[BSA rules]

Is the trend for fitting larger volume tyres to carbon road bikes an admission that the frames are too stiff especially for lighter riders? All bikes have to be designed and manufactured for the safety of the heaviest riders, I don’t think a 65 kg rider on any carbon bike even a sportive model will feel any of the comfort advantages associated with this type of bike if it has been designed to be safe for a 120 kg rider, hence I’ll be adding my 28 mm tyres running 70 psi, a carbon seat post,and the best cycling shorts I can find, anyone agree?

Topic

[andystow]

hirsute wrote:

Not sure that is right as a number of wheels state a lower mass than that.

Was that a quote from a website ?

https://www.halfords.com/bikes/faqs/adult-bike-maximum-weight-limit.html

[Dnnnnnn]

I was interested to note

I was interested to note Lizzie Deignan claiming to have run 2.3bar/33psi in her tubeless tyres in the Roubaix race. Hard to believe – I’ve probably blown balloons up with more pressure than that – but a direct quote, apparently.

[Hirsute]

Not sure that is right as a

Not sure that is right as a number of wheels state a lower mass than that.

Was that a quote from a website ?

[Hirsute]

I certainly prefer 32s at 65

I certainly prefer 32s at 65 rather than 25s at 85 given the state of roads around here.

Plus if I use the odd bit of uneven cycle track, it is much easier.

[hawkinspeter]

I’ve unintentionally ridden

I’ve unintentionally ridden with a tubeless tyre at around 20psi, but it was very squirmy and the rim bottomed out on ironworks and potholes.

[BSA rules]

Ha,ok, substitute”won” for
Ha,ok, substitute”won” for “competed in” ?

[EddyBerckx]

BSA rules wrote:

BSA rules wrote:

Nice one, exactly, I should know! My old bike rides( 05 carbon trek madone)feels just as supple as the few big tubed, dropped seatstays modern bikes I’ve tried. I wonder if the frame on the madone was ok for Lance when he won all those TDF’S? I didn’t hear him complain it wasn’t stiff enough!

yeah you might wanna check his Wikipedia entry, it’s been updated in the 16 years since you last looked ?

[BSA rules]

Nice one, exactly, I should
Nice one, exactly, I should know! My old bike rides( 05 carbon trek madone)feels just as supple as the few big tubed, dropped seatstays modern bikes I’ve tried. I wonder if the frame on the madone was ok for Lance when he won all those TDF’S? I didn’t hear him complain it wasn’t stiff enough!

[Simon E]

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Is the trend for fitting larger volume tyres to carbon road bikes an admission that the frames are too stiff especially for lighter riders?

No, it’s an admission that the target market is generally getting fatter. Fat tyres for fat arses, anyone riding 28mm or above is tacitly admitting this.

While the population has been getting heavier on average that is over a far longer timescale. Or do you mean the recent rise of the MAMILs?

As for fat arses riding 28mm, I weigh 60kg and after years on 25mm I now ride 28mm tyres (~55 psi) on the crappy roads of Shropshire. I have 32mm that I intend to try presently to see if it makes any difference. Do I need to do my food shopping at Greggs?

As others have stated, the stiffer = better marketing bullshit has been around for a while. The power we put through the pedals is a fraction of pro riders, we don’t need oversized head tubes and ovalised ‘drainpipe’ downtubes but the brands want us to believe… It’s the same as the shoe stiffness bollocks and the lightweight bullshit – “Your wheels are heavy. Shave of 300g with these wheels and you’ll fly up those hills”. It’s just bullshit. But it sells.

[BSA rules]

Adult bike Maximum weight
Adult bike Maximum weight limit
Unless otherwise stated, adult bicycles are designed to carry a rider of up to 120 Kg (18st 12lbs) and up to 20 Kg of luggage. All luggage carried must be securely mounted on the frame, uniformly distributed and fitted as low as possible, to minimize any adverse effect upon stability. The maximum total weight of the cycle, rider and luggage should never exceed 160 Kg. Unless otherwise stated, folding bikes are designed to carry a rider of up to 85kg (13st 5lbs) and up to 15Kg of luggage.

Recently Viewed

[srchar]

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Is the trend for fitting larger volume tyres to carbon road bikes an admission that the frames are too stiff especially for lighter riders?

No, it’s an admission that the target market is generally getting fatter. Fat tyres for fat arses, anyone riding 28mm or above is tacitly admitting this.

…or perhaps the target market simply has the pleasure of riding on the UK’s decrepit road network, with the potholed, cracked and patched-up stretches of tarmac that qualify as roads.

[EddyBerckx]

BSA rules wrote:

BSA rules wrote:

Hi all, thanks for all the posts/advice, I addmit now it looks like I’ve fallen for all the marketing/reviews/ hype, maybe i would’ve been much better off updating my 2005 trek madone with bigger tyres/higher stem/better bar tape/and comfier saddle as advised. Looking at both bike’s together, the trek has smaller diameter frame tubes everywhere as well as much thinner forks compared to my “endurance/sportive” bike with it’s oversized but trendy frame and fork, it makes sense now that fitting larger tyres will make so much difference to comfort levels,but that’s not what I read in the reviews, it’s all about one bike in a test of many winning in the comfy bike stakes on the tyres it came with, ah well,we live and learn as they say, at least it’s a cheap fix,I don’t know why they bother with an endurance bike category just put higher bars and bigger tyres on a race bikeand Bob’s your uncle!!!

i doubt your 2005 bike will take anything bigger than 25mm tyres tbf

Thanks to bike manufacturer innovation disc brakes (and the wide widths they enable) are now commonplace – yet people have been raging against this “marketing bs” for years…it’s not all a con and EVERYONE HAS A CHOICE!! ?
 

[BSA rules]

Hi all, thanks for all the
Hi all, thanks for all the posts/advice, I addmit now it looks like I’ve fallen for all the marketing/reviews/ hype, maybe i would’ve been much better off updating my 2005 trek madone with bigger tyres/higher stem/better bar tape/and comfier saddle as advised. Looking at both bike’s together, the trek has smaller diameter frame tubes everywhere as well as much thinner forks compared to my “endurance/sportive” bike with it’s oversized but trendy frame and fork, it makes sense now that fitting larger tyres will make so much difference to comfort levels,but that’s not what I read in the reviews, it’s all about one bike in a test of many winning in the comfy bike stakes on the tyres it came with, ah well,we live and learn as they say, at least it’s a cheap fix,I don’t know why they bother with an endurance bike category just put higher bars and bigger tyres on a race bikeand Bob’s your uncle!!!

[Chris Hayes]

Dump it on eBay….there’s

Dump it on eBay….there’s still a shortage of bikes.

[BSA rules]

Hi all, thanks for the posts/
Hi all, thanks for the posts/ /ideas, now I feel like I’ve fallen for the sales, reviews,marketing hype sucker punch! I would have been a couple of thousand pounds better off if I’d have just swapped the tyres/bar tape/seat post/higher stem and saddle on my 2005 Trek madone, looking at both bike’s the trek has smaller diameter carbon tubes everywhere including much lighter looking forks compared to the huge looking tubes and forks on my new sportive/endurance bike,ah well we live and learn, thanks for all the posts.

[Author]

Replies