Tubular tires: to glue or to tape??

[cycledogg]

I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Rick in Tennessee

[invasivenorman@gmail.com]

On Sep 16, 11:41*am, cycledogg <cycled...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
> will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
> recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
> advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.

Tufo tape is good (and is the only type I have used)
and fairly simple to apply. Dunno if it can be reused,
since it wasn't my tire.

Most of the (bike shop) glues are fine too, and usually
cheaper per tire but you'll end playing lint roller the first
few times you glue.

Experimentally, I tried some Plio-Bond contact
cement and a couple of weeks later the tube self
destructed in the casing (it was leaking at several
dozen points behind the seam). Of course this was
a really old tire, so they may not be connected.
The other tire glued so is doing fine.

The upside: About 6.00usd for what must be hundreds
of tires worth. Super handy for resticking frayed
handlebar tape.

I don't know if it creeps when heated.

The downside(s): Needs to dry for a long time (>12hr).
Sticks almost as well as peanut butter if mounted half-
cured. Fills an entire house with the delicious aroma
of MEK, which you might never be able to forget.

[Robert Chung]

cycledogg wrote:
> I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
> will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
> recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
> advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.

Since any advice would be appreciated, I'd advise selling those wheels and
going to clinchers.

You're welcome.

[Revtom]

On Sep 16, 11:41*am, cycledogg <cycled...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
> will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
> recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
> advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.
> Cheers,
> Rick in Tennessee

I have had great results with TUFO extreme tape. When I replaced the
tires on one wheel set, it took 45 minutes to get the old tires off.
The residue cleans up pretty well with naphtha - as long as you're
outside. There was an article a while back in VeloNews about carbon -
vs- alloy tubular rims. It appears that when a tubie separates from a
carbon rim, it's catastrophic. The tire just snaps off. Aluminum rims
hold better - the tire works it's way off, but you can feel it.
There's a great resource by an engineer at the University of Kansas -
the Kurata Thermodynamics Lab - google it and you'll pretty much see
all you need to know.

Tom

[chrismhaney]

My fad is 3M fastback. $15 used per tube. Does many tires and is easy enough
to remove should you flat. Although a good tire like Victoria rarely flats.
I had my first one pop in 10,000 miles last weekend.
The tape in my opinion is expensive and difficult to remove for the next
tire.

Chris

"cycledogg" <cycledogg@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:418c9279-1741-45e8-9ce5-bdb2bb33cb34@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
> will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
> recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
> advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.
> Cheers,
> Rick in Tennessee

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 16, 10:41*am, cycledogg <cycled...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I just bought my first set of tubular wheels. They are Zipp 909 and
> will be used for TT only. My question is gluing or taping the tires
> recommendations. If taping is ok, what brand of tape should I use? Any
> advice for a tubie-newbi would be appreciated.
> Cheers,
> Rick in Tennessee

Glue. ONLY downside is the need to wait 24 hours before using. Tape
'may' damage the carbon rim when you take it off to add a new tire.
Cannot be reused.

[Robert Chung]

invasivenorman@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Tufo tape is good (and is the only type I have used)
> and fairly simple to apply. Dunno if it can be reused,
> since it wasn't my tire.
>
> Most of the (bike shop) glues are fine too, and usually
> cheaper per tire but you'll end playing lint roller the first
> few times you glue.

Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get comparably
low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove should you be
unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or nothing bet. OTOH, if you go
that route it means you get to save the weight of a spare and tools -- they
won't do you any good.

[invasivenorman@gmail.com]

On Sep 16, 1:26*pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:

>
> Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
> find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get comparably
> low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove should you be
> unlucky enough to get a flat.

Subjectively speaking, I can't tell the difference when riding,
but repairing flats is worlds apart.

Also, it's not impossible, just highly improbable. And fun=<0

[Tom Kunich]

"Robert Chung" <anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:LTSzk.528$Ws1.497@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
> find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get
> comparably low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove
> should you be unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or nothing bet.
> OTOH, if you go that route it means you get to save the weight of a spare
> and tools -- they won't do you any good.

What's plain is that either you haven't used tubulars or you have the hand
strength of a 12 year old.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:26:34 -0700, "Robert Chung"
<anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote:

>invasivenorman@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Tufo tape is good (and is the only type I have used)
>> and fairly simple to apply. Dunno if it can be reused,
>> since it wasn't my tire.
>>
>> Most of the (bike shop) glues are fine too, and usually
>> cheaper per tire but you'll end playing lint roller the first
>> few times you glue.
>
>Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
>find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get comparably
>low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove should you be
>unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or nothing bet. OTOH, if you go
>that route it means you get to save the weight of a spare and tools -- they
>won't do you any good.

Robert, the way I glue tires I can't get them off w/o using a butter
knife to get under them. Is that good enough for low RR?

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 16, 12:26*pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:
> invasivenor...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Tufo tape is good (and is the only type I have used)
> > and fairly simple to apply. *Dunno if it can be reused,
> > since it wasn't my tire.
>
> > Most of the (bike shop) glues are fine too, and usually
> > cheaper per tire but you'll end playing lint roller the first
> > few times you glue.
>
> Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
> find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get comparably
> low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove should you be
> unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or nothing bet. OTOH, if you go
> that route it means you get to save the weight of a spare and tools -- they
> won't do you any good.

Coupla points and we sink into tubie vs clinchers, once again this
fall.

Rolling resistence, teeny differences as they are, is not on the list
of advantages of tubulars.

Iffa ya got a light weight, carbon wheelset, it's gonna be a tubular,
not clinchers. They have their own problems.

[Amit Ghosh]

On Sep 16, 4:08*pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address> wrote in message
>
> news:LTSzk.528$Ws1.497@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
>
> > Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you can
> > find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get
> > comparably low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to remove
> > should you be unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or nothing bet.
> > OTOH, if you go that route it means you get to save the weight of a spare
> > and tools -- they won't do you any good.
>
> What's plain is that either you haven't used tubulars or you have the hand
> strength of a 12 year old.

dumbass,

people that ride zipp 909s aren't frugal r.b.tech types that would
patch tubulars, so you might as well glue the tires such that removing
them destroys them.

[Robert Chung]

Tom Kunich wrote:
> "Robert Chung" <anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote in message
> news:LTSzk.528$Ws1.497@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>
>> Both tapes and light glue produce higher rolling resistance than you
>> can find with good clinchers. If you use enough glue in order to get
>> comparably low rolling resistance then the tire is impossible to
>> remove should you be unlucky enough to get a flat. That's an all or
>> nothing bet. OTOH, if you go that route it means you get to save the
>> weight of a spare and tools -- they won't do you any good.
>
> What's plain is that either you haven't used tubulars or you have the
> hand strength of a 12 year old.

Tom, I noticed you in the background about 42 seconds into this CNN report:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txDWRR5WRFQ

Almost as funny as McCain declaring Spain to be a member of the axis of
evil.

[Robert Chung]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> Robert, the way I glue tires I can't get them off w/o using a butter
> knife to get under them. Is that good enough for low RR?

In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per tire
rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats. This means
that roadside repairs are no longer viable because it'd take you 20 minutes
and something like a butter knife to get the tire off the rim without
destroying one or the other. If you're Tyler Hamilton you can count on your
team car to come up with everything you need but otherwise it's simpler to
use one of the low Crr clinchers.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:21:52 -0700, "Robert Chung"
<anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
>> Robert, the way I glue tires I can't get them off w/o using a butter
>> knife to get under them. Is that good enough for low RR?
>
>In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
>appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
>combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per tire
>rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats. This means
>that roadside repairs are no longer viable because it'd take you 20 minutes
>and something like a butter knife to get the tire off the rim without
>destroying one or the other. If you're Tyler Hamilton you can count on your
>team car to come up with everything you need but otherwise it's simpler to
>use one of the low Crr clinchers.

I'm surprised by your suggestion of that amount of glue - I would have
thought thick glue would flex more.

I cannot reuse the tires I glue -- the base tape tends to rip unless
I'm super-careful and use the knife every inch of the way.

No roadside changes with these.

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 16, 8:21*pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:>
> In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
> appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
> combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per tire
> rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats. This means
> that roadside repairs are no longer viable because it'd take you 20 minutes
> and something like a butter knife to get the tire off the rim without
> destroying one or the other.

Since he said he's using these for TT wheels, roadside repairs
shouldn't be a consideration. Same for road race wheels. If you get
a flat, your race is over anyway unless you're lucky to have a race
with a wheel truck that actually gets you a wheel in time to catch
back on. (which never seems to happen in my experience)

My tires get destroyed when I have to pull them off. This is with
either Conti or Mastic One glue. I think I have at least as as much
strength as a 13 yr old, and I had blisters from trying to get the
tires off. I ended up having to use my wife's blow dryer (carefully)
to soften the glue up in order to get a section pulled away from the
rim. Then I used a plastic lever to lift the tire off until I could
pull it. The base tape was wrecked though (both Vittoria and VeloFlex
tires)

On a fresh rim and new tire, I think I used about 2 tubes per wheel.
Base coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim & tire). 2nd coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim
& tire). Then final coat (rim only), wait a few minutes, then mount
tire. I think this is what is described on Zipp's site ... and is
what my wrench friends do.

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 16, 6:21*pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> > Robert, the way I glue tires I can't get them off w/o using a butter
> > knife to get under them. *Is that good enough for low RR?
>
> In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
> appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
> combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per tire
> rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats.

Absolute poppycock.

This means
> that roadside repairs are no longer viable because it'd take you 20 minutes
> and something like a butter knife to get the tire off the rim without
> destroying one or the other. If you're Tyler Hamilton you can count on your
> team car to come up with everything you need but otherwise it's simpler to
> use one of the low Crr clinchers.

'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
terms?

Please compare to the real advantages of tubulars, if you know what
they are.

[Robert Chung]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

> I'm surprised by your suggestion of that amount of glue - I would have
> thought thick glue would flex more.

http://www.biketechreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2347

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:50:45 -0700, "Robert Chung"
<anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised by your suggestion of that amount of glue - I would have
>> thought thick glue would flex more.
>
>http://www.biketechreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2347
>

Thanks,

JT

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 16, 9:02*pm, "derFah...@gmail.com" <derFah...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since he said he's using these for TT wheels, roadside repairs
> shouldn't be a consideration. *Same for road race wheels.

Well... just a thought for "the long walk home".
Or, replacing a DNF with a slow time *and* not walking. Just a
thought.

> My tires get destroyed when I have to pull them off. *This is with
> either Conti or Mastic One glue. (snip) The base tape was wrecked though (both Vittoria and VeloFlex
> tires)

Base tapes can be replaced. Possibly worth the expense, with tube
patch and postage, for a new tire with a small hole in it.

> On a fresh rim and new tire, I think I used about 2 tubes per wheel.
> Base coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim & tire). *2nd coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim
> & tire). *Then final coat (rim only), wait a few minutes, then mount
> tire. *I think this is what is described on Zipp's site ... and is
> what my wrench friends do.

Using one tube for two wheels, with probably some "base" left over on
the rims from previous use, and the "one layer, wait for the tire to
be 'dry'" method, my cohort used to (often, usually) get bonds (when
we all rode sewups 20 years ago) that required a tool to get the tire
started off-- not always; but at minimum, we got well-glued-on tires
that didn't fall off once the air was out, which is what we wanted
since we were riding lots of dirt/gravel roads and "pop" flats were
not uncommon.

IME, more glue without the "full" waiting period in between layers
resulted in gobs of Clement Red oozing out from underneath the tire,
especially once the Texas sun started cooking. Not good for smooth
braking when it gets on the rim sidewall.

If I were riding sewups these days, for sake of convenience I'd
probably use something of a combination method, where the rim bed
would get a full but not deep layer of cement applied, including
"good" (not too dry) leftover cement, wait an hour or so, and then put
that full, thin layer on the tire, and as soon as it was just "dry",
put the tire on the rim, adjust and pump up to 100 PSI or a little
more. Theory being, the variable-ness we saw with the old simultaneous
tire/rim glue method might have been due to waiting too long for the
tire's cement layer to dry while the thicker layer in the rim bed was
"setting up". Speculation. But I'd give it a try or two, just to make
the drill a little easier. What a PITA. Nice ride, though! <g>

(Opinion) Those tires you put on your bike and ride are in harm's way
as soon as they touch the pavement. If/when they flat, maybe they're
worth fixing and maybe not, all things considered. Meanwhile, you want
them stuck securely to the rim, and you even more want them stuck
securely to the rim during the time period occurring in between the
moment they go flat and the moment you get slowed down enough to hop
off unharmed, from an upright position. --D-y

[hizark21]

I prefer using one of the clear sew up glues like Vittoria and or 3m
fast tack. The advantage is that they don't dry hard and are easier
to clean. The other advantage is that once you initially glue the sew
up on you can simply add more glue to the rim the next time you
put .another sew up on . This assumes the glue is not dirty of course.
Cleaning may be a issue since you have to use a sovlvent if you are in
a hurry. Solvent is probably not good for composites. If time is not
a issue you can simply set the wheel aside and the glue will go away
over time.

On Sep 16, 7:02*pm, "derFah...@gmail.com" <derFah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 8:21*pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
> wrote:>
>
> > In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
> > appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
> > combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per tire
> > rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats. This means
> > that roadside repairs are no longer viable because it'd take you 20 minutes
> > and something like a butter knife to get the tire off the rim without
> > destroying one or the other.
>
> Since he said he's using these for TT wheels, roadside repairs
> shouldn't be a consideration. *Same for road race wheels. *If you get
> a flat, your race is over anyway unless you're lucky to have a race
> with a wheel truck that actually gets you a wheel in time to catch
> back on. (which never seems to happen in my experience)
>
> My tires get destroyed when I have to pull them off. *This is with
> either Conti or Mastic One glue. *I think I have at least as as much
> strength as a 13 yr old, and I had blisters from trying to get the
> tires off. *I ended up having to use my wife's blow dryer (carefully)
> to soften the glue up in order to get a section pulled away from the
> rim. *Then I used a plastic lever to lift the tire off until I could
> pull it. *The base tape was wrecked though (both Vittoria and VeloFlex
> tires)
>
> On a fresh rim and new tire, I think I used about 2 tubes per wheel.
> Base coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim & tire). *2nd coat, let dry 24 hrs (rim
> & tire). *Then final coat (rim only), wait a few minutes, then mount
> tire. *I think this is what is described on Zipp's site ... and is
> what my wrench friends do.

[Claus Assmann]

P.Chisholm wrote:

> Iffa ya got a light weight, carbon wheelset, it's gonna be a tubular,
> not clinchers. They have their own problems.

What about Lightweight Standard C? What kind of problems do those
have?

see: http://www.carbonsports.com/LW_Standard_C.lasso

[Tom Kunich]

"P.Chisholm" <peter@vecchios.com> wrote in message
news:b9efc535-74cb-42b4-908d-46c42db214a9@c22g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 16, 6:21 pm, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:
> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> > > Robert, the way I glue tires I can't get them off w/o using a butter
> > > knife to get under them. Is that good enough for low RR?
> >
> > In order to get a good tubular to match the Crr of a good clincher, it
> > appears that the key is to get complete contact over the entire tire/rim
> > combo -- this means probably two to two-and-a-half tubes of glue per
> > tire
> > rather than the usual one, with about 24 hours between coats.
>
> Absolute poppycock.

Those that can't talk an awful lot about it don't they?

> 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> terms?

Essentially nothing. Anyone that's ridden sewups knows that they're faster
when properly done. We'd all be riding them today if they weren't such a
pain in the butt to repair.

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 17, 7:32*am, "P.Chisholm" wrote:

> 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> terms?
>
> Please compare to the real advantages of tubulars, if you know what
> they are.

I don't pretend to "know". Some years ago, I asked one of the many,
many posters here (hope that's enough weeds and thickets), personally
(face to face), someone who is comfy with numbers, what a real
difference in "time" would be, clincher v. tubular, for a 40k TT.

Their answer was "one second". With a grin.

I'm not totally sure but I think that was "advantage, clincher". And
on we go. --D-y

[Robert Chung]

P.Chisholm wrote:

> 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> terms?

In real world terms, it depends on exactly which tubular and clincher. At
the speeds one sees for a 40K TT and assuming reasonably good CdA, a poor
Crr tubular could be as bad as 2 sec/km slower than a good Crr clincher. A
good Crr tubular will be as fast as a good Crr clincher but no faster ("no
faster" from the point of view of statistical significance).

[Tom Kunich]

<dustoyevsky@mac.com> wrote in message
news:bf54ea5a-5f78-4383-bc1a-6ceecf8d29d1@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> Using one tube for two wheels, with probably some "base" left over on
> the rims from previous use, and the "one layer, wait for the tire to
> be 'dry'" method, my cohort used to (often, usually) get bonds (when
> we all rode sewups 20 years ago) that required a tool to get the tire
> started off-- not always; but at minimum, we got well-glued-on tires
> that didn't fall off once the air was out, which is what we wanted
> since we were riding lots of dirt/gravel roads and "pop" flats were
> not uncommon.

Don't explain this to these morons. Let them believe that tubulars are
Satan's work.

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 17, 9:04*am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:

> Well... just a thought for "the long walk home".
> Or, replacing a DNF with a slow time *and* not walking. Just a
> thought.

For a TT ... personally I'd rather have a "DNF". You know, when
people look at the results on line and see your ****ty time, they
don't know that you had to stop and change a flat :-)

Even with clinchers, I don't know anyone who carries a tube, levers,
and pump in a road race. Except for maybe an early training race on
bad roads. or for the cat5's who forget to take their saddlebags off.

What is a PITA is when you get a flat in the middle of the season,
with another race coming up, and you'd really rather be riding than
hassling with mounting a new tire. So you end up using crappy wheels
in the next race.

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 17, 9:15*am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:bf54ea5a-5f78-4383-bc1a-6ceecf8d29d1@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Using one tube for two wheels, with probably some "base" left over on
> > the rims from previous use, and the "one layer, wait for the tire to
> > be 'dry'" method, my cohort used to (often, usually) get bonds (when
> > we all rode sewups 20 years ago) that required a tool to get the tire
> > started off-- not always; but at minimum, we got well-glued-on tires
> > that didn't fall off once the air was out, which is what we wanted
> > since we were riding lots of dirt/gravel roads and "pop" flats were
> > not uncommon.
>
> Don't explain this to these morons. Let them believe that tubulars are
> Satan's work.

Kunich, I object to the tone in the first place. Fat lot of good it
will do me with you, but just to make the point.

In the second place, I refute any connection with you, supposed or
implied.

The OP was (no longer virginal after this thread <g>) a "tubie
newbie", as he said.

Finding this ng and asking a really pertinent and POLITE (get it?
polite-- maybe you could look it up?) question is hardly a hallmark of
moron-ity. Quite the opposite; it's the foolish, the ego-trippers, and
so forth, who don't ask questions after finding sources of
information.

For his pains, I hope (and expect) the OP will go forward and use the
heck out of his new wheels. With a good, rugged back-up set for when
you get to "natz" and it's, like, raining or something <g> and you
want to finish.

Like they taught me (back in the days when people were crumpling
aluminum-foil rims in crits) "If you don't finish, you can't get a
placing". --D-y

[cycledogg]

On Sep 17, 10:37 am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com>
wrote:
> On Sep 17, 7:32 am, "P.Chisholm" wrote:
>
> > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> > terms?
>
> > Please compare to the real advantages of tubulars, if you know what
> > they are.
>
> I don't pretend to "know". Some years ago, I asked one of the many,
> many posters here (hope that's enough weeds and thickets), personally
> (face to face), someone who is comfy with numbers, what a real
> difference in "time" would be, clincher v. tubular, for a 40k TT.
>
> Their answer was "one second". With a grin.
>
> I'm not totally sure but I think that was "advantage, clincher". And
> on we go. --D-y

Thankyou :)

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 17, 9:37*am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 7:32*am, "P.Chisholm" wrote:
>
> > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> > terms?
>
> > Please compare to the real advantages of tubulars, if you know what
> > they are.
>
> I don't pretend to "know". Some years ago, I asked one of the many,
> many posters here (hope that's enough weeds and thickets), personally
> (face to face), someone who is comfy with numbers, what a real
> difference in "time" would be, clincher v. tubular, for a 40k TT.
>
> Their answer was "one second". With a grin.
>
> I'm not totally sure but I think that was "advantage, clincher". And
> on we go. *--D-y

Asking JFT about crr and advantages of tubulars, not you..

[Off The Back]

Robert Chung wrote:
> In real world terms, it depends on exactly which tubular and clincher. At
> the speeds one sees for a 40K TT and assuming reasonably good CdA, a poor
> Crr tubular could be as bad as 2 sec/km slower than a good Crr clincher. A
> good Crr tubular will be as fast as a good Crr clincher but no faster ("no
> faster" from the point of view of statistical significance).

Speaking as a former die-hard tubular user, I've made the switch
whole-heartedly to clinchers for everything except pure hillclimbs. Seems to
me that weight is the only advantage tubulars offer (paging mr. fogel) but
that means using cf rims which has another set of issues. I hear the
argument about flatting at high speed but I had a clincher blowout on 40 mph
descent at Devil's Punchbowl RR and managed to stay upright. Today's tires
don't seem to come off the rim like the old days.

So I say this to current tubular fanatics: These are not your father's
clinchers... get a set of high-thread-count tires (~300 tpi) and light latex
tubes and give them a try. You won't be disappointed and you won't get glue
all over yourself.

Mark
http://marcofanelli.blogspot.com

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 17, 10:04*am, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
wrote:
> P.Chisholm wrote:
> > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> > terms?
>
> In real world terms, it depends on exactly which tubular and clincher. At
> the speeds one sees for a 40K TT and assuming reasonably good CdA, a poor
> Crr tubular could be as bad as 2 sec/km slower than a good Crr clincher. A
> good Crr tubular will be as fast as a good Crr clincher but no faster ("no
> faster" from the point of view of statistical significance).

CRR, good or bad, has nothing to do with the real advantages of
tubulars. Crr is hardly ever mentioned when asked, 'why use tubies'?

Anybody that cites Crr when talking about advantages and disadvantages
of tubies vs clinchers doesn't use them, hasn't used them, got their
info 3rd, 4th hand, from the guys at the coffee shop on Sunday....

[P.Chisholm]

On Sep 17, 10:19*am, Claus Assmann <ca+sendmail(no-copies-
please)@mine.informatik.uni-kiel.de> wrote:
> P.Chisholm wrote:
> > Iffa ya got a light weight, carbon wheelset, it's gonna be a tubular,
> > not clinchers. They have their own problems.
>
> What about Lightweight Standard C? What kind of problems do those
> have?
>
> see:http://www.carbonsports.com/LW_Standard_C.lasso

Other than $4000++ price? I am sure they can make a carbon clincher
that can withstand proper clincher tire pressures but it's gonna be
expensive...

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 17, 12:33*pm, "Off The Back" <marco_fenne...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> So I say this to current tubular fanatics: These are not your father's
> clinchers... get a set of high-thread-count tires (~300 tpi) and light latex
> tubes and give them a try. You won't be disappointed and you won't get glue
> all over yourself.

There is merit to that argument. Good clinchers make a big difference
(though personally I have had bad luck with latex tubes).

However ... I will say this: I have a set of Zipp 404 clinchers which
i really like and use a lot for the Tues night crit and lesser races,
and a set of Zipp tubulars (404/808) and for me there is no comparison
between the two (the tubies being preferred, given the choice).

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 17, 12:33*pm, "Off The Back" <marco_fenne...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> You won't be disappointed and you won't get glue
> all over yourself.

meant to add also: if you use latex gloves, you won't get glue all
over yourself. I am sloppy, and it works for me.

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Sep 17, 9:33*am, "Off The Back" <marco_fenne...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> ... get a set of high-thread-count tires (~300 tpi) and light latex
> tubes and give them a try.

300 tpi per layer?

[Off The Back]

derFahrer wrote:
> Even with clinchers, I don't know anyone who carries a tube, levers,
> and pump in a road race. Except for maybe an early training race on
> bad roads. or for the cat5's who forget to take their saddlebags off.

For the record, this year I used clinchers in 3 NRC races and the Elite Natz
RR, and don't feel that I compromised any performance one bit. Obviously no
need to worry about tubes and pumps in those. In lots of other road races,
including our district championships, I carried a tube, lever, and mini
pump. To me it's a worthwhile tradeoff if there's any chance at all of being
stuck by the side of the road.

> What is a PITA is when you get a flat in the middle of the season,
> with another race coming up, and you'd really rather be riding than
> hassling with mounting a new tire. So you end up using crappy wheels
> in the next race.

Or even worse, in the middle of a stage race.

Mark
http://marcofanelli.blogspot.com

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:24:08 -0700 (PDT), "derFahrer@gmail.com"
<derFahrer@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sep 17, 12:33*pm, "Off The Back" <marco_fenne...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> So I say this to current tubular fanatics: These are not your father's
>> clinchers... get a set of high-thread-count tires (~300 tpi) and light latex
>> tubes and give them a try. You won't be disappointed and you won't get glue
>> all over yourself.
>
>There is merit to that argument. Good clinchers make a big difference
>(though personally I have had bad luck with latex tubes).
>
>However ... I will say this: I have a set of Zipp 404 clinchers which
>i really like and use a lot for the Tues night crit and lesser races,
>and a set of Zipp tubulars (404/808) and for me there is no comparison
>between the two (the tubies being preferred, given the choice).

I can't tell the difference riding.

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 17, 3:03*pm, "P.Chisholm" <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 9:37*am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 17, 7:32*am, "P.Chisholm" wrote:
>
> > > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> > > terms?
>
> > > Please compare to the real advantages of tubulars, if you know what
> > > they are.
>
> > I don't pretend to "know". Some years ago, I asked one of the many,
> > many posters here (hope that's enough weeds and thickets), personally
> > (face to face), someone who is comfy with numbers, what a real
> > difference in "time" would be, clincher v. tubular, for a 40k TT.
>
> > Their answer was "one second". With a grin.
>
> > I'm not totally sure but I think that was "advantage, clincher". And
> > on we go. *--D-y
>
> Asking JFT about crr and advantages of tubulars, not you..

I guess you got a free answer, then. --D-y

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:07:03 -0700 (PDT), "P.Chisholm"
<peter@vecchios.com> wrote:

>On Sep 17, 10:04*am, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
>wrote:
>> P.Chisholm wrote:
>> > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
>> > terms?
>>
>> In real world terms, it depends on exactly which tubular and clincher. At
>> the speeds one sees for a 40K TT and assuming reasonably good CdA, a poor
>> Crr tubular could be as bad as 2 sec/km slower than a good Crr clincher. A
>> good Crr tubular will be as fast as a good Crr clincher but no faster ("no
>> faster" from the point of view of statistical significance).
>
>CRR, good or bad, has nothing to do with the real advantages of
>tubulars. Crr is hardly ever mentioned when asked, 'why use tubies'?
>
Oh, up till a few years ago people still claimed that. And even now in
a discussion group I'm in some people were saying since the rated max
on high quality tubulars is higher than clinchers they could be pumped
harder to roll faster....

>Anybody that cites Crr when talking about advantages and disadvantages
>of tubies vs clinchers doesn't use them, hasn't used them, got their
>info 3rd, 4th hand, from the guys at the coffee shop on Sunday....

So yeah, rolling resistance is stil claimed.

[Robert Chung]

P.Chisholm wrote:

> Anybody that cites Crr when talking about advantages and disadvantages
> of tubies vs clinchers doesn't use them, hasn't used them, got their
> info 3rd, 4th hand, from the guys at the coffee shop on Sunday....

1. The OP was talking about TTs, where poor Crr can be a definite issue.
2. I used tubulars for about 10 years.

I think this makes you 0-for-2.

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 17, 3:07*pm, "P.Chisholm" <pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 10:04*am, "Robert Chung" <anonymous.cow...@invalid.address>
> wrote:
>
> > P.Chisholm wrote:
> > > 'low crr' once again. What differences are these number, in real world
> > > terms?
>
> > In real world terms, it depends on exactly which tubular and clincher. At
> > the speeds one sees for a 40K TT and assuming reasonably good CdA, a poor
> > Crr tubular could be as bad as 2 sec/km slower than a good Crr clincher.. A
> > good Crr tubular will be as fast as a good Crr clincher but no faster ("no
> > faster" from the point of view of statistical significance).
>
> CRR, good or bad, has nothing to do with the real advantages of
> tubulars. Crr is hardly ever mentioned when asked, 'why use tubies'?
>
> Anybody that cites Crr when talking about advantages and disadvantages
> of tubies vs clinchers doesn't use them, hasn't used them, got their
> info 3rd, 4th hand, from the guys at the coffee shop on Sunday....

I believe I have an understanding of where you're coming from, Mr.
Chisholm, from your past postings. I, FWLIW and limited by my
understanding, would say I share your enthusiasm for sewups. The
reason I don't ride sewups is, simply: m-o-n-e-y. And time spent
scrounging, repairing (also m-o-n-e-y). I have a friend who rides only
sewups because he has confidence in them-- "handling", feel, whatever
one would like to call it. No argument here whatsoever; even while I
follow him through a what-we-think-is-fast corner successfully on my
"beads", I'd rather be on well-glued sewups, even knowing there are
guys on lumpy cheap clinchers with patched inner tubes who would swoop
around us while texting on their cell phones. They call that "sharing
a bias" in some quarters; "knowing what you like" in others.

I disagree with you IRT Crr. It is a vital component of interest in
the use of sewups: a quick read of Mr. Chung's link shows a
representation of high-level ("natz") competitors (aka Fatty Masters
in some cases) who are wading through piles of "information" searching
for the fastest wheels (tires and wheels) they can find for use in
their competitions, to take full advantage, even at the risk of DNF's
with marginally robust equipment ("break right after the finish
line"), of "faster", however slight the difference. Because races are
won by wheel widths and small parts of seconds sometimes, and at least
some of these guys are very competitive types with a lot besides money
invested in winning.

Noting, I've read a trifred site (no citing from faulty memory, not
going to spend time to find and post link) where the drift was: "When
you get serious, you go to sewups". Powerful rhetoric for the
"invested" crowd.

I (easily) could be wrong, but I get the idea that the OP, and not a
few other bicyclists: triathloners, USAC-- USCF/FUCS, whatever--
licensed amateur USA racers, and "others", including Tuesday Nighter
Outlaw racers, and those who are members of other event-sanctioning
bodies; including also those riders not entered in formal
competitions-- head down this sometimes-mystical path and find
themselves "tubie newbies" as with the OP-- (excuse me, but we've all
been there) "whoops, what do I do now?" while dealing with conflicting
"official" information IRT to the care and use of sewups.

That sound about right? Possible, in some cases at least?

Therefore, let us join with our brothers on two wheels and help them
get their sewup tires glued on as securely as fits their needs and
desires; and if Crr may be optimized, let us share any information
that may accomplish this end also.

Moment of silence for the $24.95 + $2.95 shipping mail-order Vittoria
CG. The loss endures.





Amen!
--D-y

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 17, 6:01*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com>
wrote:
>
> >However ... I will say this: *I have a set of Zipp 404 clinchers which
> >i really like and use a lot for the Tues night crit and lesser races,
> >and a set of Zipp tubulars (404/808) and for me there is no comparison
> >between the two (the tubies being preferred, given the choice).
>
> I can't tell the difference riding.

They definitely sound a lot different on the road, but that probably
doesn't count. The braking is also a lot different ... but that is b/c
of the carbon surface so that doesn't count either.

I know I coast down the same descents faster on the 404/808, but that
could in part be from the more aero, deeper rear wheel.

They are also quite a bit lighter than the 404 clinchers. I probably
wouldn't notice that all the time, but in the hills, yeah, maybe.

c'mon, I have to justify having 2 sets of zipp wheels.

[Donald Munro]

derFahrer@gmail.com wrote:
> c'mon, I have to justify having 2 sets of zipp wheels.

Dumbass,
Assuming you're a fatty master you don't need no stinking
justification. Just do it.

[Donald Munro]

Robert Chung wrote:
> I think this makes you 0-for-2.

The French are taking up cricket ?

[derFahrer@gmail.com]

On Sep 18, 4:17*am, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > c'mon, I have to justify having 2 sets of zipp wheels.
>
> Dumbass,
> Assuming you're a fatty master you don't need no stinking
> justification. Just do it.

Can I use that as the rationale for buying a new 'cross bike too?

You should copyright it and sell it to Zipp for use in their ads.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<31cad78f-3a9e-44f2-8dc3-13348236849b@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"derFahrer@gmail.com" <derFahrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sep 18, 4:17*am, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > c'mon, I have to justify having 2 sets of zipp wheels.
> >
> > Dumbass,
> > Assuming you're a fatty master you don't need no stinking
> > justification. Just do it.
>
> Can I use that as the rationale for buying a new 'cross bike too?

Do what you have to.

> You should copyright it and sell it to Zipp for use in their ads.

What, you've never heard of viral marketing?

Tubies? Clinchers? Seriously? My theory is that at the very sharpest end
of the scale, sure, use tubies (properly glued) for the very small
weight and rolling-resistance advantages they confer. The other part of
my theory is that there are a lot of people using tubulars who barely
get the first advantage (or are doing dumb things like running
lightweight-but-not-aero wheels on courses without extremely steep
pitches) and screw up their rolling resistance because they don't use
the fussy gluing techniques that actually grant a Crr benefit.

In other words, clinchers are the compact discs* of cycling: ignore the
purists, for 99% of all circumstances they are way better.

*Seriously, even among those 1% of audiophiles who have the gear and
patience to "do vinyl properly," I suspect there's a lot of
self-delusion going on. I don't object, per se, but the silliness that
gets sold in the high-end audio market makes fatty-master bait look
almost reasonable by comparison.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Tom Kunich]

"Off The Back" <marco_fennelli@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bbvAk.8116$PS3.8100@newsfe06.iad...
>
> For the record, this year I used clinchers in 3 NRC races and the Elite
> Natz RR, and don't feel that I compromised any performance one bit.
> Obviously no need to worry about tubes and pumps in those. In lots of
> other road races, including our district championships, I carried a tube,
> lever, and mini pump. To me it's a worthwhile tradeoff if there's any
> chance at all of being stuck by the side of the road.

The problem isn't with traction or cornering ability. The very small
advantage you get from tubulars is that they ride so much softer and
smoother than clinchers that you don't grow as fatiqued on long hard races.
This is not much of an advantage save on very long and hard races or long
stage races where your strength is really being tested.

For most people these days the top of the line clinchers are so close to
tubulars that it doesn't make any sense to go through all the trouble and
expense of tubulars. If you're a pro racer on very hard rides it can make a
difference and there are hired mechanics taking care of the wheels for you.

[Bill C]

On Sep 18, 8:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> *Seriously, even among those 1% of audiophiles who have the gear and
> patience to "do vinyl properly," I suspect there's a lot of
> self-delusion going on. I don't object, per se, but the silliness that
> gets sold in the high-end audio market makes fatty-master bait look
> almost reasonable by comparison.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

You aren't kidding. I've still got a nice Adcom system that cost
about a third of the hyped "audiophile" stuff, and unless your using a
scope and other instruments you aren't hearing a difference.
Bill C

[Robert Chung]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> My theory is that at the very sharpest
> end of the scale, sure, use tubies (properly glued) for the very small
> weight and rolling-resistance advantages they confer.

Properly glued tubulars, as a class, don't appear to have rr advantages.
Proper gluing brings good tubulars into equivalence with good clinchers.

[dustoyevsky@mac.com]

On Sep 18, 7:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> The other part of
> my theory is that there are a lot of people using tubulars who barely
> get the first advantage (or are doing dumb things like running
> lightweight-but-not-aero wheels on courses without extremely steep
> pitches) and screw up their rolling resistance because they don't use
> the fussy gluing techniques that actually grant a Crr benefit.

How about using lightweight (tubular) wheels while racing in packs,
jumping out of corners?
--D-y

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Sep 18, 6:44*pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sep 18, 8:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > *Seriously, even among those 1% of audiophiles who have the gear and
> > patience to "do vinyl properly," I suspect there's a lot of
> > self-delusion going on. I don't object, per se, but the silliness that
> > gets sold in the high-end audio market makes fatty-master bait look
> > almost reasonable by comparison.
>
> > --
> > Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> > "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> > "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
>
> *You aren't kidding. I've still got a nice Adcom system that cost
> about a third of the hyped "audiophile" stuff, and unless your using a
> scope and other instruments you aren't hearing a difference.

How would a "scope and instruments" make me hear a difference?

Everytime I pick up an audio magazine written for audiophools I throw
up on it.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<8935d86d-658c-478b-8e43-19ce49be359e@a8g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Bill C <tritonrider@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Sep 18, 8:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > *Seriously, even among those 1% of audiophiles who have the gear and
> > patience to "do vinyl properly," I suspect there's a lot of
> > self-delusion going on. I don't object, per se, but the silliness that
> > gets sold in the high-end audio market makes fatty-master bait look
> > almost reasonable by comparison.
> >
> > --
> > Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> > "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> > "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
>
> You aren't kidding. I've still got a nice Adcom system that cost
> about a third of the hyped "audiophile" stuff, and unless your using a
> scope and other instruments you aren't hearing a difference.
> Bill C

It's worse than that, Bill: if you could actually measure the difference
in a lot of audio-fetish gear, that would be progress.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Tom Kunich]

"Robert Chung" <anonymous.coward@invalid.address> wrote in message
news:WKDAk.472$hc1.330@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> My theory is that at the very sharpest
>> end of the scale, sure, use tubies (properly glued) for the very small
>> weight and rolling-resistance advantages they confer.
>
> Properly glued tubulars, as a class, don't appear to have rr advantages.
> Proper gluing brings good tubulars into equivalence with good clinchers.

Can you just give us a break Robert? Tubulars have MUCH lower rolling
resistance because those silly tests you read referred to clinchers and
tubulars at the SAME pressure. The fact is that top line racing tubulars are
pumped up to twice the pressure of clinchers.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<18072872-a465-42ba-a185-50a5f126f193@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
"dustoyevsky@mac.com" <dustoyevsky@mac.com> wrote:

> On Sep 18, 7:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > The other part of
> > my theory is that there are a lot of people using tubulars who barely
> > get the first advantage (or are doing dumb things like running
> > lightweight-but-not-aero wheels on courses without extremely steep
> > pitches) and screw up their rolling resistance because they don't use
> > the fussy gluing techniques that actually grant a Crr benefit.
>
> How about using lightweight (tubular) wheels while racing in packs,
> jumping out of corners?
> --D-y

Calculate the inertial differences and then get back to me. Better yet,
calculate the aero differences too, compared to Zipp 404s or similar.

Jumping out of corners is easier with less drag,

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[Robert Chung]

Tom Kunich wrote:

> Can you just give us a break Robert? Tubulars have MUCH lower rolling
> resistance because those silly tests you read referred to clinchers
> and tubulars at the SAME pressure. The fact is that top line racing
> tubulars are pumped up to twice the pressure of clinchers.

Um, no. You've overlooked the tests on the last page that show how
increasing pressure affects Crr. When I talk about good tubulars as a class
compared to good clinchers as a class, I'm extrapolating both to typical
pressures and typical road surfaces. There are reasons why one might want to
use tubulars but for the application the OP was asking about, Crr isn't one
of them.

[Donald Munro]

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
> Everytime I pick up an audio magazine written for audiophools I throw up
> on it.

Consider yourself lucky your pets are fatty master cyclists and not
audiophools then.

[SLAVE of THE STATE]

On Sep 18, 9:45*pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <8935d86d-658c-478b-8e43-19ce49be3...@a8g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> *Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 18, 8:48*pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > *Seriously, even among those 1% of audiophiles who have the gear and
> > > patience to "do vinyl properly," I suspect there's a lot of
> > > self-delusion going on. I don't object, per se, but the silliness that
> > > gets sold in the high-end audio market makes fatty-master bait look
> > > almost reasonable by comparison.
>
> > > --
> > > Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> > > "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> > > "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
>
> > *You aren't kidding. I've still got a nice Adcom system that cost
> > about a third of the hyped "audiophile" stuff, and unless your using a
> > scope and other instruments you aren't hearing a difference.
> > *Bill C
>
> It's worse than that, Bill: if you could actually measure the difference
> in a lot of audio-fetish gear, that would be progress.

Differences/impairments in high fidelity electronic equipment can be
measured, although it isn't necessarily a trivial exercise if
performance is high. (I'm not including speakers.)

Claiming a human can (differentially) detect the small amounts of non-
linearity, noise, and spurious that measuring equipment can is a-
nutter-hole story.