First of all, thanks for checking in over the past few days, even though I had no new posts. I was out of town — in Las Vegas for three days. At an academic convention. Now, there’s an anomaly. Picture professors presenting arcane academic research to other professors, and you get the idea. Now picture it with all the lights and sounds and commotion of Las Vegas. Weird.
Anyhow, I’m back. Haven’t been on the bike since Tuesday. Didn’t do my usual Sunday morning ride. The neglected yard has caught up with me, and I put in lots of time trimming back untamed bushes, cleaning gutters, and patching browned-out sod. Maybe someday soon I’ll have another post about my riding
But I do have something today. People continue to have a lot of interest in the CO2 vs. pump issue. You know my preference — I’ve landed in the pump camp. The folks who like the cartridges cite convenience. It’s fast, the tire can be inflated in about one second, and you’re on the road again. But CO2 is only a temporary measure. It’s a good idea to deflate the tire and pump it up with good ol’ air as soon as possible. Why? Because CO2 is soluble in the butyl rubber used in tire tubes, and the tube will lose pressure quickly. Lennard Zinn explained the technical reasons why in a Velonews q & a.
But that argument against CO2 may not stand for much longer. One company now makes cartridges with a proprietary gas that last much longer in a tire than CO2. It’s called Stayfill, and the manufacturer claims it will last for over a year in a bike tire. Now, Bike Noob is not in a habit of endorsing products, and this is not an endorsement. I’ve never used the stuff, so I have no idea if it works or not. I’m sticking to my pump. If you’re one of the cartridge types, this might bear checking out. It seems to be more expensive than CO2 — but for some people, it might be worth it.