23 mm v 25 mm Tires
#26
Senior Member
I guess I am an anomaly. I use the optimal tire pressure chart shown in a biking magazine article that several years ago introduced this topic. I weigh 162 and run my 28s at 60 psi. If I was more anal the front would be a few pounds less. My ride feels great. To understand the graphic, you need to break up your total weight - 55% back and 45% front. Then find your mark on the proper tire size and move left to see pressure.
#27
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,558
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked 2,174 Times
in
1,465 Posts
Scientific testing does confirm that wider tires roll faster. Can you argue with this analysis?
Bicycle tires - puncturing the myths - BikeRadar
Bicycle tires - puncturing the myths - BikeRadar
#28
What??? Only 2 wheels?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Boston-ish, MA
Posts: 13,434
Bikes: 72 Peugeot UO-8, 82 Peugeot TH8, 87 Bianchi Brava, 76? Masi Grand Criterium, 74 Motobecane Champion Team, 86 & 77 Gazelle champion mondial, 81? Grandis, 82? Tommasini, 83 Peugeot PF10
Mentioned: 189 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked 645 Times
in
232 Posts
FWIW, I can feel the difference in weight between it and my lighter, skinnier wheels and tires. More often than not I'm on 23s or 25s. Had I been on 23s that bump might have ruined that rim too, but I keep them pumped up higher in accordance with the smaller contact patch so as to provide greater cushioning distance between rim and road.
That pressure chart makes no sense to me.
But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
__________________
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Last edited by jimmuller; 07-28-14 at 06:58 AM.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lund, Sweden
Posts: 323
Bikes: Ridley Noah, Trek Emonda, Colnago C59, Colnago Master, 1980 Colnago Super, Wilier Blade
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
approx. 205 gram (23-622)
approx. 225 gram (25-622)
approx. 235 gram (28-622)
I certainly can't feel the 30 gram difference on my 1600g wheelset...
Actually the most important feature of the Panaracer Grand Bois is the tan sidewall for that retro look on my steel frame
#30
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,796
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1392 Post(s)
Liked 1,324 Times
in
836 Posts
A couple of you have mentioned that a tire's labeled callout size does not necessarily match its actual width. I have been very pleased with 700Cx28 Continentals on the Bianchi, 90 PSI front, 100 rear, but these tires are actually only about 25mm wide on my rims. Other "28mm" tires I have owned, such as Specialized Armadillos, run enough taller and wider that they won't clear my fork crown and chainstays. I suppose we should consider sidewall height and actual tire width in this discussion.
I remember the early 1970s race to smaller and smaller clincher tires, which seemed to start right after the Michelan Elan broke through the traditional 27x1-1/8 barrier. Over the years I have migrated back toward somewhat wider tires, as have several of you.
I remember the early 1970s race to smaller and smaller clincher tires, which seemed to start right after the Michelan Elan broke through the traditional 27x1-1/8 barrier. Over the years I have migrated back toward somewhat wider tires, as have several of you.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#31
Senior Member
I'd be perfectly happy running 28s. Running 25s is almost the same. The difference between 23 and 25 is almost theoretical - I sure can't tell the difference.
#32
Senior Member
The trouble is, a bike magazine may run a chart like this and so it is accepted as "truth". Personal experience: I weigh 160 and use 28's on one of my bikes set up specifically for commuting. I keep them at 100 to 105psi. Trying a new route on the return home once this past spring with the sun in my eyes, a traffic light ahead, and traffic around me so I couldn't pay enough attention I hit a hole with my rear wheel (but somehow not the front). I hit it so hard it flat-spotted a perfectly great vintage MA2 rim, but it did not flat the tire. Had I been running 60psi it would most certainly have caused a snake-bite puncture too, and probably have bulged out the rim sidewalls too. The rim was toast anyway but at least I could ride the rest of the way home.
FWIW, I can feel the difference in weight between it and my lighter, skinnier wheels and tires. More often than not I'm on 23s or 25s. Had I been on 23s that bump might have ruined that rim too, but I keep them pumped up higher in accordance with the smaller contact patch so as to provide greater cushioning distance between rim and road.
That pressure chart makes no sense to me.
But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
FWIW, I can feel the difference in weight between it and my lighter, skinnier wheels and tires. More often than not I'm on 23s or 25s. Had I been on 23s that bump might have ruined that rim too, but I keep them pumped up higher in accordance with the smaller contact patch so as to provide greater cushioning distance between rim and road.
That pressure chart makes no sense to me.
But my real point in entering this discussion was to point out that there are three factors, not two: rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and moment of inertia. None by itself is terribly significant, especially compared to the rider's mass and wind resistance. We are talking about subtle differences. Do any of these three matter in non-competition? Not really, but the weight at least can be felt. The weight will not affect your top speed (for any given level of exertion), but it affects how quickly you get there. Rolling resistance may be speed dependent, and aerodynamic drag certainly is.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,712
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Wonder how many times this subject has been discussed? I know I looked at a bunch when a couple months ago I was deciding what size tires to put on my road bike. The conclusions I came to are:
-A few mm difference in tire width makes little or no difference for all but the most competitive riders.
-Tires are not very precisely sized. Armadillo 23's actually measured 25. A Gatorskin that was labeled 28 rubbed the bike frame where another did not.
-Lots of snake oil about tire pressure. Manufacturers aren't very forthcoming about actual strengths and recommendations. I found a manufacturer chart which I used.
-Tire quality as compared to airplanes, cars and motorcycles is very low. Manufacturers use weight requirements as an excuse not to make quality tires. Yet, in airplanes where weight has a direct effect on profits they can build tires that do not need to be pumped up frequently and are not prone to flatting.
-Lacking actual, meaningful operational testing and data each person arrives at a tire size and pressure they are comfortable with. But, this is really accepting a role as a test pilot. They may stoutly defend their decision because it seems to work. But, they haven't a clue why it works.
Seems to me customers ought to act less like sheep in demanding the manufacturers produce quality tires that are labeled with their operating parameters.
-A few mm difference in tire width makes little or no difference for all but the most competitive riders.
-Tires are not very precisely sized. Armadillo 23's actually measured 25. A Gatorskin that was labeled 28 rubbed the bike frame where another did not.
-Lots of snake oil about tire pressure. Manufacturers aren't very forthcoming about actual strengths and recommendations. I found a manufacturer chart which I used.
-Tire quality as compared to airplanes, cars and motorcycles is very low. Manufacturers use weight requirements as an excuse not to make quality tires. Yet, in airplanes where weight has a direct effect on profits they can build tires that do not need to be pumped up frequently and are not prone to flatting.
-Lacking actual, meaningful operational testing and data each person arrives at a tire size and pressure they are comfortable with. But, this is really accepting a role as a test pilot. They may stoutly defend their decision because it seems to work. But, they haven't a clue why it works.
Seems to me customers ought to act less like sheep in demanding the manufacturers produce quality tires that are labeled with their operating parameters.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
el forestero
General Cycling Discussion
53
03-18-19 08:58 PM
09box
Cyclocross and Gravelbiking (Recreational)
46
04-11-17 06:14 PM
rojeho
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
3
12-27-11 07:39 PM