Can you travel further on 700 rims?

[Rockymountain]

My personal experience is that I'd agree with the OP wheel builder. In 2012 I cycled LEJOGLE on a Surly LHT, with two rear panniers and a bar bag, often covering 65-80 miles a day, day after day. I had 700x35c tyres on it. After the first two difficult tiring days, I had no problem covering the distance. In 2013, my wife and I rode down the North Sea Coastal path from Esbjerg to Hoek. I was on my Nomad 2 and she was on her Paul Villiers custom built tourer with 700c wheels. I struggled to cover more than 40 miles a day and needed a couple of rest days because of fatigue. Admittedly I was carrying more gear with me in 2013 but the route was definitely much flatter.

26" wheels have huge advantages over 700c in strength (and in getting spare tubes etc in certain countries) but in my experience they take more effort to get going and keep going. I'm sure that physics will disagree with me but that's my experience.

Fraser

[Relayer]

Never say never  

Mavic XM719 26" - 475g

Mavic Open Sport 700C - 490g


Yes, we are talking a bee's dick here, but the bee's dick is on the 700C rim.

jags and I both run 700c wheels with Mavic Open Pro rims which are 435g ... which is significantly lighter than the 560g weight of the 26" Rigida Grizzly CSS rims on my RST.

I'm with you jags!!   

Jim

[martinf]

My own experience with Moultons and Bromptons (16" wheels, so much greater difference than 700C versus 26 inch) suggests that, for similar rims and tyres, the difference between 700C and 26 inch would be negligeable.

I have done 180 km day rides with old F-frame 16" wheel Moultons and Bromptons. Significantly less tiring on the Moultons compared to Bromptons, probably due to effective suspension. At that time I didn't use a 26" wheel bike for long rides (in 26 inch I only had a mountain bike with off-road tyres), but did have a lightweight touring bike with 700C wheels.

Comparing my 700C bike with my Moultons, the latter were better for comfort over long differences, but marginally slower, perhaps due to a combination of heavier weight and less suitable gearing.

This is on road. Off-road or on bad road surfaces a big wheel with a fat tyre works much better than a 16" wheel. But the difference between 26" and 700C is only about 11% at the rim.

In practice, 26" wheels are generally heavier to fit wider tyres (also heavier) so a 700C bike with thin lightweight tyres should perform better than a 26" with heavy tyres. But I find that a 26" wheel bike with lightweight but fat tyres (Supreme 2.0 in my case) rolls very easily, and, though slower, is more comfortable on long rides than my 700C x 28mm bike. So despite the weight difference I tend to ride my rather heavy 26" wheel bikes further than my 700C bike.  

[il padrone]

If it really makes that much of a difference you should all refit your bikes for 27" (630mm)  

[jags]

jags and I both run 700c wheels with Mavic Open Pro rims which are 435g ... which is significantly lighter than the 560g weight of the 26" Rigida Grizzly CSS rims on my RST.

I'm with you jags!!   

Jim

Thanks Jim that ilpadrone fella is way to clever for my little brain 

[Rockymountain]

Further to my earlier post....as I was riding this morning over the potholed bumpy roads of Hertfordshire and North London, I realised why I spend most of my time on my Nomad Mk2 riding 2" Duremes. The Nomad is by far the most comfortable bike I own. It may take a little more effort but at least I can ride in comfort.

[mickeg]

If we are going to get into a debate about tire diameters, I looked up my data that I use for setting my bike computer.  These are measurements I made, probably about plus or minus 5mm for tolerance.  These are not guesses off an internet chart.  My 37mm wide 700c Hutchinson Globetrotters are 2204mm circumference and the 26 inch tire that I consider to be comparable to that tire is the plain Schwalbe Marathon at 40mm width, that circumference is 2038mm.  (If you want diameter, divide by pi.)  Thus, the 700c tire is about 8.1 percent bigger.

As I noted in my previous post, I really do not see any real difference between these tires for rolling ability when I have a load of camping gear on my bike.  They are so close to each other in width that I consider them to be virtually the same width and I use about the same pressure in each size.

I have some 28mm 700c Continental slicks that are 1.3 percent bigger than my 26 inch Schwalbe Extreme 57mm wide tires, but I see little use in such a comparison.  Between these tires I clearly see a difference between which rolls better, the 120 psi in the 28mm slicks makes the bike want to almost coast up hills in comparison.  But I would never consider carrying a load of camping gear on the 28mm tires, thus it is not a fair comparison of tire size.

If it really makes that much of a difference you should all refit your bikes for 27" (630mm)  

That is too small, I think the Raleigh DL1 had a 28 inch tire, not sure what the rim bead diameter was, perhaps 635mm?

Just joking here.

[Andre Jute]

If it really makes that much of a difference you should all refit your bikes for 27" (630mm)  

You guys are all pikers. Real bicyclists fit 36 inch rims and buy their tyres from the monocycle suppliers.



http://www.unicycle.uk.com/unicycle-parts/rims/rim36stealth2.html

Unless of course the real cyclist is a hedonist who wants maximum comfort, then he goes for the 54 inch rim.

http://www.unicycle.uk.com/unicycle-parts/rims/54-velocity-deep-v-road-rim.html

Excellent for the really well-muscled cyclist.

If it really makes that much of a difference you should all refit your bikes for 27" (630mm)  

I did actually say, further up the thread, that the distance "that on 700 wheels you can, like for like, travel further than on 26in wheels ... may not be a huge amount on any day..."

[jags]

you would want to be mental to try one of those things .

where could i get one .

jags.

[il padrone]

(Still riding the 27" wheels on my old 1981 Cecil Walker road Audax bike)



Greatest challenge is finding high quality tyres for it. There are also challenges with the limited cassette range that I have. People have suggested that I convert it to a wider range cassette, but once you start on that, one change reqires another...... requires another..... and before you know it I'm $1000 poorer and the bike is no longer a 1980 classic ride.

Keeping it pretty much 'as is' for the foreseeable future.

[triaesthete]

Hmmm. 36ers do seem to smooth out the bumps   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYt6IqaHk_Q

I'm with MartinF on this one. It's a Hare and Tortoise thing.  After 12 or even 15 hours on 26x1.6 Marathon Supremes I don't feel beaten up and have avoided a lot of fatigue. (Mental as well as physical as I haven't had to concern myself with pinchflats, broken spokes, rim wobbles, wet grip, off road, technical descending or the odd pot hole, and I can use any rideable route (towpaths, NCN, sustrans, bridleways, byways etc) to avoid trunk routes and town centres and other stress raisers. And this on a bike stiff enough to carry some weight too: RST)

For me 700x32  on Mk3 Audax is faster for about 4 hours and then diminishing returns set in due to the greater harshness of the ride. Stopping for a rest is the same as stopping for a puncture: average speed =0.

I imagine this is why flexy titanium frames are so popular as they promise to square this circle. Albeit with huge expense and breakages. As a result  I'd really like a Mk4 Audax to have smaller diameter steel tubes, a 1" steerer and a quill stem to give it more compliance at the expense of luggage rating. Basically a modern take on Il padrones Cecil Walker...

Dreaming on
Ian

[JimK]

one change requires another

That's how I ended up buying my Nomad! My Trek 520 has a seven speed rear.... then the shifter went... they don't make those anymore! My LBS did find some down-tube shifters that would work. But I got all freaked out by the shifting technology. Hoping the Nomad lasts a good many more miles... yeah, part of what motivates me to get out and ride is the desire to make that investment pay off!

This might help keep your beautiful old bike on the road at some point:

http://www.compasscycle.com/hub_gb_120.html

[JimK]

36ers do seem to smooth out the bumps  

Wow, thanks for that! I want one of those!

[il padrone]

This might help keep your beautiful old bike on the road at some point:

http://www.compasscycle.com/hub_gb_120.html

Wow! Thanks very much for that link. Just what I'd be looking for (eventually) as I have one 5-speed cassette spare (be it in a narrower range than I'd like). Looks like I may need to jump to a 6-speed cassette to get the ratios I'd desire though.

[NZPeterG]

You guys are all pikers. Real bicyclists fit 36 inch rims and buy their tyres from the monocycle suppliers.



http://www.unicycle.uk.com/unicycle-parts/rims/rim36stealth2.html

Unless of course the real cyclist is a hedonist who wants maximum comfort, then he goes for the 54 inch rim.

http://www.unicycle.uk.com/unicycle-parts/rims/54-velocity-deep-v-road-rim.html

Excellent for the really well-muscled cyclist.

I did actually say, further up the thread, that the distance "that on 700 wheels you can, like for like, travel further than on 26in wheels ... may not be a huge amount on any day..."

I was thinking to build a 36"er bike for my trip down Africa (back in 2012) the only thing to stop me was that I would have had to take a number of 36" tube with me as there are very Hard to Find in Africa  



The Rule is the bigger the wheel the faster the ride.....

Kiwi Pete .... Having Fun Riding