Cat's Eye - anyone have the Enduro 2? - Page 3 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

04-27-2004, 08:19 PM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, Bran, Thanks.

-B

04-28-2004, 07:42 AM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).

Converting 81.2 inches that is between 205 and 206 centimeters.

I set it at 205 and the course measured out almost perfectly. I set it at
207 and that was absurdly high. Gave me "2 miles" after up and back of a
little parking lot. Set it at 206 and that was also ridiculously high.

So 205 it is. Average speed at this setting is 12.5mph. Course is very
lightly rolling hills. Distance I thought was 8 miles, came out as 7.97.

Best,

-B

04-28-2004, 07:42 AM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).

Converting 81.2 inches that is between 205 and 206 centimeters.

I set it at 205 and the course measured out almost perfectly. I set it at
207 and that was absurdly high. Gave me "2 miles" after up and back of a
little parking lot. Set it at 206 and that was also ridiculously high.

So 205 it is. Average speed at this setting is 12.5mph. Course is very
lightly rolling hills. Distance I thought was 8 miles, came out as 7.97.

Best,

-B

04-28-2004, 07:42 AM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).

Converting 81.2 inches that is between 205 and 206 centimeters.

I set it at 205 and the course measured out almost perfectly. I set it at
207 and that was absurdly high. Gave me "2 miles" after up and back of a
little parking lot. Set it at 206 and that was also ridiculously high.

So 205 it is. Average speed at this setting is 12.5mph. Course is very
lightly rolling hills. Distance I thought was 8 miles, came out as 7.97.

Best,

-B

04-28-2004, 07:42 AM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).

Converting 81.2 inches that is between 205 and 206 centimeters.

I set it at 205 and the course measured out almost perfectly. I set it at
207 and that was absurdly high. Gave me "2 miles" after up and back of a
little parking lot. Set it at 206 and that was also ridiculously high.

So 205 it is. Average speed at this setting is 12.5mph. Course is very
lightly rolling hills. Distance I thought was 8 miles, came out as 7.97.

Best,

-B

04-28-2004, 07:42 AM

On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:51:54 -0000, "Bran" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Tue, 27 Apr 2004
>21:58:50 UTC
>
>-> Figured I'd ask someone who had already dialed it in over a measured mile,
>-> etc.
>->
>
>being metric i never noticed the transposition. I used the measured
>rollout and got 208 on my 2.3" tyres so I would guess that the 207 is quite
>close.
>
>they recommend the use of the B setting for a mountainbike because of the
>slower speeds off road.
>
>have fun.

OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).

Converting 81.2 inches that is between 205 and 206 centimeters.

I set it at 205 and the course measured out almost perfectly. I set it at
207 and that was absurdly high. Gave me "2 miles" after up and back of a
little parking lot. Set it at 206 and that was also ridiculously high.

So 205 it is. Average speed at this setting is 12.5mph. Course is very
lightly rolling hills. Distance I thought was 8 miles, came out as 7.97.

Best,

-B

04-28-2004, 09:17 AM

Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Wed, 28 Apr 2004
14:42:17 UTC

-> OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
-> for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
-> wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
-> maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).
->

26x2.3 with a measured rollout of 208 cm.

your 81.2 inch roll out would be 206.25 cm. (81.2x2.54)
the charts are always a guess which is why I use a measured rollout at my
usual riding pressure while I am on my bike. My wife's winter and summer
tyres are both labeled as 26x1.95 but the roll out for the summer is 205
and the winter is 207 even though the summer tyre runs at 65psi and the
winter at 40. Rollouts vary widely

Do not discount the possibility that your measured mile is off by a good %
as well; the one that measured it may not have been dealing with properly
calibrated equipment.

another possibility is that varations in the line taken can also make a
measurable difference.

no worries its still the same ride at 10 or 10.1 km
--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

04-28-2004, 09:17 AM

Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Wed, 28 Apr 2004
14:42:17 UTC

-> OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
-> for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
-> wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
-> maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).
->

26x2.3 with a measured rollout of 208 cm.

your 81.2 inch roll out would be 206.25 cm. (81.2x2.54)
the charts are always a guess which is why I use a measured rollout at my
usual riding pressure while I am on my bike. My wife's winter and summer
tyres are both labeled as 26x1.95 but the roll out for the summer is 205
and the winter is 207 even though the summer tyre runs at 65psi and the
winter at 40. Rollouts vary widely

Do not discount the possibility that your measured mile is off by a good %
as well; the one that measured it may not have been dealing with properly
calibrated equipment.

another possibility is that varations in the line taken can also make a
measurable difference.

no worries its still the same ride at 10 or 10.1 km
--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

04-28-2004, 09:17 AM

Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Wed, 28 Apr 2004
14:42:17 UTC

-> OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
-> for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
-> wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
-> maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).
->

26x2.3 with a measured rollout of 208 cm.

your 81.2 inch roll out would be 206.25 cm. (81.2x2.54)
the charts are always a guess which is why I use a measured rollout at my
usual riding pressure while I am on my bike. My wife's winter and summer
tyres are both labeled as 26x1.95 but the roll out for the summer is 205
and the winter is 207 even though the summer tyre runs at 65psi and the
winter at 40. Rollouts vary widely

Do not discount the possibility that your measured mile is off by a good %
as well; the one that measured it may not have been dealing with properly
calibrated equipment.

another possibility is that varations in the line taken can also make a
measurable difference.

no worries its still the same ride at 10 or 10.1 km
--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

04-28-2004, 09:17 AM

Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> spake thusly on or about Wed, 28 Apr 2004
14:42:17 UTC

-> OK, figured out they had the table wrong and the conversion factor wrong
-> for inches to centimeters. I measured the tire, marked 26 x 2.1 on the
-> wall, and it was 81.2 inches. (I don't know how you have a 2.3 tire above
-> maybe you're measuring width?, but anyways).
->

26x2.3 with a measured rollout of 208 cm.

your 81.2 inch roll out would be 206.25 cm. (81.2x2.54)
the charts are always a guess which is why I use a measured rollout at my
usual riding pressure while I am on my bike. My wife's winter and summer
tyres are both labeled as 26x1.95 but the roll out for the summer is 205
and the winter is 207 even though the summer tyre runs at 65psi and the
winter at 40. Rollouts vary widely

Do not discount the possibility that your measured mile is off by a good %
as well; the one that measured it may not have been dealing with properly
calibrated equipment.

another possibility is that varations in the line taken can also make a
measurable difference.

no worries its still the same ride at 10 or 10.1 km
--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head
start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]