Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - What size tires?

I have 2 sets of wheels for my road bike. One lite set with 23 mm tires & another more robust set i built up for winter with 26 mm tires. I road the 26's all year round last year including 2 centuries because i like the comfort & softer ride. I am sure they are much heavier & therefore slow me a bit especially on hills.

Do you long distance riders set up your wheels for comfort or performance? Doe's it make any difference at all? Thanks!

Of course, it is a balance between performance and comfort, but for long distance not as much of a compromise as you might think ... or convention might have you believe.

More manufacturers are seeing the light and offering wider tyres that, as Continental avers this year: "... roll easier, yield higher mileage and offer more comfort and grip."

Long distance riders aren't concerned with the ounce that might give them the jump in a line sprint; they are interested in a tyre that will not beat them up over the long haul.

In pusuit of that goal, I had a new bike (http://www.veloweb.ca/mybikepages/sportivo.html) built last year that would fit bigger tyres with enough clearance for fenders.

650b, with the right tyre (http://www.veloweb.ca/mybikepages/blerioso.html), is another approach that gives an amazingly comfortable ride on rough roads without compromising speed.

I've stuck with 25C profile tyres for a long time now, and run them at the lower range of recommended pressure.

Much of the long-distance comfort factor depends on the design of the bike and its inbuilt comfort features -- chainstay length, seat and headtube geometry, frame material, wheelbase and rider fit.

But for any given bike that I have used for centuries or randonnees, I have rarely exceeded 100psi even on 23C profile tyres. More often it is around 80psi. My butt and to a degree my hands certainly know when the tyres have been inflated to higher pressures.

Increased weight from wider profile tyres, in my estimation, is almost irrelevant. However, obviously, be prepared to pay a little more for better quality tyres.

Consider also:

1. The road surface -- chipseal, potholes or patching will require more thought on ways to achieve comfort through manipulation of tyre pressures.

2. The capacity of your pump to achieve the pressure you want, especially when you are faced with repairing a puncture at 2 o'clock in the morning in rain on the side of a lonely stretch of forest road. A pump that required huge effort to get above 100 or 110psi isn't much good to you.

3. Clearance on your frame, particularly around the chainstay at the BB.

4. Proportional pressures between front and rear. I sometimes inflate the front tyre to 5psi less than on the rear.

5. Handling.

6. Whether you want to run fenders/mudguards or not. The increased profile of the tyre also means a slightly wider overall diameter when inflated.

Like most things, knowing what you satisfies your needs comes from experimenting with your set-up. FWIW, my new CF bike has followed the trend with 25C tyres fitted at 80-90 psi and I like that. I do have Vittoria Rubino Pro 23C tyres to go on it at some stage, but likely they won't be inflated above 100 psi, either, and I don't think I would use them for a randonnee.

I think i am just naive to this side of the sport. All the young turks i (try to) ride with have the latest , greatest & lightest of everything: zipp wheels 21 mm tires w/ latex tubes. I guess I am just getting old but I don't want all that fragile stuff. The wheel set-up i like right now is made up of Bontrager Classics wheels & Vittoria Rubino 25c but these are heavy compared to what others around me ride.

i rode some Grand Bois 28's that I liked a lot, but these days i'm running gatorskin 25's, which i'm starting to think don't roll as nicely as the GB's.. i might get some GB 26's and give them a shot.

from PBP 07 stats, (i think) about half of finishers were on 25's or smaller:


Tire size was not a contributing factor to success. About a third fell into each group of 23mm, 25mm and everything else

source (http://www.rusa.org/newsletter/11-02-11.html)

in the end it just comes down to personal choice, and a lot of experimentation - at least that's how i look at it.

I think i am just naive to this side of the sport. All the young turks i (try to) ride with have the latest , greatest & lightest of everything: zipp wheels 21 mm tires w/ latex tubes. I guess I am just getting old but I don't want all that fragile stuff. The wheel set-up i like right now is made up of Bontrager Classics wheels & Vittoria Rubino 25c but these are heavy compared to what others around me ride.

I would take a guess and say that the young turks turn up to events of 100 miles to 200km, but you see fewer and fewer (or none) of them as the randonnee distances get longer.

Anyone can survive on 120psi 23C tyres for 100 miles or maybe 200km. Even I have done 100 miles on an aluminium frame with 23s pumped up high. But I felt bashed up at the end.

Another thought is that randonnees can turn up some atrocious weather. Those Zipp wheels with their wide aerodynamic profiles would be almost unrideable in some of the conditions I have endured on events such as the Great Southern and Last Chance 1200s, for example.

You may think you are naive, but you are already wise, in my opinion, for deciding on stuff that you think will last the distance without you giving it a second thought and feeling more uncomfortable than you need to.

As a footnote, the bald RUSA statement quoted by mattm seems a bit fatuous to me. Success can be dictated by a number of small factors that, combined, become significant.

If your tyre pressures are high because you perceive the need for high pressures in a narrow-section tyre (or even wide section tyres), then there is a likelihood that your butt is going to suffer, along with shoulders and hands. A rough ride can take a lot out of a rider. PBP was awfully wet, and that combined with sore butt, drop in energy and a basic feeling of not having fun (ie, not being able to maintain the planned pace, for example) might have combined to eliminate more from the event than is obvious.

Statistics don't tell the whole story because the human mind intervenes all the time.

Rowan, I appreciate the kind words & also appreciate everyones advice.
I was very surprised when i finished the two 100 mile rides that i did not have back, hand or butt problems. I did develop a bad case of the HOT foot at about the 90 mile mark both times. That is very uncomfortable! It would also come back even on 30 mile rides for a short period of time following the century. That is my greatest concern on long rides.

I go for Comfort.
Used 700 X 20's in Indy last year on The Speedway Track 100 mile ride.

Went to 700 X 28's for daily rides on normal roads.
I can Now hit bumps and pot holes with no worry.

The Hot Foot sure is painful.
Somehow I outgrew it. Try more spinning and less mashing.

I was wondering what brand of 26 cm tires you run and where do you buy them.

I must be mistaken about the 700-26 tires. They are Vittoria rubino 700-25 tires that i ordered from REI. I swear they were advertised as 26's & that the packaging said 26. I remember that being an odd-ball size & it was the closest i could get to a 28. 28's will not fit my bike. What can i say?

I'll chime in as one of the Young Turks riding brevets on 23C racing tires (Conti 4000s or Michelin Pro Race IIs) at 110-120 psi (I weigh 165). Two of the three 1200s I've done were on Conti 4000s (the third was on 23C Gatorskins; no flats, but I thought they handled terribly). I like the way they ride, even on the longer rides. Only time I was uncomfortable with my tire choice was descending a gravel road on an Oregon Randonneurs 200K two summers ago. That was really dodgy....

Like many other aspects of randonneuring and distance riding, you'll see people take all kinds of different approaches. There's no "right" answer here, other than to say that those more inclined toward performace will run lighter, narrower tires on lighter wheels with fewer spokes, and those more inclined to comfort will run wider tires on heavier rims with more spokes. If someone has data correlating tire size to finish rate, please share.

in my case, i rode a couple of centuries last summer on my AL frame with 25mm tyres, and thought nothing of it---believing the pain in my body was only due to my body's lack. well, by summer's end, i had a steel frame running 28mm Contis, and, well, i've never been so excited to just rack up mile after mile. so that additional 3mm in the tyres made a giant difference for my comfort (ok, there were other helping factors, too; like the steel frame). in addition, because my body was less abused, my average speed for distance rides also went up (on 300miles, it went from 14.5mph to 16.3mph, same course, but hotter muggier weather for the second ride).

now i'm riding 35mm studded tyres for the ice; i miss the smooth tread comfort of my non-winter tyres, but the pokey carbide studs are nice for staying upright. suffice it to say, i am not riding centuries on the winter tyres---there's just no one else willing to ride with me!

Hey All
I've been following this thread and I have more questions now than ever. I am wanting to try my hand at this LD cycling thing. I recently purchased a Trek 520 that was equipped with Bontrager 700 X32. I have placed about 150 miles on them and it just seems such a chore riding with the "fatter tires". Comfortable but still a chore.

On my road bike, I use 700X25. My times riding the same route seems to generally faster on that bike as opposed to my Trek. My question is if I switched to say 28's will my time (speed) increase to an extent that it will really make a difference or is it the tire manufacturer, meaning should I get a different tire 32 or 28.

For general purpose "do everythings", I like my Ultra Gatorskin 700 x 28 tires. They give a decent amount of cushion over chip-seal and rough pavement, they're pretty fast on smooth roads, and they're big enough that I don't feel any concern about them underneath my fat behind for 200 miles. In the last 5000 miles I've only had 2 flats with them: One was a puncture on the rear tire which I knew needed replacing, but I kept putting it off because "I can still get a few more miles from it." The other was from a sharp cinder which cut through the tire.

I'm 250 pounds, and my distance bike is also a commuter ride, so it sees a lot of action; bad roads, curbside gravel/cinders all winter, some hardpack limestone pathways... Just about anything.

I like 28s myself for LD riding. Anything under 100 I like 23s or 25s. I don't think I am significantly slower on the fatter tire, but I am significantly more comfortable!

Hey All
I recently purchased a Trek 520 that was equipped with Bontrager 700 X32. I have placed about 150 miles on them and it just seems such a chore riding with the "fatter tires". Comfortable but still a chore.

On my road bike, I use 700X25. My times riding the same route seems to generally faster on that bike as opposed to my Trek. My question is if I switched to say 28's will my time (speed) increase to an extent that it will really make a difference or is it the tire manufacturer, meaning should I get a different tire 32 or 28.

There are too many variables here to draw any conclusions. If you can fit the 32s on the "road bike" switch tyres and see what you think then.

Let me tell give you an example from my bike/tyre "tests." On my Bleriot (http://www.veloweb.ca/mybikepages/blerioso.html), I have run two popular 650b tyres: the Panaracer Col de la Vie and the Grand Bois Hetre. The latter is noticeably faster and way more comfy. The Col de la Vie is 35mm. The Hetre is 42mm. My perceptions are backed by many, many 650b riders who have made the same comparison -- switching from the CdlV, to the Hetre. The difference is the very supple casing and nearly smooth tread of the Hetre, which is a very close approximation of the renowned hand-made French "demi balloon" tyres of the 1930s.

The performance/comfort factor is always going to run into the durability wall.

For 700C, I concur with CliftonGK1 that the Ultra Gatorskin 28mm is a reasonable tyre, if somewhat harsh. I've used this tyre on my Marinoni Sportivo "Randonnee" (http://www.veloweb.ca/mybikepages/sportivo.html) for rides up to 600km.

I would be really interested in trying the new Schwalbe Ultremo "R" in 25mm and the new Conti Grand Prix in 24 or 28 (not sure if the latter will be available in NA). I've used the original 23mm Ultremo and it is very fast (as backed by independent testing).

Anyway, all tyres are not created equal. Just getting a wider tyre doesn't guarantee you get comfort and performance. A wide(r) tyre can still be harsh and slow. A very wide tyre can be amazingly fast and comfortable. The idea is to find a happy medium in a tyre that fits.

I was wondering what brand of 26 cm tires you run and where do you buy them.

you can get some 26 Grand Bois from BQ (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/componentoffer.html).

i had the GB 28's for a while and loved them. haven't tried the 26's, but i'm thinking about it. love the way those tires roll.

Hey All
I recently purchased a Trek 520 that was equipped with Bontrager 700 X32. I have placed about 150 miles on them and it just seems such a chore riding with the "fatter tires". Comfortable but still a chore.

Don't chalk it all up to the tires alone. If you're not used to riding the 520, you may be surprised at how much energy that frame can soak up... good for absorbing bumps... bad for putting big muscle into a climb.



On my road bike, I use 700X25. My times riding the same route seems to generally faster on that bike as opposed to my Trek. My question is if I switched to say 28's will my time (speed) increase to an extent that it will really make a difference or is it the tire manufacturer, meaning should I get a different tire 32 or 28.

Again, don't blame only the tires for the slower transit times. If you tend to mash a lot, your riding style may have to change a bit to accommodate the 520's flexy frame. I've been riding a 520 since 1983, and I've learned that mashing isn't usually the best way to ride that bike. I can actually FEEL the frame flex when I really hammer down... but on my stiffer aluminum bike that same muscle makes the bike leap forward. With the 520 you'll be better off spinning spinning spinning... don't torture your quads for no reason.

Hey All
I've been following this thread and I have more questions now than ever. I am wanting to try my hand at this LD cycling thing. I recently purchased a Trek 520 that was equipped with Bontrager 700 X32. I have placed about 150 miles on them and it just seems such a chore riding with the "fatter tires". Comfortable but still a chore.
...]

Assuming those are the stock Bontrager Race Lite Hardcase, you might try switching to a tire that does not have all of the anti-flat Kevlar, which Bicycle Quarterly (and my own experience) has shown results in a significant increase in rolling resistance. For about thirty bucks, you can buy a couple of Panaracer Pasela 700x32's (the non Tourguard version with wire bead and all-cotton casing). I find these tires to be nearly as fast as the Grand Bois 700x30's that I use for longer (400K+) brevets. On my commute bike, I'm gradually wearing my way through a stock of smaller tires (e.g 700x25 Conti GP4's). The fatter 700x32's feel no slower than the GP4's, but are considerably more comfortable over the long haul. In the last 10000 K of brevet riding, I've gotten two flats with the all-cotton tires. Maybe out west where they have the dreaded Goats Head thorns, I would not be so lucky.

Maybe out west where they have the dreaded Goats Head thorns, I would not be so lucky.

There's not much that will save you from goatheads. I've seen them go through Mr. Tuffys, (though it was in the thinner part near the edge). They laugh at Kevlar. They're EEEEviiiiiiil.

For about thirty bucks, you can buy a couple of Panaracer Pasela 700x32's (the non Tourguard version with wire bead and all-cotton casing). I find these tires to be nearly as fast as the Grand Bois 700x30's that I use for longer (400K+) brevets.

:lurker:I have been waiting for somebody to show up on the forum who has Pasela in 32 and Grand Bois in 30, thebulls. Could you please tell me what is the actual width of 32 Pasela and 30 GB. I have Pasela in 28(non TourGuard) and they measure 25 mm actual on Open Sport rim at 90 psi. I love the tires and the way they roll. I was going to try something thicker for more comfort , but I am afraid that the tire wider that 30 will not fit under the fenders, actual 28 will be perfect. I read that 30 GB tend to run wider(30-32 actual width) and Pasela 32 tend to run narrower(28 actual). Thanks.:)
Any major difference between the two tires, except the price?

Thanks to all that responded. I think I am going to try a pair of those Panaracer Pasela 700x32's. My tires, I'm sure are the stock Bontrager Race Lite Hardcases. Thanks again.

I too have moved to larger widths on the bikes and am running a Panaracer Pasela TG 28 on the back of my Fugi Team Pro, the white wall doesn't look great but it is a light weight tuff tire. Measured width was pretty close to 27 if I remember correctly and 28 is as big as I could go. On the touring bike I have gone to the 37-40mm range with no regreats. After trashing a rear tire on a couple miles of gravel road the skinny tire advantage lost its interest with me.