Ted wrote:
> It's difficult for many people to work with and use sew-ups.
> So, make it easy on yourself, show the sews and ride the wires.
then John wrote:
> Personally, I prefer tubulars
> because I seem to be plagued by flats when I use
> clinchers.
could we take an informal survey of tubulars and clinchers (note, not vs.)? these seem to be good arguments for either. I am in the process
of building sets of freewheel clinchers, one 5 and one 6 speed which I am planning to synchronize with the tubular couterparts that are on some
of the bikes. I will also be setting up a C record set with a possible 7 or 8 for a later Cinelli, Spectrum and Fuso of similare vintage. The reason I am doing this is , like John, all the people I ride with use clinchers. If i have a flat i carry all the neccesary repair tools, i can easily fix it. I also have the kit for others in case they are ill prepared (which slows one up just as much if you are not- if you never drop anybody). I ride with a spare tubular when i am on those, but it does not inspire the confidence as i always wonder whether it will make it 'home' as it is not readily patched on the road.
However, I have never flatted a tubular except for the pair once at the bottom of a downhill in 1970. This is even with old cracked tubulars that came with bikes that i have bought and taken for a spin. I really enjoy riding both clinchers and tubulars.
so, anything else beyond the archives? and where is the point of visual inspection that one would not consider an older tubular rideable? I always fill them to high pressure for a few days before trying them. I don't want to annoy anyone on list for redundancy, so if anybody is interested, please send me your 'flat rate' on either clinchers or tubulars in either time or mileage (km) please.
--
gabriel l romeu
chesterfield nj usa
± http://studiofurniture.com Ø http://journalphoto.org ±