Michigander Cross

Comment

Comment by Surly Bastard on June 22, 2010 at 1:06pm

Okay, so no UCI Elite races for me this year. I guess Sven and Stybie can rest easy. Lucky bastards. But if the UCI wants to take away my 34s they're gonna have to pry them off my cold, alloy rims.

Comment by Randy Arellano on June 22, 2010 at 12:51pm

Yeah Marc, UCI *reduced* the max width of a tire for CX.

* https://www.usacycling.org/forms/uci/Cyclo-crossRulesModifications.pdf

Comment by Surly Bastard on June 22, 2010 at 12:12pm

The UCI changed tire width to 33?

Comment by Randy Arellano on June 22, 2010 at 9:49am

With the new rules in place for this coming season, I don't know how strict the officials will be on tire width ("33mm at the widest part"). But this will definitely affect tire choices going into the future. Ironically enough, with all the different tire mfr's and their varying specifications, choosing a tire by "stated" width will always be somewhat subjective. I know that some tires marked as 32 can be as wide as some marked as 35. And the same goes for the other way around, some tires marked as 35 or greater don't necessarily measure out to their marked width.

As far as discs are concerned, I am one that actually likes that UCI allows them. I know it doesn't necessarily affect me since I race (or will be racing) in the B's. But knowing the pro's/elite's will have bike sponsors who will bring the technology to racing will hopefully make the trickle down faster and bring the availability sooner to more mainstream riders. The whole "disc VS canti" debate reminds me of the late 90's early 2000's when the MTB segment went through the same transition. I like the modulation and braking consistency discs offer. Stopping power isn't necessarily what I need, but the consistent (or near consistent) braking performance in different conditions is what I look to have. I know it may not be a CX traditionalist viewpoint, but sometimes some progress is good.

Comment by Surly Bastard on June 21, 2010 at 6:53pm

I think the limit is actually 35 mm. But you're right, that's just elites since lower classes run mountain bikes.

Comment by brianhancock on June 21, 2010 at 6:19pm

The 34 rule is only for the elite classes, from what I understand.

Comment by Surly Bastard on June 21, 2010 at 1:51pm

Big guy like you I'd plop for the 34s. They won't measure your tires at the USGP unless you're riding a Big Dummy with 48s. I'm certain that if you're riding Challenge (a series sponsor) there's a very good chance you won't get DQ'd since they'd have to send home about 75% of the racers and close the series down. However what you're going to do about passing doping control is a whole 'nuther can of Potocki.

Comment by Curt P on June 21, 2010 at 1:34pm

Interesting article...
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/uci-allows-disc-brakes-for-cy...

So should I order some 32`s or 34`s for this season? Are they going to measure my tires for the USGP? :)

Comment by Paul Steigerwald on June 21, 2010 at 6:28am

I wonder why the UCI even wanted to make the change? Have a bunch of Euro pros like Nys and Albert been advocating for the use of disc brakes? I just started mountain biking and during the short time I have been using them I realize that disc brakes certainly work better than cantis, but they are heavier and like Surly Bastard said, do you even need that type of braking power in cross?

If the trend catches on though you will see a flood of used EuroX-Mag cantis on ebay and halfway through the season people will be saying how essential disc brakes are for cross...

Comment by brianhancock on June 20, 2010 at 6:58pm

I've heard of people trying to mod road shifters to include a hydraulic cylinder just for that reason. I've never ridden them but apparently the road version of cable-actuated disc brakes don't feel the greatest.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 30
• 31
• 32
• 33
• 34
• …
• 83
• Next ›
• Page