Latex Ride
🔞 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Latex Ride
Discussion Starter
·
#1
·
Feb 20, 2008
I am in the market for high end clincher tires for my fixed gear bike. Possible candidates for tires include Veloflex, Vittoria CX, Pro Race 3.
My bike is geared at 75" and I ride fast and over broken roads. I considered getting tubular wheels by relacing my current hubs to tubular rims but I decided that it would be prudent to discover the advances in clincher technology before I did that. (Besides, my cross bike has gone tubular.)
My question is, in high-end clincher applications (TPI >200) is the ride quality noticeable using latex vs butyl tubes?
The reason why I ask: my experiences with latex & butyl tubes in cheap clinchers saw no difference in ride quality.
*Ride quality of latex tubes used in nice clinchers is the only issue at hand here.
Rubber Lizard
·
monkey with flamethrower
You probably won't notice much of a difference other than the fact that you always have to pump a latex tube up and they are more expensive. Your ride quality quest will be better served by purchasing a higher volume tire such as 700x25 or 700x27.
Discussion Starter
·
#3
·
Feb 20, 2008
I am in fact looking for 25c or 28c tires. (Roubaix, Pave Open CX for the first two manufacturer.)
The qualitative differences between butyl and latex tubes are subtle, but it isn't all hype.
I find they provide a slightly, I emphasize slightly, quieter ride.
They tend to resist thorns and glass a little more effectively than butyl tubes, or at least the lightweight racing butyl tubes.
They usually weigh less than the equivalent butyl tube.
Because latex tubes often come in colors, they can be easier to mount onto the rim. That is, you can see the tube better as you are putting it on, thus making it easier to tell if you are pinching the tube with the tire bead.
On the downside, yes, they do need to be pumped up every time you ride. And yes, they can cost quite a bit more.
Hope this helps.
Mapie is a conventional looking former Hollywood bon viveur, now leading a quiet life in a house made of wood by an isolated beach. He has cultivated a taste for culture, and is a celebrated raconteur amongst his local associates, who are artists, actors, and other leftfield/eccentric types. I imagine he has a telescope, and an unusual sculpture outside his front door. He is also a beach comber. The Rydster.
Ride quality of latex tubes used in nice clinchers is the only issue at hand here.
Discussion Starter
·
#6
·
Feb 20, 2008
I doubt latex would be *smoother* since it takes little effort to deform a thin butyl tube... but latex has lower rolling resistance due to low hysteresis. In other words butyl provides damping while latex doesn't. *If* you could feel that (I can't), I'd expect the latex to feel a bit bouncier.
Yup, they reminded me of that 'tubular feeling', kinda floaty - subtle but there. I like mine.
It is a well known fact that nice tubular tires generally use latex tubes. Do you know the reason for this?
My question is, in high-end clincher applications (TPI >200) is the ride quality noticeable using latex vs butyl tubes?
Discussion Starter
·
#10
·
Feb 21, 2008
For me, I value ride quality above all else because I accept that the major source of drag is aero and not tire resistance at the speeds I like to cruise at.
For me, I value ride quality above all else because I accept that the major source of drag is aero and not tire resistance at the speeds I like to cruise at.
Your kidding, right?
A difference in "feel" with different tubes?
I thought the only reason for latex tubes was because they were slightly lighter... that's it.
I cannot fathom an occasion where I would feel the difference. Maybe at the end of a 4+ hour ride, after the latex tubes lost about 5psi or so.
The difference in feel and speed will be MASSIVE, HUGE! Or maybe you won't be able to feel a thing. It just depends on who you talk to. Bear in mind that two recent reports (one from MAVIC and one in Bicycle Quarterly) have demonstrated that riders are not able to predictably "feel" differences in rolling resistance or wheel stiffness. Claims about lower rolling resistance with latex tubes are not consistently supported by multiple tests (some say faster, some say no difference). Belief is a powerful thing, so if you believe they are better, then you are (by the rules of the Internet) able to claim as much.
Hit me again, Ike, and put some stank on it.
cxwrench
·
'brifter' is f'ing stupid
Your kidding, right?
A difference in "feel" with different tubes?
I thought the only reason for latex tubes was because they were slightly lighter... that's it.
I cannot fathom an occasion where I would feel the difference. Maybe at the end of a 4+ hour ride, after the latex tubes lost about 5psi or so.
Poor insensitive types - missing out on so much!
My michelin latex replaced lighter butyl tubes. Same wheels, tires, pressures + bingo memories of my old clement setas.
Go ahead and try it. Or not.
my take on it...
I think a latex tube provides a subtle difference in ride quality - could be placebo effect.
That said, there are really just two main reasons for using them:
1. Flat resistance - it's harder to flat a latex tube vs. butyl tube of similar weight. I have pulled glass out of Vittoria and Veloflex tubulars with latex tubes and experienced no flat Both times a jagged shard was sticking through the casing and the latex tube had conformed around it. I've never had the same thing happen with latex tubes in many different clinchers, but my season flat rate is definitely lower than when racing on light butyl tubes.. Also, when a flat does occur, it's more likely to be a slow leakdown instead of sudden blow out. At least that's been my experience. This might save your a$$ in a corner or allow you to keep riding until wheel support catches up.
2. Lower rolling resistance. Most rolling resistance tests support this. Considering the other costs of racing, a pair of latex tubes is a pretty small investment for this sort of advantage.
Bad excuses for using them:
1. Less weight - perhaps, especially in the past when manufacturers built better quality stuff, but any modern latex tube (Michelin) is heavier than many race-oriented butyl tubes. Even if they are 10-15 grams lighter (weigh them instead of trusting whatever is claimed on the box), those few grams alone are not worth the ridiculous MSRP for latex tubes.
2. They ride better. Maybe, maybe not. My opinion is that tire pressure, tire quality, the rim, and even the frame make more difference than the inner tube. Compared to a thick 130 gram training butyl tube, yes the latex will feel better. Compared to a 50 gram Conti Supersonic or a 75 gram Michelin A1, it's pretty hard to tell the difference.
Placebo effect is huge in many aspects of life. The only way you could truly determine if a person can really and more importantly accurately tell the difference in ride quality of a butyl versus latex tube would be to have 2 pairs of identical wheels each mounted with opposing tubes and conduct some blind tests. If you know what you are riding it is essentially impossible to assess subjective things like ride quality in an objective manner. This is exactly why lab tests on newly developed drugs, stereo equipment and other things are double blind tested in laboratories where the test subjects do not know what they are listening too, what they have been injected with, etc...
I'd be willing to guess that those who claim they can feel a difference in ride quality would do no better than pure random guessing at picking which is which if it were a legitimate blind test. Someone ought to try such a test. If Ron Ruff were say willing to donate 2 identical sets of quality clincher wheels he built, I'd be willing to conduct the test on local riders in my area and report back on the noted test results.
PS - of course when the tests are completed I'll be happy to take one for the team and keep the donated wheelsets and conduct further road tests to assess the quality of the wheels themselves.
"The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force."
Adolph Hitler, 1934
"The great mass of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."
Adolph Hitler 1935
Sorry kids, you can't take away my experience. My 'test' was as close as possible with the tubes the only variable changed. It's a subtle change, but I liked it enough to keep the latex despite the weight penalty.
My guess is if you can't feel this change your tires suck.
Discussion Starter
·
#20
·
Feb 21, 2008
Wow this is developing into an interesting discussion! The cost of latex tubes is negligible and really a non-issue since I have a stockpile of both lightweight latex and butyl tubes.
I am very curious about the experiences from others on this board regarding any perceivable differences... obviously there will be no consensus on this issue in the near future.
As a side note, I am a recent bikeforums.net transplant and I find the level of technical discourse here more enlightened and civil. Cookies for all of you.
A forum community dedicated to Road Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
VerticalScope Inc., 111 Peter Street, Suite 600, Toronto, Ontario, M5V 2H1, Canada
The Fora platform includes forum software by XenForo
Home Apps 12 Best LaTeX Editors You Should Use
Srikanth AN -
Last Updated: December 27, 2021 3:58 pm
Handling digital documents has become a part of the daily lives of users. We have seen a lot of Document editing tools and most of them follow the WYSIWYG (‘What you see is what you get’) approach to Word formatting. In such type of Word formatting, a GUI based approach is established and users can see the end result while typing the content. That is one way of approaching Word Formatting. Another way is through the use of a Word formatting tool that makes use of the WYSIWYM (‘What you see is what you mean’) approach. LaTeX Editors fall in the second category and in this article, we list the best LaTeX editors that you should use in 2022.
Before we begin our article, let us first understand LaTeX editors. If you already know what they are want to skip to the list, you can use the table of content below.
Still don’t get what this is all about? In simple terms, LaTeX (pronounced Lay-tek), is a markup level text editing tool that separates the word formatting from the content entry task. Quite similar to HTML in its formatting, LaTeX is one of the most commonly used text editor in the academia. For people who have to deal with scientific papers and publishing, with a lot of mathematical equations thrown into the mix, LaTeX text editors are pretty much the industry standard.
These tools allow users to define formatting of text before hand through markup-level instructions and once the content is inserted, the document is ready to be exported as a PDF or any other file format. Mathematical equations are exceptionally handled by these editors and they were the primary reasons leading to its development in the first place.
Note: LaTeX editors aren’t meant for basic text editing. If that’s what you’re looking for you should check out some of the best text editors instead.
If you like using open-source apps , TeXmaker is one of the most popular, open-source, multi-platform solution for LaTeX editing. This tool is available for all major platforms and possesses features that make a great case for any LaTeX text editor. To get started with TeXmaker, its configuration window allows users to set-up all the basic settings of their LaTeX document before starting work on it.
TeXmaker also allows users to set-up the spell-checking and other document layout settings through the ‘Quick start’ window. The ‘Structure View’ allows users to streamline their documents into separate sections, labeling each one in the process. Inserting Tables, Math formula, cross-references, pictures , etc is pretty straightforward with TeXmaker.
Once the groundwork of your document layout is set up using TeXmaker, the document can now be compiled to get it extracted as a PDF, HTML or ODF file format. Another key feature of TeXmaker is the way it allows users to track errors during the compilation stage.
All warnings and errors are displayed to let the user take the needed action regarding the same. Parts/sections of your documents could be easily folded/unfolded using TeXmaker. This tool is also great for creating a structured Bibliography section of your document. Keyboard short-cuts are abundant for TeXmaker and it makes the overall experience with this tool pretty worthwhile. Overall, TeXmaker is one of the best LaTeX editors for Linux, Mac, and Windows.
Key Features: Unicode support, Code folding, Spell-checking, Built-in PDF viewer, Auto-completion, 370 mathematical symbols and more.
Platforms Supported: Windows, macOS, and Linux
TeXnicCenter is another great LaTeX editor specifically developed for Windows operating system . Since it runs on Windows, TeXnicCenter uses Microsoft’s MiKTeX typesetting distribution which makes it easy for Microsoft Word to process LaTeX documents. Also, TeXnicCenter is a free and open-source LaTeX editor so that’s great. Talking about the features, it has almost everything that you want in a LaTeX editor.
You have a powerful GUI editor with support for auto-completion and thousands of UTF-8 character encoding. Along with that, TeXnicCenter follows a master-branch navigator which makes it easy for users to navigate LaTeX documents.
What I love about TeXnicCenter is that it has pre-defined LaTeX snippets which makes it easy to create complex formula and documentation particularly for computer scientists. It goes without saying that TeXnicCenter has all the common features like syntax highlighting, bracket matching and spell checking . To sum up, if you are a Windows user, TeXnicCenter is one of the best LaTeX editors that you can use in 2022 and you don’t have to look any further.
Key Features: Integrated LaTeX environment for Windows apps, Auto-completion, Complete UTF-8 support, Document navigator, Library of LaTeX snippets, Syntax Highlighting, Spell Checking and more.
LyX is among the most popular LaTeX editors right now with support for many modern and unique features. It is an open-source editor and it’s available on a number of platform including Windows, macOS, and Linux. It emphasizes on the WYSIWYM writing approach with a simple GUI based interface. The app uses many flexible tools like integrated equation editor and reference indexing to create LateX documents seamlessly.
While many prefer LyX for mathematical documents, you can also create a structured novel or script using its advanced markup tools. Besides that, you have support for academic article referencing, link overlay and ability to create a master thesis using branched out nodes.
In addition, you can also author scientific papers with reference lists and citations. The automatic index creation is a unique feature that you will only find on LyX. With its advanced mathematical tools, you can visually drag and drop equations and edit them right there.
You also have access to many algorithms, theorems, and arrays of equations. Having said that, what I love about it is that how easy it’s to create LaTeX documents without worrying about formatting details or design attributes. Simply put, if you are new to LaTeX word processing and want to create scientific documents, opt for LyX and it will take you right home. It’s a solid LaTeX editor for Ubuntu, Windows, and Mac.
Key Features: Visual Mathematical Editor, Auto-completion, BibTeX support for creating a bibliography, Support for many graphic formats like complex graphs and tables, Huge library of mathematical formulae, Spell-checking, PDF viewer and more.
Platforms Supported: Windows, macOS, and Linux.
TeXstudio is another open-source and multi-platform LaTeX editor, which is quite popular among the academia. This tool is based on the open-source TeXmaker which we just talked about. TeXstudio is pretty much an extension of the former mentioned tool and added further support and features to it.
While the entire interface might pretty much feel similar to TeXmaker, but additional features like Document Word count, frequency count analysis and more made it into an independent full-blown LaTeX editing tool itself.
Some of its key features are Syntax Highlighting, reference checking, multi-cursors and more than 1000 mathematical formula included with it. Citations form a major component of scientific documents and TeXstudio provides support for Link overlay helps a lot in that. The Assistant feature of TeXstudio makes it easy for anyone without the complete knowledge of LaTeX editors set up a file and place blocks of images or tables anywhere in the document.
Images can be dragged and dropped into this editor and Table Auto-formatter takes care of adequately formatting your created tables. These are the additional features to TeXstudio, in addition to the regular Structure viewing, Code folding, Spell-checking, Auto-corrections, Syntax highlighting and all the other features that TeXmaker possesses.
Key Features: Auto-completion, Insertion of Tables, Figures, Mathematical formulae, Spell-checking, Built-in PDF viewer, Syntax highlighting, Export to HTML and more.
Platforms Supported: Windows, macOS, Linux and FreeBSD.
TeXworks is a multi-platform, open-source LaTeX editor. It is a LaTeX editing tool that is based off another open-source LaTeX editor – TeXshop. It provides a GUI-based approach to LaTeX editing and features many of the key advantages found in the previous mentioned tools. The app features a built-in PDF viewer just like in the above mentioned tools, but this tool also possesses an auto-synchronization feature to it.
TeXworks features many of the key capabilities of a LaTeX editor like auto-completion, auto-correction, Unicode support and more. If only the basic bare bones of a LaTeX editor is required, It ticks in all the boxes perfectly.
This tool although does not feature many of the key features, its minimalist approach to LaTeX editing gets the work done without fussing much about its functionalities. Code folding, Insertion of graphics/tables, interaction with external editors and its powerful built-in PDF viewer and exporter makes this tool one of the best LaTeX editors that the academia often tend to consider.
Key Features: Code folding, auto-completion, auto-correction, Unicode support and built-in PDF viewer.
Platforms Supported: Windows, macOS and Linux
Papeeria is an online LaTeX editor which is quite good with advanced tools and features. You can achieve all the LaTeX editing features online using its web-based UI. One of the key features of Papeeria is its huge library of templates .
Among these templates, there are technical paper layouts, Scientific magazines, journal articles, CV and more. You can simply choose one such layout and get started on editing your content without worrying much about the formatting associated with it.
Another great feature of Papeeria is that it allows users to collaborate on a LaTeX document . You can collaborate with other members on your LaTeX docume
Porno Milf Cuckold
Xxx Korea Japan
Big Ass Girl Xxx