In the not so distant past, I made a habit of running a 23 in front and a 25 in the rear. Since I've gone back to running bigger tires (28-32), I don't bother with different sizes. Though this thread has gotten me to thinking that some of those Grand Bois tires, 28 back, 26 front, might be just the ticket. Hmmm.
John Wood Red Lodge, MT
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Barb & Dan Artley <hydelake@verizon.net>
wrote:
> I've got an early Colnago Super that I've run Avocet 700x25's (22 mm?)
> front, 28's rear for ages. Maybe originally because of tire supply, but
> it works well. I have a 26 tooth freewheel on the back for the hilly
> terrain in my area, and pull the hub back fairly far dropping the rear
> of the frame a mm or so in order to get the Campy to do it well. I
> figure the larger tire restores the correct fork angle and I like having
> a bit extra rubber on the back. Is that a bit anal? I do generally
> ride 25 to 28's regularly on the road with a 32 thrown in a bit and
> pretty much the same size front to rear.
>
> Happy trails,
>
> Dan Artley in Parkton, MD
>
> Archive-URL:
> http://search.bikelist.org/
> 1563.eml
> Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:58:30 -0800
> From: "Kurt Sperry" <haxixe(AT)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CR]Question about logic of "unequal" brake reach
>
> Has anyone ever actually run different sized tires front/rear on their
> vintage bikes? I don't think I've ever seen it. I've always thought
> that having different reach brakes f/r was illogical.
>
> Kurt Sperry
> Bellingham WA
> USA