Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: fastest tires

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    My Bikes
    Merckx sxm carbon, Merckx corsa extra, Dawes galaxy, Giant full suspension mtb.
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    fastest tires

    I just replaced a set of [mavic cxp30's with mavic hubs and Maxxis Fuse 25c tires] with a set of [campy sciroccos with older axial pro 23c tires]. The Sciroccos feel much faster than my older mavic wheelset.
    I also purchased a pair of nos Axial pro's 25c which I plan to put on the new wheels. My question is:
    1. What is your opinion of Axial pros 25c?
    2. Should I consider keeping both 25c tires for the rear and buying a 23c or smaller tire for the front. Say a new Michelin light, or something else?
    Thanks for your help in this.
    Cheers all
    Bill

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oklahoma
    My Bikes
    Trek 510, Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
    Posts
    8,851
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm still running an Axial Pro along with several Pro Race tires, the replacement. The Pro Race tires feel a bit softer, could be the compound or just that the Axials are older. The Pro Race tires seem to show some small weather cracks sooner, but I still get plenty of miles out of them, 1500 to 2000 on rears and 3000+ on fronts.
    If it was me I'd run the 25's on the rear and put 23's on the front. But tires do harden some with age whether you ride them or not. For time trials I run 23's on the rear and 20's on the front.

    Al

  3. #3
    cab horn
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    1987 Bianchi Campione
    Posts
    28,298
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Unless you're riding on smooth panes of glass, 25/23 will have lower rolling resistance than smaller tires.

    Of the aero benefits will outweigh the rolling resistance as you go faster. Then you want to go down in size.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    My Bikes
    Merckx sxm carbon, Merckx corsa extra, Dawes galaxy, Giant full suspension mtb.
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks Al. Both my old 23c pros do have weather cracks and one has a damaged sidewall. I am leaning towards using the new 25c's for the rear only. What do you think is the fastest 23c tire out there. I only weigh 126lbs and I'm 61 so I'm not too hard on equipment!!

  5. #5
    cab horn
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    1987 Bianchi Campione
    Posts
    28,298
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you're going to mismatch the tire sizes, the big one should be up front. But also realize that the rear tire wears out much faster like this. If you aren't time trialing, not much point in putting a 23 in the rear.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    My Bikes
    Merckx sxm carbon, Merckx corsa extra, Dawes galaxy, Giant full suspension mtb.
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks operator, but I do not comprehend why the larger tire should be in front. I thought the larger should be in the rear,
    as it is behind the seat tube and sheltered; plus the tire with less wind resistance would be in front.

  7. #7
    Senior Member curt in denver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Englewood, Colorado
    My Bikes
    Giant Ocr limited (carbon) Redline Conquest (cross)
    Posts
    458
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What's the range of tire size a 700cc rim will accomodate?
    "People who speak in metaphors should shampoo my crotch"
    -Jack Nicholson

  8. #8
    Senior Member spinerguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    SO-CAL
    My Bikes
    Litespeed Teramo, Argon 18 Road, Fuji Mt Fuji Pro MTB, Fuji Track Pro FG, & Cannondale Quick CX Cross
    Posts
    850
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by curt in denver
    What's the range of tire size a 700cc rim will accomodate?
    I depends on the rim width & break cleareance. Usually a typical road max out at 28 & about 40 on cyclocross bikes.


    At 126# you are borderline anorexic

  9. #9
    Barbieri Telefonico huhenio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
    My Bikes
    Crappy but operational secondhand Motobecane Messenger
    Posts
    3,523
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Small torax and shoulders, thin bones, the aero pink panther.

    Boy ... I was 146 once and pretty healty ... but 126 ...
    Giving Haircuts Over The Phone

  10. #10
    Sometimes knows stuff. rmfnla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    La La Land (We love it!)
    My Bikes
    Gilmour road, Curtlo road
    Posts
    2,538
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by willum44
    Thanks operator, but I do not comprehend why the larger tire should be in front. I thought the larger should be in the rear,
    as it is behind the seat tube and sheltered; plus the tire with less wind resistance would be in front.
    It shouldn't. Most of your weight is on the rear so you want the additional air cushion there.
    (I'm not sure that 2mm of width on a rotating object will make any aerodynamic difference.)

    I think the larger-tire-in-the-front thing is a holdover from BMX and MTB riding, where you want the larger contact patch up front for cornering traction in the dirt.

    Wake up, guys; this is road.
    Last edited by rmfnla; 03-17-06 at 08:11 AM.
    Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here...

  11. #11
    Senior Member juicemouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    813
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rmfnla
    It shouldn't. Most of your weight is on the rear so you want the additional air cushion there.
    (I'm not sure that 2mm of width on a rotating object will make any aerodynamic difference.)

    I think the larger-tire-in-the-front thing is a holdover from BMX and MTB riding, where you want the larger contact patch up front for cornering traction in the dirt.

    Wake up, guys; this is road.
    Are you saying a larger contact patch up front won't improve cornering grip on the road?

    And if a narrower tire does not have a (small) aerodynamic benefit, why do the pro's usually resort to 23mm widths? It has been demonstrated that wider tires can have both more grip and less rolling resistance.
    It is my belief that every person in this world has something to teach, and everything to learn.

    In memory of Jim Price (aka. sydney) ...

  12. #12
    chopsockey jo5iah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    My Bikes
    Monkey SS everythingbike, Ti frankenroadbike
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i really dig my schwalbe fat albert 29ers - 700 x 60.
    oh wait... i thought it was fattest tires...
    they do go fast downhill...
    in a hurricane.

  13. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    My Bikes
    Merckx sxm carbon, Merckx corsa extra, Dawes galaxy, Giant full suspension mtb.
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    SPINERGUY:
    Im also 5' 3" so with no access fat 126lbs-130lbs is okay. I eat a lot. Just do not eat junk or hi glycemic food when I'm not about to exercise. Lots of organic vegitables and nuts etc. I'm also a land surveyor so spend very little time sitting at a desk.

  14. #14
    Banned. sngltrackdufus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    tartarus
    My Bikes
    MTB's & a Cyclocross
    Posts
    1,258
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the fastest tires would be 99% of who be on top of them driving them..

  15. #15
    Senior Member AnthonyG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Queanbeyan, Australia.
    Posts
    3,519
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by willum44
    SPINERGUY:
    Im also 5' 3" so with no access fat 126lbs-130lbs is okay. I eat a lot. Just do not eat junk or hi glycemic food when I'm not about to exercise. Lots of organic vegitables and nuts etc. I'm also a land surveyor so spend very little time sitting at a desk.
    I was going to make a simmilar comment however the guy say's he's 6'1". That bit makes me wonder.OK ignore this because I misread the posts. 126 lbs is not that light for 5'3". I'm overweight at 130 lbs and 5'1"

    EDIT: OK back on subject the best advice I've seen say's to run the larger tire on the rear because that's where the weight is and only if you insist you can run a smaller tire on the front for the aerodynamic advantage but at the cost of grip.

    Regards, Anthony
    Last edited by AnthonyG; 03-18-06 at 03:48 PM.

  16. #16
    Senior Member juicemouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    813
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AnthonyG
    I was going to make a simmilar comment however the guy say's he's 6'1". That bit makes me wonder.
    The OP says he's 5'3", and 61 years old.
    It is my belief that every person in this world has something to teach, and everything to learn.

    In memory of Jim Price (aka. sydney) ...

  17. #17
    Senior Member DannoXYZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Saratoga, CA
    Posts
    11,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by juicemouse
    Are you saying a larger contact patch up front won't improve cornering grip on the road?

    And if a narrower tire does not have a (small) aerodynamic benefit, why do the pro's usually resort to 23mm widths? It has been demonstrated that wider tires can have both more grip and less rolling resistance.
    Larger contact patch is only a function of pressure, not tyre size. You do get better grip with larger tyres because you can run them at lower-pressures. Tyre size and pressure are independent factors. Although the rounder shape of the wider contact patch does provide slightly more grip than the long narrow shape of a small tyre at the same pressure and contact-patch size. But that's not as great as the difference of a larger contact patch from less pressure.

    In the context of the OP's question on rolling-resistance, while splitting hairs is fun, you might as well do it the best you can. In which case, you want to minimize tire-compression. That means you should customize the size for the load its carrying. The larger tyre in the rear will sink and compress less compared to the narrower one when the rider hops on, leading to less rolling-resistance. Of the two possible configurations, bigger in back/smaller in front will be faster (and longer lasting).

  18. #18
    Senior Member juicemouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    813
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
    Larger contact patch is only a function of pressure, not tyre size. You do get better grip with larger tyres because you can run them at lower-pressures. Tyre size and pressure are independent factors. Although the rounder shape of the wider contact patch does provide slightly more grip than the long narrow shape of a small tyre at the same pressure and contact-patch size. But that's not as great as the difference of a larger contact patch from less pressure.

    In the context of the OP's question on rolling-resistance, while splitting hairs is fun, you might as well do it the best you can. In which case, you want to minimize tire-compression. That means you should customize the size for the load its carrying. The larger tyre in the rear will sink and compress less compared to the narrower one when the rider hops on, leading to less rolling-resistance. Of the two possible configurations, bigger in back/smaller in front will be faster (and longer lasting).
    I agree completely. Here's a link with more info for you hair-splitting types: http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/?id=...res/conti_tech

    My strategy:
    • A larger tire in the rear (25mm) at fairly high pressure. This improves rolling resistance (read the article above) as well as possibly comfort (larger volume of air to absorb impacts, on the wheel which is more heavily loaded) and durability (less deflection of the tread at the ground).


    • A skinnier tire in the front (23mm) at significantly lower pressure (enough to see visible deflection when I'm on the bike). This improves grip (larger contact patch) on the wheel where grip matters most, as well as aerodynamics (smaller cross section) on the wheel which is less shielded from the wind.

    My tires are also slicks for road use, which increase grip (wet and dry) and aerodynamics and decrease rolling resistance. I prefer clinchers for convenience, though tubulars offer less rolling resistance and lower weight.
    Last edited by juicemouse; 03-18-06 at 01:43 PM.
    It is my belief that every person in this world has something to teach, and everything to learn.

    In memory of Jim Price (aka. sydney) ...

  19. #19
    Sometimes knows stuff. rmfnla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    La La Land (We love it!)
    My Bikes
    Gilmour road, Curtlo road
    Posts
    2,538
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by juicemouse
    Are you saying a larger contact patch up front won't improve cornering grip on the road? No, I'm saying it won't make any difference on a road bike.

    And if a narrower tire does not have a (small) aerodynamic benefit, why do the pro's usually resort to 23mm widths? It has been demonstrated that wider tires can have both more grip and less rolling resistance. Different issues; 23s usually are lighter and run higher pressures than larger tires, much more important than an unmeasurable aerodynamic advantage.
    Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here...

  20. #20
    Senior Member DannoXYZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Saratoga, CA
    Posts
    11,496
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by juicemouse
    My strategy:
    • A larger tire in the rear (25mm) at fairly high pressure. This improves rolling resistance (read the article above) as well as possibly comfort (larger volume of air to absorb impacts, on the wheel which is more heavily loaded) and durability (less deflection of the tread at the ground).


    • A skinnier tire in the front (23mm) at significantly lower pressure (enough to see visible deflection when I'm on the bike). This improves grip (larger contact patch) on the wheel where grip matters most, as well as aerodynamics (smaller cross section) on the wheel which is less shielded from the wind.

    My tires are also slicks for road use, which increase grip (wet and dry) and aerodynamics and decrease rolling resistance. I prefer clinchers for convenience, though tubulars offer less rolling resistance and lower weight.
    Hmm.. interesting.... I'd think you'd want to adjust pressure based upon the amount of tyre-compression/deflectionn. You'd use pressure to balance load vs. contact-patch vs. compression. The numbers that's been posted is a 15% sink-rate, you might want to use 10% if you want even less rolling-resistance and sacrifice some cornering ability. In any case, you'll find that the rear-tyre will end up with more pressure than the front if they're both the same size. In the case of a 25/23mm rear/front combo, they may end up at the same pressure. However, a low-pressure, narrow tyre is just asking for flats and high rolling-resistance.

  21. #21
    Senior Member juicemouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    813
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by juicemouse
    Are you saying a larger contact patch up front won't improve cornering grip on the road?
    Quote Originally Posted by rmfnla
    No, I'm saying it won't make any difference on a road bike.
    Quote Originally Posted by juicemouse
    And if a narrower tire does not have a (small) aerodynamic benefit, why do the pro's usually resort to 23mm widths? It has been demonstrated that wider tires can have both more grip and less rolling resistance.
    Quote Originally Posted by rmfnla
    Different issues; 23s usually are lighter and run higher pressures than larger tires, much more important than an unmeasurable aerodynamic advantage.
    Aerodynamic resistance, not rolling resistance, is dominant at road racing speeds. Anything smaller than 28c or so in width is going to be able to run a high enough pressure that rolling resistance won't be a huge factor anyway. At lower speeds (such as when climbing) lighter tires are an obvious advantage.

    Grip is extremely important on road bikes, especially when the conditions are bad due to wet roads, debris, etc. That's why some racers elect to use wider tires than the typical 19c width for time trials under these conditions (so they can run lower pressures to make the contact patch bigger, without risking flats/blowouts).

    But for the recreational rider, the performance differences are slim enough that none of this is nearly as relevant as comfort.
    It is my belief that every person in this world has something to teach, and everything to learn.

    In memory of Jim Price (aka. sydney) ...

  22. #22
    Senior Member juicemouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    813
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
    Hmm.. interesting.... I'd think you'd want to adjust pressure based upon the amount of tyre-compression/deflectionn. You'd use pressure to balance load vs. contact-patch vs. compression. The numbers that's been posted is a 15% sink-rate, you might want to use 10% if you want even less rolling-resistance and sacrifice some cornering ability.
    Yeah, I haven't gotten nearly that "scientific" about it. I just adjust the pressure so that there's some visible deflection of my front tire under load.



    Quote Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
    In any case, you'll find that the rear-tyre will end up with more pressure than the front if they're both the same size. In the case of a 25/23mm rear/front combo, they may end up at the same pressure. However, a low-pressure, narrow tyre is just asking for flats and high rolling-resistance.
    I'm not talking ultra-low-pressure here, just something like 80-90 psi front and 110-120 rear. I don't weigh very much (140 lbs.) so I've never had a problem with flats and I haven't noticed any increased rolling resistance.
    It is my belief that every person in this world has something to teach, and everything to learn.

    In memory of Jim Price (aka. sydney) ...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •