Timeline for What are the benefits of 700c23 tires?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 10, 2015 at 21:53 | history | suggested | 300D7309EF17 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
correct typo that could lead to confusion. had to add txt at the end to reach the minimum.
|
| Feb 10, 2015 at 20:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 10, 2015 at 21:53 | |||||
| Oct 28, 2013 at 16:16 | comment | added | Rory Alsop | I miss my old racer. 11mm front tire and 17mm rear tire on Mg alloy rims. Admittedly they weren't very strong - I shattered two wheels in 18 months, but it was a fast bike, and still the lightest I have ever owned. | |
| Oct 25, 2013 at 21:39 | comment | added | Johnny | On my bike, the advantage is that 23mm tires fit between the brake pads (even with the brake quick release opened all the way), while when I tried 25's, I had to let the air out of the tires get the wheels on and off. Not a big deal if you only take your wheels off to fix a flat, but when you have to take the front wheel off to put it on the bike rack, it quickly gets annoying. Granted, I only tried one brand (Michelin) of 25mm tires, so maybe another brand would be less wide and would fit better. | |
| Jul 30, 2012 at 19:01 | comment | added | Mike Samuel | You might find the Rivendell Reader review of Surley's Pugsley interesting. After Grant made it up his benchmark climb in under 8 minutes on the Pugsley he says "I don't get it - The 15.9lb wheels alone weigh more than some whole bikes." and notes that he "feels slower" on it but is as fast climbing on the heavy fat-tired Pugsley as on his lighter narrower-tired bikes. | |
| S Jul 27, 2012 at 7:58 | history | suggested | BBB | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
I've edited my post to make its tone less confrontional (grumpy) as one of the posters very rightly pointed out :-)
|
| Jul 27, 2012 at 1:54 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jul 27, 2012 at 7:58 | |||||
| Jul 26, 2012 at 23:27 | comment | added | Benzo | I tend to agree on the point of suspension loss affecting rolling resistance, leading to slower speeds. It does depend on the type of riding you do. Skinny 23mm tires are ideal on smooth pavement. If you hit rough pavement, cobbles, tar and chip, all of which I ride over every day, then you may be better served with 25mm-28mm tires. If you hit trails, gravel, or dirt, you'll want to go bigger yet, maybe 28mm - 35mm. It's partially to use the extra air volume to absorb shock, increase traction, prevent sinking in loose terrain, and avoid slowdown due to impact of small road imperfections. | |
| Jul 26, 2012 at 22:00 | comment | added | amcnabb | You have some very interesting thoughts here, but unfortunately the tone seems unnecessarily confrontational. It would also be helpful to have references for any specific studies that show that wider tires have lower rolling resistance, so it's not just one person's word against another's. | |
| Jul 26, 2012 at 21:49 | history | answered | BBB | CC BY-SA 3.0 |