Re: When is fat too fat?

On 3/22/2025 11:10 PM, zen cycle wrote:

 At any rate, yes, there seems to be more and more vindication for wider tires and the bikes needed to support them as time goes on. It's amazing how I was brought into the racing world being told skinny high-pressure tires were the way to go, while older school people back when I started were pooh poohing the idea. I remember one old codger at the local time trial in the 1980s saying that skinny tires should only be used on the track (he was the last guy to show up at the TT with wooden rims). It seems like we should have taken his word back then.

AFAIK, the trend toward accepting the benefits of wider tires was started by Jan Heine with his coast down tests on outdoor soapbox derby tracks. He pointed out that those tests were more representative of real world riding than were the smooth rolling drum tests of the day. And he was inspired to do the tests by his fascination with French randonneuring bikes of the '50s and '60s.
The speed benefits are usually explained by less energy transmitted to the rider's flesh, where it is lost (and adds discomfort). In this forum, I remember Jobst rather fiercely defending rolling drum data, and saying that those energy losses should not be considered part of rolling resistance.
That may be a semantic argument. It's clear those losses are real, and they need to be considered _somewhere_.
--
- Frank Krygowski