PeteHski

That’s how it appears from your perspective only. Have you noticed how nobody else ever seems to agree with you? It must be frustrating for you.

TC1

What license is required to point out that people are venerating a reference with numerous embarrassing errors? Are you suggesting that fake news is beyond challenge?

TC1

NASA agrees with me. As does everyone else who has ever studied the problem in question. That must be frustrating for you -- which is probably why your only remaining option is to lash out with an ad hominem attack.

PeteHski

No NASA doesn’t agree with your assertions about bicycle hydroplaning.

tomato coupe

I think some amount of awareness beyond one's own bubble is necessary to feel embarrassment.

Chuck M 

License was just a euphemism for giving you the opening you were fishing for (didn't want to say tolling because that is wrong) to blabber on about how smart you are compared to anyone else on the planet. Since you want to enlighten everyone, you should check out the latest counter steer argument instead of crapping on this thread.

TC1

Oh really? NASA did not author the first version of the aforementioned formula, in 1963?

Talk about fake news, now you are trying to rewrite history.

Hell, even the Sheldon Brown site agrees with me in-part. It contains the very formula for calculating the hydroplane speed, and then contradicts itself by claiming hydroplaning is impossible.

TC1

Again with the ad hominem attacks. If you think I should be embarrassed, try to embarrass me -- but you'll have to make a sound argument, supported by evidence, in order to do so. In this case, that will require overturning many decades of research. So, have at it.

Childish attacks will not suffice, sorry to say.

SurferRosa

Meanwhile, back on earth...

tomato coupe

This guy really has a knack for sending threads down the toilet.

PeteHski

Nobody is questioning the formula

TC1

I understood how you were using the word. If you think correcting dangerous myths is "blabber", well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I think wading into a thread with nothing to say but ad hominem attacks is definitely "blabber", but you seem fine with it.

This thread is specifically about the Brown site, so my comments are entirely on-topic. Yours, on the other hand, are "crap".

That said, I do not consider it dangerous that some people believe they countersteer their bicycle, and others believe that they don't. It's also challenging to prove either case, scientifically. That is diametrically opposed to this case, where is it dangerous for people to run around "blabbering" about hydroplaning being impossible, when science has long-since proved the opposite case to be true.

Lenton58 

Blah blah blah ... I've not worried about hydroplaning since I was falling off motorcycles on a race track back in the early '70's. What has concerned me riding bicycles is "tram lining" on high pressure tubulars. I've found myself sprawled out on trafficked streets and wondering WTF until I recalled the last fraction of a second before the bike went down underneath me.

Way off topic, but perhaps this remark will finish this part of the discussion — although I gotta say this fracas has been apros pos and necessary in order to review the efficacy of the Sheldon Brown's work.

TC1

Yes, they are. Everyone claiming that bicycle tires cannot hydroplane is questioning that formula. And that includes the Brown site -- which has been my point, all along.

"At high speeds, hydroplaning is just possible for car tires, but is absolutely impossible for bicycle tires." -- Sheldon Brown, at https://www.sheldonbrown.com/tires.html

If you, Pete, are now backing off and realizing that I am correct, just say so. Don't try and claim that "Nobody is questioning" exactly what they have been questioning.

PeteHski

Well if I should ever exceed 80 mph in the pouring rain then I suppose it will be an issue.

TC1

I'd say that is actually precisely on-topic -- and that's been my point all along.

The site contains mistakes, and many readers of it are not equipped to distinguish the mistakes from the accurate information, as we are seeing all over this thread. The Brown site has an excellent reputation, and in many areas, it is deserved. The sections about bicycle hardware and maintenance are invaluable. Unfortunately, the sections about the rubber parts of bicycles are not, and they are causing many readers to learn inaccurate "fake news" -- and that's an unnecessary shame.

TC1

Or, if you ride like these folks:

You Tube

Among many, many others who didn't have a camera pointed at them.

PeteHski

So if I ride through flood water at high speed I might have an endo? Thanks for the heads up. Anyway it’s bedtime here now and you are the winner. I don’t think there are any prizes though.

TC1

According to the erroneous theories being bandied about here, you should be able to do exactly that, in safety. Your tires should maintain firm contact with the road, and assuming you are a reasonably capable cyclist, you should be able to ride in a straight line, no?

By the way, calling a few inches of water a "flood" and failing to address most of the evidence provided is sadly typical of the depths you've had to resort to here. Better luck next time.

Neither are a surprise to me.

tomato coupe

I hydroplaned on wet tile getting out of the shower last week.

indyfabz

He gives the impression that that is his sole reason for being here.

icemilkcoffee 

OK. So let's say we pump the bike tires up to 81psi. Square root of 81 is 9. 9 X 10.2 = 91.8. So your bike tire will hydroplane at 91.8mph! Hence Sheldon Brown is 100% correct, You never have to worry about your bike tire hydroplaning. Thank you for proving the man right.

TC1

It's not my fault that so many of the other vocal people here are so ignorant about bicycles, and so prone to resorting to ad hominem attacks and bad attempts at comedy, when that is brought to light.

​​​​​You should be having a talk with those folks -- not the person who is discussing bicycles, and the physics thereof.


​​

TC1

Are you completely dense?

First of all, the record speed on a bicycle exceeds 92 mph, so your attempted proof failed miserably -- recall that the claim you are defending is that hydroplaning a bicycle is "absolutely impossible" in Brown's words.

More to the point, see if you can manage the arithmetic for lower pressures.

icemilkcoffee 

You are tying yourself in knots trying to 'prove' Sheldon Brown wrong.

OK. So let's try 25psi on a MTB. Sqrt of 25 = 5. 5 X 10.2 = 51mph. Yeah. Good luck pedaling your MTB to 51mph!