On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:47 PM, EricP <[email protected]> wrote: > At 225 pounds, and often carrying things on the bike, I find that > anything less than 35mm is just too narrow for me. Funny, because a > few years ago when I weighed 300 pounds, a Bianchi Volpe with Vittoria > Randonneur 700x32 tires was just fine.
To chime in with a different perspective, I regularly carry 30 lb loads on the rear of my '73 Motobecane and the 29 mm actual IRC Tandems handle it all with grace and aplomb, even on smooth-ish dirt and gravel. I've carried up to 45 lb, rear, with the same tires with no problems. Now, I must admit that I chose tires in the 28-30 mm range because I often ride the bike with much smaller loads, but I haven't yet wished for anything much bigger. I'm 170, buck nekkid. > > Can tires be too big? With my limited experience it's bike > dependent. My Sam Hillborne doesn't seem to like 700x40 Marathon > Supremes as well as 700x35 Pasela TGs. However, with non-Rivendell > bikes, the Salsa Fargo seems to be really happy with the WTB Vulpine > 2.1s which I ride both on and off pavement. The only limitations > there are the rider. > > For a bike such as the Surly LHT in the larger size with 26" wheels > have discovered that two inch wide tires are pretty much a "sweet > spot" in handling. I found the same with my late, early '90s Diamond Back Axis Team Weirdo Fixie. With 559X60 BAs, that bike handled very sweetly -- sedate compared to a good road bike like my skinny tire'd 559/571 Rivs, but sweetly. And the 12" high bb allowed me to carve into turns pedaling away happily with no bad results. OTOH, other similar mtbs with, say, 1.25s or, even worse, 1" Turbos, did not handle nearly as well. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
