Nova Haibike
Well-Known Member
I wonder if you would get a better fit with 27.5" wheels and the 2.25" G-Ones. The overall diameter would only be slightly less than the 700C wheels and stock tires.
the Schwalbe Big One / G-One 2.35" 29'er
- Thread starter Reid
- Start date
Asher
Well-Known Member
You'd have to relace the whole motor... Although that may be less work than what Reid is attempting lol
Nova Haibike
Well-Known Member
Just rebuild the wheels. I bet he would enjoy learning how to do it.
Reid
Well-Known Member
It really isn't very much work to crush the chainstays, now that the proper tool is on the way. Got it from Amazon for under $35, used-like-new, three-quarter-inch screw, all the power I should need.
Last edited:
Reid
Well-Known Member
Just arrived today: this over two-inch capacity bridge clamp. It weighs an ounce over four pounds,
If I spoil the frame, well, so be it.
I do not expect to spoil the frame.
PS: I expect to find 25PSI to be a fine pressure for the 2.35" wide rear tire, because during this interim period I am necessarily running the 2.0" version and it works OK at 25PSI on pavement: The rolling resistance of the 2 inch SnakeSkin Schwalbe is subjectively fairly low. But, subjectively not nearly so easy rolling as its bigger brother temporarily sidelined while I write and think about how good it will be to run again.
The present, nominally 2" wide tire, by the way, contains only about half the compressible air volume that the larger tire offers.
The low pressure that can be run with either tire on asphalt or reasonable offroad terrain, is remarkable. Mr. Batchelar of Schwalbe said the other day, in part,
coupled with relatively high volume, a bike run on low pressure tires truly does float over irregularities without converting power to heat in bouncing the bike UP, like it would at higher air pressure. The bumps of a pneumatically-compliant and and corporially-insignificant tire cannot much slow you down. Leave asphalt for turf, you will hardly notice the difference, you will hardly pedal harder, if your tire is A) large and B) low air pressure and C) of relatively low substantiallity.
But just you try going onto turf or gravel or sand with narrower and conventionally armored tires. You are going to pedal considerably harder, for one thing, even if you can avoid sinking or sideslipping. I bold the key result of a narrow tire on purpose:
compliance is everything here. If we accept compressible air (it is always further compressible) as the best asperity-compliance officer, low air pressure is to be saluted if employed in a suitably-wide tire to bear the instantaneous and steady state tire-deflecting loads (the two are mutually exclusive).
Therefore, there is no sweet spot of tire width. The wider, the better, for a sub-20mph rider, for instance; except that reducing the OD wheel weight and increasing the suppleness, both qualities afforded by the LiteSkin carcass, really does make a fundamental and uncriticisable difference...at low pedalling speeds, like under (I will make up to say) about, perhaps, 12mph, where even a non-aero bike and rider do not negatively factor against the bicycle's rolling resistance.
The greater the width, the better the float over uneven or yeilding surface; this stated fact is a sure thing and you will revel over its truth when wind resistance is not an additional factor.
So, at low pressures to roll over asperities undisturbing to the bike, and at sub-20mph speeds, as on beach sand or uneven turf at the speed you will roll in practice, this conditionset establishes just where the very thin, yet reasonably fat and very lightweight G-One LiteSkin tire makes a remarkable difference, a difference it may be asserted, that you will feel and you will be amazed by, if you happen to like to pedal a bike.
I don't care about aero drag at higher speeds where this ultimate tire compliance feature retires due to log-increasing wind resistance, because we have our motors to counterbalance increasing wind resistance.
It is amazingly fun to pedal our CCS bikes at low speed when they seem on level ground to run without any effort at all but to follow the cranks describing a circle.
I am not selling anything. I am not selling sizzle, because this guy already has! I am promoting steak without a carbon footprint pro bono.
It is not work to get you excited to want to try the experience; rather, it is a joy to share. We all demonstrate in order to share; we all sell the truth we have experienced, the truth perceived, the truth we earnestly promote because we think it will help all others.
That is why and that is what every last and first one of us here does with every posting.
If I spoil the frame, well, so be it.
I do not expect to spoil the frame.
PS: I expect to find 25PSI to be a fine pressure for the 2.35" wide rear tire, because during this interim period I am necessarily running the 2.0" version and it works OK at 25PSI on pavement: The rolling resistance of the 2 inch SnakeSkin Schwalbe is subjectively fairly low. But, subjectively not nearly so easy rolling as its bigger brother temporarily sidelined while I write and think about how good it will be to run again.
The present, nominally 2" wide tire, by the way, contains only about half the compressible air volume that the larger tire offers.
The low pressure that can be run with either tire on asphalt or reasonable offroad terrain, is remarkable. Mr. Batchelar of Schwalbe said the other day, in part,
We have our motors for those higher speeds...so what about just leaving power OFF for our general cycling, instead? Is it an attractive proposition?
coupled with relatively high volume, a bike run on low pressure tires truly does float over irregularities without converting power to heat in bouncing the bike UP, like it would at higher air pressure. The bumps of a pneumatically-compliant and and corporially-insignificant tire cannot much slow you down. Leave asphalt for turf, you will hardly notice the difference, you will hardly pedal harder, if your tire is A) large and B) low air pressure and C) of relatively low substantiallity.
But just you try going onto turf or gravel or sand with narrower and conventionally armored tires. You are going to pedal considerably harder, for one thing, even if you can avoid sinking or sideslipping. I bold the key result of a narrow tire on purpose:
compliance is everything here. If we accept compressible air (it is always further compressible) as the best asperity-compliance officer, low air pressure is to be saluted if employed in a suitably-wide tire to bear the instantaneous and steady state tire-deflecting loads (the two are mutually exclusive).
Therefore, there is no sweet spot of tire width. The wider, the better, for a sub-20mph rider, for instance; except that reducing the OD wheel weight and increasing the suppleness, both qualities afforded by the LiteSkin carcass, really does make a fundamental and uncriticisable difference...at low pedalling speeds, like under (I will make up to say) about, perhaps, 12mph, where even a non-aero bike and rider do not negatively factor against the bicycle's rolling resistance.
The greater the width, the better the float over uneven or yeilding surface; this stated fact is a sure thing and you will revel over its truth when wind resistance is not an additional factor.
So, at low pressures to roll over asperities undisturbing to the bike, and at sub-20mph speeds, as on beach sand or uneven turf at the speed you will roll in practice, this conditionset establishes just where the very thin, yet reasonably fat and very lightweight G-One LiteSkin tire makes a remarkable difference, a difference it may be asserted, that you will feel and you will be amazed by, if you happen to like to pedal a bike.
I don't care about aero drag at higher speeds where this ultimate tire compliance feature retires due to log-increasing wind resistance, because we have our motors to counterbalance increasing wind resistance.
It is amazingly fun to pedal our CCS bikes at low speed when they seem on level ground to run without any effort at all but to follow the cranks describing a circle.
I am not selling anything. I am not selling sizzle, because this guy already has! I am promoting steak without a carbon footprint pro bono.
It is not work to get you excited to want to try the experience; rather, it is a joy to share. We all demonstrate in order to share; we all sell the truth we have experienced, the truth perceived, the truth we earnestly promote because we think it will help all others.
That is why and that is what every last and first one of us here does with every posting.
Last edited:
highpockets
Member
I thought these bikes had big ol batteries to push them along. Why worry about rolling resistance? I just don't want to have a flat!
Ann M.
Well-Known Member
Reid, an extra 3mm won't over stress your rear stays; my concern is with damage from the fall that caused the initial misalignment, so look carefully for vertical micro cracks along the tubing that may be visible in the paint or along the welds.
The screw spreader is a simple way to to this; however, Park Tools makes a precision tool to spread and realign the rear stays or forks, the FFS-2. You've already gotten the rear triangle where you need it to be; however, you may find this Park Tool article on Frame Alignment interesting; particularly if you want to really correct the position of the whole rear triangle at some point.
Also wanted to point out to many who've posted on this thread that your images do not show. Please upload an image from your computer so it gets saved here rather than posting a link that can disappear or change over time. If you upload and choose "thumbnail" to display, readers can click on the image to see the larger, high resolution image
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this wider setup.
The screw spreader is a simple way to to this; however, Park Tools makes a precision tool to spread and realign the rear stays or forks, the FFS-2. You've already gotten the rear triangle where you need it to be; however, you may find this Park Tool article on Frame Alignment interesting; particularly if you want to really correct the position of the whole rear triangle at some point.
Also wanted to point out to many who've posted on this thread that your images do not show. Please upload an image from your computer so it gets saved here rather than posting a link that can disappear or change over time. If you upload and choose "thumbnail" to display, readers can click on the image to see the larger, high resolution image
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this wider setup.
Bruce Arnold
Well-Known Member
Certain People <ahem> are obsessed with the lowest rolling resistance possible.
To be fair, Certain People like to pedal a lot and don't always use pedal assist. In fact, those same Certain People have equipped their bike with a switch that turns off pedal assist while leaving the rest of the system On so that, for instance, the front light will still work.
Certain People are a lot more skilled with their hands than I am. But I enjoy reading about all these experiments. I can't help but feel that a body of knowledge is being built up in what is pretty much a pioneering technology, which I hope will be assimilated into ebike design and implementation in general, not just among us hobbyist types.
highpockets
Member
After reading all these 'high tech' posts on this thread I just wanted to lighten things up a bit. I smiled when when my thought hit me. I went ahead and posted it hopefully to share a smile. I'm like you. I enjoyed reading this thread also. Some of it went way over my head though.
Reid
Well-Known Member
Well, we are a forum of individualists.
We post to share our passions and prejudices and we tolerate the oddball seeker of the best of the best.
I do not need the lowest rolling resistance tire in the world on my bike today.
However, I want it.
And I want to make the too-wide, lowest rolling resistance tire in the world today fit the CCS rear triangle.
My bike sort of survived a crash three months ago but the frame is never going to be as it was before the crash. It should be replaced, period.
Eventually, I will get an insurance replacement value for the bike. Until then or until...never quitting...
...I shall proceed with confidence because this cannot fail:
The tubeless benefit of course includes better flat resistance. I have that now.
And too, a 2.35" tire LOOKS very good on a CCS, not fat-bike crazy wide, but it looks like the business it is. It looks athletic and competent and draws even more compliments for the CCS. What a beautiful bike, strangers say. And if at all possible, I reply,
Wanna try it?
We post to share our passions and prejudices and we tolerate the oddball seeker of the best of the best.
I do not need the lowest rolling resistance tire in the world on my bike today.
However, I want it.
And I want to make the too-wide, lowest rolling resistance tire in the world today fit the CCS rear triangle.
My bike sort of survived a crash three months ago but the frame is never going to be as it was before the crash. It should be replaced, period.
Eventually, I will get an insurance replacement value for the bike. Until then or until...never quitting...
...I shall proceed with confidence because this cannot fail:
The tubeless benefit of course includes better flat resistance. I have that now.
And too, a 2.35" tire LOOKS very good on a CCS, not fat-bike crazy wide, but it looks like the business it is. It looks athletic and competent and draws even more compliments for the CCS. What a beautiful bike, strangers say. And if at all possible, I reply,
Wanna try it?
Last edited:
Reid
Well-Known Member
Technical description of the clamp above, how it is expected to work and be used:
The half-round concentrates pressure for a series, next to each other, of very small pressings, to be repeated until the wanted clearance is achieved.
The outside of the tube is prevented from crushing at all by distributing the clamp pressure over a large area, by agency of the stacked fender washers, with compliance afforded by the crushable woolen felt.
The half-round concentrates pressure for a series, next to each other, of very small pressings, to be repeated until the wanted clearance is achieved.
The outside of the tube is prevented from crushing at all by distributing the clamp pressure over a large area, by agency of the stacked fender washers, with compliance afforded by the crushable woolen felt.
Asher
Well-Known Member
It's not just rolling resistance. I have the tire in question on my front wheel.
These tires are more comfortable to ride on, and can handle higher loads, than narrower versions. Which may help reduce flats with a wider contact patch and lower pressure from say running into bumps and potholes.
Hopefully Schwalbe will make 2.8" versions soon.
Within a year or two, non balloon tires on new commuter ebike models will be seen as obsolete, as a design flaw.
These tires are more comfortable to ride on, and can handle higher loads, than narrower versions. Which may help reduce flats with a wider contact patch and lower pressure from say running into bumps and potholes.
Hopefully Schwalbe will make 2.8" versions soon.
Within a year or two, non balloon tires on new commuter ebike models will be seen as obsolete, as a design flaw.
Reid
Well-Known Member
This is so true. And the float. The float. You can run on the shoulder of the road if need be without getting ditched. The bike "feels" as if it runs over turf almost as effortlessly as on pavement. The bumps don't get through the huge air cushion. The bumps don't bump the bike. What does not bump the bike is energy saved for your battery to last longer or your legs to feel stronger.
The engineered, thin tire does not absorb as much of your energy, or the battery's Watts, as a stiffer tire.
Can you feel a few Watts output difference, if you are a fifty Watt cyclist? I do. It is like a small boat anchor was removed.
Snakeskin will definitely be more cut and puncture resistant than LiteSkin. Schwalbe states there is only a couple Watts difference in their power absorbtion.
I, despite being an easily winded duffer at 64, still want to pedal, and pedal a machine that does the basic work for me, not against me. The basic ease. The inherent float over bumps.
Here in Miami today, in a sole CCS, thin is in for chainstays to allow the thickest tire that will fit.
Progress report: I went to work an hour ago. The clamp fits and it works. The one side is done, crushed plenty serious! (grin)
However, the superglued washers are not staying stuck to each other. So I am going to rebond them with epoxy and put under a square of 1/4" thick hard fiberboard in place of the red piano felt pad.
The plot of this story is not thickening. It is thin-inning a lone pair of CCS chainstays.
We are at this time of writing halfway done. Then I have to realign the tire laterally and vertically because the crushing alters the existing alignment. Then I have to ultra-carefully clearance a fender for which there is almost no room. Hours of fiddling. I can profitably waste this time because it is going to be a success.
One side of my CCS chainstay pair is already sufficiently thinned-down for clearance of the Schwalbe Big One.
And Asher is right: WE here are making hay for manufacturers of bikes and tires in the coming season.
Juiced will please, ASAP, direct their factory to increase chainstay clearance for at least for a 2.35" tire and wider rim to suit.
Any wider and we are in RipCurrent's marketing 'hood. Complications there!
Anyway, Asher is a thought leader just like my personal hero,
Perhaps I ought to revise an earlier statement. I am selling the sizzle.
In my little book the people who dare and do are the kings of the hill (and I include Hank Hill, genuine USA moral compass who would never cause harm or alarm to anybody, ever.)
Addendum: Asher is forbidden to like this post because it looks like self congratulation if he does, ha ha! Oh, wait, he already did! Egoist Asher. Just like me and every other public spirited opinion shaper.
Elmer. Wheeler. What a funny name. I read his book found in my long-late, dead in 1945,grandfather's library of casual books, about 1960. The title fascinated. What a funny concept! And today I am posting about bicycles and this long gone but common sense icon who was a fellow of ours, being a wheeler.
What goes round. Now, don't get me started on Chef Boyardee and the greatest carbohydrate of the forum, the world champion pasta pro, Ravi, the certified by Guiness Olympian who has traveled the farthest distance of any human, ever, on an ebike.
Last edited:
Asher
Well-Known Member
Haha thank you for the lavish praise . I leaned on the Bicycle Rolling Resistance site, as well as Trek, Stromer and Specialized's tire choices. @Ravi Kempaiah sealed the deal by suggesting rigid fork and a wider tire. And unlike Reid's adventures , a rigid front fork is a very easy way to cut weight and increase agility.
2.35" may be ideal, but I'd like to see a bike that is capable of 2.8s. Would also make the bike more suitable for mountain biking. Wider tire clearance means having your cake and eating it too. You want a fast bike for the road? Here it is. Want to go off-road? Here's the same bike. Even with the same tires, for mild off road.
I'd also love to see a non-powered urban balloon bike for aggressive fast riding.
Also, my tire seems to have gotten even smoother, as the mohawk on the new tire comes off. If headwinds are low, and especially on the slightest downhill, this thing just rolls interminably.
. I leaned on the Bicycle Rolling Resistance site, as well as Trek, Stromer and Specialized's tire choices. @Ravi Kempaiah sealed the deal by suggesting rigid fork and a wider tire. And unlike Reid's adventures , a rigid front fork is a very easy way to cut weight and increase agility.2.35" may be ideal, but I'd like to see a bike that is capable of 2.8s. Would also make the bike more suitable for mountain biking. Wider tire clearance means having your cake and eating it too. You want a fast bike for the road? Here it is. Want to go off-road? Here's the same bike. Even with the same tires, for mild off road.
I'd also love to see a non-powered urban balloon bike for aggressive fast riding.
Also, my tire seems to have gotten even smoother, as the mohawk on the new tire comes off. If headwinds are low, and especially on the slightest downhill, this thing just rolls interminably.
Reid
Well-Known Member
The Big One truly fits the rear of the CCS after a lot of hand labor. No risk of rubbing any more.
The fender was made to fit, too, after a lot of hand fitting to gain good clearances.
Now that this ordeal is done I am glad I did it. But if I knew how hard it would be I...I guess I would have done it anyway.
The fender was made to fit, too, after a lot of hand fitting to gain good clearances.
Now that this ordeal is done I am glad I did it. But if I knew how hard it would be I...I guess I would have done it anyway.
Last edited:
bob armani
Well-Known Member
Wow Reid, Good job-The bike is looking awesome indeed. Outstanding job with matching components. I betcha Tora would be impressed as well LOL!
Reid
Well-Known Member
I have less and less need for the bus, thank goodness. But if I did need to use my Miami-Dade County free Patriot Pass *am a viet era vet*, I would let most of the air out of the tires so they'd conform to the bus rack's limited tire width carrier. Our Big Asher tires can run with very little pressure in a pinch!
Am thinking, as I pedal manually, because my electrical system is broken at present, how the relatively thin Big Ones seem not to become more work to pedal as I experiementally drop the pressure. Starting at 30 PSI, now I am a bit under 20 PSI front and rear.
I cannot say for sure the bike is easier to pedal as I drop the pressures, but it sure -seems- to be this way.
I have further thoughts and maybe they will gel in a few days for an essay! Huh. Maybe I am just full of OneStar compound...
The placebo effect is pervasive. I can only be subjective, though, in trying to be objective.
The relatively thin tires seem to pedal with less effort as I drop the pressure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance (The article does not fully explain why this is so)
I think of mountain bikers and how low pressure they run their large volume tires tubeless,
Am thinking, as I pedal manually, because my electrical system is broken at present, how the relatively thin Big Ones seem not to become more work to pedal as I experiementally drop the pressure. Starting at 30 PSI, now I am a bit under 20 PSI front and rear.
I cannot say for sure the bike is easier to pedal as I drop the pressures, but it sure -seems- to be this way.
I have further thoughts and maybe they will gel in a few days for an essay! Huh. Maybe I am just full of OneStar compound...
The placebo effect is pervasive. I can only be subjective, though, in trying to be objective.
The relatively thin tires seem to pedal with less effort as I drop the pressure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance (The article does not fully explain why this is so)
I think of mountain bikers and how low pressure they run their large volume tires tubeless,
Last edited:
Barry S
Well-Known Member
About time they get with it and accommodate fat tire bikes.I've finally discovered one disadvantage of going bigger
That was something I have to consider if I go with a fat tire bike. I'll be stuck with fix it, push it, or wait on the wife.Similar threads
