MTB slicks thread...

[danielhaden]

If you don't have tall gearing and narrrow rims, that's not a problem at all!

Schwable makes the Schwable Big Apple (and a lighter version) at 26x2.2 size. . .that is also incredibly fast.

How incredible is it? You'll get roadie speeds, an intact mountain bike that still has wide rims, and no need to buy taller gears. The only known big rollers that let mountain bikes join a roadie group ride. . .Bravo Schwable!
This combination of ultra speed and features can have a big price, but you do get no-holds-barred performance along with a very fun ride.

Coming in at second place on big roller speed is Schwinn Typhoon Cord that is also nearly flatproof (zero for me), also has a fast, motorcycle-like ride, and is available in a remarkably inexpensive blackwall version. Marketing resulted in a low pressure rating on the sidewall. They'll still handle 65 on a wide rim (just like every tire this size), but I'd recommend 40 for the front because the casing gets hard (and slower) if there's too much air in the front. Anyway, it is considerably faster than all of the slicks I have tried, often making the difference of over 5 mph gain.
Several treads available--very tight semi-slick tread tested fast.

Big rollers produce speed entirely differently than small slicks, so expect some differences in behavior. Tarmac (gritty pavement) speed is incredible, but expect some slight speed mismatches with other surfaces. Steering is very. . .big, like a motorcycle. Uphills are considerably faster because of the flywheel effect (look up racing with weighted wheels) to see the benefit, which is that the heavy wheel/tire evens out the differences between horizontal and vertical pedal--noticable on any obstacle, such as pothole or uphill. Performance on gravel is slower and more secure than a small skinwall slick. Performance on pavement is fast, and the rougher the faster. The mix of tiny, white gravel with tar that is found on the shoulders of most highways can be nearly cause for joy as your speedometer passes 25 on flat ground (high marks for a mountain bike powered by a "weekend warrier")--but that's an optimal surface for these, so other results are less. Since big slicks casings can be hard, air pressure adjustment (mainly front) can be crucial since they get their speed mostly from averaging out road abberations and floating on top. Faster big slicks are made of more-dry rubber to improve rolling efficiency, yet I have not found this to be any problem in the rain. Okay, one problem. The tires are so confidence-inspring that you may mistakely try to steer over a very tall bit of paralell, unlevel pavement in the rain. Fast bicycle tires, in general, can't do that at less than 10 degree angles, and these are no exception. Having said that, wet performance (cornering, stopping) is still excellent, with no sliding.
Yes, it is very different, and there's actually few to choose from, but it is also a very fun experience that, in my opinion, shouldn't be missed.

I do not believe that this technology could replace a road bike for racing purposes, but the astonished double-takes on a group ride can be extremely entertaining.

Using tires to compensate a vehicle does not result in a race vehicle, even though it can add both enjoyment and much speed.

[danielhaden]

Originally Posted by gclark8

I'll second that. I would like to see all his sources. A lot of his comments don't confirm some of my recent experiences.

Oh, do please write about the experiences. I'd love to hear.

[jur]

Well look who's crawled out of the woodwork again.

[danielhaden]

It took some time to experiment with the slicks.

I gave in to peer pressure and actually purchased bald tires.

For me, there were some "deal breakers" about each one, so I kept trying again.

Most slicks were overly "sticky" and very slow.
The smallest made some attempt to turn my mountain bike into a road bike, but then I had neither instead of of both.
The main problem is that my wide rims "mashed out" the smaller slicks into a wider profile and put a lot of sticky stuff in contact with the road--like riding with the brakes on. A minor problem is that I now needed to buy a new crankset too. Yuck!

Tioga and Tom Ritchey slicks were made of a fast more-dry rubber that could not stop in the rain. They did not lie about the speed--they were fast and they slid like bald tires.

Big semi-slicks, called rollers, were both fast and fun.
I still had a fun, comfy mountain bike, but it was far faster than before.

[gclark8]

Originally Posted by jur

Well look who's crawled out of the woodwork again.

Use the heel of your shoe.

[jur]

Originally Posted by danielhaden

A minor problem is that I now needed to buy a new crankset too. Yuck!

I call BS on having to buy a new crankset:

The difference in circumference between a 1" and 2" tyre is 15cm approx, in a total of approx 200cm. That is less than 10% difference. While not insignificant, that's the difference between a 11T and 12T cog. If you weren't fast enough with a 11T cog with a 1" slick, that sure as eggs is not going to make you all that much faster with a 2" slick. You may run out of gears on the downhill but the flats would be just fine.

[gclark8]

Originally Posted by jur

I call BS on having to buy a new crankset:

I agree!!

I just set up a training bike for a lady:
Giant Upland Ladies, Purple. (no suspension)
Crankset, TX71 28/38/48
Freewheel, MF HG50 7 speed 11-28
Tyres 26x1.5 city slicks

This bike is ideal for its purpose, bike paths and quiet streets and has a good potential top speed. However, while waiting for the Freewheel to come in, I fitted a pair of 650c training wheels and took it for a spin:
Front tyre, Conti Ultra Gator Skin 23x571
Rear tyre, Conti GP 23x571
Cassette, HG50 8 speed 11-32, just using the high 7, 11-28.

I rode it over my reagular training ride, Bassendean to UWA Pool, time 48 minutes. This is my second best time, the best, 42 min, was on a MTB with Conti Sport Contact Slicks and the same top gearing, 11-48. My normal time on my Road Bike is 50-55 minutes.

So Daniel, you speak crap!

[artemidorus]

Originally Posted by danielhaden

In my opinion. . .Of course it is! I'm the one writing it. lol!

Tiny slicks seem faster because they cripple the high end of most mountain bikes by reducing the gearing. You may have made the bike easier to pedal instead of speeding it up.

If you've got narrow rims and tall gears, the tiny slicks can work.
However, we used to throw away bald tires because they make it hard to stop in the wet. How about adding back the ability to stop in the wet with Panaracer T-Serv (full sheild, non-slip grip) 26x1.25 (actual 26mm road size, larger 26" sizes are not speed versions, but the little one is a speedy roadie tire) so you can stop in the wet?

Oddly enough, new models of slicks are coming out with tread on the sides so that you can corner in the rain. They still can't stop unless they are made of softer, slow rubber. Tread helps you stop. I'd like to use it instead of glue-like rubber.

Machines to measure tire friction do not resemble a bicycle in actual conditions. Some, and many, conditions may be perfect for a tiny, cushy touring tire that can run over grit, pebbles, cracks, etc. . . without slowing down. That is a complex way of saying that performance and application need to match. Go ahead and tell an older person that bald tires are the hot new thing. . .just to see the look on their face.

Semi slicks (very modest tread) seem to handle a wider variety of road surfaces with the same or slightly enhanced speed.

Sorry Daniel, I'm not happy with any of these points.
Firstly, changing the gearing - people do not choose to ride in a particular gear, but rather choose whichever gear gives them their usual torque and cadence for the power output required. They will simply use a higher gear, but might run out of gears at 43km/h instead of 45km/h. Not really a big deal.
Noone has ever shown me any evidence that tread assists cornering or braking on sealed surfaces, wet or dry - in fact, the evidence is quite the opposite. My experience accords with the evidence.
I think we'd be happier with your posts if you weren't expressing your views as apparent proven fact rather than as opinion.

[artemidorus]

Originally Posted by danielhaden

If you don't have tall gearing and narrrow rims, that's not a problem at all!

Schwable makes the Schwable Big Apple (and a lighter version) at 26x2.2 size. . .that is also incredibly fast.

How incredible is it? You'll get roadie speeds, an intact mountain bike that still has wide rims, and no need to buy taller gears. The only known big rollers that let mountain bikes join a roadie group ride. . .Bravo Schwable!
This combination of ultra speed and features can have a big price, but you do get no-holds-barred performance along with a very fun ride.

Coming in at second place on big roller speed is Schwinn Typhoon Cord that is also nearly flatproof (zero for me), also has a fast, motorcycle-like ride, and is available in a remarkably inexpensive blackwall version. Marketing resulted in a low pressure rating on the sidewall. They'll still handle 65 on a wide rim (just like every tire this size), but I'd recommend 40 for the front because the casing gets hard (and slower) if there's too much air in the front. Anyway, it is considerably faster than all of the slicks I have tried, often making the difference of over 5 mph gain.
Several treads available--very tight semi-slick tread tested fast.

Big rollers produce speed entirely differently than small slicks, so expect some differences in behavior. Tarmac (gritty pavement) speed is incredible, but expect some slight speed mismatches with other surfaces. Steering is very. . .big, like a motorcycle. Uphills are considerably faster because of the flywheel effect (look up racing with weighted wheels) to see the benefit, which is that the heavy wheel/tire evens out the differences between horizontal and vertical pedal--noticable on any obstacle, such as pothole or uphill. Performance on gravel is slower and more secure than a small skinwall slick. Performance on pavement is fast, and the rougher the faster. The mix of tiny, white gravel with tar that is found on the shoulders of most highways can be nearly cause for joy as your speedometer passes 25 on flat ground (high marks for a mountain bike powered by a "weekend warrier")--but that's an optimal surface for these, so other results are less. Since big slicks casings can be hard, air pressure adjustment (mainly front) can be crucial since they get their speed mostly from averaging out road abberations and floating on top. Faster big slicks are made of more-dry rubber to improve rolling efficiency, yet I have not found this to be any problem in the rain. Okay, one problem. The tires are so confidence-inspring that you may mistakely try to steer over a very tall bit of paralell, unlevel pavement in the rain. Fast bicycle tires, in general, can't do that at less than 10 degree angles, and these are no exception. Having said that, wet performance (cornering, stopping) is still excellent, with no sliding.
Yes, it is very different, and there's actually few to choose from, but it is also a very fun experience that, in my opinion, shouldn't be missed.

I do not believe that this technology could replace a road bike for racing purposes, but the astonished double-takes on a group ride can be extremely entertaining.

Using tires to compensate a vehicle does not result in a race vehicle, even though it can add both enjoyment and much speed.

Once again, show us your data.
Just because you can pedal a steamroller just as fast as your local roadie bunch does not prove your point - if true, I think it tells us more about your fitness.
You were lucky to get away with posting your big tyre hypothesis on the "cycling equipment" forum - none of the engineering types took the bait.

[jur]

He should apply for a scriptwriter's job at one of those TV infomercial/sale channels.

[gclark8]

He must be the MTB rider from this topic: http://www.cyclingforums.com/showthr...66015&posted=1

I guess we will have to wait until he is home from school to get a reply, that's if his mummy lets him on the computer.

[danielhaden]

Originally Posted by gclark8

I agree!!

I just set up a training bike for a lady:
Giant Upland Ladies, Purple. (no suspension)
Crankset, TX71 28/38/48
Freewheel, MF HG50 7 speed 11-28
Tyres 26x1.5 city slicks

This bike is ideal for its purpose, bike paths and quiet streets and has a good potential top speed. However, while waiting for the Freewheel to come in, I fitted a pair of 650c training wheels and took it for a spin:
Front tyre, Conti Ultra Gator Skin 23x571
Rear tyre, Conti GP 23x571
Cassette, HG50 8 speed 11-32, just using the high 7, 11-28.

I rode it over my reagular training ride, Bassendean to UWA Pool, time 48 minutes. This is my second best time, the best, 42 min, was on a MTB with Conti Sport Contact Slicks and the same top gearing, 11-48. My normal time on my Road Bike is 50-55 minutes.

So Daniel, you speak crap!

650 road bikes are lovely, indeed. This was not the topic.

Not crap. Application is totally different than your test.

I was talking about using a tire to compensate the usual low-speed mountain bike--plus retaining mountain bike character intact.


You've lost a mountain bike by building a road bike out of it.
This usually works well when it involves small rims and tall gears.
In your case, it worked extremely well. I'm happy to hear about it.

However. . .

I did not lose a mountain bike with my approach.

So there!

[danielhaden]

Originally Posted by artemidorus

Once again, show us your data.
Just because you can pedal a steamroller just as fast as your local roadie bunch does not prove your point - if true, I think it tells us more about your fitness.
You were lucky to get away with posting your big tyre hypothesis on the "cycling equipment" forum - none of the engineering types took the bait.

OH MY GOSH!!! I FINALLY UNDERSTAND!!!


Yes, those who are interested in creating a small stature road bike out of a mountain bike---would absolutely hate what I've been writing about.
Some have been behaving as if sitting on a pinecone at an auction, and I have not understood it. Now it makes sense. The reason behind this approach, I don't comprehend, because road bikes are available at a similar price point as these projects. Would someone explain the benefits?

Those who own a mountain bike that has tall gears and narrow rims--would find information about speedy big tires totally pointless, and the waste of time could have been offensive. My apologies.

In fact, only the people that love the sensation of a human-powered motorcycle--a mountain bike--would get any use out of what I've been writing about. This group loves the idea of adding speed to their ride without losing this fun sensation. I love the idea of adding features without removing any, and I consider the motorcycle-like ride to be a beneficial feature.

If this idea is lost to you, yet you want a "confident" feeling ride, see the last of this post for a super-easy super-speed narrow tire method towards a high performance hybrid.


To answer a question:
Data is from foreign markets that value multi-feature bicycles.
Just as fast? As in exactly? No, never. The approach is too different. It always (so far) goes either faster or slower. Momentum is the key difference. The second difference is that even though grip can be balanced for contact patch size for any size, the larger size can cause far more variable results depending on road surface varities. Momentum differences, despite more momentum being inherently fun, will cause you to ride at a totally different speed, even though you can usually make the same average as the rest of your group ride. This might be tiresome in stop-and-go city rides during stop and go, and it does cost extra for using up more brake pads (when the energy you put in is released as momentum, causing your bike to nearly pass the others for a brief period) under city group ride conditions. The big-tire approach does not alter this aspect of a mountain bike; it only makes possible doing the same thing at a faster rate.



**For all of those who were offended or confused by my previous postings, here's a treat, although it is obnoxiously simple.

EASIER HYBRID METHOD (1):
Purchasing a road bike, and then altering the handlebars to suit, seems to be a more effective way of creating a faster hybrid, because the machine was already designed for road speed.
I have tried it, and it was remarkably successful.
Case study was in adding tiny, cushy, touring tires (T-Serv 28mm), a 3" stem riser (Delta), a more medically-advisable saddle, and whatever handlebars you prefer (as long as you don't slouch), to an ordinary road bike. Features were added, none were lost, and very high speed was not decreased. However, expect to go faster over rough pavement, slower over extremely smooth or wet pavement, and faster over gravel, all while being more comfortable.
Effective! And a very obvious way to a confident, comfortable and competent ride.

I will get a big laugh if you start quoting tire hardness or efficiency when even the smallest pebble will slam the efficiency right out of a hard tire--but try if you must. My application is not a machine upon a labratory surface, so this is not the bike for you if you race within labratories.

[Little Jackie]

Learn to write more concisely and proof read your work before you post. Also consider the adult audience and their experience before you post. This will cut down on the ridicule you receive and possibly your points will be more valid!

Mountain bikes are far cheaper than road bikes and easy to upgrade cheaply to a more advantageous performance level for general riding. I have upgraded my gearing on my Apollo Panther mtb to 11-28 7speed and fitted 24" x 1.75 city tires(semi- slick) and am amazed at its performance (similar to my 650c Felt road bike) I use the mountain bike for rough paths and short journeys!

cost ratio $350 : $1000

[danielhaden]

Originally Posted by Little Jackie

Learn to write more concisely and proof read your work before you post. Also consider the adult audience and their experience before you post. This will cut down on the ridicule you receive and possibly your points will be more valid!

Mountain bikes are far cheaper than road bikes and easy to upgrade cheaply to a more advantageous performance level for general riding. I have upgraded my gearing on my Apollo Panther mtb to 11-28 7speed and fitted 24" x 1.75 city tires(semi- slick) and am amazed at its performance (similar to my 650c Felt road bike) I use the mountain bike for rough paths and short journeys!

cost ratio $350 : $1000

Thank you for the critique and for the infirmation. Good stuff!

I will try to be more concise.

One comment confused me:
The adult audience? Does this define those with mainsteam-centric behavior? Or, do I write like a child?