I'm with you on the word chuck, though I'm not entirely sure what else to call it either. With these chucks though, if you screw it on to just before it starts releasing the air, then you can attach the hose to it before nipping it up tight.
I've been getting curious after all you musings on here and decided to test my mini pump out. I decided to let the air out of my Tern's tire, which is a 20 inch wheel and then attempted to re-inflate it using the mini pump. I had to attach the track pump to it to take pressure readings because the mini pump doesn't have any gauge. Well at first it was really quick and easy and then it progressively got harder. I stopped when it felt like I was getting close to 60 psi and checked, I'd managed a measly 45psi. So I got back to it and really struggled to get any more than 55 psi. I probably could have gone further, but to be fair I really didn't fancy the struggle, so I topped it up with the track pump.
So what did i learn? Well like you already were finding, mini pumps are pretty rubbish at reaching high PSI. I probably could have got more, but certainly not 100 psi and not something I would fancy trying in the cold and rain. For my purposes my pump is fine and 45 - 50 psi will get me home with the folder, however, it really isn't great.
Cheers - glad I'm not the only one who has issue with the word "chuck"
I'm with you on alternatives too - perhaps "valve head" or "valve adaptor"...? Feck knows tbh, although "chuck" sounds wrong for some reason.
I'm pleased
(sorry!) to hear that my OCD has enticed you down the dark rabbithole of paying more attention to these dismissible details than the marketing men would like. It seems that your findings are similar to my own - i.e. achievable, real-world pressures are about half what the manufacturers' state.
I guess there's always the "good enough to get you home" argument; however this is still likely to do the tyres no favours and like everything else in marketing there appears to be an appreciable chasm between what "they" want you to believe and the reality of the situation. I'm sure some could get the headline figures out of these mini-pumps, however I suspect they'd be in the minority; especially when selecting from a sample of cyclists who typically have arms like matchsticks..
Sorry for my part in shaking your faith in these pumps - you know about Santa and the easter bunny, right...?
Getting high pessures with mini pumps is very hard work. I invested in a nano Fumpa electric pump as further back up for longer rides. Works well for 1-2 tyres and only the size of a match box, just got to remember to charge it.
Thanks - on the one hand these look like nice little units; on the other they rely on an external power source and contain integrated batteries; so in this context I'm not keen. Ta for the suggestion though
So, after generally gravitating towards everything that's not the Topeak Morph range, last night I had an epiphany that I didn't really want all the valve-stem-stress and bike-wobbling-horror likely with the Topeak Roadie pump.
Likewise while the Lezyne looks like a lovely piece of kit, I think that's largely it's downfall in my case. I'm sure it'd be great as something to be kept at home and cossetted; however as an in-field workhorse that's going to be hastily dragged out and smashed into action under less-than-favourable circumstances, I can see its pristine finish quickly getting battered during feverish attempts to get the bike up and running ASAP to preserve my hourly pittance.. which would not be conducive to my mental health.
Plus, it would require additional expenditure and hassle in the form of the extra 90 degree presta chuck required to fit the little B's wheels without further compounding the misery of the situation.
So, the whole thing turns full circle and leaves me staring down the barrel of the Morph - it's uninspiring if practical placcy format actually working in its favour since it'll probably resist damage better than the crispy, silver-underneath mars-bar finish of the Lezyne's anodised aluminium, while it's less of a thing of beauty in the first place; inviting me to be less precious about it from the off.
On top of that the push-fit, 90-degree head on the Morph seems eminently better suited to the B's little wheels and sensitve valve cores.
The led to a deep-dive into the Morph range; which for my purposes boils down to the Mini (short, small diameter), Road (long, small diameter) and Mountain (long, larger diameter). Specs on the website are scant but better than some others.
From the difference in overall length and volume between each, I was able to have a stab at determining piston cross-sectional area (and hence pumping effort for a given pressure) as well as stroke length:
Mini Morph:
Displacement: 50cm^3
Max Pressure: 160psi
Overall length: 26cm
Body diameter: 2.8cm
Force required at max pressure (calculated): 392N
No. strokes required to fill 1000cm^3 tyre to 100psi: (calculated) 152
Road Morph:
Displacement: 82cm^3
Max Pressure: 160psi
Body diameter: 2.8cm
Overall length: 35cm
Force required at max pressure (calculated): 392N
No. strokes required to fill 1000cm^3 tyre to 100psi: (calculated) 93
Mountain Morph:
Displacement: 101cm^3
Max Pressure: 160psi
Body diameter: 3.0cm
Overall length: 35cm
Force required at max pressure (calculated): 483N
No. strokes required to fill 1000cm^3 tyre to 100psi: (calculated) 75
So the winner currently is looking like the Road Morph; larger than the mini but it should still fit in the Brompton's front bag. It displaces more per stroke and I think its longer length might aid the ergonomics of using it like a floor pump.
The greater displacement of the Mountain Morph is appealing, however I have no way of quantifying how easy or otherwise applying the necessary load will be in the probably-ergonomically-compromised-position likely required for operation. I need a high-ish pressure output and mountain bike tyres don't - so I guess the clue's in the name.
Will probably sleep on it then might actually commit to a purchase - hopefully I don't get a puncture in the meantime..