Jump to content

MCM5 v2 3-inch tire?


Recommended Posts

Has anyone been able to successfully fit a 3-inch tire on the MCM5 v2?

@houseofjob I think read somewhere that you attempted this unsuccessfully on a MCM5 v1, but wondering if you've revisited it with the extra clearance available on the v2?

Does anyone have recommendations on a 3-inch tire that might be able to fit?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You mean like this?  MCM5 v1 (left) with Bridgestone HOOP 2.75-10 & MCM5 v2 (right) with CYT H-5167 14 x 3.0 / 76-254   Both require cutting the shell wider and higher, but the

you need to cut the shell to fit the 3inch, attached photos will help some difference from v2 and 2.5 tire: way more comfortable  increase cornering radius, gyro effect and overall sta

I wasn't asked but did this same mod recently on my MCM5 v2. Posted at the bottom of this thread - https://forum.electricunicycle.org/topic/24468-mcm5-initial-review/?tab=comments#comment-385281

Posted Images

Thanks @houseofjob, that was very helpful!

The cuts on the v2 shell look very clean. Did you use a Dremel to cut the shell?

With 16-inch inner tubes squeezed into 14-inch tires, did you find that you had to adjust your tire pressure?

Did going to the larger tire reduce the acceleration of the wheel noticeably?

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

Thanks @houseofjob, that was very helpful!

Sure~

31 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

The cuts on the v2 shell look very clean. Did you use a Dremel to cut the shell?

Yes. I’ve found using the metal cutting pieces much better, longer lasting blade, than their plastic purposed blades, for this kind of job.

32 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

With 16-inch inner tubes squeezed into 14-inch tires, did you find that you had to adjust your tire pressure?

Did going to the larger tire reduce the acceleration of the wheel noticeably?

It’s really not that much squeezed, as the real diameter of these wheels again is minimum 15.5”. 
I usually only use the tire PSI markings as a reference, then pump according to my weight on the wheel regardless; didn’t notice anything that different when pumping here, than with any other wheel.

34 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

Did going to the larger tire reduce the acceleration of the wheel noticeably?

I want to say ever so slightly, but this also might be a placebo effect. Even if it did, it’s not anywhere near slower enough for me to care, not outweigh the much greater benefits of the wider tire.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

@houseofjob Being a soft-mode aficionado, does the wider tire improve your travel/swing feel?

Not so much, the tire isn't going to affect that. But it's interesting, the v1 soft mode feels like the v2 hard mode (makes sense, as v2 FW is tuned for a little more speed), so the v2 has softest soft of the 2, albeit that's not nearly as soft nor swingy as the OG standards like Monster soft, etc.

Oh well, I really have the MCM5 more for the smaller form factor and best-in-class performance.

Edited by houseofjob
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, houseofjob said:

Not so much, the tire isn't going to affect that. But it's interesting, the v1 soft mode feels like the v2 hard mode (makes sense, as v2 FW is tuned for a little more speed), so the v2 has softest soft of the 2, albeit that's not nearly as soft as the OG standards like Monster soft, etc.

Can I assume that the v2 being softer feels "better" from your point of view?

I can intellectualize the benefits of the "soft mode swing" for additional leverage required to accelerate larger wheels (would love to see a video of you demo-ing soft mode with the Sherman).

Do you see the same benefits of "soft mode swing" with smaller wheels that are already easy to accelerate? Or is "soft mode swing" less about leveraged acceleration and more about safety compared to superman leaning, by keeping your CoG over the pedals?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Can I assume that the v2 being softer feels "better" from your point of view?

In comparison, yes. Softer the better for me.

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

I can intellectualize the benefits of the "soft mode swing" for additional leverage required to accelerate larger wheels (would love to see a video of you demo-ing soft mode with the Sherman).

Yeah, like I've said before, if you could push the pedal arms 360 around the wheel in a circle, that would be the ideal force-leverage for acceleration, but since we realistically can't do that while also standing on the pedals, soft mode swing is the closest thing.

I'm probably gonna get more guilt trip for my pandemic video YouTube laziness, so I'll just leave you with this Monster soft mode nugget, something I've cut down and shared on my IG:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V8t9gKhC_9AZSi-DbLbyTOXXZUBVZTVg/view?usp=sharing (my motion has improved since this, as I am forcing it a bit too much for the camera, but you might get the idea)

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Do you see the same benefits of "soft mode swing" with smaller wheels that are already easy to accelerate?

It doesn't matter which wheel it is, nor the mode, although softer and swingier maximizes the acceleration potential since it doesn't fight you.

Even the smaller wheels guys rave about the "torque-i-ness" of, I can squeeze a greater accel with the soft mode technique, more accel that you wouldn't think was there, and it Is easier because there is no muscle-ing, just tilt the wheel so that your bodyweight pressing down on the angled pedal sticking upward is the force, no awkward superman lean out of the centered position.

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Or is "soft mode swing" less about leveraged acceleration and more about safety compared to superman leaning, by keeping your CoG over the pedals?

This too, exactly.

Guys do superman cuz they can't get leverage on an upright wheel whose pedals are flat, so they try to make the angle with their body, but you risk faceplant, and you don't have super fine control operating this way, usually all-or-nothing; whereas the soft mode technique, you do the opposite: tilt the wheel so you don't have to tilt yourself. This leaves you in a way better position in the event of a cutout or fall, your most important asset, your head, is still farthest from the ground still at the start of a fall and/or cutout, riding this way. Not to mention much better control resolution, being more stable and over the wheel the entire time.

Edited by houseofjob
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank-you! That video helped clarify a lot about this technique.

Is it fair to say that if the swing rate of each wheel is determined by how the soft mode is programmed, then each wheel model will have a unique "resonant frequency" or rate at which you can swing back and forth, to leverage the dip?

If so, then this technique would work best on surfaces where you have room to swing/carve at the rate dictated by the wheel. On rough terrain, like a steep narrow rocky gravel trail, this technique wouldn't be as suitable because it requires some directionality, rhythm and lateral space, which may not be available due to terrain?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Thank-you! That video helped clarify a lot about this technique.

Sure.

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Is it fair to say that if the swing rate of each wheel is determined by how the soft mode is programmed, then each wheel model will have a unique "resonant frequency" or rate at which you can swing back and forth, to leverage the dip?

I don't really think of it as rate or frequency, more the swing's pedal travel distance & resistance after the initiation of force to the pedal, as it's this initiation force that sets things in motion, not some regular automated frequency interval. Think of pedals on a bicycle, and how changing gears affects the resistance. Soft mode would be the highest gear, very little resistance, but you still have to pedal.

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

If so, then this technique would work best on surfaces where you have room to swing/carve at the rate dictated by the wheel. On rough terrain, like a steep narrow rocky gravel trail, this technique wouldn't be as suitable because it requires some directionality, rhythm and lateral space, which may not be available due to terrain?

Well, first, yes, this is optimal in an urban type environment for max acceleration; but no matter how you ride, you're not gonna get the optimal acceleration push anyways if your terrain is coming out from under you, as in the case for gravel; you'll be more worried about maintaining stability.

As such, if the terrain is unstable, it's not like I can't just hold one "swing" side, as with all the other popular methods, pads and whatnot.

And space-wise, sure, if you're literally pinned between a rock and a hard place, yes, you're just gonna hold the accel in one orientation, but for even the tightest of cases, you really don't need that much lateral real estate to operate. Plus, you'll notice, riding acceleration in this manner tends to look like carving, which it kind of is, and in rough terrain, I doubt your path is always in a single straight line, so using this method lets you accelerate out of the turns much quicker than the conventional methods, again, due to the leverage angles.

The real weakness of this way to ride, I will always say, is it's not very optimal when accelerating from low speed or dead stop going extreme uphills, as you need that initial rhythmic momentum build to get going.

Edited by houseofjob
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, houseofjob said:

The real weakness of this way to ride, I will always say, is it's not very optimal when accelerating from low speed or dead stop going extreme uphills, as you need that initial rhythmic momentum build to get going.

Thanks for being honest about the weakness of this technique.

So optimal acceleration to top speed from a dead stop might look something like the @Darrell Wesh Sprint Launch, transitioning to the @houseofjob Softmode Swing and finally shifting into some sort of Naruto-like seated tuck position to reduce wind resistance at top speed.

Which leads to the question of the optimal way to decelerate...is there an equivalent way to use soft mode to brake more effectively? It seems hypothetically possible (just do the reverse), but is it practical in real situations? Would it be any better than Fantomas' extreme lean-back technique?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Thanks for being honest about the weakness of this technique.

So optimal acceleration to top speed from a dead stop might look something like the @Darrell Wesh Sprint Launch,

I said my way is weak on extreme uphills from dead stop. On flats or lesser uphills from dead stop, I can usually out accel most riders.  

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

finally shifting into some sort of Naruto-like seated tuck position to reduce wind resistance at top speed.

Seated in general is the fastest accel compared to any standing technique. I have a method where I sit slightly up on the nose of the wheel, then hook the bottom of my sneaker soles on the pedal front edges, pulling my feet into my arse as in a hamstring curl, which squeezes every ounce of acceleration in combination with my natural gravity, while all remains relatively centered.

1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

Which leads to the question of the optimal way to decelerate...is there an equivalent way to use soft mode to brake more effectively? It seems hypothetically possible (just do the reverse), but is it practical in real situations? Would it be any better than Fantomas' extreme lean-back technique?

Let’s get one thing straight: any traveling vehicle has a stopping distance, don’t matter good or bad brakes. So if you don’t ride factoring this in, that’s on you.

And the prevailing straight upright, one extreme lean back tug on the wheel to brake IMHO is just failure to realize breaking up the brake into carves, thus increasing the braking distance, is way superior to straight-lining it; overall just poor technique. This is no different from how guys shave speed and brake when skiing or snowboarding; those rides you can travel extremely fast and your brakes are side knife edges into the ice, can’t rely on some motorized device to stop you without any semblance of actual real technique. I find the guys who complain about lack of braking power have usually never skied or snowboarded, or have done so, but are not very adept at it.
So as you said, I just do my technique in reverse, but with each “side carve”, my wheel is dipping perpendicular and away relative to the forward traveling direction, so I am also using the side-leaning friction of the tire to eat speed with every “carve” (ie if my momentum is going forward, but my wheel is facing sideways, the friction of the rubber treads on the road will assist in braking, unless you have no traction and start to drift/slide, which is rare)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

If it feels like the mten3 I’d pay! It’s a 3” tire like the mten correct? Does it feel as easy to maneuver/do 360s on the spot?

Well, the mod makes it almost a 16” wheel, so it won’t be like the MTen3 that is almost a full beach ball.

And any wheel you can do 360 turns given the real estate, but I assume you mean something like this? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

Well, the mod makes it almost a 16” wheel, so it won’t be like the MTen3 that is almost a full beach ball.

And any wheel you can do 360 turns given the real estate, but I assume you mean something like this? 

 

Yea the v1 mcm5 pedals were too low coupled with 2.1” tire which made z10 like 360s Awkward and forced. But a wider tire, even with low pedals, would allow those easy little 360s. Is there any fight back to turning since the tire is wider? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, houseofjob said:

And the prevailing straight upright, one extreme lean back tug on the wheel to brake IMHO is just failure to realize breaking up the brake into carves, thus increasing the braking distance, is way superior to straight-lining it; overall just poor technique. This is no different from how guys shave speed and brake when skiing or snowboarding; those rides you can travel extremely fast and your brakes are side knife edges into the ice, can’t rely on some motorized device to stop you without any semblance of actual real technique. I find the guys who complain about lack of braking power have usually never skied or snowboarded, or have done so, but are not very adept at it.
So as you said, I just do my technique in reverse, but with each “side carve”, my wheel is dipping perpendicular and away relative to the forward traveling direction, so I am also using the side-leaning friction of the tire to eat speed with every “carve” (ie if my momentum is going forward, but my wheel is facing sideways,

Carving to stop is faster then straight line braking unless you do a true Fantomas brake which involves pulling on the handle and forcing the wheel to stop. There is nothing faster then that to decelerate. I usually do that on the Monster when going down steep hills that I went down too fast. Has saved me a couple times from blowing through stop signs in my hilly ass town.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Asphalt said:

So optimal acceleration to top speed from a dead stop might look something like the @Darrell Wesh Sprint Launch, transitioning to the @houseofjob Softmode Swing

 

1 hour ago, houseofjob said:

my way is weak on extreme uphills from dead stop. On flats or lesser uphills from dead stop, I can usually out accel most riders.  

And my technique is perfect for extreme uphills, lessening the demands on the motor from having to haul someone’s heavy ass from that awkward position where the wheel wants to roll down the hill. 
@Asphalt Although I disagree with your sequence, as my technique will put you in an accelerative posture to reach top speed too fast to need any further help from other techniques. Perhaps if we could go 60mph you could see time benefits switching to a different technique like House’s, but reaching 40 takes very little time. Changing up the accelerative position midway will only slow you down.
 

With the exception of sitting on the wheel; that would allow faster acceleration BUT! You would need a tall seat (short seats put your center of gravity too far rearward) like the Monster seat. The problem with tall seats however, is you can’t get low enough in the start to use my technique; you can’t sink your hips to push hard enough. I can’t use my technique 100% with the Monster seat, and I can’t with the tall KS18s shell. 
 

I see @houseofjob technique shining in the rolling start/already moving on the wheel application; which is undoubtedly the most useful. Although really you can’t compare our two techniques; mine begins from a standstill and ends when the foot gets on the pedal, and his begins when the foot gets on the pedal. 

Edited by Darrell Wesh
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice both @houseofjob and @Darrell Wesh. A lot of good points to consider. In my 10000km riding I haven't really needed to optimize my riding technique, but I have a Sherman coming in a few weeks, so I'm eagerly anticipating learning techniques for taming the 77lb beast. I only weigh 135lbs and hesitate to use power pads, so I don't expect I'll be able to max out the performance without taking advantage of leverage through skill and technique.

 

6 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

...my technique will put you in an accelerative posture to reach top speed too fast to need any further help from other techniques. Perhaps if we could go 60mph you could see time benefits switching to a different technique like House’s, but reaching 40 takes very little time. Changing up the accelerative position midway will only slow you down.

@Darrell Wesh Do you think this still holds true for a light weight rider? With the wheel mass being greater than half of rider body weight, I don't expect to be able to launch the wheel like you do with your Monster (also I'm not an Olympic sprinter :lol:).  I don't think superman leaning with my bodyweight alone will push the Veteran to maximum acceleration, hence my expectation to have to transition from Sprint Launch to Softmode Swing.

 

8 hours ago, houseofjob said:

Seated in general is the fastest accel compared to any standing technique. I have a method where I sit slightly up on the nose of the wheel, then hook the bottom of my sneaker soles on the pedal front edges, pulling my feet into my arse as in a hamstring curl, which squeezes every ounce of acceleration in combination with my natural gravity, while all remains relatively centered.

@houseofjob This seated hamstring curl posture seems a little terrifying - doesn't seem to be much of chance you're running off if there's a cut-out. I'm still going to try it though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Asphalt said:

don't think superman leaning with my bodyweight alone will push the Veteran to maximum acceleration, hence my expectation to have to transition from Sprint Launch to Softmode Swing.

I don’t understand. If you’re lighter then you will accelerate faster. There is not a problem with accelerating if you’re light. There is a dude from NYC whose like 16 and man handling these heavy 100v wheels. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

Why do you hesitate to use them?

I understand the benefits of power pads, but choose not to use them for the following reasons:

1. They get in the way when you’re turning, sitting, trying to use the soft mode swing.

2. They get in the way of folding pedals, increasing the parked profile - space is very limited in my condo.

3. More cumbersome to carry.

4. Looks ugly and is less likely to be accepted in restaurants and stores.

5. They reinforce bad superman leaning habits, which is particularly problematic when frequently switching between big and small wheels.

6. They lock you in and reduce your ability to jump or run off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

I don’t understand. If you’re lighter then you will accelerate faster. There is not a problem with accelerating if you’re light. There is a dude from NYC whose like 16 and man handling these heavy 100v wheels. 

It’s a matter of the ability to apply adequate torque to the wheel. With the superman leaning technique, a 270lb person with size 13 feet is going to be able to generate more force on the front of the pedals, compared to a 135lb person with size 8 feet. 
I agree that once you approach being able to apply adequate force, then acceleration improves with reduced weight. But if the lightweight rider cannot produce enough force on the front of the pedals then they won’t realize the wheel’s potential.

Proper technique can make up for lack of gravitational force.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Asphalt said:

It’s a matter of the ability to apply adequate torque to the wheel. With the superman leaning technique, a 270lb person with size 13 feet is going to be able to generate more force on the front of the pedals, compared to a 135lb person with size 8 feet. 
I agree that once you approach being able to apply adequate force, then acceleration improves with reduced weight. But if the lightweight rider cannot produce enough force on the front of the pedals then they won’t realize the wheel’s potential.

Proper technique can make up for lack of gravitational force.

I highly disagree man. It doesn’t matter what your shoe size is, the general stance is to stand with the middle of your foot in the middle of the pedal(unless you use a staggered stance). This gives the best balance. A bigger shoe will have more hanging off the front AND rear, which will counter balance each other.

In fact, a smaller foot size will accelerate better because they will have more pedal to stand on and thus more fine control over their acceleration through the balls of their foot. 
 

And reduced body weight SIGNIFICANTLY effects your acceleration. Why do you think race vehicles make such efforts to shave even a few pounds to be able to go faster? A powerful motor won’t even sweat moving a light body.
 

You can’t seriously think a 300lb obese American can accelerate faster than a 100lb Chinese man. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...