Re: Suspension losses

Liste des GroupesRevenir à rb tech 
Sujet : Re: Suspension losses
De : roger (at) *nospam* sarlet.com (Roger Merriman)
Groupes : rec.bicycles.tech
Date : 02. Jan 2025, 12:45:31
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <ltncirFoe27U1@mid.individual.net>
References : 1
User-Agent : NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Good article from Jan Heine on benefits of wider, softer tires for
absorbing vibration and lessening suspension losses:
 
https://www.renehersecycles.com/the-missing-link-suspension-losses/
 
At the time the rumble strip test was published, I expressed some
skepticism because its roughness is fundamentally different than the
random roughness of either a rough road or a gravel road. In particular,
the rumble strip is all "negative," cut into the smooth surface, while
rough or gravel roads have both "negative" holes plus "positive" patches
or rocks that protrude above the surface. One practical difference is
that when dealing with only "negative" roughness, higher speeds reduce
losses. The opposite is true with "positive" roughness.
 
But I suppose for demonstrating the fundamental effect, the consistency
of the rumbles is useful. And the measurements seem valid as long as the
test speed is also consistent.

Not that convinced to be honest, for a starters folks aren’t going to be
riding rumble strips but by mistake!

And if you’re going to be real world testing, testing on dirt roads with
all of the inconsistencies that brings is what gravel riders do. With the
dips as well as the bumps, plus ruts etc.

Rumble strip testing seems somewhat misleading ie it’s not that controlled
nor what riders do.

As ever claims that they influence pro athletes etc and started the wider
tire use, IMO it along with disks was adapted by consumers/commuters with
pro racers lagging behind with adoption and haven’t gone quite as wide, ie
stopped at 28 for the Pros where as 30/32 are fairly common among club
riders.

 
BTW, Jobst Brandt is mentioned in the article. I recall that in
discussing rolling resistance here, he insisted that "rolling
resistance" should be defined _only_ as the losses generated by tire
rubber's hysteresis. I disagreed, because that implied that solid rubber
tires a la 1880, or near infinite tire pressure, or even metal rims with
no tire, would be best. Anyone who has ridden an antique solid tire
"safety" bike knows how slow those tires were.
 

As ever is a what you want as well, on the old school road bike, I commute
on, 28mm felt on the twitchy side 32mm much more planted, the speed
difference I’m less concerned about, though at that level maybe wider is
faster? What is faster would depend on road/bike/rider.

Roger Merriman



Date Sujet#  Auteur
1 Jan 25 * Suspension losses219Frank Krygowski
2 Jan 25 +* Re: Suspension losses214Roger Merriman
2 Jan 25 i`* Re: Suspension losses213AMuzi
2 Jan 25 i +* Re: Suspension losses211bp
2 Jan 25 i i`* Re: Suspension losses210AMuzi
2 Jan 25 i i +* Re: Suspension losses9bp
2 Jan 25 i i i`* Re: Suspension losses8Frank Krygowski
2 Jan 25 i i i +- Re: Suspension losses1Roger Merriman
3 Jan 25 i i i `* Re: Suspension losses6bp
3 Jan 25 i i i  `* Re: Suspension losses5Frank Krygowski
3 Jan 25 i i i   +- Re: Suspension losses1AMuzi
3 Jan 25 i i i   `* Re: Suspension losses3Radey Shouman
3 Jan 25 i i i    `* Re: Suspension losses2Frank Krygowski
3 Jan 25 i i i     `- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Rider
2 Jan 25 i i +* Re: Suspension losses190Frank Krygowski
2 Jan 25 i i i+* Re: Suspension losses2AMuzi
3 Jan 25 i i ii`- Re: Suspension losses1bp
3 Jan 25 i i i+- Re: Suspension losses1bp
4 Jan 25 i i i+* Re: Suspension losses185Jeff Liebermann
4 Jan 25 i i ii+* Re: Suspension losses180Frank Krygowski
4 Jan 25 i i iii+* Re: Suspension losses15AMuzi
4 Jan 25 i i iiii`* Re: Suspension losses14Jeff Liebermann
4 Jan 25 i i iiii +* Re: Suspension losses12AMuzi
4 Jan 25 i i iiii i`* Re: Suspension losses11Frank Krygowski
4 Jan 25 i i iiii i +- Re: Suspension losses1AMuzi
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i `* Re: Suspension losses9Jeff Liebermann
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  +* Re: Suspension losses6zen cycle
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  i+* Re: Suspension losses4Frank Krygowski
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  ii`* Re: Suspension losses3AMuzi
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  ii +- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
6 Jan 25 i i iiii i  ii `- Re: Suspension losses1John B.
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  i`- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i  `* Re: Suspension losses2AMuzi
5 Jan 25 i i iiii i   `- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
5 Jan 25 i i iiii `- Re: Suspension losses1zen cycle
4 Jan 25 i i iii+* Re: Suspension losses163Jeff Liebermann
4 Jan 25 i i iiii+* Re: Suspension losses157Frank Krygowski
5 Jan 25 i i iiiii`* Re: Suspension losses156Jeff Liebermann
5 Jan 25 i i iiiii +- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
5 Jan 25 i i iiiii `* Re: Suspension losses154Frank Krygowski
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii  `* Re: Suspension losses153Jeff Liebermann
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   +* Re: Suspension losses151zen cycle
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   i+* Re: Suspension losses149Jeff Liebermann
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii+- Re: Suspension losses1Shadow
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii`* Re: Suspension losses147Wolfgang Strobl
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii +* Re: Suspension losses142Frank Krygowski
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii i+* Re: Suspension losses28zen cycle
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii`* Re: Suspension losses27Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii +* Re: Suspension losses4Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i+- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i+- Re: Suspension losses1Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i`- Re: Suspension losses1Roger Merriman
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii `* Re: Suspension losses22zen cycle
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  +* Re: Suspension losses17AMuzi
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  i+- Re: Suspension losses1zen cycle
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  i+* Re: Suspension losses14Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii+- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii`* Re: Suspension losses12Roger Merriman
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii `* Re: Suspension losses11Frank Krygowski
15 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii  `* Re: Suspension losses10Roger Merriman
15 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii   `* Re: Suspension losses9Frank Krygowski
15 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii    `* Re: Suspension losses8Catrike Ryder
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii     `* Re: Suspension losses7Frank Krygowski
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii      `* Re: Suspension losses6Catrike Ryder
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii       `* Re: Suspension losses5Frank Krygowski
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii        +* Re: Suspension losses3Catrike Ryder
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii        i`* Re: Suspension losses2Frank Krygowski
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii        i `- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
17 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  ii        `- Re: Suspension losses1Roger Merriman
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  i`- Re: Suspension losses1Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  +* Re: Suspension losses2Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  i`- Re: Suspension losses1Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  +- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  `- Re: Suspension losses1Frank Krygowski
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii i+* Re: Suspension losses44Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii`* Re: Suspension losses43Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii +* Re: Suspension losses15zen cycle
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i`* Re: Suspension losses14Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i +* Re: Suspension losses4AMuzi
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i i`* Re: Suspension losses3Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i i +- Re: Suspension losses1AMuzi
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i i `- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i +- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i `* Re: Suspension losses8zen cycle
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i  +- Re: Suspension losses1Wolfgang Strobl
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i  `* Re: Suspension losses6Frank Krygowski
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i   +- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i   +* Re: Suspension losses2Roger Merriman
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i   i`- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i   `* Re: Suspension losses2zen cycle
16 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i    `- Re: Suspension losses1Wolfgang Strobl
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii +* Re: Suspension losses8AMuzi
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i+- Re: Suspension losses1Frank Krygowski
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i`* Re: Suspension losses6John B.
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i `* Re: Suspension losses5AMuzi
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i  +- Re: Suspension losses1John B.
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i  `* Re: Suspension losses3Catrike Ryder
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i   `* Re: Suspension losses2Roger Merriman
14 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii i    `- Re: Suspension losses1Catrike Ryder
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii `* Re: Suspension losses19Wolfgang Strobl
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii ii  `* Re: Suspension losses18Frank Krygowski
12 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii i`* Re: Suspension losses69Jeff Liebermann
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii +- Re: Suspension losses1zen cycle
11 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii +- Re: Suspension losses1zen cycle
13 Jan 25 i i iiiii   ii `* Re: Suspension losses2Jeff Liebermann
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   i`- Re: Suspension losses1Frank Krygowski
10 Jan 25 i i iiiii   `- Re: Suspension losses1Frank Krygowski
5 Jan 25 i i iiii`* Re: Suspension losses5Jeff Liebermann
4 Jan 25 i i iii`- Re: Suspension losses1Wolfgang Strobl
5 Jan 25 i i ii`* Re: Suspension losses4zen cycle
6 Jan 25 i i i`- Re: Suspension losses1AMuzi
3 Jan 25 i i +* Re: Suspension losses9Zen Cycle
4 Jan 25 i i `- Re: Suspension losses1Jeff Liebermann
3 Jan 25 i `- Re: Suspension losses1Roger Merriman
3 Jan 25 `* Re: Suspension losses4Frank Krygowski

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal