I think all the studies have shown that the aerodynamic resistance increases somewhere around 20 MPH so that the wider tire loses that roll fast advantage. A kilo rider isn't going to be riding under 20 MPH. For fast riding or climbing, aero resistance and weight come into play, thus negating the wider tire rolling advantage. Frankly, I don't think riders who ride under 20 MPH really care whether the fat tire is rolling faster. It is comfort, road adhesion and rim protection they are interested in. Lou Deeter, Orlando FL
-----Original Message----- From: Dave Porter <frogeye@porterscustom.com> To: 'Julian Shapiro' <julianshapiro@gmail.com>; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Sent: Wed, Feb 2, 2011 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [CR] Wider = faster
First, there's a big difference between coasting down a hill and a machine that appears to measure resistance. Second, there's a big difference between a mass bouncing on a seat and a measured resistance on a machine. So, I'm still on the unconvinced side of the fence. Which one of you wants to tell the current hot shoe that his Kilo record will be on a fat tire? DaveP
frogeye@porterscustom.com
Porter Customs 2909 Arno NE Albuquerque, NM USA 87107 505-352-1378 1954 BN2 1959 AN5 Porter Custom Bicycles
cars:
http://www.britishcarforum.com/
blog: http://porterbikes.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Shapiro [mailto:julianshapiro@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:21 PM
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR] Wider = faster
>From Velonews:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/
Further confirmation of what "our own" Jan Heine has been telling us for years.
Julian Shapiro in icy icy Sag Harbor, NY (where tires don't matter much on the mag-trainer)