CO2 Systems for tire inflation

[Cino1947]

I'd like to buy a CO2 system for tire inflation.
There a number of these on the market. Which is best?
Do they work well?
Thanks,
Josh

[Steve Knight]

On 15 Oct 2004 22:33:09 GMT, (Cino1947) wrote:

>I'd like to buy a CO2 system for tire inflation.
>There a number of these on the market. Which is best?
>Do they work well?

one that can take a variety of cartridges. so you can buy the cheap ones for
airguns and such at walmart.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

[Steve Knight]

On 15 Oct 2004 22:33:09 GMT, (Cino1947) wrote:

>I'd like to buy a CO2 system for tire inflation.
>There a number of these on the market. Which is best?
>Do they work well?

one that can take a variety of cartridges. so you can buy the cheap ones for
airguns and such at walmart.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

[Werehatrack]

On 15 Oct 2004 22:33:09 GMT, (Cino1947) wrote:

>I'd like to buy a CO2 system for tire inflation.
>There a number of these on the market. Which is best?

Pick one that allows the use of the cheap large CO2 carts that you can
get at sporting goods stores and Wal-Mart.

>Do they work well?

For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
faster than air. Use the CO2 inflator as a portable fast-fill method
to employ when patching a tire on the road...and be prepared to use a
pump to top off the tire if one cart's not enough.

--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On 15 Oct 2004 22:33:09 GMT, (Cino1947) wrote:

>I'd like to buy a CO2 system for tire inflation.
>There a number of these on the market. Which is best?

Pick one that allows the use of the cheap large CO2 carts that you can
get at sporting goods stores and Wal-Mart.

>Do they work well?

For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
faster than air. Use the CO2 inflator as a portable fast-fill method
to employ when patching a tire on the road...and be prepared to use a
pump to top off the tire if one cart's not enough.

--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Zog The Undeniable]

Werehatrack wrote:


> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
> faster than air.

Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?

Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.

[Zog The Undeniable]

Werehatrack wrote:


> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
> faster than air.

Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?

Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.

[Steve Knight]

>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?

it sure does.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

[Steve Knight]

>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?

it sure does.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

[Werehatrack]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:05:39 +0100, Zog The Undeniable
> wrote:

>Werehatrack wrote:
>
>
>> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
>> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
>> faster than air.
>
>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?
>
>Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.

Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
mentioned.

Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? Certain
refrigerants have this problem with a number of common hose and o-ring
compounds, with the result that materials choice can be critical in
that area. Use the wrong compound in the o-rings of an R134 system,
for instance, and the o-rings will absorb the 134 on the system side,
and then try to expand out of the atmosphere side...as foam.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:05:39 +0100, Zog The Undeniable
> wrote:

>Werehatrack wrote:
>
>
>> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
>> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
>> faster than air.
>
>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?
>
>Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.

Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
mentioned.

Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? Certain
refrigerants have this problem with a number of common hose and o-ring
compounds, with the result that materials choice can be critical in
that area. Use the wrong compound in the o-rings of an R134 system,
for instance, and the o-rings will absorb the 134 on the system side,
and then try to expand out of the atmosphere side...as foam.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:12:51 GMT, Werehatrack
> wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:05:39 +0100, Zog The Undeniable
> wrote:
>
>>Werehatrack wrote:
>>
>>
>>> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
>>> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
>>> faster than air.
>>
>>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?
>>
>>Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.
>
>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>mentioned.
>
>Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
>experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
>losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
>slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? Certain
>refrigerants have this problem with a number of common hose and o-ring
>compounds, with the result that materials choice can be critical in
>that area. Use the wrong compound in the o-rings of an R134 system,
>for instance, and the o-rings will absorb the 134 on the system side,
>and then try to expand out of the atmosphere side...as foam.

Dear Zog and Werehatrack,

Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
this. Here's the relevant section:

In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:

'The permeation of small molecules through flawless polymer
films occurs by the consecutive steps of solution of
permeant in the polymer and diffusion of the dissolved
permeant.'

In the table for Natural rubber which follows (page
III-233), the following permeabilities are given: oxygen
23.3, argon 22.8, nitrogen 9.43, carbon dioxide 153.
Permeability is governed by solubility and diffusion. There
is little difference in the respective diffusion
coefficients: 1.73, 1.36, 1.17, and 1.25 for the four gases
(note that diffusion coefficients through the polymer do not
reflect either molecular size or molar mass directly).
The striking difference in the permeability figure for
carbon dioxide is associated with solubility in the rubber:
heat of solution figures are -4.2 kJ/mol for oxygen, -0.1
for argon, +2.1 for nitrogen, but -12.5 for carbon dioxide.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/may98/895552329.Ch.r.html

Carl Fogel

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:12:51 GMT, Werehatrack
> wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:05:39 +0100, Zog The Undeniable
> wrote:
>
>>Werehatrack wrote:
>>
>>
>>> For certain values of the word "well", yes. Be aware that air is a
>>> better inflation gas; CO2 will escape through the pores of the tire
>>> faster than air.
>>
>>Does it? CO2 molecules (about 20g/litre at 10 bar) are heavier and
>>larger than O2 (14g/litre) and N2 (12.5g/litre) molecules. Were you
>>thinking of helium, which is very difficult to keep in any container?
>>
>>Incidentally, a racing tyre isn't far off 1 litre in air volume.
>
>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>mentioned.
>
>Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
>experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
>losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
>slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? Certain
>refrigerants have this problem with a number of common hose and o-ring
>compounds, with the result that materials choice can be critical in
>that area. Use the wrong compound in the o-rings of an R134 system,
>for instance, and the o-rings will absorb the 134 on the system side,
>and then try to expand out of the atmosphere side...as foam.

Dear Zog and Werehatrack,

Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
this. Here's the relevant section:

In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:

'The permeation of small molecules through flawless polymer
films occurs by the consecutive steps of solution of
permeant in the polymer and diffusion of the dissolved
permeant.'

In the table for Natural rubber which follows (page
III-233), the following permeabilities are given: oxygen
23.3, argon 22.8, nitrogen 9.43, carbon dioxide 153.
Permeability is governed by solubility and diffusion. There
is little difference in the respective diffusion
coefficients: 1.73, 1.36, 1.17, and 1.25 for the four gases
(note that diffusion coefficients through the polymer do not
reflect either molecular size or molar mass directly).
The striking difference in the permeability figure for
carbon dioxide is associated with solubility in the rubber:
heat of solution figures are -4.2 kJ/mol for oxygen, -0.1
for argon, +2.1 for nitrogen, but -12.5 for carbon dioxide.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/may98/895552329.Ch.r.html

Carl Fogel

[Werehatrack]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 12:13:35 -0600, wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:12:51 GMT, Werehatrack
> wrote:
>>
>>Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
>>experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
>>losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
>>slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? [snip]
>
>Dear Zog and Werehatrack,
>
>Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
>this. Here's the relevant section:
>
>In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
>1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:
[snip]
>
>In the table for Natural rubber which follows (page
>III-233), the following permeabilities are given: oxygen
>23.3, argon 22.8, nitrogen 9.43, carbon dioxide 153.

Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given that
data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a convenience,
not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this could be an
important thing to take into consideration.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 12:13:35 -0600, wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:12:51 GMT, Werehatrack
> wrote:
>>
>>Hmmm. I've seen it stated in numerous places that real-world
>>experience was that CO2 inflation was subject to high permeability
>>losses. I wonder if the problem might actually be that CO2 is
>>slightly soluble in the tire compound matrix instead? [snip]
>
>Dear Zog and Werehatrack,
>
>Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
>this. Here's the relevant section:
>
>In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
>1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:
[snip]
>
>In the table for Natural rubber which follows (page
>III-233), the following permeabilities are given: oxygen
>23.3, argon 22.8, nitrogen 9.43, carbon dioxide 153.

Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given that
data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a convenience,
not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this could be an
important thing to take into consideration.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[foldedpath]

Werehatrack > wrote in
:

> Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
> compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given that
> data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a convenience,
> not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this could be an
> important thing to take into consideration.

Interesting, I didn't know this. But what's the practical result? I can't
tell from those numbers. How much pressure would you lose if you flatted
and re-filled with CO2 in the middle of a 7 day tour, for example? Would it
be enough to matter?

Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try filling one
with air, and the other with CO2 to the same pressure. Then let 'em sit for
a week or two, and compare the pressure loss.

BTW, I recently bought one of those systems (I forget the brand name) that
uses the same inflator head for both a CO2 cartridge and a mini-pump. So
(in theory) you're covered both ways... the CO2 for convenience, and the
pump if you need to top off, or if you get multiple flats and run out of
CO2. I haven't flatted since buying it, so I don't know how well it works
yet.

--
Mike Barrs

[foldedpath]

Werehatrack > wrote in
:

> Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
> compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given that
> data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a convenience,
> not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this could be an
> important thing to take into consideration.

Interesting, I didn't know this. But what's the practical result? I can't
tell from those numbers. How much pressure would you lose if you flatted
and re-filled with CO2 in the middle of a 7 day tour, for example? Would it
be enough to matter?

Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try filling one
with air, and the other with CO2 to the same pressure. Then let 'em sit for
a week or two, and compare the pressure loss.

BTW, I recently bought one of those systems (I forget the brand name) that
uses the same inflator head for both a CO2 cartridge and a mini-pump. So
(in theory) you're covered both ways... the CO2 for convenience, and the
pump if you need to top off, or if you get multiple flats and run out of
CO2. I haven't flatted since buying it, so I don't know how well it works
yet.

--
Mike Barrs

[[email protected]]

Mike Harris writes:

>> Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
>> compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given
>> that data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a
>> convenience, not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this
>> could be an important thing to take into consideration.

> Interesting, I didn't know this. But what's the practical result? I
> can't tell from those numbers. How much pressure would you lose if
> you flatted and re-filled with CO2 in the middle of a 7 day tour,
> for example? Would it be enough to matter?

> Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try
> filling one with air, and the other with CO2 to the same
> pressure. Then let 'em sit for a week or two, and compare the
> pressure loss.

If it is anything like latex tubes of tubulars, you need to pump
daily. I can recall that only in cold weather I could skip pumping on
some mornings. I don't care to even pump once a week, considering
that an air inflated tire, in the absence of a puncture, requires no
pumping in a month.

Jobst Brandt

[[email protected]]

Mike Harris writes:

>> Sonofagun, then, I had it right about CO2 being soluble in rubber
>> compounds. Well, that explains it adequately enough. So, given
>> that data, I'd have to consider CO2 inflators to be merely a
>> convenience, not a valid substitute for a pump. On a tour, this
>> could be an important thing to take into consideration.

> Interesting, I didn't know this. But what's the practical result? I
> can't tell from those numbers. How much pressure would you lose if
> you flatted and re-filled with CO2 in the middle of a 7 day tour,
> for example? Would it be enough to matter?

> Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try
> filling one with air, and the other with CO2 to the same
> pressure. Then let 'em sit for a week or two, and compare the
> pressure loss.

If it is anything like latex tubes of tubulars, you need to pump
daily. I can recall that only in cold weather I could skip pumping on
some mornings. I don't care to even pump once a week, considering
that an air inflated tire, in the absence of a puncture, requires no
pumping in a month.

Jobst Brandt

[Blair P. Houghton]

Werehatrack > wrote:
>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>mentioned.

I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.

--Blair
"Keep a supply with me at all times anyway."

[Blair P. Houghton]

Werehatrack > wrote:
>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>mentioned.

I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.

--Blair
"Keep a supply with me at all times anyway."

[Zog The Undeniable]

wrote:

> Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
> this. Here's the relevant section:
>
> In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
> 1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:
>
> 'The permeation of small molecules through flawless polymer
> films occurs by the consecutive steps of solution of
> permeant in the polymer and diffusion of the dissolved
> permeant.'

Fascinating. This was for latex balloons - I wonder how butyl tubes
compare? Or even polyurethane (if they're still made)?

[Zog The Undeniable]

wrote:

> Honest, Peter cited a link a few months ago that explains
> this. Here's the relevant section:
>
> In the "Polymer Handbook" (Ed. Brandrup & Immergut, 2nd Ed.
> 1975. Wiley), page III-230, it says:
>
> 'The permeation of small molecules through flawless polymer
> films occurs by the consecutive steps of solution of
> permeant in the polymer and diffusion of the dissolved
> permeant.'

Fascinating. This was for latex balloons - I wonder how butyl tubes
compare? Or even polyurethane (if they're still made)?

[Werehatrack]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>mentioned.
>
>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.

Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
would ride a bit rough, though.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>mentioned.
>
>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.

Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
would ride a bit rough, though.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Larry Coon]

foldedpath wrote:

> Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try filling one
> with air, and the other with CO2 to the same pressure. Then let 'em sit for
> a week or two, and compare the pressure loss.

One of my bikes has Continental Sprinter sew-ups, and the
front one has a slow leak. Starting from the same PSI, the
tire goes flat in about two days with pumped-in room air,
and about three days with CO2.

Needless to say, your mileage may vary.


Larry Coon
University of California

[Larry Coon]

foldedpath wrote:

> Someone with a couple of extra wheels sitting around should try filling one
> with air, and the other with CO2 to the same pressure. Then let 'em sit for
> a week or two, and compare the pressure loss.

One of my bikes has Continental Sprinter sew-ups, and the
front one has a slow leak. Starting from the same PSI, the
tire goes flat in about two days with pumped-in room air,
and about three days with CO2.

Needless to say, your mileage may vary.


Larry Coon
University of California

[Blair P. Houghton]

Werehatrack > wrote:
>On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>
>>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>>mentioned.
>>
>>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>
>Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
>entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
>would ride a bit rough, though.

I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:

http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm

--Blair
"Enough to fill them with Angelina Jolie's
old farts..."

[Blair P. Houghton]

Werehatrack > wrote:
>On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>
>>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>>mentioned.
>>
>>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>
>Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
>entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
>would ride a bit rough, though.

I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:

http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm

--Blair
"Enough to fill them with Angelina Jolie's
old farts..."

[philhudson]

ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple t
use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size

--
philhudso

[philhudson]

ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple t
use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size

--
philhudso

[Peter Cole]

"foldedpath" > wrote

> BTW, I recently bought one of those systems (I forget the brand name)
that
> uses the same inflator head for both a CO2 cartridge and a mini-pump. So
> (in theory) you're covered both ways... the CO2 for convenience, and the
> pump if you need to top off, or if you get multiple flats and run out of
> CO2. I haven't flatted since buying it, so I don't know how well it works
> yet.

Maybe you should try it out before you need it? The only CO2 powered gadget
I've had was a dive vest. I decided to try it out before I needed it,
unfortunately, I put it on over bare skin. I think I still have the scar.

[Peter Cole]

"foldedpath" > wrote

> BTW, I recently bought one of those systems (I forget the brand name)
that
> uses the same inflator head for both a CO2 cartridge and a mini-pump. So
> (in theory) you're covered both ways... the CO2 for convenience, and the
> pump if you need to top off, or if you get multiple flats and run out of
> CO2. I haven't flatted since buying it, so I don't know how well it works
> yet.

Maybe you should try it out before you need it? The only CO2 powered gadget
I've had was a dive vest. I decided to try it out before I needed it,
unfortunately, I put it on over bare skin. I think I still have the scar.

[flatline]

I have the same inflator. I've had to use it only once on the road,
and the inflator worked perfectly and saved myself a lot of effort
with a frame pump. I'm sold on the usefulness of CO2 inflators.

r.b.

philhudson > wrote in message >...
> ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple to
> use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size!

[flatline]

I have the same inflator. I've had to use it only once on the road,
and the inflator worked perfectly and saved myself a lot of effort
with a frame pump. I'm sold on the usefulness of CO2 inflators.

r.b.

philhudson > wrote in message >...
> ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple to
> use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size!

[Werehatrack]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 05:52:37 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>
>>>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>>>mentioned.
>>>
>>>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>>
>>Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
>>entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
>>would ride a bit rough, though.
>
>I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:
>
>http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm

You'd have to make the hairs a lot more durable before it would be a
marketable product, but hey, who knows, with enough of them on a fat
tire you could ride up a wall, right?
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 05:52:37 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>
>>>Werehatrack > wrote:
>>>>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was the only
>>>>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice still, with
>>>>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of those
>>>>mentioned.
>>>
>>>I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>>
>>Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer; potentially,the
>>entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule. It
>>would ride a bit rough, though.
>
>I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:
>
>http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm

You'd have to make the hairs a lot more durable before it would be a
marketable product, but hey, who knows, with enough of them on a fat
tire you could ride up a wall, right?
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Guy F. Anderson Sr.]

On 18 Oct 2004 09:54:24 -0700, (flatline) wrote:

>I have the same inflator. I've had to use it only once on the road,
>and the inflator worked perfectly and saved myself a lot of effort
>with a frame pump. I'm sold on the usefulness of CO2 inflators.
>
>r.b.
>
>philhudson > wrote in message >...
>> ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple to
>> use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size!

What they said---but do try it out before you really need it, just to
see how it operates and how much pressure it puts into your tires.
I use el cheapo Crosman "Copperhead" cartridges (unthreaded)--labeled
for pellet guns--and they inflate 700c X 23 tires to about 95 lbs,
plenty of pressure to get home!

[Guy F. Anderson Sr.]

On 18 Oct 2004 09:54:24 -0700, (flatline) wrote:

>I have the same inflator. I've had to use it only once on the road,
>and the inflator worked perfectly and saved myself a lot of effort
>with a frame pump. I'm sold on the usefulness of CO2 inflators.
>
>r.b.
>
>philhudson > wrote in message >...
>> ive got an innovations ultraflate plus and its very good and simple to
>> use, it gets the job done and is a reasonable size!

What they said---but do try it out before you really need it, just to
see how it operates and how much pressure it puts into your tires.
I use el cheapo Crosman "Copperhead" cartridges (unthreaded)--labeled
for pellet guns--and they inflate 700c X 23 tires to about 95 lbs,
plenty of pressure to get home!

[Weisse Luft]

If you get the combination inflator/pump, you can use any size
cartridge and if you opt to use cheap 12g non-threaded, you can pum
20-30 PSI into the tire before hitting the CO2 for high pressur
top-off. Its a little slower than exclusively using CO2 but its fa
easier than 100% pumping

--
Weisse Luft

[Weisse Luft]

If you get the combination inflator/pump, you can use any size
cartridge and if you opt to use cheap 12g non-threaded, you can pum
20-30 PSI into the tire before hitting the CO2 for high pressur
top-off. Its a little slower than exclusively using CO2 but its fa
easier than 100% pumping

--
Weisse Luft

[Jay Beattie]

"Werehatrack" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton >
wrote:
>
> >Werehatrack > wrote:
> >>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was
the only
> >>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice
still, with
> >>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of
those
> >>mentioned.
> >
> >I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>
> Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer;
potentially,the
> entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule.
It
> would ride a bit rough, though.

It's been done. What were those plastic hose inserts called?

I was riding around in the rain with some raceurs this weekend,
and one flatted. He used a CO2 filler but had to top it off with
my Zefal HPX. I still think a full sized frame pump is the best,
but then again, it weighs more than a few grams and is probably
unacceptably big and heavy for most modern cyclists. -- Jay
Beattie.

[Jay Beattie]

"Werehatrack" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:05:20 GMT, Blair P. Houghton >
wrote:
>
> >Werehatrack > wrote:
> >>Oops, you're right, CO2 is a larger molecule. If that was
the only
> >>criterion tha counted, then Xenon would be a better choice
still, with
> >>a molecular diameter that's significantly larger than any of
those
> >>mentioned.
> >
> >I say we fill our tires with cholesterol.
>
> Why stop there? Use a massively cross-linked polymer;
potentially,the
> entire space could be enclosing just one very large molecule.
It
> would ride a bit rough, though.

It's been done. What were those plastic hose inserts called?

I was riding around in the rain with some raceurs this weekend,
and one flatted. He used a CO2 filler but had to top it off with
my Zefal HPX. I still think a full sized frame pump is the best,
but then again, it weighs more than a few grams and is probably
unacceptably big and heavy for most modern cyclists. -- Jay
Beattie.

[B.B.]

In article >,
Werehatrack > wrote:

[...]

>>I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:
>>
>>http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm
>
>You'd have to make the hairs a lot more durable before it would be a
>marketable product, but hey, who knows, with enough of them on a fat
>tire you could ride up a wall, right?

Ooh, you could make a "velcro" helmet--no more itchy chin strap!

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail.net

[B.B.]

In article >,
Werehatrack > wrote:

[...]

>>I wonder what you could charge for tires based on this:
>>
>>http://www.nanotech-now.com/ucb-release-08262002.htm
>
>You'd have to make the hairs a lot more durable before it would be a
>marketable product, but hey, who knows, with enough of them on a fat
>tire you could ride up a wall, right?

Ooh, you could make a "velcro" helmet--no more itchy chin strap!

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail.net

[Dave Kahn]

Larry Coon > wrote in message >...

> One of my bikes has Continental Sprinter sew-ups, and the
> front one has a slow leak. Starting from the same PSI, the
> tire goes flat in about two days with pumped-in room air,
> and about three days with CO2.

Gas escaping through a slow leak is not the same as gas diffusing
through the material itself. In the case of a leak you might expect
the molecule size to be the major factor determining the rate of flow.
This probably explains why the CO2 lasts longer in this case. It does
seem an expensive way to keep refilling a tyre that you know is
leaking.

--
Dave...

[Dave Kahn]

Larry Coon > wrote in message >...

> One of my bikes has Continental Sprinter sew-ups, and the
> front one has a slow leak. Starting from the same PSI, the
> tire goes flat in about two days with pumped-in room air,
> and about three days with CO2.

Gas escaping through a slow leak is not the same as gas diffusing
through the material itself. In the case of a leak you might expect
the molecule size to be the major factor determining the rate of flow.
This probably explains why the CO2 lasts longer in this case. It does
seem an expensive way to keep refilling a tyre that you know is
leaking.

--
Dave...

[Larry Coon]

Dave Kahn wrote:

> Gas escaping through a slow leak is not the same as gas diffusing
> through the material itself. In the case of a leak you might expect
> the molecule size to be the major factor determining the rate of flow.
> This probably explains why the CO2 lasts longer in this case.

I'm not up on the physics of gas diffusion, so I'll
take your word for it.

> It does
> seem an expensive way to keep refilling a tyre that you know is
> leaking.

I just sacrificed one cartridge for the sake of testing...


Larry Coon
University of California

[Larry Coon]

Dave Kahn wrote:

> Gas escaping through a slow leak is not the same as gas diffusing
> through the material itself. In the case of a leak you might expect
> the molecule size to be the major factor determining the rate of flow.
> This probably explains why the CO2 lasts longer in this case.

I'm not up on the physics of gas diffusion, so I'll
take your word for it.

> It does
> seem an expensive way to keep refilling a tyre that you know is
> leaking.

I just sacrificed one cartridge for the sake of testing...


Larry Coon
University of California