I am confused. Occasionally on this forum, and since I’ve been riding bicycles since from the early 90’s to now, I’ve seen 2 themes I don’t quite understand. Looking for some discussion here.
-
2 frame sizes fit (the key is they both fit, meaning 50/50). Always pick the bigger one. Because you might grow into it? Because one is making up for other inadequacies? Because it weighs more? This one makes no sense, except when you get a second water bottle perhaps.
-
Thin skinned tires for MTB races. I mean thin sidewalls/casings, and not puncture resistant construction. I find that when I race, I have less selection of the line, and am more likely to put my wheels in less than optimal locations than when on trail/training rides. I know I go faster on descents while racing as well, so I put my tires in harsher conditions in races. This one feels like, “IF YOU AIN’T FIRST, YER LAST!” Reese Bobby, 2006. Unless one actually is contemplating the win vs. Flat and lose, you might want tires designed to survive the day, and maybe the next day, and probably the day before. Shouldn’t tire selection be more about the tread pattern for the conditons (moisture/sand/mud, roots, rocks, etc.), and less about how skimpy the casing is? Is it because its smart to ourchase disposable, one rsce tires? I can’t think of the benefit of wanting to plug, or boot and tube in a race (and then throw out afterwards). I know I couldn’t do that faster than using a set of tires thst weighs 200g more.
Thoughts?