Author Topic: Wheels: width vs riding surface  (Read 3070 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

papo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
  • Rep: -191
Wheels: width vs riding surface
« on: April 19, 2019, 01:12:19 PM »
The geometric difference is obvious, width may not be the same as the riding surface but from a practical point:

Whats the difference when riding? Like with wheel size, speed can vary (ahrdness as well) but with width?

sneakpeakmeek

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Rep: 0
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2019, 01:41:13 PM »
bigger/softer duro = faster

Smaller/harder duro = slower

softer duro/wider contact patch = grippier

harder duro/small contact patch = more slidy


Hercules Rockefeller

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 8374
  • Rep: -13
  • i`m a double-bacon-genius-burger.
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2019, 01:54:38 PM »
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.

backinaction

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1130
  • Rep: 279
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2019, 02:11:11 PM »
bigger/softer duro = faster


Super dependent on surface you are skating.

 If it's rough (shitty pavement)  softer = faster.

 If it's smooth (baby bottom smooth concrete parks) harder=faster. 

papo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
  • Rep: -191
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2019, 02:17:49 PM »
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha

baustin

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 609
  • Rep: 118
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2019, 03:14:17 PM »
Expand Quote
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.
[close]

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha

Try radials

sneakpeakmeek

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Rep: 0
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2019, 03:17:47 PM »
Expand Quote
bigger/softer duro = faster

[close]

Super dependent on surface you are skating.

 If it's rough (shitty pavement)  softer = faster.

 If it's smooth (baby bottom smooth concrete parks) harder=faster.

i automatically assumed street skating

papo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
  • Rep: -191
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2019, 03:21:07 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.
[close]

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha
[close]

Try radials

Slim or regular? The slim ones appear more slideable and faster?

roba

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2994
  • Rep: 809
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2019, 03:29:51 PM »
Expand Quote
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.
[close]

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha

you had problems with powersliding on f4s? conical fulls are the only shape i ride, and i haven't had any problems with doing powerslides on them, ever (54mm 99a). best wheels i've ever skated.

j....soy.....

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 18286
  • Rep: 1595
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2019, 04:42:37 PM »
Bones is the only answer.....Bones or die.....

silhouette

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 5668
  • Rep: 1572
    •  avatar image
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2019, 08:43:47 PM »
bigger/softer duro = faster

Smaller/harder duro = slower

softer duro/wider contact patch = grippier

harder duro/small contact patch = more slidy

I find that hard wheels with a wider contact patch actually slide better than hard wheels with a smaller contact patch. More room for friction or something. Or maybe it's just easier to control.

talklessSkateMore

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • Rep: -40
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2019, 10:15:59 PM »
Boot slootn boogie
it said to learn how to tie for a reason.
This is all structured as a trap.
Tied by those who know the fundamentals.

givecigstosurfgroms

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 7013
  • Rep: -958
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2019, 11:01:02 AM »
   If they made the fatties in 52 id do that but until then ill get the slim 54 non radias(bones).  Im not a radial dude.
"I just care about the river, I dont care about your back"

Roisto

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2745
  • Rep: 474
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2019, 12:45:42 PM »
bigger/softer duro = faster

Smaller/harder duro = slower

softer duro/wider contact patch = grippier

harder duro/small contact patch = more slidy


Incorrect. See below:

Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Im sure this has been asked before, if so please direct to correct page number. But can someone crack an egg of knowledge on the difference and purpose of the radial,conical, etc. Been skating some 99a classic Spits. I usually stick to ledges and rails. Was looking to give the Sfw's a try. I like the look of a wider wheel, but wondering other than grip what they excel in. Thanks
[close]

Width of the wheel has nothing to do with grip. A wider wheel will roll over crummy ground better than a narrower one. Wider also wears down slower cuz there's more material to wear down. Wheels shape can help you lock into grinds or get into slappies etc.
[close]

this has never made sense to me. you'd think if you have two wheels of the same formula and duro, the wider wheel would be grippier bc of higher probability of contact? i guess that assumes wherever you're skating is not a perfectly flat surface. or, on the other hand, would a slimmer wheel distribute/concentrate the same weight on a smaller riding surface which could increase grip? or maybe its not even friction but the torque applied to the edges of the wheel which would be determined by the distance from the axle? idk these are random thoughts (and i almost failed general physics II) it's just hard to imagine width has nothing to do with grip.
[close]

Yeah, I know it's kinda counterintuitive for some reason. Took me a while to get too. But the thing is that the weight bearing down to the ground is distributed over a larger area with a wider wheel so per mm^2 in a wider wheel the friction is less but as the wider wheel has more area, the overall grip (friction) will stay the same. If the friction per mm^2 would keep the same, then widening the wheel would make it more grippy but it doesn't due to the force pressing down on the wheel distributing over a larger area.

I think this is a nice explanation:
https://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae140.cfm

I've also posted this video many times before. It has a decent example of what is going on IMO:


tzhangdox

  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2151
  • Rep: 527
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2019, 01:48:34 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.
[close]

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha
[close]

Try radials
[close]

Slim or regular? The slim ones appear more slideable and faster?

I love radial slims, still has a wider contact patch than classics, but it might be on the slimmer end for some people. I'd probably try normal conicals or the regular radials as they aren't that drastically different too the conical fulls but are probably enough to feel a little more nimble.

sneakpeakmeek

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Rep: 0
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2019, 02:48:34 PM »
Expand Quote
bigger/softer duro = faster

Smaller/harder duro = slower

softer duro/wider contact patch = grippier

harder duro/small contact patch = more slidy
[close]


Incorrect. See below:

Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Im sure this has been asked before, if so please direct to correct page number. But can someone crack an egg of knowledge on the difference and purpose of the radial,conical, etc. Been skating some 99a classic Spits. I usually stick to ledges and rails. Was looking to give the Sfw's a try. I like the look of a wider wheel, but wondering other than grip what they excel in. Thanks
[close]

Width of the wheel has nothing to do with grip. A wider wheel will roll over crummy ground better than a narrower one. Wider also wears down slower cuz there's more material to wear down. Wheels shape can help you lock into grinds or get into slappies etc.
[close]

this has never made sense to me. you'd think if you have two wheels of the same formula and duro, the wider wheel would be grippier bc of higher probability of contact? i guess that assumes wherever you're skating is not a perfectly flat surface. or, on the other hand, would a slimmer wheel distribute/concentrate the same weight on a smaller riding surface which could increase grip? or maybe its not even friction but the torque applied to the edges of the wheel which would be determined by the distance from the axle? idk these are random thoughts (and i almost failed general physics II) it's just hard to imagine width has nothing to do with grip.
[close]

Yeah, I know it's kinda counterintuitive for some reason. Took me a while to get too. But the thing is that the weight bearing down to the ground is distributed over a larger area with a wider wheel so per mm^2 in a wider wheel the friction is less but as the wider wheel has more area, the overall grip (friction) will stay the same. If the friction per mm^2 would keep the same, then widening the wheel would make it more grippy but it doesn't due to the force pressing down on the wheel distributing over a larger area.

I think this is a nice explanation:
https://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae140.cfm

I've also posted this video many times before. It has a decent example of what is going on IMO:

[close]

ooo thanks for that physics lesson

Dustwardprez

  • Guest
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2019, 10:37:18 AM »
Want to go really fast get a T bone. Big hard wheels. Skinny is faster too.

I had Alva wheels way way long ago when my brothers and I were just bombing hills still. It was a hard tall conical. I think they were called Hard-ons. Lol. I remember my dad laughed when we picked that wheel and he got a Mike Conroy sticker for this toolbox.
Anyway that was a scary fast wheel. We had some city streets and some bullet 66s but they were softer.

Ooo I remember gleaming the cube made some kids think black wheels were faster

SpankerChief

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 656
  • Rep: 2
  • Rob_Skate_Lurker_
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2019, 10:50:39 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
the correct answer for wheel based questions is spitfire formula four.
[close]

Been riding conical full which i like but the width is a real bitch for power slides. Also i only rode conical full so i wondered what else was worth trying. Last wheel size was 53, which is about 50-49mm right now. I dont like to grind my wheels down to the bone, haha
[close]

you had problems with powersliding on f4s? conical fulls are the only shape i ride, and i haven't had any problems with doing powerslides on them, ever (54mm 99a). best wheels i've ever skated.
conical fulls are the absolute best........for those wanting a street techy type of wheels with a wide contact and slimmer to conicals the lockins are a reasonable choice. 

I have been getting in contact with JT at DLXSF, you can too he answers emails. I have been giving him pointers and requests on shape design with heavyweights decks.  the wheels they make bar-none they hold it down, to me if the owners take their time and answer an email to me that says good quality control and forward thinking .
[ url ]http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2011/09/mind_blown.gif[ / url ]

GasTheHostage

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 143
  • Rep: -23
Re: Wheels: width vs riding surface
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2019, 10:50:49 AM »
bigger/softer duro = faster

Smaller/harder duro = slower

softer duro/wider contact patch = grippier

harder duro/small contact patch = more slidy
Some of this is a little incorrect. Harder duro actually means faster, but not on all surfaces. For example, a 99a wheel in 54mm would go faster than a 54mm wheel in 80a. This is because the harder urethane keeps its shape and the softer urethane will move just a little bit to even out rough terrain. That's why softer wheels are better for cruising and rougher surfaces. However, you are correct on all the other info.