Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - What makes "better" tire better?

There have been a few threads on multiple forums recently asking about tires:
Which ones are faster? Which ones roll smoother? What's the longevity? etc.

I've started reading up about so many different brands and models, and I'm buried in information which is increasingly difficult to make sense of. I've got limited experience with different tires: I ride 700 x 28 Gatorskins and I've never seen a need to switch. I have some Vittoria Randonneur-Cross 700 x 28 on my singlespeed; and sure, I notice a difference. It was obvious in putting the tires on that the sidewall is stiffer, the casing and tread is thicker, they have a lower pressure rating, etc. It's my beater bike so I don't care.

But what is it that makes certain tires (Challenge, Grand Bois and the like) so highly prized for their ride quality over a tire like the Gatorskin. I specifically chose those because of the "handbuilt" factor, which I would assume brings them into a similar class. I could be totally off base with that reasoning.

Hi

It's likely you (and many others) know of the two articles on tires (one on tire pressure/width etc and the other a review of various tires) from Bicycle Quarterly. Even if you're familiar with them I bet others are not.

http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/samples.html

I think ride quality is a function of compliance. Compliance is a function of design, thread weight and count, and thickness. In general, tires with thinner casings and higher thread count are more compliant and most people feel they ride nicer. Grand Bois are a particularly noticeable case. Typical high end racing tires are also usually very compliant. Being narrower than Grand Bois, they can be a little thicker and still have good ride quality, though at higher pressure. Some people still feel that sew-ups are the best that way, but clinchers have gotten so good that we don't see too many people on the road with a sew-up under their saddle any more.

What he said. A lightweight, flexible, high thread count casing with a relatively thin tread is almost guaranteed to give a nice ride "feel" and low rolling resistance. The casing and tread also needs to be straight, which seems obvious but is often imperfect. I've also found that natural materials (cotton, silk) feel much better than the modern substitutes. I haven't yet ridden a nylon tire (most of them are now) that felt as nice as cotton, let alone silk. The nylon is almost certainly stronger than cotton, though, and both are much stronger and more puncture resistant than silk -- although neither can match the ride of silk.

The main trouble, in my experience, is that the factors that give great "feel" also lead to more fragile tires -- the Grand Bois Cypres being a perfect example. The other end of the scale might be a tire like the Paselas and Rolly-Pollys that last forever and rarely flat, but also ride like ****.

I just ditched the entire debate and bought a pair of handmade 27mm cotton tubulars. Hopefully these are as good as I remember them from 20 years ago -- when they cost one quarter of what I paid for them last week...

What he said. A lightweight, flexible, high thread count casing with a relatively thin tread is almost guaranteed to give a nice ride "feel" and low rolling resistance. The casing and tread also needs to be straight, which seems obvious but is often imperfect. I've also found that natural materials (cotton, silk) feel much better than the modern substitutes. I haven't yet ridden a nylon tire (most of them are now) that felt as nice as cotton, let alone silk. The nylon is almost certainly stronger than cotton, though, and both are much stronger and more puncture resistant than silk -- although neither can match the ride of silk.

The main trouble, in my experience, is that the factors that give great "feel" also lead to more fragile tires -- the Grand Bois Cypres being a perfect example. The other end of the scale might be a tire like the Paselas and Rolly-Pollys that last forever and rarely flat, but also ride like ****.

I just ditched the entire debate and bought a pair of handmade 27mm cotton tubulars. Hopefully these are as good as I remember them from 20 years ago -- when they cost one quarter of what I paid for them last week...Never rode tubulars, but ride with folks who do. But cotton! Way cool. Anyway, I've always wondered . . . you're an LD guy. On brevets, I always carry two tubes, a patch kit, a pump, and a tire. Some SIR riders carry four tubes. A buddy of mine once had 8 flats in one day, and not just repeats of the same thing in the tire, either. So what do you do when you flat your spare? Seriously.

I carry two spares! There was a time when you could count on a buddy to provide an extra spare if necessary (I once had four flats on a rainy sixty mile club ride, and was having trouble keeping track of all the people to whom I owed tires) but it's a rare bike ride today when I'm not the only one using tubulars. So it's a very serious concern to the modern day rider, and one of several very good reasons not to use them.

I put them on a "luxury" British-style fixed wheel touring bike that probably won't ever see more than 200 kilometers in a day, so worst-case scenario has me on a bus for a 60 mile trip home. The "serious" LD bike still runs the wonderful and very reliable Grand Bois Hetre 650b clinchers. I'm sure these have nylon casings, but I guess that doesn't matter so much when the tire is 42mm wide!

I did, FWIW, once know someone who carried a tubular repair kit with him. He figured a bit of sewing at the roadside would be more fun than riding a flat spare home. Dunno if he ever used it, but it seems pretty impractical to me. I don't have any riding buddies who are willing to sit through a half-hour flat repair...

I used to use tubulars on my race wheels (Zipp 404's with Vittoria Triathlon evc tires). I used them till I had a crash where the rear tire rolled off the rim like Beloki in the TDF a few years back. I had to replace the wheel and decided to switch to clinchers. I don't know that the tubulars had that much better ride. I think modern clinchers have really closed the gap.

The problem with tires is that evaluating them is extremely subjective and so many other things effect ride quality. The only way to really do it is to ride different tires on the same bike/wheels and compare them that way. Personally I feel that if you have good complaint wheels and a well made frame you don't need balloon tires to have a great comfortable ride for long distances. Balloon tires are often a crutch for poorly designed frame/wheel combination's.

BTW, when you read BQ's articles on tires remember that they sell Grand Bios tires...

But what is it that makes certain tires (Challenge, Grand Bois and the like) so highly prized for their ride quality over a tire like the Gatorskin. I specifically chose those because of the "handbuilt" factor, which I would assume brings them into a similar class. I could be totally off base with that reasoning. Mostly - you've read marketing blather - mostly meaningless.

As a previous post mentions - a single term is used to describe the nature of a tire's "ride" - compliance. What the previous post didn't mention - tires that use tubes - rely on the fit and nature of the tube - as well as the style, depth and width of the rim to resulting compliance.

Tire discussions on these boards remain juvenile.

The problem with tires is that evaluating them is extremely subjective and so many other things effect ride quality. The only way to really do it is to ride different tires on the same bike/wheels and compare them that way.
I've been wondering how much of the comparison is subjective, since I've seen so many differing opinions on the same tires.


BTW, when you read BQ's articles on tires remember that they sell Grand Bios tires...
What I found interesting was that BQ did make the admission of GB tires being more fragile than the others in the comparison. So for all their hype, they were given that one down mark.


Mostly - you've read marketing blather - mostly meaningless.

As a previous post mentions - a single term is used to describe the nature of a tire's "ride" - compliance. What the previous post didn't mention - tires that use tubes - rely on the fit and nature of the tube - as well as the style, depth and width of the rim to resulting compliance.

Tire discussions on these boards remain juvenile.

Some of what I've read is marketing blather, and some has been "impartial" industry comparison, while the rest has been personal opinion off these forums. That's the mix of info overload I've been attempting to wade through. Like you and Homeyba pointed out, I understand that there's more to the feel of a bike than just the tires. I wasn't aware of the tubes affecting performance, though. Care to elaborate on that a bit? (I usually buy "Qualty" (QBP house brand) $4.00 tubes as opposed to a lightweight racing tube.)

Wider rims provide a smoother ride and better cornering. Comfort is almost always a function of air volume and pressure. A 23mm wide rim will provide more air volume than a 19mm wide rim with the same tire installed. The 23mm wide rim can also operate at a lower air pressure without an increase in rolling resistance.

Michael

Wider rims provide a smoother ride and better cornering. Comfort is almost always a function of air volume and pressure. A 23mm wide rim will provide more air volume than a 19mm wide rim with the same tire installed. The 23mm wide rim can also operate at a lower air pressure without an increase in rolling resistance.

MichaelSheldon Brown has left us a guide for which tire widths fit which rims. After a little effort, I've turned it into a gif and attached it.

Not as pretty as Sheldon's: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire_sizing.html
but you don't have to go to the effort of clicking a link.

Anybody want to tell me how I could have just included it in the post, rather than attaching?

Wider rims provide a smoother ride and better cornering. Comfort is almost always a function of air volume and pressure....

Michael

I don't think it is as simple as that Micheal. There are a whole lot of other factors involved such as tire (carcass) design, materials and tubes used just to name a few. Not to mention the effects of frame and wheel design. As far as cornering goes, with a bigger tire you get bigger sidewalls surface area and more flex in the tire itself (unless you make the carcass stronger which results in a much heavier tire). That isn't necessarily a good thing and it may or may not translate into better cornering. Way back in my younger years I road raced motorcycles professionally so I feel I have a pretty good feel for how a tire feels and handles in the corners. I certainly haven't ridden every tire/wheel combo out there but I've ridden a lot of them and I really don't see (or feel) the advantages you are talking about. I'd be riding them if I did. Sure you can get a slightly lower rolling resistance from a larger tire but in the grand scheme of things it is so small that it is completely insignificant and to get that you have a significantly heavier tire. Like I said above, Balloon tires are often a crutch for poorly designed frame/wheel combination's.

IMHO the "best" tyre is the one that does not go flat when it "finds" one of those dang previously invisible sticker/burrs. To date, I have not found it ... :(

To me, "Better" in tires is defined by a combination of longevity, grip, ride comfort, and puncture resistance.

YMMV ;) :p