BRIFTER-and other lame cycling terms - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 56 of 56
  1. #51
    banned
    Reputation: Fredrico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    26,773
    Quote Originally Posted by velodog View Post
    Originally there was one tire size that in combination with a 622 diameter rim made up a 700c wheel. That was then, now there are many different width tires that fit a 622 rim, from as small or smaller than 20mm on up thru 40mm or larger. The wheel has stayed the same since its inception, but the tire has changed, and the tires change is measured in mm's. It doesn't matter that the manufacturer calls the tire size 25c, they may not care or know the history and are just printing what they think is right or what they think that the market understands.

    Why would a nominal 28mm tire be called 28c? A mm is a known, whether they hit the mark, or miss, so why settle for a "c" that means nothing unless measured in conjunction with a 622 rim, and then is only, in reality, one tire size?
    Well shucks. A 622mm rim with a 78mm [about 3"] tire measures 700mm in circumference. So ok, if the original clinchers were that fat, one could note that as the original. So C does mean circumference. C makes more sense describing the roundness of the tire in area, width and height combined.

    I think whippersnappers hitting on us old timers saying the C word might be a cultural thing, along with Zwift, statistics and weekly opinion polls. As you say, precise millimeter measurements are more satisfying than references to circumference, even if they aren't any more accurate. Digital thinking likes quantifying with numbers. Letters are a throwback to the literary age.

  2. #52
    [REDACTED]
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Fredrico View Post
    Well shucks. A 622mm rim with a 78mm [about 3"] tire measures 700mm in circumference. So ok, if the original clinchers were that fat, one could note that as the original. So C does mean circumference. C makes more sense describing the roundness of the tire in area, width and height combined.
    Huh? I don't think the circumference of that tire is 700. And if c stands for circumference, what does b in 650b stand for? Sounds like you're making stuff up unless you're mixing up circumference with diameter.
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  3. #53
    Russian Troll Farmer
    Reputation: No Time Toulouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    Huh? I don't think the circumference of that tire is 700. And if c stands for circumference, what does b in 650b stand for? Sounds like you're making stuff up unless you're mixing up circumference with diameter.
    As usual, Freddy is talking out of an alternative orifice. He gets confused, you know.

    First of all, remember your geometry: Circumference = 2*(pi)*r., and Ĝ=2*r. With a diameter of 622mm, the r=311, so therefore the C of a 622D wheel without tires is 1,953mm. Obviously Frederico is completely ignorant in his post, or else he's getting confused in his old age. Now, let's "splain" what it really means:

    In the French/metric sizing system, there is 700A (642mm Ĝ, obsolete), 700B (635mm Ĝ, same as old British "28'" roadsters, rare today), 700C (622mm Ĝ, common today), and 700D (583mm Ĝ, odd, very close to 650B).
    "L'enfer, c'est les autres"

  4. #54
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    11,988
    cockpit
    gravel grinding.
    Blows your hair back.

  5. #55
    .je
    .je is online now
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: .je's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,020
    Any incremental change or substitution of one part for another is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

    This would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT but is even it?


  6. #56
    Devoid of all flim-flam
    Reputation: Mapei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    7,120
    Quote Originally Posted by .je View Post
    Any incremental change or substitution of one part for another is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

    This would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT but is even it?

    Great vid!
    Mapie is a conventional looking former Hollywood bon viveur, now leading a quiet life in a house made of wood by an isolated beach. He has cultivated a taste for culture, and is a celebrated raconteur amongst his local associates, who are artists, actors, and other leftfield/eccentric types. I imagine he has a telescope, and an unusual sculpture outside his front door. He is also a beach comber. The Rydster.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. NNC Brifter - Lame or not
    By frdfandc in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-24-2019, 07:18 AM
  2. What is the most polarizing topic in terms of cycling?
    By pittcanna in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 09-09-2015, 02:24 PM
  3. How much is modern cycling tech really worth in terms of speed?
    By slegros in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-20-2011, 04:41 PM
  4. Other Elitist Cycling Terms
    By Tschai in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-17-2008, 06:24 PM
  5. terms for "the other kind of bike"?
    By DougSloan in forum Fixed/Single Speed
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-10-2004, 02:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.