What size tires are these?
#1
There's time now
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On a stack of books, PA
Posts: 768
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4096 Post(s)
Liked 163 Times
in
113 Posts
What size tires are these?
https://www.schwalbetires.com/Schwal...ed-11601054.01
Size: ETRTO 35-622 (28x1.35 Inch)
Is that 28c or something bigger? I am looking at a bicycle that has a maximum size of 28c (time alpe d'huez), and these are my current tires. I am missing something completely obvious and not sure what it is. Thank you for any help
Size: ETRTO 35-622 (28x1.35 Inch)
Is that 28c or something bigger? I am looking at a bicycle that has a maximum size of 28c (time alpe d'huez), and these are my current tires. I am missing something completely obvious and not sure what it is. Thank you for any help
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Valley Forge: Birthplace of Freedom
Posts: 1,301
Bikes: Novara Safari, CAAD9, WABI Classic, WABI Thunder
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 366 Post(s)
Liked 457 Times
in
240 Posts
The 28x1.35 is a European measurement. The 35x622 ERTO means the tire is 700x35c.
__________________
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.
Likes For stevel610:
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,763
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1109 Post(s)
Liked 1,200 Times
in
760 Posts
It is not a 28mm wide tire (which is what you mean by 28C?). The 622 is a diameter measurement for the wheel itself, the ERTO nomenclature for a 700C wheel. The 35 denotes a 35mm tire width. So 35-622 = 700CX35, aka 700X35C. In either case the "C" refers to the classification of the wheel size, not the tire width.
1.35, in the 28X1.35, is the width of the tire in inches, equal to 35mm (which of course would actually be 1.38"... so I guess 1.4" would actually be closer since they want to round to the nearest .05")
The 28 denotes an approximate 28" diameter of the wheel and the mounted tire (in inches). It is the same 700C/622 wheel with a medium sized tire (in this case 1.35"/35mm), as opposed to the same 622/700C wheel mounted with a fatter (2-3") MTB tire - that would be called a 29-er! (PHEW!).
Dumb and confusing all around, except the 35X622 which is very precise and non-confusing labeling if you know what the ERTO system is. It should be the only system used, imho.
Why should I know this stuff? It's just dumb that I have had any need to or that you do. And I apologize for any unnecessary pedantry.
Thanks to the late great Sheldon Brown: Tire Sizing Systems (sheldonbrown.com)
1.35, in the 28X1.35, is the width of the tire in inches, equal to 35mm (which of course would actually be 1.38"... so I guess 1.4" would actually be closer since they want to round to the nearest .05")
The 28 denotes an approximate 28" diameter of the wheel and the mounted tire (in inches). It is the same 700C/622 wheel with a medium sized tire (in this case 1.35"/35mm), as opposed to the same 622/700C wheel mounted with a fatter (2-3") MTB tire - that would be called a 29-er! (PHEW!).
Dumb and confusing all around, except the 35X622 which is very precise and non-confusing labeling if you know what the ERTO system is. It should be the only system used, imho.
Why should I know this stuff? It's just dumb that I have had any need to or that you do. And I apologize for any unnecessary pedantry.
Thanks to the late great Sheldon Brown: Tire Sizing Systems (sheldonbrown.com)
Last edited by Camilo; 11-24-23 at 11:51 PM.
Likes For Camilo:
#4
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,226
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2585 Post(s)
Liked 5,648 Times
in
2,924 Posts
Went to Sheldon Brown’s site. OMG, tire sizing is such a needless cluster. A standardized sizing nomenclature shouldn’t be that hard.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
#5
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
It's totally standardized, if you can find the xx-xxx, or sometimes xxx-xxx if you're into fatbikes. But yeah the inches and the As, Bs, Cs are all over the place
#6
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
It is not a 28mm wide tire (which is what you mean by 28C?). The 622 is a diameter measurement for the wheel itself, the ERTO nomenclature for a 700C wheel. The 35 denotes a 35mm tire width. So 35-622 = 700CX35, aka 700X35C. In either case the "C" refers to the classification of the wheel size, not the tire width.
1.35, in the 28X1.35, is the width of the tire in inches, equal to 35mm (which of course would actually be 1.38"... so I guess 1.4" would actually be closer since they want to round to the nearest .05")
The 28 denotes an approximate 28" diameter of the wheel and the mounted tire (in inches). It is the same 700C/622 wheel with a medium sized tire (in this case 1.35"/35mm)
1.35, in the 28X1.35, is the width of the tire in inches, equal to 35mm (which of course would actually be 1.38"... so I guess 1.4" would actually be closer since they want to round to the nearest .05")
The 28 denotes an approximate 28" diameter of the wheel and the mounted tire (in inches). It is the same 700C/622 wheel with a medium sized tire (in this case 1.35"/35mm)
Likes For LesterOfPuppets:
#7
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
Likes For LesterOfPuppets:
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 506 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 639 Times
in
357 Posts
https://www.schwalbetires.com/Schwal...ed-11601054.01
Size: ETRTO 35-622 (28x1.35 Inch)
Is that 28c or something bigger? I am looking at a bicycle that has a maximum size of 28c (time alpe d'huez), and these are my current tires. I am missing something completely obvious and not sure what it is. Thank you for any help
Size: ETRTO 35-622 (28x1.35 Inch)
Is that 28c or something bigger? I am looking at a bicycle that has a maximum size of 28c (time alpe d'huez), and these are my current tires. I am missing something completely obvious and not sure what it is. Thank you for any help
#9
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,790
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 3,401 Times
in
1,935 Posts
That's what the ETRTO/ISO size designations do. I tell people to ignore the archaic inch-size and A-B-C designations and only pay attention to the ETRTO/ISO designations, which look like "35-622" where the first number is the nominal width of the tire and the second number is the bead seat diameter. The bead seat diameter is the most important part, as it determines whether the tire will actually mount on your rim. Rims can accommodate a range of tire widths (frame clearance is often a deciding factor when choosing tire width), but the bead seat diameter must match, or the tire won't mount.
#10
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,226
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2585 Post(s)
Liked 5,648 Times
in
2,924 Posts
That's what the ETRTO/ISO size designations do. I tell people to ignore the archaic inch-size and A-B-C designations and only pay attention to the ETRTO/ISO designations, which look like "35-622" where the first number is the nominal width of the tire and the second number is the bead seat diameter. The bead seat diameter is the most important part, as it determines whether the tire will actually mount on your rim. Rims can accommodate a range of tire widths (frame clearance is often a deciding factor when choosing tire width), but the bead seat diameter must match, or the tire won't mount.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Likes For rsbob:
#11
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,790
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 3,401 Times
in
1,935 Posts
Some do, but by no means all. I think tires are required to be marked with ETRTO size designations, but not rims.
#12
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times
in
1,579 Posts
That's like saying we should all speak Esperanto. I find it kinda fun to be able to "speak" multiple systems.
Likes For Camilo:
#15
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
Wow some people just muddy up the waters and create confusion...The simple answer to OPs question is the tires in question are 700 x 35mm. That's all that matters here.
#16
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: "Driftless" WI
Posts: 388
Bikes: 1972 Motobecane Grand Record, 2022 Kona Dew+
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked 146 Times
in
107 Posts
35mm vs. 120/220 for years before that.
I've somehow managed to limit it to Imperial vs. Metric the last 1/3 of my close-to-75 years.
If it's really, really important to you you'll work to wrap your head around a nomenclature as it applies to your non-trivial pursuits.
Likes For spclark:
#17
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,116
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1790 Post(s)
Liked 1,631 Times
in
934 Posts
Prompted from above: I didn't find what I was looking for regarding the actual difference between beaded and tubular bead seat diameters. (They are different, btw. (Tubular rims are 632mm. No, Really.)) But I did find this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_5775
Could be interesting from a general discussion standpoint.
Could be interesting from a general discussion standpoint.
Last edited by base2; 11-26-23 at 12:06 PM.
#18
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
How are they measuring BSD on tubulars? Seems like middle of the tire bed would make the most sense to me. Slightly surprised it would be that big there though.
#19
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
Likes For LesterOfPuppets:
#20
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,116
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1790 Post(s)
Liked 1,631 Times
in
934 Posts
Rim edge to rim edge since there is no lip or anything to hook in to and it glued to the outermost surface. The brake tracks are in the same place though. So, typical "700" naming convention seems to be the order of the day when researching. It's probably a smart omission among manufacturers. The various systems are confusing enough.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
Likes For base2:
#21
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: "Driftless" WI
Posts: 388
Bikes: 1972 Motobecane Grand Record, 2022 Kona Dew+
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked 146 Times
in
107 Posts
But I did find this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_5775
Helps having another approach laid out when next I try again to wrap my head around tire / rim sizing specs.
#22
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,856
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12781 Post(s)
Liked 7,696 Times
in
4,085 Posts
#23
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times
in
1,579 Posts
Hehehe... for awhile I tried Beta vs. VHS but that got decided by others fairly quickly.
35mm vs. 120/220 for years before that.
I've somehow managed to limit it to Imperial vs. Metric the last 1/3 of my close-to-75 years.
If it's really, really important to you you'll work to wrap your head around a nomenclature as it applies to your non-trivial pursuits.
35mm vs. 120/220 for years before that.
I've somehow managed to limit it to Imperial vs. Metric the last 1/3 of my close-to-75 years.
If it's really, really important to you you'll work to wrap your head around a nomenclature as it applies to your non-trivial pursuits.
#24
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,790
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3590 Post(s)
Liked 3,401 Times
in
1,935 Posts