johnridley (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
johnridley) wrote2008-03-15 07:39 pm
johnridley) wrote2008-03-15 07:39 pm
Entry tags:
Bike maintenance-tire change
Odometer 12907; installed SPD pedals, TT2000 tires.
A couple of days ago I swapped the platform pedals (which I use in cold temps < 15*F so I can ride with heavy boots) for my SPDs.
Today I took the studded tires off, put on a pair of Continental Top Touring 2000 tires given to me by the generous![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
erikvolson. He says they have only a dozen or two miles on them and they look new. They're only rated 75 PSI so I'm not sure how fast they'll be though of course after the studded tires they'll feel like lightning for a while.
I also powerwashed the bike (MAN was it dirty; it's been 500 miles in the winter gunk since it was washed). Also lubed the chain and the derailler, and tuned up the rear brake; the cable had gotten pretty sluggish (oiled it) and the pulloff springs weren't balanced anymore.
The odometer is at 12907, so assuming I'll only get 3 days of riding in this week, it should be rolling to 13K next Tuesday or so.
That means I only put about 660 miles on the studded tires this winter. I think the rear is about done in though. There are a dozen studs missing, and several are twisted sideways in their holes. I think I may replace it with the new Marathon Winter, which has more studs up the side. I love the Nokians, but this particular one has only center studs and they're useless for climbing out of icy ruts, which can give control problems. Nokian makes a W240 model with 240 studs, one farther out, but it's pretty knobby, looks very rough and high rolling resistance. Most of my riding is on pavement and ice. I do ride some snow so some tread is desired. The Marathon Winter looks to be about perfect, plus it's $10 cheaper than the W240, and still has 240 studs in 4 rows.
Also the Schwalbe has kevlar puncture protection belts and reflective sidewalls, so those are both bonuses.
If I only buy one, the old Nokian will go in the back, the new one up front where it's most needed.
A couple of days ago I swapped the platform pedals (which I use in cold temps < 15*F so I can ride with heavy boots) for my SPDs.
Today I took the studded tires off, put on a pair of Continental Top Touring 2000 tires given to me by the generous
erikvolson. He says they have only a dozen or two miles on them and they look new. They're only rated 75 PSI so I'm not sure how fast they'll be though of course after the studded tires they'll feel like lightning for a while.I also powerwashed the bike (MAN was it dirty; it's been 500 miles in the winter gunk since it was washed). Also lubed the chain and the derailler, and tuned up the rear brake; the cable had gotten pretty sluggish (oiled it) and the pulloff springs weren't balanced anymore.
The odometer is at 12907, so assuming I'll only get 3 days of riding in this week, it should be rolling to 13K next Tuesday or so.
That means I only put about 660 miles on the studded tires this winter. I think the rear is about done in though. There are a dozen studs missing, and several are twisted sideways in their holes. I think I may replace it with the new Marathon Winter, which has more studs up the side. I love the Nokians, but this particular one has only center studs and they're useless for climbing out of icy ruts, which can give control problems. Nokian makes a W240 model with 240 studs, one farther out, but it's pretty knobby, looks very rough and high rolling resistance. Most of my riding is on pavement and ice. I do ride some snow so some tread is desired. The Marathon Winter looks to be about perfect, plus it's $10 cheaper than the W240, and still has 240 studs in 4 rows.
Also the Schwalbe has kevlar puncture protection belts and reflective sidewalls, so those are both bonuses.
If I only buy one, the old Nokian will go in the back, the new one up front where it's most needed.
no subject
no subject
I'm FAR more interested in durability than speed. The speed question was just curiosity since the PSI rating is lower than I'm used to.
no subject
The Top Touring are designed for loaded touring -- take a heavy bike, put 100 pounds of crap on it, and ride it all day. They're great commuting tires, but I dislike tread on bikes, so I swapped them out.
They are heavy, lots of rubber, etc. so they're a bit slower, but I knew you wanted tough over performance. Presuming sitting the basement didn't hurt them, they should last. If they fall apart this year, don't blame the tires, blame the basement.
no subject
The TTs aren't much different than the Race Lites. I just weighed and the Race Lite I still have is 440 grams. The Nokian is 840 grams. The one I had on the back is a full kilogram since it has the remains of a Race Lite inside it being used as a liner.
The TTs are mounted so I can't weigh them but they sure seem lighter than the race lites. I can't find any consistent weight online. Oh, to hell with it...
I just dismounted one and weighed it. 460 grams. I'm not too worried about 20 extra grams. Plus the TT has a much thinner and more flexible sidewall so I bet the rolling resistance is signficantly lower than the race lites. The race lites have very thick and inflexible sidewalls. If you measured overall power to roll the tires, I'm pretty sure the TTs would beat the race lites, even though the race lites are technically slicks.
Besides, the race lites are pretty shoddily constructed. The slick part is just a strip that's glued on, and it came apart on me on the rear. Admittedly, it did so after 4000 miles, but it bothers me because it was nowhere NEAR worn out, it just fell apart. Wearing out is one thing, falling apart is inexcusable.
no subject
no subject
I really don't give much of a damn what a tire weighs. I doubt I could tell the difference, really. I just want them to last a long time and not get a flat from the tiniest sliver. I think running another 10 PSI probably speeds me up way more than dropping 50 grams from the tire. My bike already weighs about uhh, I don't know. Wait. OK, just weighed it for the first time ever. 37 pounds, 41 with the lights and battery. Unloaded. Add a pannier with lunch/phone/mp3 player/camera/outgoing mail/notebook/stuff to scan/etc, possibly an 8 pack of 16 oz bottles, and probably more like 50.
If I want to get my weight down, I really should get ME down to 160 where I should be instead of the 185 I've been pushing since not riding for 7 weeks (170 before). I was up to 198 before I started commuting 3 years ago and climbing steadily; the trend I was on would have put me at about 220 by now.
In any case, I wouldn't want to go with anything lighter than the TTs; they already seem insubstantial. If people go with tires thinner than this, it's no wonder I see people griping about flatting 3 or 4 times a month. The TTs were actually one of the ones I would have liked to get, but I was looking at probably going with Marathons this spring, but I couldn't beat the price on the TTs.
no subject
I can't even believe that I'm weighing tires. You're a bad influence, mister.
no subject
No, seriously, the one place it is worth it to be a weight weenie is the outside rim of the wheels and the tires. Think of how fast they spin, then think of the inertia.
I'd rather drop 100g off the tires than a whole kilogram off the bike -- it really does make a significant difference.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Out of a 40 minute commute I spend about 4 minutes not cruising on straight road. I spend a lot more time on hills, and for that I'd LIKE to have more spinning inertia; it wouldn't affect me grinding up the hills at 10 MPH that much, but it might store up some power to help me part way up the next hill.