Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing

Roger Marquis writes:

> (Jobst Brandt) writes:

>> For one who complains about who knows best, the claim that cotton
>> or nylon, or for that matter any other material, has some effect
>> on tire traction should not be left to old wive's tales.

> Who's talking old wives tales?  I gave one excellent and
> subjective methodology for determining tire traction.  Your style
> (obfuscate and run) is showing.

I didn't know you were a methodologist.  This must be an exciting
new major at your school.  On the other hand wheel spin on a slick
spot of the road doesn't do much for the scientific process of
evaluating tire traction.  Were you standing, and if so were you
leaning forward or back.  Was there any traffic to distribute fine
grit over the road or not and many other parameters come to mind.
I can recall unaware riders falling on Pierce Rd. once on a wet day
because the cracks had been tarred.  The more experienced riders had
no problem.  We rode tubulars.

>> this stuff when I started racing and I questioned it but never
>> found where it came from.

> I never knew you raced bikes Jobst.  When was that?

Are you sure it makes a big difference.  Yes I held a racing license
and raced here and in Europe but I won't get into the kind of
pissing match you sucked Tom Kunich into.  Your racing career might
have exposed you to some of the things under discussion but instead
of telling us about how much you raced, you might give some evidence
why some of the lore that you pass on might be true.  There is truth
to some of it and it would be better to know about it than just to
take all of it on faith.  We have enough religions already.

>> As has been discussed at length in prior exchanges, no tread
>> rubber can break through the boundary layer of water on a smooth
>> surface
>>> jobst_brandt@hplabs.hp.com

> Are you trying to say that bald tires don't lose their traction in
> the wet?  Come on Jobst, or was it you who sold Bud and Bernie
> (Avocet) on that hairbrained theory in the first place?

Maybe your newsfeed doesn't get Mike Iglesias's weekly posting, so
just in case let me quote:

|               Weekly posting for Rec.Bicycles.racing
|
| * Trim down your quotes.  Delete parts of the article to which you
|   are not responding.  Less to read from previous posts is better.
|   And please don't include the signature of the article to which
|   you are responding.

If you believe a tread pattern is essential to wet traction you had
better not fly commercial air or ride in buses.  Tread grooves in
these tires are used to gauge how much rubber is left and they are
about four or more inches apart on a larger airliner with only
smooth rubber between them.  These aircraft use their on the brakes
on wet runways at about 0.75g and at over 100 mph.  There is also
substantial weight on the nose wheel that has no brakes.  Smooth
tread works for commercial vehicles as well as on bicycles and on
tire testing machines.

That bicycle racers fall on wet roads is certainly nothing new.  I
think you will find that this occurred before Michelin started
making smooth clinchers.  Besides slick tubulars were also popular
in the late 1930's made by, among others,  Sieber (Chiasso) when
Mrs. Cinelli worked there.  In fact a young Bike racer named Cino
met her there as he was picking up some tires.

jobst_brandt@hplabs.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing