Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Lower pressure tyres vs suspension seat post??

Started by Jose · · Last activity · 34 posts · 3,010 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
12 June 2008
Last activity
25 June 2008
Original author
Jose
Posts
34
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
3,010
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 34
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Hi All,

    Which of the 2 will make me loss more performance, a tyre with lower
    pressure, or a 1 pound heavy suspension seat post?

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Thanks,
    Jose

  2. (Jose) said:

    Hi All,

    Which of the 2 will make me loss more performance, a tyre with lower
    pressure, or a 1 pound heavy suspension seat post?

    Tires and suspension posts vary wildly in design, so one can't make a
    blanket statement. For road riding, a 35mm+wide smooth tread tire with
    a fine supple casing at 80psi (5 bar) or less is probably the least
    fussy way to get a nice ride. Tires with rigid casings will be more
    durable--but you'll feel a lot more road noise in your butt and hands--
    road noise that even a suspension post won't be able to absorb.

    As for performance--again, a supple casing'd tire will offer very
    little performance loss--but a thick squidgy one at low pressure can
    be downright nasty feeling.

    Perhaps someone can chime in on suspension posts--but seems to me that
    tires are enough suspension on the road. Suspension posts can add
    another layer of complexity to your bike if that's something you find
    compelling!

    Quoted message said:


    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Yes.

  3. landotter said:
    Quoted message said:

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Yes.

    I had REI bike with suspension post - looks good on paper but
    unless you ride offroad all the time that thing is useless.
    Good padded shorts and standing on pedals when going thru rough
    surface is more effective. Seatpost on my bike eventually
    developed torsional play so it was a really energy sink.

  4. Jose who? said:

    Which of the 2 will make me loss more performance, a tyre with lower
    pressure, or a 1 pound heavy suspension seat post?

    Quoted message said:

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Rolling drag of tires is caused by flexing of elastomers (rubber and
    inter ply bonding) in the casing. If you want to get a feel for that,
    look at the RR curves at:

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/rolling-resistance-tubular.html

    These losses are not affected by road gradient, but only by speed.
    That is, the faster the speed the greater the power required to
    overcome RR. Meanwhile, extra weight on a bicycle has almost no
    effect on flat terrain and requires a bit more power when climbing.

    I don't think the two effects are trade-offs.

    Jobst Brandt

  5. Jose said:

    Hi All,

    Which of the 2 will make me loss more performance, a tyre with lower
    pressure, or a 1 pound heavy suspension seat post?

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Thanks,
    Jose

    I run 700X35 Avocet Cross Ks at 85 psi and find them to be more
    effective at muting road vibrations than narrower tires at 100 psi. I
    really feel this is a better way to go than a suspension post for road
    riding. I do use a Thudbuster for off-roading on my mountain bike.

    Smokey

  6. Woland99 said:

    Good padded shorts and standing on pedals when going thru rough

    I'm not sure I can stand padded shorts - I tend to get numb :-(

    Quoted message said:

    Seatpost on my bike eventually
    developed torsional play so it was a really energy sink.

    You mean side play? How was that affecting your performance?

    Thanks,
    Jose

  7. smokey said:

    I run 700X35 Avocet Cross Ks at 85 psi and find them to be more
    effective at muting road vibrations than narrower tires at 100 psi.

    Well, if/when I decrease my tyres' pressure to 70 psi, I find them
    confortable too. If you pumped your 700x35 tyres up to 100 psi, would
    you still find them better than a 700x28 equally at 100 psi??

    Quoted message said:

    I
    really feel this is a better way to go than a suspension post for road
    riding.

    Why?

    Thanks,
    Jose

  8. "Jose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Woland99 said:

    Good padded shorts and standing on pedals when going thru rough

    I'm not sure I can stand padded shorts - I tend to get numb :-(

    Then you need a wider saddle or set up your bike so that you sit further
    back on the wide part of the saddle. Numbness is not normal and that's the
    first thing you need to work on. It took me 3 years to find a saddle that
    worked good for me though most people seem to have fewer problems finding a
    good fit.

    The saddle I use is a San Marco Regal. Remember that regardless of what you
    THINK, harder is usually better.

    By the way - plastic saddles always hold their shape though if they have a
    lot of padding it can squash down and change the dynamics of the saddle fit.
    About the best you can usually get from plastic saddles is a fit that is
    acceptable.

    But leather saddles can stretch and shape themselves to your posterior and
    can actually get comfortable. That's why you see some people who have spent
    a small fortune on carbon fiber bikes mounting a 3 lb leather saddle to it.


  9. Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Good padded shorts and standing on pedals when going thru rough

    I'm not sure I can stand padded shorts - I tend to get numb :-(


    ?

    Quoted message said:


    Thanks,
    Jose

    It's not the padded shorts that are causing your numbness....look elsewhere.

    Pat in TX

  10. On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:40:58 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot

    canada said:
    (Jose) said:
    Quoted message said:

    These losses are not affected by road gradient, but only by speed.
    That is, the faster the speed the greater the power required to
    overcome RR.

    Seems logical - after reading your explanation.

    Quoted message said:

    Meanwhile, extra weight on a bicycle has almost no
    effect on flat terrain and requires a bit more power when climbing.

    I'm sure I'm follwing you... I've always that a heavier object would
    take more energy/efford to be kept going. Such as in heavier vs
    lighter cars...

    Quoted message said:

    I don't think the two effects are trade-offs.

    I'll agree, if I can understand how the heavier object doesn't require
    more power to be kept going.

    Thanks,
    Jose


    The heavier object only requires more power to keep going because it
    causes more flexing in the tires and suspension. Increase the tire
    pressures to compensate for the extra load and the rolling resistance
    does not increase (up to a limit) Smooth roads do not affext the
    suspension losses - which CAN be corrected for to some extent by
    tuning the suspension.
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

    Dear Jose & Clare,

    For a typical bicycle on level ground, adding a kilogram results in
    such a tiny increase in rolling resistance (the tires flex a hair or
    two more) that only a theoretical calculator can see the difference.

    Here's a side-by-side calculator:
    http://bikecalculator.com/veloMetricNum.html

    If you raise the bike weight from 9 to 10 kg, the increased rolling
    resistance lowers the speed from 24.75 km/h to 24.71 km/h, a rather
    theoretical 0.04 km/h drop, about 0.16%

    Here's another calculator, with fewer digits:
    http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

    Choose on-the-drops, and the result is 19.4 mph for the defaults with
    a 20.9 pound bicycle. The predicted cruising speed won't drop to 19.3
    mph until your raise the bike weight to 26.7 pounds, adding 5.8
    pounds.

    Even hauling such extra weight uphill doesn't make that much
    difference. Go back to this comparison calculator:

    http://bikecalculator.com/veloMetricNum.html

    Here are the predicted km/h speeds up a 6% grade for several power
    levels:

    bike watts watts watts
    weight 100 200 300
    9 kg 6.70 12.90 18.38 (0.08 to 0.17 km/h faster)
    10 kg 6.62 12.76 18.21

    And some of that difference is offset by the slightly greater speed of
    the slightly heavier bike back down the 6% grade:

    bike watts
    weight 0
    9 kg 51.20
    10 kg 51.52 (0.32 km/h faster)

    Such tiny speed differences from weight are rarely as important as
    wind drag and rider comfort, but weight is much easier to measure and
    boast about.

    Cheers,

    Carl Fogel

  11. Woland99 said:
    landotter said:
    Quoted message said:

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    Quoted message said:

    Yes.

    I had REI bike with suspension post - looks good on paper but
    unless you ride offroad all the time that thing is useless.
    Good padded shorts and standing on pedals when going thru rough
    surface is more effective. Seatpost on my bike eventually
    developed torsional play so it was a really energy sink.

    The cheaper suspended seatposts, with only one control for vertical
    stiffness and horizontal rotational control, suffer torsional play. I
    like the Post Moderne Glide and the cheap Kalloy well enough for
    comfort biking, but the amound of torsional play would probably
    disconcert a roadie. That said, the much more expensive Post Moderne
    Cushy is torsionally stiffer only because it is stiff and obstructive
    in all directions, adding zero to either objective or subjective
    security of comfort and control.

    Andre Jute
    Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
    "wonderfully well written and reasoned information
    for the tube audio constructor"
    John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
    "an unbelievably comprehensive web site
    containing vital gems of wisdom"
    Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

  12. On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:07:31 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.
    com> wrote:

    Hi Tom,

    Quoted message said:

    Then you need a wider saddle or set up your bike so that you sit further
    back on the wide part of the saddle. Numbness is not normal and that's the
    first thing you need to work on. It took me 3 years to find a saddle that
    worked good for me though most people seem to have fewer problems finding a
    good fit.

    I haven't tried paded shorts with my present sadle - some Selle
    Italia, very similar to models SLC/SLK, with no padding at all. I've
    never felt so "free" on a sadlle before; I still need to get my
    posterior used to long rides on it, though - last time I did, I think
    I ended up with blisters...

    Still on the mater of paded shorts, I admit I have some troublke
    understanding how such a thin layer of foam can make a significant
    diference. Worse than that, what the point of getting a non-paded
    sadle, and then wearing paded shorts??

    Quoted message said:

    But leather saddles can stretch and shape themselves to your posterior and
    can actually get comfortable. That's why you see some people who have spent
    a small fortune on carbon fiber bikes mounting a 3 lb leather saddle to it.

    Good point! I can imagine that after a while a leather sadle would
    accomadate my seat bones quite well. However, I imagine that would
    make me "sink" in the sadle and get numb you know where ;-P

    Thanks,
    Jose

  13. On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:27:56 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Hi Andre,

    Quoted message said:

    The cheaper suspended seatposts, with only one control for vertical
    stiffness and horizontal rotational control, suffer torsional play. I
    like the Post Moderne Glide and the cheap Kalloy well enough for
    comfort biking, but the amound of torsional play would probably
    disconcert a roadie.

    I use a cheap Kalloy. It does have side play; that doesn't bother me.
    I was much more disconcerted when I last rode a front suspension MTB
    bike from a friend of mine - I felt I couldn't tell which way the bike
    was going :-(

    Thanks,
    Jose

  14. On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:13:19 -0600, [email hidden] wrote:

    Hi Carl,

    Quoted message said:

    For a typical bicycle on level ground, adding a kilogram results in
    such a tiny increase in rolling resistance (the tires flex a hair or
    two more) that only a theoretical calculator can see the difference.

    OK, that makes feel less guilty about using a suspension seat post ;-)

    Quoted message said:

    Choose on-the-drops, and the result is 19.4 mph for the defaults with
    a 20.9 pound bicycle. The predicted cruising speed won't drop to 19.3
    mph until your raise the bike weight to 26.7 pounds, adding 5.8
    pounds.

    So, basically you're saying that aerodynamic drag would play a bigger
    role in performance that an increase/decrease of 1 or 2 pounds...

    Quoted message said:

    Such tiny speed differences from weight are rarely as important as
    wind drag and rider comfort, but weight is much easier to measure and
    boast about.

    It's easier to sell a lighter bike, than a more aerodynamic position
    ;-)

    I was amazed at the diference in more speed and less efford during a
    recent longish ride, after removing the front mudgard. Next, I'll see
    if I can lower the handlebar.

    Thanks!
    Jose

  15. Jose said:
    Quoted message said:

    As for tire pressure, I would suggest going to a wider tire at lower
    pressure if you want to minimize road shock. That would minimize
    rolling resistance and avoid pinch flats.

    I'm presently using a 700x25, which I pump up to 90 psi on the road,
    70 psi around town.  

    That should be pretty comfortable, although I'd worry about getting
    pinch flats at 70 psi on a 700x25.

    Quoted message said:

    I can still fit a 700x28, but I'm not sure I can
    fit a tyre wider than  that.

    Quoted message said:

    Would the wider tyre:
    1) absorb shock equally well, if pumped at 100, and 80 psi,
    respectivelly?

    A wider tire should get _less_ pressure. For example, a 700x28 at 70
    psi would have less rolling resistance and less chance of pinch
    flatting than a 700x25.

    Optimum tire pressure depends on tire width, rider weight, and your
    preference for either comfort or lowest rolling resistance. It's a
    trade-off.

    Note that some tires aren't really the width they're advertised as. A
    tire marked 700x28 might actually measure 25 or 26mm on a rim.

    In your case, I'd recommend a true 700x28 at about 85 psi rear and 80
    psi front (assuming you're not a heavyweight). If comfort is your
    primary goal, you might need a bike that takes 700x32 tires.

    Quoted message said:

    2) would it have a better performance at, say, 70 psi, due to less
    flexing/deformation than the 700x25?

    Yes, a 700x28 would have better performance than a 700x25 at 70 psi.

    Art Harris

  16. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Jose) said:
    landotter said:

    Tires and suspension posts vary wildly in design, so one can't make a
    blanket statement. For road riding, a 35mm+wide smooth tread tire with
    a fine supple casing at 80psi (5 bar) or less is probably the least
    fussy way to get a nice ride.

    I've been using Maxis Detonator 700x25. Around town, I need to drop
    the pressure to 70 psi. Away from town, I'm fairly confortable at 90
    psi (+ the suspension seat post I use).

    Quoted message said:

    Tires with rigid casings will be more
    durable--but you'll feel a lot more road noise in your butt and hands--
    road noise that even a suspension post won't be able to absorb.

    How do you know if a tyre is less rigid than another (before trying
    both)? Just by looking at the tpi count? I get the feeling that the
    lower tpi count tyres are smoother - could I be mistaken?

    A true high thread per inch side wall is thinner than
    lower tpi. Thinner side wall means less power dissipated
    flexing the side walls.

    Before you buy you handle the tire flex the sidewall with
    your hands. Check the tread thickness. Flex the tread.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Of the non suspension seatposts, are they all equally "bad" at
    absorbing shock and vibration?

    OK, so why are so many people enthusiated about carbon and titanium
    seat post? I understand that carbon can be made more flexible, but on
    such a short extension, I have doubts. Titanium - besides
    outrageously expensive - I had the idea was more rigid than
    aluminum...

    --
    Michael Press

  17. "Jose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:07:31 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.

    Quoted message said:

    But leather saddles can stretch and shape themselves to your posterior and
    can actually get comfortable. That's why you see some people who have
    spent
    a small fortune on carbon fiber bikes mounting a 3 lb leather saddle to
    it.

    Good point! I can imagine that after a while a leather sadle would
    accomadate my seat bones quite well. However, I imagine that would
    make me "sink" in the sadle and get numb you know where ;-P

    It is possible for a leather saddle to break-in badly and then not work
    well. But most of them do not apply pressure to the wrong places. My Brooks
    B-17 was fairly comfortable right from the start, but after 500 miles it was
    sort of surprising to me that it actually felt good to sit on. I've never
    known that sensation before. Of course I always used plastic saddles too.

  18. On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 04:41:17 -0700 (PDT), Art Harris
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Hi Art

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Would the wider tyre:
    1) absorb shock equally well, if pumped at 100, and 80 psi,
    respectivelly?

    A wider tire should get _less_ pressure. For example, a 700x28 at 70
    psi would have less rolling resistance and less chance of pinch
    flatting than a 700x25.

    On a 15 mm wide rim, I doubt it would pinch flat. Anyway, 700x28
    seems a better all round choice - it should have better performance at
    70 psi around town, and still take 90 or 100 psi for real road use,
    without bursting.

    Quoted message said:

    Optimum tire pressure depends on tire width, rider weight, and your
    preference for either comfort or lowest rolling resistance. It's a
    trade-off.

    Yes, I think I understand that - my present 700x25 Maxis Detonator, at
    around 66 tpi, is significantly smoother than the 700x25 Continental
    UltraGatorSkin I used before, at the same pressures

    Quoted message said:

    Note that some tires aren't really the width they're advertised as. A
    tire marked 700x28 might actually measure 25 or 26mm on a rim.

    That sucks! Anyway, since I can't find any 700x28 around here, I'll
    have to order through Internet, and rely on thread counts, recommend
    pressures, etc.

    Quoted message said:

    In your case, I'd recommend a true 700x28 at about 85 psi rear and 80
    psi front (assuming you're not a heavyweight). If comfort is your
    primary goal, you might need a bike that takes 700x32 tires.

    I'm not sure if my bike can take 700x32 tyres, but among the 700x28,
    some are more confortable (albeit less performant) than others ;-)

    Best,
    Jose

  19. On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:29:58 -0700, Michael Press <[email hidden]>
    wrote:

    Hi Michael,

    Quoted message said:

    A good 25 mm wide tire
    can be built with 127 thread per inch casing. A 28 mm wide
    is always built with 66 thread per inch casing.

    Vittoria Rubino Pro and Pro Tech, 700x28, 120 tpi, 70-115 psi, 230-250
    gr.

    The ContinentalUltraGatorSkin 700x28, and Panaracer Pasela 700x28 also
    come to mind. At the least the Continental has a hight thread count -
    as always...

    Quoted message said:

    This difference
    alone will negate the advantage in width of the 28 mm wide tire.

    Not sure what you mean here. I've learned that lower tpi equals more
    confort but less performance. Am I missing something?

    Aramid vs steel bead: besides a slight weigh diference, what
    perceivable diferences do they have?

    Quoted message said:

    I find 25 mm wide tires to be comfortable.
    If you want wide tires for comfort, then you need a new frame.

    No, I don't think I want a full suspension frame ;-)

    Best,
    Jose

  20. Jose said:

    At the least the Continental has a hight thread count -
    as always...

    Continental counts the threads in each ply. It's not a fair
    comparison.

    Quoted message said:


    I've learned that lower tpi equals more
    confort but less performance. Am I missing something?

    A high tpi casing is more flexible and has lower rolling resistance.
    If anything, it may be more comfortable.

    Quoted message said:


    Aramid vs steel bead: besides a slight weigh diference, what
    perceivable diferences do they have?

    None, except they're easier to fold and carry as a spare.

    Art Harris

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.