Last TDF winner to flat?

Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
wrote:
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

You "don't believe that tires are aged nowadays" and
you "sure
don't do it."

Yet you seem to believe that the top cyclists/mechanics
do age
tires and that we would therefore be wise to believe in
it.

Sometime in the 1980s I read some info from a tubular tire
manufacturer that tires no longer needed to be aged.

Did this source give any reasons or was this another
marketing blurb
as valid as the one that encouraged aging tires?

I raced a pair of fairly old tires for about 4 years in
key events
before that, and they lasted a long time. After that I
stopped doing
it. I don't think it's necessary with tires now.

It was my experience that I could ride a 2000+ mile ride
int he Alps
on Clement Campionato del Mundo tubulars but not on
Specialized
Touring II tires that needed rotation front to rear half
way through
such a ride. My Clements were brand new as were the
specialized tires.

Can you please explain your decision-making method here
in more
detail?

If there is rigorous impirical evidence I follow that.
If there
isn't, I follow the advice/practice of people who do
well in the
activity in question. In the absense of that I follow
my gut. And
if I have no gut opinion, I just make whatever choice is
cheapest/easiet.

I'm in favor of that method, but I don't think claiming a
performance
effect from aging should be derived from that.

As opposed to your decision-making, which is basically
that in the
absense of numbers you assume conventional wisdom by
winners/people
doing well is wrong.

I don't understand what you mean by that. "Conventional
wisdom" has
often been terribly wrong. Typically, the belief that
tslicks on
bicycles are prone to giving poor traction on wet
surfaces, a subject
that I think was disproven here to most readers
satisfaction.

presumptive nonsense. unless of course you ride on
perfectly dry, perfectly dust and mud-free surfaces. 'cos
the moment it rains, all kind of crap washes onto roads.
even in palo alto. and when there's any form of lose
surface, tread suddenly becomes extremely important. you
can guarantee me perfect road conditions wherever i ride
can you jobst?

When I replaced the stock Primo Comet tires that had
"herringbone" tread with smooth tread Avocet tires, wet
weather traction was greatly improved [1], both on rural
farm country roads and on city streets. How could that be
(rhetorical question)?

[1] Significantly greater rear braking force could be
applied before locking the rear wheel.


so both tires used identical compounds then tom? or are you
just a lightweight bull****ter making false comparisons?
[rhetorical]

W H O O O O O S H!

Way to miss the point, "jim".


no "tom", i refuse to swallow red herring and therefore stick
to the facts. you're comparing two different compounds and
attributing differing results to only tread patterns. not smart.

Now you figure it out. I was wondering when that would happen.

The obvious point is that tread compound is more important that
tread pattern for traction on wet paved roads.

of course, that might be expected from a goddamned factless,
useless, meaningless lightweight, but otoh, someone that poses
as an "engineer" should he held to a higher standard. do
worthy of being held to a higher standard? or are you merely
a goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight?
[rhetorical]


"do worthy of being held to a higher standard?" - huh?

Poses as an engineer? Sorry "jim", but I am a licensed
Professional Engineer. Where is your professional registration?


if you're a professional, why do you pose as a goddamned
factless, useless, meaningless lightweight then? because your
s/n ratio here is 0.0001

Well "jim", giving you the chance to spew profane invective
demonstrates your true nature to the newbies.

so what? does it make your mommy cry?

Non sequitur.


Secondly, I am not making professional recommendations here -
note that "PE" does NOT appear after my name in my signature. If
"jim" was a registered professional, he would understand the
liability implications.

eh? since when did anonymous trolls give a damn about liability???

You did "jim" in this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_thread/thread/e56b27a7e0e0cf79/1843d52a717e2150?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=jim+beam+acceptin g+liability#1843d52a717e2150.




So answer the question "jim" - are you a licensed professional,
or just a salesman who likes to spew invective?

i told you before - i write traffic tickets.

Meter maid and Jobst Brandt stalker. OK then.


Or are you perhaps a theologian or ordained religious person
"jim", as you seem to profess great knowledge about what God is
damming.

oh dear, busted. actually tom, since you caught me out, i
confess, i am satan's lieutenant. or one of them. and
unfortunately for you, i received an email from the big "s" early
this morning. "new inductees, fires for the stoking of". seems
you're on there buddy. apparently you've been disavowed by
jehovah because:

1. you're a lightweight.
2. you're dumb enough to get into it with ed dolan. [see #1 above.]

When I first argued with Ed Dolan, he was new to Usenet and an
unknown quantity. I stopped taking Mr. Ed the Grate seriously half
a decade ago, and only respond to him when it amuses me, or to
correct disinformation for the benefit of the newbies.

tell me - do you want barbecue sauce on your pasty white buttocks
or do you want to be roasted au naturel? i have your arrival down
for friday afternoon - about 4pm. drunk driver.

[goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight.]

As either humor or a flame, this falls flat.


don't say i didn't warn you...

Why "jim", were you planning on showing up in my neighborhood drunk
and behind the wheel?


there's not a jury on the planet that would convict a driver for
running over a recumbent.

goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight.

More on-topic technical content from "jim beam".


really? so where are you on tire compounds? where were you on rim
cracking or extrusions? where were you on spoke fatigue? where were
you on brinelling? where were you on disk brake pull-out forces? where
were you on strength of pre-stressed structures where were you on,
well, /anything/ other being a goddamned factless, useless, meaningless
delusional lightweight?

Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
aka Harry Travis wrote:
On Jul 1, 2:33 pm, Tom Sherman
wrote:
aka Harry Travis wrote:

...
The thing about aging is that it is irreversible, can't be
rushed,...
Actually, aging of tires can be rushed by increasing temperature,
since
chemical reactions and loss of volatile compounds occurs more
rapidly.

Recipes for baking sew-up tires, anyone?


You assume a simple chemical reaction promoted by temperature....

What is the missing ingredient then? Not UV radiation, since tires
were not necessarily aged in direct sunlight. Ozone from electrical
motors, perhaps?


oh dear, goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight tom
sherman missing the point. again.

no tom, "age" in this context refers to the continued cross-linking
that occurs within the material with the passage of time. /not/ the
degradation that occurs when exposed to foreign chemical agents or
to bond-breaking radiation. try to keep up.

OK Mr. Materials Expert, does the rate of cross-linking change with
temperature?


yes. next? oh, you want to know is it's a simple linear
relationship? no, it's not. do you want to know if it's positive or
negative? goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight.

Neither "jim beam" or Harry Travis has yet answered the question - could
the changes wrought in sew-up bicycle tires by traditional aging methods
occur in a shorter period of time in an increased temperature
environment? The silence is deafening.


er, you apparently can't read. but i don't think you /want/ to given
that you're a goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight bent
on self-delusion.

Tom Sherman wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 1, 9:04 pm, wrote:

I take it that you have no data, aren't paying attention to the data
just presented, and don't know of anyone who ages clinchers.


Clinchers are like white wine and tubulars are
like red wine. Everybody knows this: as aficionados
know, tubulars have more subtle variations in ride quality
(and mouth feel) than clinchers, which are more
quickly pleasing, especially on a hot summer ride,
but not as deep. And this is why you age tubulars,
and not clinchers.

So non-pneumatic bicycle tires are Cisco/Wild Irish Rose/Thunderbird
class wine?


goddamned factless, useless, meaningless delusional lightweight.

Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Meter Maid "jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
Ted Bennett wrote:
jim beam wrote:

Tom Sherman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote:
...because rubbers /do/ age...

That explains the presence of several regulars...

goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight.

Now jb is humping Tom's posts as well as Jobst's. That
boy has an appetite.


so you identified any factual, useful, meaningful or even
technical content in sherman's post???

Where did the damnation by God that "beam" speaks of come in?


it comes in every time you open your goddamned factless,
useless, meaningless lightweight mouth.

For the record, I can type with my mouth closed.

By the way "jim", this constant spewing of foul invective
while hiding behind a sock puppet does not help your
credibility any.


says the "engineer" that can't exercise any scientific logic!
or who chooses to deceive. goddamned lightweight.

What are your credentials "jim"? Salesman for Mavic?

and your s/n is???

no, i write parking tickets. goddamned factless, useless,
meaningless lightweight.

Seeing someone of "jim's" alleged age throw verbal temper
tantrums is mildly amusing.


not half as amusing as seeing a goddamned factless, useless,
meaningless lightweight get bent about tech content when he
doesn't contribute any!

Hey "jim", your stalking posts do not contribute a single bit of
useful technical information to the group. Hope this helps.


raw nerve? if you weren't a goddamned factless, useless,
meaningless lightweight with a s/n ratio 0.00001, you'd not be
vulnerable.

Keep digging "jim".


so where's the signal then tom?

goddamned factless, useless, meaningless lightweight.

Well "jim", you are providing so much useful technical information in
your stalker posts, there is no need for the rest of us to contribute
anything.


weren't you accusing /me/ of post humping earlier??? goddamned
factless, useless, meaningless delusional lightweight.