Significant difference between 23c and 25c?

[fluxgame]

Just another question in my quest to dial in my bike... I'm currently running 23c tires (well, 22c on front actually, the Conti Attack/Force combo), but I'm wondering if I should perhaps move up to something a little wider. I'm not interested in racing, I use my bike more as transportation and I have a bit of a fledgling long-distance bug going on. So, here's my question. I think I'm going to get a pair of Conti Ultra Gatorskins (I hear all kinds of good things about them), but I can't decide whether I should go to 25c or 28c. It doesn't seem like a 2mm jump is going to make much of a difference at all. Does it? And perhaps a further question: Should I go for wider tires at all? I'm a really lightweight rider (how come Clydes get all the attention around here?) and the ride on 23c's doesn't bother me, but perhaps I just don't know what I'm missing. Thanks to anyone who made it through this ramble...

[howsteepisit]

Mostly depend and what fits in your frame, and how you ride. Wider tires can be run at lower pressures ad are more comfortable on less than smooth roads. Narrower tires can be generically said to be a lower riding resistance. I find my 28c tires are really good at soaking up road buzz from chip sealed roads, and great for all day riding. But then again, I am an old fart that has decided that comfort is of higher priority than the fastest possible speed. Your mileage will vary of course.

[Six jours]

I was perfectly content with narrow tires until I tried wide ones. "My bike is perfectly comfortable with _____ equipment" is a common refrain, posted mostly by folks who don't have anything with which to compare. So if you're curious, the only way you'll learn is by trying.

There is a difference between 23 and 25, and a bigger difference between 23 and 28. (Shocking, eh?) As mentioned above, depending upon your frame there is a good chance the 28s won't fit.

[Buckshot77]

I switched from the stock 25C Michelin mid line tires to 23C prorace2 tires and couldn't beleive the difference. I love the 23's much more than the 25's. I guess maybe I'm young enough (30) and the roads I tend to ride on aren't ones that would vibrate you to death to need the wider tires. Most of the rough spots I ride over aren't going to be soaked up by anything less than a full suspension mountain bike in regards to making it "comfortable" to go over them.

Rick

[Six jours]

Not that I have anything against people who prefer narrower tires, but switching from a medium quality tire to a high quality tire completely overwhelms any difference noticed in width. If you switched from the 23mm race tire to a 21mm gumwall piece of crap, would you then decide that narrow tires are no good? :p

[tobyjoe]

After reading the Bicycle Quarterly tire test articles, I'm switching from Vredestein Fortezza TriComp Quattro 23s to a much wider and softer tire.

The rolling resistance seems to be less on quality wider tires (according to BQ) than quality thinner tires, and comfort is pretty important.

My NYC commute pretty much sums up what bad streets are, and these 23s are kicking my butt. In fact, I have 2 brand new ones and 2 week-old ones to sell ;)

[Godwin]

I'm a lightweight too (125-130lbs), I switched from 25s to 20s and felt a lot better but I think it also has a lot to do with the brand and your bike too. Try something different and see how you like it. I use Vittoria Open Corsas; I also avoid any road debris and holes and if I have to go over anything rough I lift myself slightly out of the saddle.

[sch]

Standard road brakes don't spread much more than 27mm gap between the pads,
so wider tires will require some bumping to force them between the pads. Canti
and V types are designed to allow a much wider spread though how easily this is
done varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. My Parks are a piece of cake
to unhook, the one on the front of the Burley tandem is so hard it is easier to
unclamp the cable. Frame clearance under the front fork and behind the seat
tube can be problems with tire sizes larger than 28 on some road bikes.

[Mr. Beanz]

I've used Conti Ultra 2000's or equivs for 10 years. Always 23's, just replaced with a 25 Gatorskin cause I had it in the closet. I was expecting it to feel very slow. Maybe a bit of a difference on the first ride but could have been a tired me. Since then I have ridden it and it does move pretty well. Been in a couple of funtime competitions with a couple of racer dudes on superlite bikes. They were trying to drop me but I held on till they got tired then jumped in front to do the pull and picked it up 4 mph over their pace. I was very shocked to have done so knowing I had 25's. Just always heard they were slow. Didn't feel slow but just the head thing made me think so. That day I picked it up to 26 on that stretch. With the 23's, I had hit 29-32 on the same flat section. Hard to say though, could have been that the tires were slow. But then again could have been because it was my second day riding the same 42 mile ride and I just didn't have the kick that day, or the wind? But overall, I did not notice that they felt slow.

Another I have always heard is that the wider tires are smoother and more comfy. I notice the exact opposite. Maybe more contact equals more vibration cause the wider tires actually feel more harsh to me. I do run all my tires at 120 psi and I weighed 240 lbs while riding both sizes. I've done several centuries with 23's and never a problem.

When the tire wears, I will go back to a 23. 25's didn't make the ride any more comfy IMO.

[Daveyboy]

I'm 220 and ride 25's. Last season I was about 235 and rode 23's all year. The biggest difference is that I've had less flats on 25's than 23's. The ride is a touch more comfortable with the 25's. I found that my speed and endurance had more to do with the amount of mileage I put in, intensity of workouts, and proper nutrition. Case in point, I've doubled my mileage this year and added 2-3 mph on my rides, dropped a little more weight, and climb hills alot easier.

I was actually looking into a new set of wheels and was talking to Peter White last week. He was suggesting that I move up to 28's - and that the rolling resistance would actually be lower. Seems counter-intuitive to me, but he should know he's been building wheels longer than I've been riding.

To me, the answer is clear, whatever size tire keeps me on the road more (i.e. less flats) is the one I'm going to ride.

[Six jours]

Another I have always heard is that the wider tires are smoother and more comfy. I notice the exact opposite. Maybe more contact equals more vibration cause the wider tires actually feel more harsh to me. I do run all my tires at 120 psi and I weighed 240 lbs while riding both sizes.

I'm not bright enough to understand the physics of it, but if you pump both a narrow tire and a wide tire up to the same pressure, the wide tire will be "harder". Taken to the extreme, a car or motorcycle tire is rock hard at 35 psi or so.

Take 20 psi out of the Gatorskin and it will be as "hard" to the hand as the 23 at 120, but more comfortable to ride.

[Longfemur]

Are you a racer, a racer wannabee? Are you going to be hopscotching with "racer dudes"? Or are you a rider? Wider 25mm is better than narrower 23. There's a reason that so-called training tires have traditionally been 25mm. I don't agree with the craziness about riding 650B "pillows", and mounting 35mm tires on road bikes, but I think you would find that 25 is just about right for a light rider (which I am), doing the typical road riding on the typical urban streets and highways (and occasional light gravel, construction zones, etc.).

I'm faster on 25/28mm kevlar-belted tires myself, simply because I can pretty much just ride over everything. I'm using 28 mm skinwalls that measure 25mm in reality right now. A true 28mm tire would probably be overkill in my case.

Now, if you replace a high-quality 23 with a really stiff 25, and/or you inflate the 25 at the same high pressure as you did the 23, then you won't gain anything.

Ultimately though, there's nothing like personal experience, so try them. You can always go back to 23's. Tires don't last forever anyway. Also, there are some significant differences in real width between different tires, so it's important to be comparing true 25 or 28 mm to true 23 mm. Depending on so many factors, for a light rider well-fitted and well-balanced on a good road bike, the value of any of these can be a toss-up, really.

Not sure if the advice of "clydes" is of any value here, because I'm sure the experience of a 225 pounder and a 125 pounder on the same tires is going to be vastly different.

[Skeleton]

Like you, I was also interested in going with a tire wider than 23mm on one of my bikes - Cervelo R3.

In my case, I mainly use that bike for unsupported long distance rides (200 km, and weekenders). I would be carrying 20 lbs on a rear rack over the back wheel. My question was what larger tire width while carrying an extra 20 lbs would give me the same performance (load carrying) as a naked bike with 23 mm. This proved to be a 25 mm tire. See chart below - note that wider tires have larger width but lower recommended air pressure; the product of the two gives the load capacity.

[Longfemur]

A relatively light rider can easily do light touring on 25 mm tires. I don't believe in pushing more tire than is necessary. I want the easiest and fastest time of it getting there for the effort I put in it. That's true no matter if it's an hour's ride, or a tour.

But look, I'm not saying there wouldn't be some types of riding where a narrower tire wouldn't be appropriate. All I'm saying is that yes, assuming we are talking about true sizes (where the stated size on the label is the true mounted size), there is a difference you can feel, and unless you have to squeeze out absolutely every watt of power like the juice out of a lemon, a 25mm tire should be plenty fast, and less stressful on you and your bike.

[zowie]

Standard road brakes don't spread much more than 27mm gap between the pads,
so wider tires will require some bumping to force them between the pads.

Let the air out. The real problem is the clearance of the top of the brake and the frame.

[fluxgame]

Wow, thanks for all the input. I'm not so much worried about clearance. My bike is an old Raleigh, I think 28's should be fine, probably even 32's. The original tires were 27," so I really doubt I'm going to run into clearance issues unless I start going to ridiculous widths. But, like Longfemur, I just don't want to be pushing more of a tire than is necessary. I weigh 120 lbs on a heavy day, so I imagine I can get away with significantly skinnier tires than most people. I guess I'll just have to try some wider tires and make a decision for myself. Maybe bump up to 25's for my next tires and then 28's after that? I was just hoping to avoid such a long, drawn out experiment.

Oh, and does anyone have any comments on the choice of 25? Are Gatorskins a good choice or should I consider something else? GP4000's? Michelin Pro2's? Krylion Carbons? I haven't had issues with flats with the Attack/Force's (none in close to 1000 miles), so maybe I don't really need the extra flat protection, especially with a wider tire. Just too many choices.

[Six jours]

About a year ago Bicycle Quarterly published the most thorough "real world" tire test I am aware of. They found the Deda Tres Giro d'Italia the fastest tire of all, but that model has apparently been changed to the point of non-existence. Second place went to the Michelin Pro2, with -- wait for it -- the widest model being the fastest, the middle model being in the middle, and the narrowest being the slowest. This was a pure rolling resistance test, so weight didn't play a factor, but still...

The 23mm Gatorskin, BTW, scored a tie with the 23mm Michelin.

[banerjek]

Not that I have anything against people who prefer narrower tires, but switching from a medium quality tire to a high quality tire completely overwhelms any difference noticed in width.
An important factor IMO. I've ridden everything from 23's to 32's. For riding on decent surfaces, I prefer the 23's because they're faster and lighter. However, when commuting in winter, I like 28's I'm less likely to slip when hitting debris.

Softer tires do give a cushier ride, but frankly, you can get used to anything. Also, good tires give a better ride. Armadillo 28's give a far worse ride than any of the 23's I ride.

[njkayaker]

This was a pure rolling resistance test, so weight didn't play a factor, but still...
It would seem a test without a representative load (ie, weight) isn't very meaningful.

[fluxgame]

Honestly, the rolling resistance issue doesn't interest me very much. I really doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between two road tires. I'm much more interested in grip, cornering ability, and wet weather performance.

[Six jours]

It would seem a test without a representative load (ie, weight) isn't very meaningful.
I don't mean that there was no load, I mean that tire weight was not factored in, so the test did not take into account accelerating or climbing. IOW, "pure rolling resistance".

One interesting thing done by the magazine was to calculate the amount of time it would take to complete Paris-Brest-Paris at a given wattage, and then calculate how much time would be lost or gained by going to a tire with higher or lower rolling resistance. The difference between the slower tires in their test and the faster ones was on the order of 8 hours, IIRC. That's shocking, to me. At randonneuring pace (as opposed to higher "race" pace, where wind resistance becomes paramount) rolling resistance appears to be much more important than I had ever thought.

[banerjek]

Honestly, the rolling resistance issue doesn't interest me very much. I really doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between two road tires. I'm much more interested in grip, cornering ability, and wet weather performance.
As you get narrower, this all gets worse. In addition, narrower tires seem more vulnerable to flats, and they get kicked worse when you hit something. That's why my winter commuter uses heavier tires.

Narrower tires are faster. People talk about rolling resistance, but my opinion is that effect is minimal. The weight and aerodynamics seem to have a bigger effect.

[fluxgame]

The difference between the slower tires in their test and the faster ones was on the order of 8 hours, IIRC. That's shocking, to me. At randonneuring pace (as opposed to higher "race" pace, where wind resistance becomes paramount) rolling resistance appears to be much more important than I had ever thought.

Now that's interesting. I'd love to get my hands on that article, sounds like a good read. I ended up picking up a pair of 25c Pro2Races from PBK, by the way. Looking forward to trying them out.

[Six jours]

Bicycle Quarterly, volume five, number one, Autumn 2006, available at their website. http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/subscriptioninfo.html

Only decent bicycle magazine available, IMO.

Oh, and let us know how the tires work out for you.

[MarkAJ]

Wow, thanks for all the input. I'm not so much worried about clearance. My bike is an old Raleigh, I think 28's should be fine, probably even 32's. The original tires were 27," so I really doubt I'm going to run into clearance issues unless I start going to ridiculous widths. But, like Longfemur, I just don't want to be pushing more of a tire than is necessary. I weigh 120 lbs on a heavy day, so I imagine I can get away with significantly skinnier tires than most people. I guess I'll just have to try some wider tires and make a decision for myself. Maybe bump up to 25's for my next tires and then 28's after that? I was just hoping to avoid such a long, drawn out experiment.

Oh, and does anyone have any comments on the choice of 25? Are Gatorskins a good choice or should I consider something else? GP4000's? Michelin Pro2's? Krylion Carbons? I haven't had issues with flats with the Attack/Force's (none in close to 1000 miles), so maybe I don't really need the extra flat protection, especially with a wider tire. Just too many choices.

I have used 25 & 23 folding only. I can not really tell you squat about the feel or performance in changing widths. Now, I only use 23 folding tires because they work fine for me (180lbs) in California all year for my rides of 40-100 miles. You can spend a lot of time fixing flats here in Southern California. People think the roads are their trash can. When I used Conti 4000’s 23’s folding I was very impressed with performance. I had almost 3,000 miles before I started to get flats. The Conti 4000 comes in colors and is soft when you first get them. They harden up after about 100 miles. So I recommend you ride on good clean surface for the 100 mile break in. I did not so after each ride I had to pick debris out of the soft surface of each tire. This left cuts in the tires I believe I would not have had had I harden them first. I have recently moved to Conti Gatorskins folding with Kevlar 23’s and they are bullet proof. I don’t care about the riding resistance or weather capability any more. I like riding without getting flats. I expect to get several thousand miles on these Conti Gatorskins too. I have run over debris and stuff which other tires would have been shredded, but not the Gatorskins. I had about 1000 miles on the Gatorskin tires before the rear showed a cut. BTW: Conti tires have a rotation arrow on the side wall so you mount them properly. It is hard to see and only on one side. Most LBS don’t even care or know so they mount them hit or miss.

You can get great buys on Conti tyres here. (http://www.probikekit.com/index.php) If you don’t see the pricing in dollars just click on the American flag at the top of the page.

[banerjek]

One interesting thing done by the magazine was to calculate the amount of time it would take to complete Paris-Brest-Paris at a given wattage, and then calculate how much time would be lost or gained by going to a tire with higher or lower rolling resistance. The difference between the slower tires in their test and the faster ones was on the order of 8 hours, IIRC. That's shocking, to me.
That sounds too high unless we're talking fat knobbies. I thought the PBP is 1200K (less than 750 miles). My unscientific experiments lead me to believe tires can make a couple minutes difference in 20 miles. Extrapolate that out to 1000 miles and we're still talking a couple hours tops.

[Six jours]

It sounds too high to me too. But they've been thorough enough ("peer reviewed" might be too strong a term to use for the article, but not by much) that I don't have anything substantial upon which to base that opinion.

[MKahrl]

I believe the editor of BQ managed a 50 hour time on this year's Paris-Brest-Paris.

Word of warning regarding BQ; if you get one issue you will be tempted to not only subscribe but order every back issue.

[fluxgame]

Word of warning regarding BQ; if you get one issue you will be tempted to not only subscribe but order every back issue.

From reading through the list of articles in the back issues, I'm getting that distinct impression. I'm already debating whether I should just order the one issue, or the whole year's worth. It is cheaper per issue that way after all...

[vik]

That sounds too high unless we're talking fat knobbies. I thought the PBP is 1200K (less than 750 miles). My unscientific experiments lead me to believe tires can make a couple minutes difference in 20 miles. Extrapolate that out to 1000 miles and we're still talking a couple hours tops.

BQ rocks. I just finished my first year's subscription and signed up for two more.

I was just reading the issue about PBP performance regarding tires. For a less powerful rider [70W] the difference between the 4 tires reviewed was about 15.5hrs. That's two solid nights of sleep so it is a huge difference. For a 150W rider the difference was 7.5hrs which is still a lot of sleep at PBP.

The important thing to realize is tires are your #1 speed upgrade from a $ to kph point of view.

[maxine]

Honestly, the rolling resistance issue doesn't interest me very much. I really doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between two road tires. I'm much more interested in grip, cornering ability, and wet weather performance.

Yup. I :love: my Continental Grand Prix 4-Seasons (25c, pump to 100-105.) Very flat-resistant, too.

[Hocam]

How are those conti's on wet roads?

[banerjek]

BQ rocks. I just finished my first year's subscription and signed up for two more.

I was just reading the issue about PBP performance regarding tires. For a less powerful rider [70W] the difference between the 4 tires reviewed was about 15.5hrs. That's two solid nights of sleep so it is a huge difference. For a 150W rider the difference was 7.5hrs which is still a lot of sleep at PBP.

The important thing to realize is tires are your #1 speed upgrade from a $ to kph point of view.
Just out of curiosity, what were the fastest and slowest tires compared? I do swap tires out on my bikes for different conditions and strongly prefer lighter/narrower tires for decent roads and climbing, but I wouldn't expect the difference between my slowest tire (Schwalbe Marathon Plus 700/28) and fastest (Specialized Mondo S-Works or Vittoria Open Corsa CX 700/23) would be that great even if I can feel a very significant difference.

[Rails2Trails]

I just purchased a new Giant TCR C1. The bike came stock with a Michelin Pro Race 3. Since the MPR3 is a racing tire, I went ahead and replaced them with a training tire. I have been using Conti tires on my bikes since 1988. One tire that has always done the trick, whether I am training or just tearing up the town, is the Continental Grand Prix. Yes, the original Conti Grand Prix; not the Grand Prix 3000 or 4000, but the original Continental Grand Prix.

I weigh 175 lbs. and use a 700 x 23c (Folding). I am a long distance/centure rider. I have never experienced a flat with these tires - ever. I guess it's because I always inspected them before and after a ride, then changed them out whenever I felt it was necessary. I would occaissionaly notice glass fragments embedded in the tires, but never experienced a puncture or gash. Above all, I always put a crapload of miles on them.

Get em' at BikeTiresDirect.com

[banerjek]

.... I have never experienced a flat with these tires - ever...... I would occaissionaly notice glass fragments embedded in the tires, but never experienced a puncture or gash. ....
You've jinxed yourself now......

[maxine]

How are those conti's on wet roads?

If your question was for me about the Four Seasons, they're great. I ride in all weather, and those tires have been through more than a few day-long, rain-almost-all-day rides without me giving them a second thought.

(Now, it's not like I'm racing at top speed in driving rainstorms . . . )

[Rails2Trails]

You've jinxed yourself now......

You're probably right! :eek:

[MKahrl]

Just out of curiosity, what were the fastest and slowest tires compared? I do swap tires out on my bikes for different conditions and strongly prefer lighter/narrower tires for decent roads and climbing, but I wouldn't expect the difference between my slowest tire (Schwalbe Marathon Plus 700/28) and fastest (Specialized Mondo S-Works or Vittoria Open Corsa CX 700/23) would be that great even if I can feel a very significant difference.

The fastest tire was a Deda Tre "Giro d'Italia" 24.5 mm actual width clincher with cotton casing. The slowest was the Nifty-Swifty 650Bx32. Other fast tires include the Clement Del Mundo 700Cx28 tubular, Michelin Pro2Race 700Cx25, Conti. Ultra Gator 700Cx23, and the Mitsuboshi 650Bx38.

Width didn't seem to matter, the Ultra Gator 700x23 at 105 psi rolled as fast as the Mitsuboshi Trimline 650Bx38 at 55 psi. For an individual tire, very high pressure (130 psi) rolled slower than 105 psi in the same tire. On a slightly wider tire 105 psi rolled only a little slower than the same tire at 85 psi. Rolling resistance increased once tire pressure dropped below 55 psi for a 27mm wide, 25 psi for a 38mm wide tire.

For the identically constructed Michelin Pro2 Race tires in 21, 23.5 and 25.5 actual widths, the widest tire was 2% faster than the narrowest even though they are pretty close in widths.

The testers were asked how fast each tire felt after each run and there was no correlation between how fast a tire felt and how fast it actually was. Tires that were actually slow felt fast and tires that were fast felt slow. This is important because we get a lot of tire advice from other riders and it usually sounds like "I switched to the SUX6000 and it is much faster." Ask him what his testing protocol looked like and see if it's as thorough as BQ's testing protocol. Decide for yourself whether you want tires that feel fast or are fast.

[fluxgame]

The Michelins came in the mail Monday (fast shipping from the UK!). I've put about 40 miles commuting around on them. They're seriously wider than my Conti's were. I have a suspicion that they're a good bit wider than the 25mms they're marked as. Or maybe my Conti's were less than their marked sizes. Anyway, I'd say that they're marginally more comfortable. They absorb some of the surface imperfections in the road, but I'm not about to ride over potholes without coming out of the saddle. Not that I was expecting such to be feasible. And for some reason the tires "feel" slower, yet my average flat cruising speed went from 21-22 mph to 24-25 mph. Clearly they're a bit faster. Handling feels perhaps slightly less snappy, but not enough to make a difference most of the time. Don't know about wet weather handling yet, but imagine I'll find out this Sunday. I'm riding a century and it's supposed to rain.

[Six jours]

Yeah, the manufacturers don't do a good job off accurately labeling tire width.

How much pressure are you using? If you pump the 25s to the same pressure as the 23s they'll actually be a bit harder. If you want to compare apples to apples, you'll need to reduce pressure in the 25s by about 10-15 psi, compared to the 23s.

As MKahrl (http://bikeforums.net/member.php?u=47141) pointed out, BQ says tire "feel" and tire speed can be unrelated. I know they tested a tire that was as fast as my favorite Grand Bois Cypres, and it's a tire that I hate because it feels like riding through glue. Hmm...

I'd love to believe your tires are responsible for your 2-5 mph increase in speed, but there simply has to be something else at work here. BTW, you might want to introduce yourself to the local pro team. They'd be quite happy to hire someone who cruises at 25mph. Seriously.

Handling is one thing we all neglected to mention. Wider tires can be expected to slow things down a bit. This can be a good thing if you call it "increased stability" or a bad thing if you call it "sluggish handling". :)

[LWaB]

I have recently moved to Conti Gatorskins folding with Kevlar 23’s and they are bullet proof.

Continuing OT for a minute:
Not everybody thinks Gatorskins are good tyres, particularly if they deal with flints. Google "hamsterskins" for more opinions.

[fluxgame]

How much pressure are you using? If you pump the 25s to the same pressure as the 23s they'll actually be a bit harder. If you want to compare apples to apples, you'll need to reduce pressure in the 25s by about 10-15 psi, compared to the 23s.

I pumped 'em up to 100psi, so a good 20 below my 23s. I might try dropping to 90-95, which is what the little "suggested inflation" chart on the tire packaging suggested for my weight ('course I had to convert Kg to Lbs and Bar to PSI to figure this out, why can't us American just convert to the metric system already?).

I'd love to believe your tires are responsible for your 2-5 mph increase in speed, but there simply has to be something else at work here.

Now that you mention it, it probably had more to do with me working a little harder to make up for the perception of slowness in the tires.

BTW, you might want to introduce yourself to the local pro team. They'd be quite happy to hire someone who cruises at 25mph. Seriously.

Even riding fixed? :D I don't normally cruise at 25 though, usually more like 21-22, as I said. And that's just for my short (7 mile) commute. I drop it down to a much more reasonable 18 for longer rides. ;) I've been thinking about trying racing out though. It's just that pesky freewheel/derailer business and the (at least perceived) lack of CAT5 races around here. I'm more interested in brevets though. Hence the posting in the LD forum. They may look at me funny, but they won't outlaw my silliness.

Continuing OT for a minute:
Not everybody thinks Gatorskins are good tyres, particularly if they deal with flints. Google "hamsterskins" for more opinions.

Wait, there's a topic here? If anyone's guilty of getting things off topic around here, it's me. That's pretty funny about the "hamsterskins" moniker though. No flint around here, but I didn't end up going for them anyway.

How are those conti's on wet roads?

Oh, and if that was directed at me. The Attack/Forces are great on wet roads. Short of taking it easy over metal, I rode exactly the same in the wet as I did in the dry. Hopefully the Pro2's treat me so well...

[chill123]

anyone got an opinion on continental ultra sport kevlar folding tyres? i was reccommended some and just wanted to guage opinion...

having done a 170miler at the weekend and got 5 flats (on the stock tyres that came with my trek 1000) i'm hoping they are a bit more flat resistant?

[Six jours]

Thanks for the info, fluxgame. Always good to hear from people with direct experience.

[chill123]

well first run out with the continental ultra sport kevlar folders and i got a pancake after 2 miles!

[Longfemur]

Most of the subjective "tests" people make do depend on the rim somewhat. Tires feel differently on different rims. If you put a true 25mm tire on a very narrow racing rim, it will not perform as well as if it was mounted on a bit wider rim (and what true 25mm is depends on what width rim the manufacturer uses to size its tires). It will be "floppier" on the narrower rim, and so handling and overall performance will suffer a bit. Comparison tests, even ones by magazines, etc., are also just tests. They aren't YOUR riding conditions. There isn't much point riding the fastest, lightest tire if you're riding in most cities. But on the other hand, if you are indeed going to be riding 1000 km on your next ride, then it might make a difference. But then, only if you're really counting the time and you don't have to spend much time fixing flats along the way. I mean look at the tires that long distance tourers use.

To those who obsess about this, you are probably are reading magazines and the internet too much.