19, 09:07 PM
  #144  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,446

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 41 Posts
Originally Posted by Johno59 View Post
I run clinchers at 110 psi. Do you recommend tubs at a lower pressure than a clincher, say 100 or even less?
I have use numerous tubs with one piece valves but shall seek out the two piece ones for the good reasons you have pointed out.
I usually fill tubulars 95 to 105, depending on the day and the tire. My choice of those pressures is generally based on comfort with a strong sense of responsiveness. I do not use the Berto chart for tubulars. I think it has two main benefits: manage tire bead stress due to weight, and maintain enough pressure to reduce or eliminate pinch stresses, but I like tubulars when the "sing," do not get jittery, and protect the rim from normal impacts.

Jobst Brandt believed tires used in his California and Colorado mountain riding needed significantly higher pressure than the Berto chart, to maintain shape and rim protection on fast corners that may be bumpy.

Last edited by Road Fan; 10-20-19 at 09:10 PM.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 10-20-19, 09:13 PM
  #145  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,446

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 41 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
^ For what it's worth, that calculator is built from the Frank Berto charts referenced above. My suggestion would be not to use the 40%/60% setting unless you ride an upright bike in a flat city. 45%/55% puts a bit more of the air in front to avoid pinch flats and wallowing, and your butt may appreciate having only 89 psi in the back.
I'm not sure if the app gives you full choice of balance setting like you have using Frank's or Jan Heine's charts, but I would suggest measuring fore/aft loading and plugging in those actual numbers.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 12:27 AM
  #146  
Johno59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 472

Bikes: 1903 24 spd Sunbeam, 1927 Humber, 3 1930 Raleighs, 2 1940s Sunbeams, 2 1940s Raleighs, Rudge, 1950s Robin Hood, 1958 Claud Butler, 2 1973 Colnago Supers, Eddie Merckx, 2 1980 Holdsworth, EG Bates funny TT bike, another 6 or so 1990s bikes

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 61 Times in 56 Posts
I would consider a 85 psi tire as flat. Me and my bikes are over 200lbs. BITD when I was 40 lbs lighter the tires were narrower but just as hard. The calculators above seem to agree with my experience.
In my experience a pinch flat is almost impossible on a soft road tub but on a clincher an almost certainty.
The amount of extra power you need to put into the cranks as you pass 20 mph on 80 to 90 psi 23-25 mm Continentals 4 Seasons becomes blatantly obvious on your legs after less than a 100 yards.
In my experience 100 plus psi tires puncture much less (leaving aside pinch flats) than a soft tire - especially in the rain. It was once explained to me it was simply coz less area of rubber is in contact with possible debris on the road surface.
My dirt bike riding is limited to 35 - 38 mm tires which is IMHO completely different.
Having said that I'm very grateful for people sharing their experiences and I'm inspired enough to attempt a few changes as to how I approach tubular riding and maintainence.
So many thanks.

Last edited by Johno59; 10-21-19 at 02:27 AM.
Johno59 is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 03:12 AM
  #147  
Rollfast
What happened?
 
Rollfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,860

Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1723 Post(s)
Liked 195 Times in 172 Posts
Will this help you?



Tubular to me...
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
Rollfast is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 05:20 AM
  #148  
Johno59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 472

Bikes: 1903 24 spd Sunbeam, 1927 Humber, 3 1930 Raleighs, 2 1940s Sunbeams, 2 1940s Raleighs, Rudge, 1950s Robin Hood, 1958 Claud Butler, 2 1973 Colnago Supers, Eddie Merckx, 2 1980 Holdsworth, EG Bates funny TT bike, another 6 or so 1990s bikes

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 61 Times in 56 Posts
Originally Posted by Rollfast View Post
Will this help you?



Tubular to me...
How much goo would you put in that tube!
Johno59 is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 01:07 PM
  #149  
ThermionicScott 
hungry
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,397

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2468 Post(s)
Liked 363 Times in 265 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
I'm not sure if the app gives you full choice of balance setting like you have using Frank's or Jan Heine's charts, but I would suggest measuring fore/aft loading and plugging in those actual numbers.
That's the thing -- I'm sympathetic to both Berto's and Brandt's viewpoints, so I tend to use and recommend something in between. Even if you accurately measure a 40/60 or 35/65 weight distribution on your bike, that leaves the front pretty low if you ever have to brake hard while descending a steep road.

It's likely that my road bikes with me and my gear aren't exactly 45/55, but it works so well on my bikes, I can't think of a better arrangement. My hands and wrists are plenty comfortable, and I have yet to get a pinch flat anywhere.

But also to your point, the Berto stuff probably isn't appropriate for tubulars, since they don't have the same constraints.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 02:50 PM
  #150  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,446

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 41 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
That's the thing -- I'm sympathetic to both Berto's and Brandt's viewpoints, so I tend to use and recommend something in between. Even if you accurately measure a 40/60 or 35/65 weight distribution on your bike, that leaves the front pretty low if you ever have to brake hard while descending a steep road.

It's likely that my road bikes with me and my gear aren't exactly 45/55, but it works so well on my bikes, I can't think of a better arrangement. My hands and wrists are plenty comfortable, and I have yet to get a pinch flat anywhere.

But also to your point, the Berto stuff probably isn't appropriate for tubulars, since they don't have the same constraints.
As often happens, we are not too far from the same page. I have measured my F/R wheel loading for a few bikes. Good news: it's not too difficult, and it is nearly always between 60/40 and 55/45. Bad news (well, not really, I guess!): it varies either due my bad measurement technique (tol'ja it was not too difficult!), my weight is dynamic, or I don't sit the bike consistently.

Bottom line, I conclude it doesn't matter very much. I tend to use 45/55, because it gives a harder front tire for better braking control. Back in college days I made the tires equal, and I liked that, too. And when I've tried it with 60/40, it also doesn't seem much different.

Getting my saddle setback to a comfy point is a LOT more important!
Road Fan is offline  
Likes For Road Fan:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.