Show HN: Web page that parses and explains the label on a bike tire (fahrrad-tools.de)
History: Last year I had to replace the tire on my bike, and I was surprised how difficult it was to find a suitable new tire. There were a lot of numbers written on the casing, so I googled what they meant. In the end I was successful, but I didn't want to do the same work again for the next bike after I've forgotten the details. So I wrote this website.
Technically, the web page is kept very simple, no frameworks, no templates, no website builder. It uses HTML5, CSS and JavaScript, and it privides a responsive layout for mobile usage.
I'm happy to receive feedback. If you have tried the label of your bike tire, and it doesn't work, please post it as well. Thanks!
184 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 256 ms ] threadI won't need it for my own bike anymore, but definitely when I get a new (used) one next.
I tried looking at the source a bit and it seems like your markup is pretty clean, if a bit unreadable after minification. I liked the classes "question" and "answer". It looks like you are planning on using affiliate links to monetize it?
The affiliate links are just a side effect to pay for the hosting.
Their source code is here: https://github.com/zerforschung/schnelltesttest.de
[0]: https://antimatter15.com/gocr.js/demo.html
Identify the audience and build the product for it. A tech savvy audience (HN) would love to see OCR because we have nothing better to do than look for “latest cool gadgets”.
There are no affiliate links, and he went way beyond the company he worked on, it's a pure act of love and is super comprehensive. It's just info to help you.
Sheldon passed over a decade ago, and the site has been modified over time by a guy named John Allen. He fancies himself an expert of similar caliber, but has a tiny fraction of the hands-on experience Sheldon did.
He's made a number of edits/additions injecting his personal opinion. For example: about belt drives, of which he clearly has no personal experience.
And wow, over a decade indeed, I can't believe its been so long :(
(FWIW my main bike has been belt drive & Rohloff geared, dynamo lights for 6 years now, the reduced maintenance is great, I can just step on my bike and go)
I'm pretty sure when the guy said fixies weren't cool, I heard Sheldon spin in his grave a little.
One favor you can do yourself is to start patching your tubes if you're not already doing so.
Everything else, check. Roughing up the patch area, waiting a few minutes for the vulcanizing fluid to dry, squeezing the patch for a few seconds after applying.
I've never had a problem with the little sandpaper that comes with the kit.
Over the past 20 years of riding a collection of ~10 bikes, I would be lucky if patching tubes would have saved me even 200 dollars. What your time is worth to you may be different, but for most working adults I don't think patching makes time-money-sense. Assuming you already have a pump, instead of ordering a patch kit to carry with you on rides or keep at home, just order one of whatever tube your bike needs (usually ~5-9 bucks), some tire levers (reusable, 5 bucks) and keep in drawer until day dawns you need it. The rare time I buy a new bike with a weird innertube I don't already have, I buy a couple of spares immediately with the bike.
Each person has to satisfy their own sense of time and money, which I suspect is partially subjective for most of us. For instance I actually have spare time, and am not paid for working extra hours on my day job. Admittedly, being self sufficient for bike maintenance is part of "life" for me, and even when my kids needed more attentive care, I was always able to carve out 15 minutes to patch a tube.
Paranoid me always carry two spare tubes, a patch kit and a puncture repair spray (it's supposed to inject a product that reinflates the tyre immediately, allowing me to keep riding and then go home without having to repair or remplace the tube, but since I've never had the opportunity to use it I can't tell if it's really effective).
Where I am, in the south of France, as well. And they are of the really aggressive species!
I do run latex on my gravel/cx bike and those go into the trash immediately as they're far more difficult to properly patch. Hurts a little more when you pay 2-3x the price though :(
So yeah, useful! And my compliments for the neatness in your data privacy approach.
At one point I just took the old tyre into a bicycle repair shop and asked for the proper replacement, and the person who sold me one even managed to get the wrong one (they replaced it for the proper one afterwards of course). It used to be that most normal use bicycles all had the same tyre, and only racing bikes had those weird French style ones, but newer bicycles tend to have fatter tyres (which is not a bad development for sturdy day-to-day bicycles laden with groceries, an adult cyclist, and a child in front or behind the cyclist).
There have only been some rare cases such as a 1963 Schwinn repack cruiser, where I needed to do a bit of research to match its oddball tire size. Then the Sheldon Brown website came to my aid.
How are you going about monetizing this? Affiliate links?
I've used it for buying my truck's tires in the past.
That's not the way I edit HTML files. :-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Tyre_and_Rim_Technica...
I fit Continental GP5000TL (depending on the generation and width, they are notoriously difficult to mount) to two different sets of wheels. One set of wheels gave me a hard time and it took 30-45m per tire, but they eventually went on. On the second set of wheels, one went on easy enough. The second took well over an hour and resulted in multiple blisters (and much cursing) even after using every known trick. Schwalbe Ones in comparison mounted in a minute with no struggle, and actually hold air better than the Contis which can supposedly be used without a sealant.
Did I learn from the experience? Absolutely not, still haven't bought the Kool Stop jack ...
I've seen videos of people easily fitting tyres using just their thumbs, but I refuse to believe that's possible.
I personally love GP line of tires (used 4k/5k clincher and 5k TLs) as they have a good compromise of puncture protection, tread wear and rolling resistance. They generally rate at the top for just about any tire I'd use in a non-race scenario. I will not buy another pair though until I switch wheels as I have no desire to torture myself. I did not go as far as to bake the tires to loosen them, but I did let them sit out in the sun which made a bit of a difference.
The other factor to consider is roadside repairs. If you have a really hard time mounting the tire initially and you puncture severely enough to need a tube (sealant leaked and plug won't hold), you're likely calling for a ride back. I did find they loosen after 500-750km so you are more likely to be able to fix it roadside if needed. I sliced the sidewall on my almost new GP5k but thankfully the plug held. Irresponsibly I used it for another 500km+ until it would no longer hold pressure overnight, but I do not recommend that route!
As for using tire levers - buyer beware when it comes to carbon. I resorted to levers, but you do run a risk of permanently damaging your wheel. I have seen a picture of someone put one of the plastic with steel spine levers straight through their rim doing this. A tire bead jack is a far safer and far easier option (though I've yet to buy it).
With the exception of hookless rims (which are not common yet, at least here), TL wheels will take a clincher tire and tube, and TL tires will take a tube. The potential incompatibility comes from TL tires and TL wheels, not at all related to tubes, and is because of lack of spec and manufacturing tolerances.
rims with thick rim tape designed to seal with tubeless tires have much less gutter, so it's a bit more difficult to squeeze the last bit of the tire onto the rim. they're compatible, just difficult to work with.
I want to be able to fix a flat outside, not call an Uber.
I’ll echo your frustration 100%. I found Schwalbe Ones are much looser fitting and have no problem mounting them on two sets of rims I have that will barely take a GP5K.
As I read somewhere else, Frank Schwinn and Frank Brilando wanted a bike to be serviceable by a 10 year old.
With that said I have never had a flat on the outside of the casing without actually an obvious sidewall tear/puncture. Definitely possible, but I would say it is far less likely.
For off-road riding (cross) I pinch flat almost exclusively so I don’t bother checking around. It is pretty obvious when you smack a root or rock.
It would be neat if the information and links could be localized.
You tool says:
> Reifenhöhe C: ca. 39 mm (French designation)
but it says that for 700x19C as well as for 700x40C which seems odd?
The wikipedia page for Bicycle wheel [1] says:
> The ISO 5775-2 standard defines designations for bicycle rims. It distinguishes between 1. Straight-side (SS) rims 2. Crochet-type (C) rims (...)
and also
> Road wheels may be designed for tubular or clincher tires, commonly referred to as "700C" tires.
but it doesn't explain the B in 650B.
Sheldon Brown [2] says (emphasis added)
> A second number or letter code would indicate the *width* of the tire. (26 x 1.75, 27 x 1 1/4...650B, 700C...)
The wikipedia page does mention both 650B and 650C and that the ISO diameter differs by a few mm. So if I understand right, these codes (650B and 700C) specify the full-wheel diameter (650/700) and the letter indicates how much of that diameter the tire needs to make up, i.e. a 650B rim is slightly smaller (571mm) than a 650C (584mm) and the tire needs to make up that differencxe to get to 650?
[EDITED] 700C rims are ISO diameter 622mm, which matches with 2x 39mm tire width: 622 + 78 = 700mm. So I guess the intended tire height at time of standard-invention was 39mm?
But in practice a 700x19C rim-tire combo will be smaller in diameter than a 700x40C so I guess they're not fully "700C" standard compliant?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_wheel#650B_gravel_bicy...
[2] https://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
In the French sizing system, tires are designated by a three-digit number, which may be followed by a letter. The number is the nominal outside diameter of the tire the rim was originally designed for. The absence of a letter indicated a narrow tire; "A", "B" and "C" indicated increasingly wider tires."A" was originally a tire about 30 mm wide, so the 650A rim is pretty large, 590 mm. If you add the top and bottom 30 mm tire thickness to 590, you wind up with the 650 mm tire diameter.
The 650C size was originally intended for a quite wide tire, about 40 mm wide. Top and bottom 40 mm tire plus the 571 mm rim size again bring you to a 650 mm outside diameter, even though the rim was smaller.
My understanding is that in the current world the suffix doesn't really matter, since all 28" rims and tires are marketed seem to be marketed as 700c, and all 27.5" ones as 650b. The height of the tire pretty much correlates with the tire width, so one would rather look at the tire and rim width to determine whether they are compatible (wider rims should be used for wider tires).
And it's actually fun that 700c bikes are usally ridden with narrower and lower tires than 650b bikes (which was in the recent years mostly used for mountain bikes and tire width of >= 2.3"), despite this designation claiming the opposite.
[1] https://www.pinkbike.com/news/rim-widths-comparison-test-mou...
We're mostly riding on wider tires, 2.3 seems to be a rational minimum for real trail riding, and you'll often see widths of 2.6 and beyond (and fat bikes of course go way wider) on both 27.5 and 29in bikes.