 21-Sep-2005, 10:12 | #17 |
| Well, I was happy last night, but not so convinced on the actual "theory" of the antistatic strip. Do I smell BS? Can anyone else smell it? Not being an expert in tyres, but having worked in the electrical engineering industry for, ohhhh, about 28 years - including specification and testing of anti-static flooring to pharma installations, I reckon there may be a bit of spin involved (no pun intended) with this tyres story. For anti static protection to work, it must be in contact with a good earth and also in contact with that which is charged. As far as I can ascertain, the antistatic is indeed in contact with the floor, but michelin say it will only be there for 500 to 1000 miles. I personally am now on 2000+ miles and it's still there. But where does the anti-static strip make contact with the bike? Why would michelin have the strip only usable for the 500 to 1000 if as they say "It is necessary to ensure that this [static] is dispersed during usage" Considering the life of a tyre (say about 3000miles?), does this mean that I am at risk of static shocks or that the bike is at risk when the carbon strip is not in contact with earth? I can understand why they would assume that the bike gains a static charge (just like aircraft gain a charge as they pass through air, or like air ducting gains a charge as air passes through it), I can also understand why they may want to disperse this charge safely to earth (could this be the reason the CAN technology had a few bugs on earlier bikes?), but using the tyres to discharge the static charge???  I shall also be sending this query to Michelin and await a reply. | |
Threaded Mode