Clinchers vs Tubulars (vs Rim Weight)
Click on the graphic to read the formula.
I'm bored of fighting. I'm a lover, not a fighter. Run the numbers for yourselves people...
Some good resources for finding out about rolling resistance and getting numbers for coefficient of rolling resistance (Crr):
http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-1503651.html
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesTires_Page.html
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesTire_TireRollingResistance.html
http://www.biketechreview.com/tires/AFM_tire_crr.htm
posted by THEGAMESTAYSTHESAME at 8:35 PM
6 Comments:
Note: When comparing tubs and singles, I assumed all extra weight was distributed at the rim, leading to an increase in moment of inertia of (delta m) X (rim radius)^2. It is quite easy to prove that weight so distributed is worth twice weight on the bike under acceleration. There is no difference at a constant speed whether you are climbing hills or not. The thing is, the marginal effect of weight is not high. An order of magnitude less than the effect of rolling resistance.
Clearly, in most situations aerodynamics is more important than rolling resistance and weight combines.
And with that... I invite you all to play with the formula for yourselves and see what you come up with.
Dude- nobodies fighting.
You sure have worked yourself up into a lather over cycle geekdom.
I'm not lathered. Just having some fun. Sorry - tone doesn't come across well in electronic form.
Do you ever sleep?
(Do I ever leave work?)
do i ever post without a glass of wine in my hand?
this is 'the Ned' sauv blanc, from marlborough, nz. quite a sweet nose, yet rather vegetal and long on the palate. well balanced.
18/20, $$$ ($16)
Hey- I just read about that in the Age Epicure last week.
Sounds good Larson.
Now that I'm back from Belgium I'm slowly making my way through Yarra Valley Pinot Noir.
Man- hard work
Post a Comment
<< Home