Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!diego
From: diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Re: Tire Pressure, etc.....  & Turbo R's
Message-ID: <4428@cca.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 12:17:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: cca.4428
Posted: Mon Oct  7 12:17:34 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 9-Oct-85 04:26:16 EDT
References: <5490003@acf4.UUCP> <> <368@cubsvax.UUCP>
Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge
Lines: 61


> >. . . Face it, we've probably all been hoodwinked
> >by Specialized's tire tread ads, and the only reason they're
> >not recommending turbo/rs for all surfaces is because they would
> >be admitting that they've been selling us extra rubber for years.
> >
> >-Ben Leimkuhler
> 
> Ever tried them in the rain?  (I haven't, but I suspect that's where
> they'd lose it.  Just like smooth automobile tires, which have been  
> around for years, and which do hold the track better than treaded
> tires when it's dry.) 
> -Peter S. Shenkin

Hi.  The smooth tires?  I'm one of those people who may be influenced
by effective advertising.  I saw the ads for the new Avocet FasGrips but
have been riding regularly on Specialized Ultralights and Turbo/Ss.

I had a major ride coming up and was very concerned with performance
(more of the speed kind and less of the puncture resistant variety).  I
ordered a set of Turbo/Rs because I figured this way:  if they performed
as advertised, I'd get a great ride and an edge on speed.  If they
didn't, they probably wouldn't be any worse than the Turbo/Ss that were
already mounted.  (I ruled out sew-ups, as I had a flat during training
in the previous week and didn't want to be bothered with the expense
and hassles of those repairs/replacements.)  So it was the 'Rs.

Well, you should have seen me trying to mount those suckers.  I mean
blister village, really.  The Kevlar doesn't stretch much, and it's
extra tight anyhow to hold the 115 psi.  But I would say it was worth
it.  They sing!  No puncture problems, they seat straight, and run on
rough pavement or dirt.  And they did just fine on wet roads, too.  I
weigh 185 and have been riding skinny wheels and tires for years.  These
are definitely the best yet.

As for the Reynolds 531 tubes, it's about equal to Colombus SL.
Critically formulated Chrome-manganese steel tubes are tempered and
cold-rolled to high standards.  They have excellent tensile strength and
rigidity and are usually selected by skilled builders.  My road-racing
frame is a Japanese-built 531 D-B Raleigh.  It's twitchy and responsive.
Outer tube dimensions of these tube sets give a very attractive
appearance.  According to tests performed on the tubes of different
manufacturers by Bicycling Magazine a few years back, the top grade
tubes of Reynolds (English), Colombus (Italian), Ishiwata and Tange
(Japanese), and Vitus (French) had similar characteristics (as affect
frame performance) but different alloy content.  A truly high-tech
tubing from Reynolds, 753, has even greater strength to weight
characteristics than the more popular 531.  One thing in all this
discussion is that while the metal formulations are the same for any
manufacturer's tube series, the tube sets may vary in type.  For
example, Reynolds 531 can have all, some, or no double-butted members.
The tubes are labelled with decals that specify the type of members used
in the frame.  It is worth the effort to look for these decals and know
what they indicate on any frame you contemplate purchasing.  My touring
frame is made of "Tange Special Series Touring Champion Cr-Moly Double
Butted" tubing. It was a bargain frame and I didn't really worry what
that meant.  If you're going for a "big" bike purchase, though, you
should care. 

The Reynolds 531 is going to make you very happy.