Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31
  1. #1
    Senior Member Guitarrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    236
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Looking for a lighter, faster 700x35 tire

    My new Sojourn has Vittoria Randonneur Cross tires, they weigh as much as the rest of the bike, + my car. I want a lighter tire but I'm not looking to go any thinner than 35s, I like the ride vs 28s or 32s. I'm finding out there's not a lot of light & fast advertisement out there for fat tires like the 35s... not much of a surprise!

    I've found a couple of candidates so far, Vittoria Randonneur Hyper & Schwalbe Marathon Racer. Any opinions on those 2 or other suggestions?
    Quote Originally Posted by cs1 View Post
    You could always pick up a goat head from one of middle eastern vendors. Just strap that on your bike and ride it home.

    2011 Raleigh Sojourn

  2. #2
    Life is good RonH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Between Crystal River and Hernando, Florida, 6 miles west of the Withlacoochee Trail
    My Bikes
    I've had several since 1999 but have settled on my beloved 2001 Litespeed Tuscany and my latest, a 2013 Cannondale CAAD 10.
    Posts
    13,611
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    700x35mm tires are made for touring, commuting and urban riding. Weight is usually not a concern for those folks.
    My bikes --> 2001 Litespeed Tuscany---2013 Cannondale CAAD 10 2 (5) "Racing Edition"

    Life is like a 10-speed bicycle. Most of us have gears we never use. ~ Charles Schultz

  3. #3
    rebmeM roineS JanMM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    My Bikes
    RANS V3, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
    Posts
    11,529
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The 700x35 Forte Metro-K is a bit lighter than the 700x28 Victoria Rand. Cross. I am running on a pair of the 559/32 and like them so far.
    http://www.performancebike.com/bikes...8_20000_400237
    RANS V3 (steel), RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer

  4. #4
    .
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    My Bikes
    2010 Moots Psychlo-x ybb, 2013 Soma ES, 89 Trek 950
    Posts
    3,692
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I know someone that has the Schwalbe's and has nothing but positive things to say about them. They are pricey, but are high quality.
    Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    My Bikes
    2010 Kona Dr. Dew, Yuba Mundo V3, 2009 Diamondback Kalamar
    Posts
    798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The easiest, most reliable way to go lighter is probably to go with kevlar beaded tires instead of wire bead. For instance, you're Randonneur Cross tires are 640 grams each. If you go with Randonneur Cross Pros (if you can find them) they're only 450 grams each. That's a 380 gram difference between the two tires, about 0.84 pounds. It's at the rims to boot, which is where weight has the greatest impact.

    From the little bit of research I've done, you're not going to lose much weight swapping difference wire beaded tires of the same size.

  6. #6
    Senior Member late's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the Hypers.

    The 32c in a Hyper is bigger than most tires claiming to be 32c.
    The 35c is HUGE.

    Look at the Vittoria Rando Pro in a 32c. It's large, lite and quick.
    We are as gods, we might as well get good at it.
    Stewart Brand

  7. #7
    Insane Bicycle Mechanic Jeff Wills's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    other Vancouver
    Posts
    6,716
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitarrick View Post
    My new Sojourn has Vittoria Randonneur Cross tires, they weigh as much as the rest of the bike, + my car. I want a lighter tire but I'm not looking to go any thinner than 35s, I like the ride vs 28s or 32s. I'm finding out there's not a lot of light & fast advertisement out there for fat tires like the 35s... not much of a surprise!

    I've found a couple of candidates so far, Vittoria Randonneur Hyper & Schwalbe Marathon Racer. Any opinions on those 2 or other suggestions?
    Panaracer Paselas http://www.universalcycles.com/shopp...ls.php?id=7608 . Very light, supple, and fast 700 x 35C tire. When I had them I always thought my tires were underinflated, even at 110psi. It was the lack of road vibration that fooled me.

    Schwalbe Kojaks: http://calhouncycle.com/productcart/...1&idcategory=0 are on my list to try once the current tires are worn out.
    Jeff Wills

    All my bikes.

  8. #8
    coprolite fietsbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW,Oregon Coast
    My Bikes
    7
    Posts
    39,853
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    there are the tires VBQ's Jan raves about and of course after analyzing fast fat tires , also imports and sells ,
    http://www.cyclesgrandbois.com/SHOP/T700_F30.html
    Or,
    Rivendale's Grant Peterson designed

    Jack Brown skin wall 33's may float your boat. Green label folding bead ,
    but not the tread belt, of the Blue label.
    http://www.rivbike.com/products/show...en-blue/10-092
    Last edited by fietsbob; 03-14-11 at 12:32 AM.

  9. #9
    Has opinion, will express
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    12,677
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Our new tandem came with Schwalbe Duranos. I am surprised how light they are and how well they ride, plus how well they are wearing. They only go to 32mm with a wire bead, though.
    Dream. Dare. Do.

  10. #10
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitarrick View Post
    My new Sojourn has Vittoria Randonneur Cross tires, they weigh as much as the rest of the bike, + my car. I want a lighter tire but I'm not looking to go any thinner than 35s, I like the ride vs 28s or 32s. I'm finding out there's not a lot of light & fast advertisement out there for fat tires like the 35s... not much of a surprise!

    I've found a couple of candidates so far, Vittoria Randonneur Hyper & Schwalbe Marathon Racer. Any opinions on those 2 or other suggestions?
    It's not really tyre weight that sets speed and acceleration but rolling resistance, which comes from tyre wall thickness and the compound used. (Look how little difference a huge amount of weight on the rim makes even on a climb: http://www.training4cyclists.com/how...on-alpe-dhuez/)

    The Marathon Racer is probably as fast as any 35 out there - probably as fast as many 25mm clinchers. The Marathon Supreme costs more and isn't quite as fast but has superb puncture protection and will last longer. Conti Sports Contacts are fast, but I didn't like the lack of wet weather grip that mine have. (Since then I've heard other people rate them highly: Conti may have added more silica to the compound.)

    You could also reduce rolling resistance by fitting latex inner tubes - you can find 35s if you look hard enough, people use them for cross racing.
    Last edited by meanwhile; 03-14-11 at 05:49 AM.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Let's compare my 23C Orium (280g) to my 32C City (680g). The mass of the tire is located at the outer-most edge of the wheel. Therefore, per Newtonian physics, this should present a worst case weight penalty scenario. Additionally, the wider 32C tire generates more drag at higher speed. If an extra 400g per wheel amounts to less than 0.5mph penalty, then the difference between worst and best tire (same size), when properly inflated, will also amount to less than 0.5 mph.

    Train the motor. Don't waste time and $ seeking out magic bullets to cure speed deficiency. Physics is the ultimate reality check.

    I cruise between 17 and 18 mph (no wind).

  12. #12
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by furballi View Post
    Let's compare my 23C Orium (280g) to my 32C City (680g). The mass of the tire is located at the outer-most edge of the wheel. Therefore, per Newtonian physics, this should present a worst case weight penalty scenario. Additionally, the wider 32C tire generates more drag at higher speed. If an extra 400g per wheel amounts to less than 0.5mph penalty, then the difference between worst and best tire (same size), when properly inflated, will also amount to less than 0.5 mph.

    Train the motor. Don't waste time and $ seeking out magic bullets to cure speed deficiency. Physics is the ultimate reality check.

    I cruise between 17 and 18 mph (no wind).
    Sorry, but this makes absolutely no physical sense at all. You've come up with an arbitrary number for the drag of a heavier wider tyre (which doesn't necessarily exist) and insisted that the difference between two tyres of the width can't be larger than this - without giving any reason at all.

    Your key error is

    Let's compare my 23C Orium (280g) to my 32C City (680g). The mass of the tire is located at the outer-most edge of the wheel. Therefore, per Newtonian physics, this should present a worst case weight penalty scenario.
    That rim weight will be the worst situation for increasing the amount of energy needed to accelerate the wheel to a given speed - angular kinetic energy - but will have no affect on what maximum speed will be or the power required to maintain it. Because it doesn't alter drag from the tyre at all.

    Read

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle...cycle_dynamics

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mass of tire, size of tire, and construction of tire (tread and casing) all affect speed. Rim mass and tire mass can be treated as one mass at a fixed distance R from the axis of rotation. The moment of inertia is proportional to the mass (tire or rim) and the square of the distance from the axis of rotation. If the tire and rim have the same mass, then the moment of inertia of the tire will be more than the rim due to the larger distance from the axis of rotation (square of the distance).

    The penalty of a heavy rim+tire is approximately 1.8x the penalty of a non-rotating mass on the bike. The 28C has lower mass, smaller size, and smoother contact patch. Its case construction probably yield a lower rolling resistance. Yet my odometer (calibrated to +/-0.1mph at 20mph) only shows a maximum of 0.4mph gain over the larger 32C. Therefore, the actual improvement is no more than 0.5mph and no less than 0.3mph.

    The OP wants keep the same size tire. Therefore, any improvement in speed must come from a reduction in tire mass, and tire construction (casing and thread). It is impossible to gain more than 0.5mph simply by switching to a "lighter/faster 35C". The physics does not add up unless once can shave-off 1/4 the mass of rider and bike by swapping out tires.

  14. #14
    Senior Member late's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    8,248
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meanwhile View Post
    It's not really tyre weight that sets speed and acceleration but rolling resistance, which comes from tyre wall thickness and the compound used. (Look how little difference a huge amount of weight on the rim makes even on a climb: http://www.training4cyclists.com/how...on-alpe-dhuez/)

    The Marathon Racer is probably as fast as any 35 out there - probably as fast as many 25mm clinchers. The Marathon Supreme costs more and isn't quite as fast but has superb puncture protection and will last longer. Conti Sports Contacts are fast, but I didn't like the lack of wet weather grip that mine have. (Since then I've heard other people rate them highly: Conti may have added more silica to the compound.)

    You could also reduce rolling resistance by fitting latex inner tubes - you can find 35s if you look hard enough, people use them for cross racing.
    I used Marathon Racers a couple years ago. They were slower than the Paselas I had been using, and the ride wasn't as nice.
    Not that they were bad tires, but I am not entirely sure who they are for.

    Somebody mentioned Grand Bois Cypres tires. My wife (110 pounds soaking wet) uses those. They are VERY thin
    and if you aren't quite light you will have quite a few flats. They have a really sweet ride. Here's an American source for them..
    http://www.compasscycle.com/Tires.html
    We are as gods, we might as well get good at it.
    Stewart Brand

  15. #15
    .
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    My Bikes
    2010 Moots Psychlo-x ybb, 2013 Soma ES, 89 Trek 950
    Posts
    3,692
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meanwhile View Post
    It's not really tyre weight that sets speed and acceleration but rolling resistance, which comes from tyre wall thickness and the compound used. (Look how little difference a huge amount of weight on the rim makes even on a climb: http://www.training4cyclists.com/how...on-alpe-dhuez/)
    For every day riders yes I agree. For racing, it meant almost 2 minutes on this test. That would be huge in a race.
    Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    My Bikes
    2010 Kona Dr. Dew, Yuba Mundo V3, 2009 Diamondback Kalamar
    Posts
    798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meanwhile View Post
    It's not really tyre weight that sets speed and acceleration but rolling resistance, which comes from tyre wall thickness and the compound used. (Look how little difference a huge amount of weight on the rim makes even on a climb: http://www.training4cyclists.com/how...on-alpe-dhuez/)
    There's about a 5% difference between normal and rim loaded on a sustained climb by a professional rider. While maximum speed may not change much, is it unreasonable to think that the slower acceleration will be more noticeable, particularly for a casual rider? Even if maximum speed doesn't change, that change in acceleration could conceivably give the impression of a "slower", less responsive ride.

  17. #17
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by furballi View Post
    Mass of tire, size of tire, and construction of tire (tread and casing) all affect speed.
    No, mass doesn't. You think it does, but you're wrong. See those links.

    The penalty of a heavy rim+tire is approximately 1.8x the penalty of a non-rotating mass on the bike. The 28C has lower mass, smaller
    See my explanation of how angular KE affects (very slightly) acceleration but not speed.

    (Btw - I have a physics degree from the UK's equivalent of MIT. Trust me: a lot of people think what you do, but it's complete bs and against the laws of physics.)

  18. #18
    .
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    My Bikes
    2010 Moots Psychlo-x ybb, 2013 Soma ES, 89 Trek 950
    Posts
    3,692
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I disagree meanwhile. Mass will affect speed. The study is in a controlled environment where air resistance doesn't come into play. In the real world, aerodynamics will play a part. The faster you go, the more it will play the part. If it wasn't the case, then nothing would be aerodynamic. There are a lot of variables that have to be taken into consideration though. Over chip seal a fatter tire will be faster than a skinny tire, on smooth pavement, the skinny tire will win out. Until some real world research is done that uses the tire how it's designed to be used and not both of them at the same pressure, then all this entertaining, but far from scientific.
    Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.

  19. #19
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcanum View Post
    There's about a 5% difference between normal and rim loaded on a sustained climb by a professional rider.
    Yes. WITH ALMOST TWO KG OF EXTRA WEIGHT ON A STEEP HILL CLIMB! Please use your common sense. The problem isn't a magical rim effect - the speed difference is only around 30s more (on a 50 minute climb) than with the weight on the frame - but that this is a light, athletic rider hauling extra weight up a hill. The guy probably weighs only 150lbs, so for him a 1.8Kg weight penalty is pretty significant.

    (As for the slight difference between rim and frame weight, the rim weight was added by putting water in the inner tubes - a LOT of it! This may well have added to rolling resistance - in fact I'm surprised the difference wasn't bigger.)

    While maximum speed may not change much, is it unreasonable to think that the slower acceleration will be more noticeable, particularly for a casual rider?
    Yes, it is. At least if you bother to READ THOSE LINKS and get out a calculator and do the maths. Really.

    Even if maximum speed doesn't change, that change in acceleration could conceivably give the impression of a "slower", less responsive ride.
    The amount of extra mass that can feasibly be changed on a rim by changing from one 35mm tyre to another will equate to around 1% slowdown in initial acceleration and much less at higher speeds. No, you're not going to notice it. Read the links. Otoh, you WILL notice the difference between a fast and a slow 35, so the OP is exactly right to ask for recommendations.

  20. #20
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by knobster View Post
    I disagree meanwhile. Mass will affect speed. The study is in a controlled environment where air resistance doesn't come into play. In the real world, aerodynamics will play a part. The faster you go, the more it will play the part..
    You're wrong about mass (except for the effect on RR, which is negligble in deciding bike speed.) Re aero - yes, you're correct. But aero is a cube law and RR a square law, so tyre aero only becomes more important than RR at very high bike speeds - TT and pro peleton stuff. See http://www.bikeradar.com/news/articl...he-myths-29245 or the docs on Schwalbe's site.

    (Also, if you're not riding on perfectly smooth roads then kinetic energy is drained in bike vertical motion - which is why pros often ride stages on such roads on crossers with bump-absorbing 28s - because they're faster, not just more comfortable. Something to mention to your roadie friends, K...)

    For every day riders yes I agree. For racing, it meant almost 2 minutes on this test. That would be huge in a race.
    Completely true. But I think a Clyde on 35s probably isn't competing in the Tour...

  21. #21
    Uber Goober StephenH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Dallas area, Texas
    Posts
    10,536
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've got the same tires on my Sojourn. I don't handle enough tires, that I hadn't thought about them being any heavier than other tires of the same size. But I will say, that after a bit over 10,000 miles on them, I have had zero flats so far. (Front tire is still good at 10,000 miles, rear tires have lasted about 5,000 miles.) I also like the reflector strip on them.
    "be careful this rando stuff is addictive and dan's the 'pusher'."

  22. #22
    .
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    My Bikes
    2010 Moots Psychlo-x ybb, 2013 Soma ES, 89 Trek 950
    Posts
    3,692
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meanwhile View Post
    You're wrong about mass (except for the effect on RR, which is negligble in deciding bike speed.) Re aero - yes, you're correct. But aero is a cube law and RR a square law, so tyre aero only becomes more important than RR at very high bike speeds - TT and pro peleton stuff. See http://www.bikeradar.com/news/articl...he-myths-29245 or the docs on Schwalbe's site.

    (Also, if you're not riding on perfectly smooth roads then kinetic energy is drained in bike vertical motion - which is why pros often ride stages on such roads on crossers with bump-absorbing 28s - because they're faster, not just more comfortable. Something to mention to your roadie friends, K...)



    Completely true. But I think a Clyde on 35s probably isn't competing in the Tour...
    Like you, I'm just an average everyday rider. I ride on 28's and have found these to be a good do most everything size for me. Seems fast enough and they are comfortable. I don't have roadie friends and the only racing I do is triathlons which I ride on a bike I use specifically for this and it has 23's on it. Am I faster on this bike, somewhat. Definitely on the climbs and accelerations, but for triathlons, it doesn't really matter. I ride around 20-24 mph on the race and tend to notice aerodynamics more in this situation. But recreational riding, I don't notice tire size at all. Well, with the exception that anything below 28's are not very comfortable.
    Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.

  23. #23
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,903
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    PS This might help -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle...f_light_wheels

    The advantage of light bikes, and particularly light wheels, from a KE standpoint is that KE only comes into play when speed changes, and there are certainly two cases where lighter wheels should have an advantage: sprints, and corner jumps in a criterium.[15]
    In a 250 m sprint from 36 to 47 km/h to (22 to 29 mph), a 90 kg bike/rider with 1.75 kg of rims/tires/spokes increases KE by 6,360 joules (6.4 kilocalories burned). Shaving 500 g from the rims/tires/spokes reduces this KE by 35 joules (1 kilocalorie = 1.163 watt-hour).
    So, 35J compared to 6360J - about a 0.5% change in performance. And the numbers would be worse for a Clyde.

    So, really - forget about tyre weight and worry about the rubber compound used and rolling resistance. The better makers will give you a realistic speed rating that lets you compare their tyres inside their own range.

  24. #24
    In the wind mercator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Calgary AB
    My Bikes
    Giant TCR Advanced Team, Lemond Buenos Aires, Giant TCX, Miyata 1000LT
    Posts
    602
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by late View Post
    I have the Hypers.

    The 32c in a Hyper is bigger than most tires claiming to be 32c.
    The 35c is HUGE.

    Look at the Vittoria Rando Pro in a 32c. It's large, lite and quick.
    I've got a set of the Rando Pro 35's on my touring bike: the ERTO code is 37-622, meaning a 37mm tire - huge indeed!
    ... but quite a comfy ride. I think I will go for the 32's when they wear out.

  25. #25
    Dog is my co-pilot 2manybikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    My Bikes
    2 many
    Posts
    13,682
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Panaracer Pasela Tour Guard The tour guard has a Kevlar belt for flat protection, They are also sold with a Kevlar bead as well, that's what I use. They come in many sizes. They are light and fast. Faster than most touring tires. Partly because the sidewalls are so supple. The sidewalls are not very resistant to scrapes. But, I did get 6,000 miles out of a pair. The tread was still ok but the tape over the bead started to unravel. Probably the fastest 35's out there. I have used 35's 32's 28's and 27+1 1/8". If you scrape things like curbs or rocks the sidewalls might not be for you.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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