Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    18

    Schwalbe Big Apple 2.35 - how much effect on Stand-Over?

    Hi,

    I'm 5'8". Using the Competitive Cyclist Fit Calculator I get a SO of 29.1 - 29.7 in.

    I test rode a Medium Fisher Hi Fi (spec 29.6") with Bontrager 2.1 and it fits well. I'd like to run Schwalbe Big Apple 2.35's.

    What effect will Schwalbe Big Apple 2.35's have on the specified SO?
    In other words should I look for spec's other than 29.1 - 29.7 in and if so what should I use?

    For example would a Small Fisher Hi Fi (spec 28.1") with Big Apple 2.35's be a better fit than the medium?
    If so would it be a good fit or just better than a medium?

    Thanks!
    Best Wishes!


    Mitch

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    489
    SO should not be defining your bike fit, it is the least important measure. This is especially true with most modern bike frames having "compact" geometry with sloping top tubes.

    Most important is the ETT or effective top tube length. You should find the bike that fits you best for length and then just make sure you can stand over it.

    The difference from 2.1 to 2.35 tyres should be hardly noticable and you should not be considering changing frame size based on tyre size.

    I have run 26 x 2.1's down to 26 x 32mm and even 700c(29) x 28mm all on the same frames. If the frame fits then minor differences in rolling diameter of the wheel and tyre will make hardly any difference.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: John Jencks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    432
    Don't worry about it.

  4. #4
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,952
    Quote Originally Posted by MitchJi
    Hi,

    I'm 5'8". Using the Competitive Cyclist Fit Calculator I get a SO of 29.1 - 29.7 in.

    I test rode a Medium Fisher Hi Fi (spec 29.6") with Bontrager 2.1 and it fits well. I'd like to run Schwalbe Big Apple 2.35's.

    What effect will Schwalbe Big Apple 2.35's have on the specified SO?
    In other words should I look for spec's other than 29.1 - 29.7 in and if so what should I use?

    For example would a Small Fisher Hi Fi (spec 28.1") with Big Apple 2.35's be a better fit than the medium?
    If so would it be a good fit or just better than a medium?

    Thanks!
    Where are you going to be riding a FS with urban slicks - or what type of riding are you planning on doing? Other big casing tires would be the Racing Ralph 2.4's and Ardent 2.4's that would have a bit more height than the BA's and are much more suitable for dirt.

    BB

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    401
    I don't think you will have a problem with the height of this tire but man they are REALLY heavy. I have them on my around town/rail trial with wifey beater bike. They roll fast but they are tanks

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    18
    Hi,

    Thanks for all the replies! I've been having some health issues (nothing to worry about I hope) that sometimes prevent timely responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by ozynigma
    SO should not be defining your bike fit, it is the least important measure. This is especially true with most modern bike frames having "compact" geometry with sloping top tubes.

    Most important is the ETT or effective top tube length. You should find the bike that fits you best for length and then just make sure you can stand over it.
    Making sure I can stand over it is exactly what I am trying to do. Even if I buy locally I probably won't be able to get a test ride with Big Apple 2.35's, so I want to be sure I'll be able to stand over it with those tires.

    Quote Originally Posted by ozynigma
    The difference from 2.1 to 2.35 tyres should be hardly noticeable and you should not be considering changing frame size based on tyre size.

    I have run 26 x 2.1's down to 26 x 32mm and even 700c(29) x 28mm all on the same frames. If the frame fits then minor differences in rolling diameter of the wheel and tyre will make hardly any difference.
    If that's correct I don't have anything to worry about. But it might be more than 2.1 vs 2.35 as the BA's are fatter than most tires.

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBowan
    Where are you going to be riding a FS with urban slicks - or what type of riding are you planning on doing? Other big casing tires would be the Racing Ralph 2.4's and Ardent 2.4's that would have a bit more height than the BA's and are much more suitable for dirt.
    Building a high-powered Ebike to either replace or reduce the use of one of our cars. My health is on the weak and sickly end of the spectrum and we live at the top of a steep (10%-17% slope), and I want to be able to use it to go 15-25 miles. I want to pedal as much as I can but I don't want pedaling to be a limiting factor. I plan to build it to sustain 35 mph because I will be safer on many local roads if I can keep up with the flow of traffic.

    I initially planned on no suspension but a friend (who has a slower [25 mph] ebike) is adamant that I need a front suspension. He doesn't think a rear suspension is necessary but some people think its important and I decided I'd like at a minimum a softail with an inch or two of travel.

    Thanks!
    Best Wishes!


    Mitch

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •