Re: Patching TPU innertube

On 1/2/2025 10:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/2/2025 8:30 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 1/1/2025 9:50 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/1/2025 7:49 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>

On 1/1/2025 6:30 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>

On 12/31/2024 6:25 AM, Catrike Rider wrote:

On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 17:54:03 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
>

>
I read Frankie's violins. If I remember the test correct it was
carried out in a hotel room and the test players got to play each
instrument for something like 1 minute.

>
Perhaps you should read more than one article before wading into a
discussion you know nothing about.

I have no opinion on whether violin players can tell the difference
between Strads and modern violins.  It's not important to my point,
which is that *someone* can tell the difference, even if it requires an
electron microscope.  That is all that is required to explain the
difference in price.  Even if the preference is completely unrelated to
the sound actually produced by the violins.
A preference for old violins based completely on history and emotion
may
be a problem for you, but it makes perfect sense to economists.  The
multi-million dollar price seems to be the biggest issue for you; I'm
not sure why.

>
It's not an issue for me, and I didn't say it was. I'll never attempt
to buy a Strad, and I'll never expect to get millions if I sell one of
my fiddles.
>
But since this is Usenet, so you can read back to see the flow of the
thread. We got into this kerfuffle from Roger's statement that "feel"
of a tire can be important, apart from rolling resistance.

>
I did read the thread.
>

I expressed some skepticism, saying "Given what I've read about
violins (Stradivarius can't be told from modern ones in blind hearing
tests) and wines (cheap wines really light up pleasure centers in the
brain if tasters are told the wine is expensive), I'm somewhat
skeptical of a lot of "feel" judgements regarding bike tires - and
bikes."

>
The issue you introduced with violins and wines is price. Not much was
made of price differences with bike tires, although if you can't tell
the difference cheaper is always better.  Paying large amounts for
something that may not be objectively better certainly seemed to bother
you.  If that's not really the case then perhaps you should review your
communication style.

>
OK, I'll try again - not that I'm hopeful.
>
I mentioned price because in our society, it's common to assign a higher price to things that are reputed to be better. Price is thus considered a signifier of higher quality.
>
What characteristic of a violin is thought to be signified by a high price? Its sound. More expensive violins are expected to sound better, and much more expensive violins are expected to sound much better.
>
What characteristic of a wine is thought to be signified by a high price? Its flavor. More expensive wines are expected to taste better, and much more expensive wines are expected to taste much better.
>
But do super expensive violins sound better? Do super expensive wines taste better? It's not obvious! Sound and taste are not directly measurable. They are "soft" properties, entirely subject to the judgment of the observer. So can observers _really_ tell "better" from "worse" in a way that corresponds to price?
>
Nope. With violins, it's been shown dozens of times by careful tests that listeners do not consistently rank the sound of Strads far better than violins costing one five hundredth as much. In careful blind tests, wines have gotten similar results.
>
I think the same likely applies to the "feel" of bicycle bits, at least among close competitors. Many of us have been around here long enough to remember the blind test results of several bike frames made from different grades of steel tubing, back in those days of steel. Road test "experts" couldn't agree on what "felt" best, and often ranked the cheapest as the best riding. I suspect the same would be found for the "feel" of roughly similar tires.
>
In a sense, on this particular issue I'm agreeing with Mr. Tricycle, who claims over and over that almost _everything_ is subjective.
>
But again, I'm not hopeful that he or you or John will agree with me regarding judgments of "feel." The default posture of you three is that I'm wrong no matter what I say. You won't let yourself admit anything else.
>

>
I know nothing of violins and very little of wine (aside from generally of the various Italian regions).
>
But I do know that price curves are parabolic not linear and that scarcity is an equal if not higher input than quality.

 Yes, scarcity affects price. A Mickey Mantle baseball card has no higher intrinsic value than any other baseball card. That really doesn't affect my points above.
 Unlike Mickey Mantle cards, the purported valuable characteristic of Strads is not rarity (there are hundreds of them); it's sound quality. The purported valuable characteristic of very expensive wines is not rarity (there are probably millions of such bottles); it's flavor.
 Those who disagree with me should give us links to a few studies where observers in blind comparison tests consistently said "Ah! THAT one is the Strad!" I've been reading about this issue for decades, and I've never heard of such results.
 And Andrew, I'm curious about your thoughts on the "feel" of closely comparable bike frames, or closely similar tires. Not tubulars vs. clinchers, or road slicks vs. knobbies. Say, parallel models of Continental vs. Michelin.
 

I'm not so sure about all that.
For example, the #2 currently most expensive French vintage is the 1907 Heidsieck & Co. Monopole Diamant Bleu, going for about $275000 per bottle. It does have an unique history and I choose this example because extant quantity is well known:
"The above bottle was part of the cargo of the Swedish schooner Jönköping which was sunk of the coast of Finland in 1916 by a German U-boat.
In 1997 the wreck was located and was salvaged. Of the original cargo of 4400 bottles of 1907 Heidsieck, Goüt Américain, some 2000 bottles were recovered by the salvage crew. Some bottles were tasted and the champagne was found to be in excellent condition, having withstood the pressure and been preserved in the dark, ice-cold water
1 bottle per lot"
https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5150758
2000 bottles, all in, is not 'millions'.  Highly desirable ($$$) but not recovered from shipwrecks French vintages were not produced by the millions, not even close.
Although this is an oddity in some regards, it does amply reflect price relationship to scarcity which, as with baseball cards or Ferraris, is well established.
Regarding bicycles, evaluation of handling among quality examples is highly individual.  (for 'among quality examples', almost all road riders will take any year Cinelli Supercorse over even the best Murray Ohio.)  Each rider has not only different muscular, skeletal, proportion differences but also different riding position and weight distribution (all within a finite range but not exactly alike) and each rider also has preconcieved criteria. For example, one man's snappy is another's twitchy, stable to one rider is sluggish to another, etc.
Attempts to quantify that will fail.
Oh by the way. the absolutely best riding frame I ever owned was a 1976 Pogliaghi Italcorse 56cm. (pretty, too). Never should have sold it. Other riders may find that model wonderful but many others merely call them acceptable.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971