's Forum Archives - Components

Archive Home >> Components(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 )

Difference(13 posts)

Dec 3, 2002 8:32 PM
What is the difference in folding and non-folding tires? anyone?
BeadsEager Beagle
Dec 4, 2002 3:36 AM
folding = Kevlar or similar - you can scrunch them up.

Non-folding = steel, so you can't.

Practical difference - folding will layer into a pocket/bag/underseat etc. Non folding can only usually be double hooped into a smaller circle.
Folding tires are typically higher end (nm)Kerry
Dec 4, 2002 5:32 PM
Don't know if this makes a difference, but...DINOSAUR
Dec 5, 2002 8:46 AM
My big crash I was involved in almost 3 years ago was caused by a wire bead (Conti 2000 Ultra) tire going flat on the front rim after I ran over a couple of good sized rocks while descending (operator error). As I was turning at an intersection the front tire lost all it's air at that precise moment and rolled off the front rim which caused me to loose the steering and I went down (hard). I'm wondering if a fold up would have done a better job of staying on the rim. For that reason I don't use wire bead tires anymore. And I watch what the heck is on the road in front of me. If I want to save money I just look for the fold ups on sale, usually discontinued models, sometimes at half price.....
HowEager Beagle
Dec 5, 2002 8:50 AM
would wire beads hold less well than soft ones?

In my experience folders are more prone to stretch from on/offing than wire, so the opposite is the case.

Depends on manufacturer I would think...DINOSAUR
Dec 5, 2002 9:52 AM
It probably depends on the tire manufacturer. I can pull off the Conti GP3000's by hand without using tire irons once they have been on my bike for awhile. On the other hand all the Michelin folds ups are hard to get off even using tire irons and a bear to mount the first time around. Like I said I don't know if this made a difference when my tire rolled off it's rim, but I was looking for feedback. I would think the harder to mount, the less apt to roll off. The fold ups have a higher psi rating then the wire beads, I'm just wondering. What is the highest rating psi for a wire bead, about 110? That's probably why most of us use fold ups...any thoughts, anyone?
Going one step further...DINOSAUR
Dec 5, 2002 10:19 AM
That's probably one reason the Pro's use tubbies, as the tires are glued to the rims and they don't have to worry about tires rolling off during those high speed descents. That probably should be added to the advantage of tubular wheels vs clincher wheel debate. But I'll stick with the hard to mount, high psi fold-ups...not too many high end, high psi (120+) wire bead tires available that I can think of....
Can't see that at allEager Beagle
Dec 5, 2002 10:34 AM
1) Lots of pros use clinchers - I have seen plenty of tubbies come off the rims too.
2) The only way a properly fitted clincher is going to roll off is if you get an air-out situation, in which case you are going to be stuffed with either tyre.
3) I can't imaging any situation where I would need to ride a clincer at anything near 120psi+ - why would you?
Can't see that at allDINOSAUR
Dec 5, 2002 10:50 AM
Well, I don't claim to be an expert, otherwise I would be writing for VeloNews or Cycle Sport and not sitting in front of a computer screen along with the rest of us.
I ride my Conti GP3000's at 120 and the Ritchey Toms slicks I have now at 115 as that's where they feel the best for my weight and road condition (foothills). If I ride lower I'm subject to rim punctures if I happen to run over something.

I didn't mean to start a debate, perhaps the real reason behing the wire bead and the fold ups is the weight factor as mentioned in another post....also the wire beads are a heck of a lot cheaper at cost...
I'm sure that weight and foldability areEager Beagle
Dec 6, 2002 1:36 AM
the key to the issue.

Interesting re pressures. I am 210 and tend to ride around 100 on a 23 front and 25 rear Axial Pros, and have never had a pich flat even on the UK's terrible roads. Are you huge and heavy, or on deep section rims (some of which I notice sit the tire deeper in the rim)?
I'm sure that weight and foldability areDINOSAUR
Dec 6, 2002 8:59 AM
I weigh 200, ride one bike with Rolf Vector Pros and another with Mavic OP's. I ride mountain roads that have chipped sealed surface (Sierra Nevada foothills in NorCal). I'm either climbing or descending, no flat land. The shoulders are always covered with gravel and small rocks scattered along with various kinds of debris. When I rains all the debris is washed onto the roadway and mingle in with the pine needles. If I run too low a psi (110 and under) I'll pinch flat if I don't watch where I am going (secret is to watch where I am going). But sometimes you can't see what is under the pine needles. The Conti's feel the best for me between 115-120. Too high a psi and the ride will be too harsh and my tires will wear out rapidly. I was running 130 on Performance Forte Pro Kevlars and the rear tire would last about 800 miles if I was lucky (this is the psi listed on Performance's website). 130 is way too high a psi and I wonder where Performance came up with this psi. I'm really picky about my tires ever since I crashed and ended up in the hospital for seven days. I think there are too many variables to pick a psi for everyone. I like to experiment and I'm always tweaking with my bike. I found some good tires that were discontinued, Ritchey Tom Slicks WCS (the model I use anyway). They are made my Victoria and I found them at Performance for $19.98 a tire. The Rolf wheels on my Klein ride real rough and are subject to rim punctures due to the high rim profile. I also found that when I started to use a mirror I could concentrate on the road ahead of me and I rarely have flats. They also came to a screeching halt when I got tired of dealing with frame and muni pumps and started packing c02. I had a flat a couple of weeks ago and ran through 3 cartridges of c02 before I got air into my tires as It's been so long I forgot how to use it. The psi on my rear tire felt real good and when I got home I checked it and it was 110. I inflated to 110 the next day and I ran over a large piece of gravel and rim punctured about 40 minutes into the ride. I'm also neurotic about any setting on my bike. Everything has to be perfect or I'll pull it off. I've seen some tires listed with a psi rating of 160 and wonder why anyone would want that high a psi that high. In a perfect world I'd stick with the Conti GP3000's at 120 psi, but in a inperfect world for a retired old guy living on a retirement check and a lot of time of his hands (indicated my the length of this message) for riding I have to go with whatever is on sale (I look for whatever is marked down the most).

Anyway-if anyone can recommend a decent wire bead tire at low cost, let me know I need a new set of tires for my second bike that I only ride once and awhile.

The sun is shinning and it's time for a ride...
Dec 7, 2002 4:54 AM
... both wire and kevlar bead tyres perform perfectly normally when their beads have been cut through. I've tried it. This shows that it is not the tension in the bead that holds tyres on; rather its capture under the hook of the rim, which is maintained by the air pressure. Tyres that are difficult to mount are an inconvenience, not an advantage.

re: DifferenceFignons_ponytail
Dec 5, 2002 10:00 AM
The main reason most use fold-ups is for the reduced weight, not for the folding ability (well, unless you do bike tours...). It's the cheapest way to save 50-100 grams of rotating weight.