Low tyre pressure vs suspension

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
Post Reply
thelawnet
Posts: 2736
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Low tyre pressure vs suspension

Post by thelawnet »

I've tried my tyres (29x2.1" Rapid Rob) around 15psi, they aren't tubeless so this isn't recommended, but they go over large rocks very easily. At 30psi they slip around and struggle to make purchase over the same rocks. Also the ride is very comfortable at 15-20psi, but horrid at 30psi on the same stretch of rocky path. (30psi is I think the rated minimum)

I have a fairly basic Suntour XCR fork (coil), I am probably going to replace it with a Rockshox Reba and this I think will help, but I'm wondering whether I should perhaps go tubeless first.

In general perhaps could one make a cheap 'suspension' bike using tubeless tyres at low pressure and a rigid fork?

How about, for example at roughly the same price point this bike:

https://www.bicyclesonline.com.au/2018- ... ntain-bike (roughly £235 here in Indonesia at the moment)

or this one
https://www.bicyclesonline.com.au/2018- ... ntain-bike (roughly £285)

versus this one

https://www.bicyclesonline.com.au/2018- ... -city-bike (roughly £260)

but then converting the latter to tubeless (not sure those 700x42 tyres would be the right thing, might want some chunkier tyres perhaps)

A decent bike with proper suspension would obviously be far more expensive

Note that apparently at low tyre pressures a tubeless setup has significantly lower rolling resistance than tubed. https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... utyl-tubes
Airsporter1st
Posts: 796
Joined: 8 Oct 2016, 3:14pm

Re: Low tyre pressure vs suspension

Post by Airsporter1st »

I'm no expert, but I would have thought that if adequate suspension for mountain bikes used as described could be provided by tyres alone, there would be no need for mechanical suspension.

Those bikes look to be very good value at the prices you are paying. From what you have said, I don't think the hybrid (the third one) would suit you.

I notice the second one comes in differing specs - have you priced it with the Rokshok fork?
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Low tyre pressure vs suspension

Post by reohn2 »

I have a Genesis Longitude a rigid MTB,fitted with 29er x 2.4 folding Conti X Kings with tubes in,I ride them with an all up weight of 100kg at 15psi front and 25psi rear,that can go as low as 10psi and 20psi on really rough and rooty tracks.I've had no snakebites in the past three years.
The only puncture I've had was a three pronged one from a hawthorn hedge clipping but that was when I first got the bike and was experimenting with TP's,and IIRC was riding it at 20/30psi at the time
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
thelawnet
Posts: 2736
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Low tyre pressure vs suspension

Post by thelawnet »

Airsporter1st wrote:I'm no expert, but I would have thought that if adequate suspension for mountain bikes used as described could be provided by tyres alone, there would be no need for mechanical suspension.

Those bikes look to be very good value at the prices you are paying. From what you have said, I don't think the hybrid (the third one) would suit you.

I notice the second one comes in differing specs - have you priced it with the Rokshok fork?


Hi.
I have a couple of better bikes (3x10-speed Deore drivetrain, now partly upgraded to XT, still with the original XCR coil forks). The current price here for a similar bike (now 'upgraded' from 3x10 40/30/22x11-36 to 2x10 36/22x11-36 or even 1x10 at 32x11-42) is £350, or for £615 there's an upgraded version with 32x11-46 11-speed (XT RD, SLX shifter) and Recon RL air fork.

Or for around £130 you can get a Suntour Epixon air fork (which itself comes in different versions with and without low-speed compression adjustment, but the common one here is without) and chop in the supplied fork for perhaps £15 or so.

Anyway I want to hire bikes for tours here essentially, I have some concerns obviously that people probably crunch the gears etc. and 9-speed is quite attractive from that sense in being cheaper to maintain, and 11-speed not at all, and things like shock servicing seems like an extra headache.

I have a couple of local routes, one of which is around 20km (just a gentle cycle past some ricefields and such like), potentially half off-road, with the off-road mostly flat sort of unmade towpath type of thing (hard, mostly dry, rocks), with a half-a-mile of hill with some loose rocks and what not, and another which is 40km and potentially all surfaced road (recently surfaced). Then longer routes of around 60-70km with some really rather bad roads including long stretches of quite fast very bumpy surface, and also steep rocky unsurfaced roads.

I guess the potential to sell the shorter trips is much higher, so in that sense it makes sense to buy several cheaper bikes as these would be adequate for 20km on a sort of towpath type route, and also without suspension, that removes a point of failure.
Post Reply