Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-13-11, 05:48 PM   #1
Guitarrick
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Guitarrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cleveland, OH
Bikes:
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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?
Guitarrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 06:15 PM   #2
RonH
Life is good
 
RonH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Not far from the Withlacoochee Trail. 🚴🏻
Bikes: 2001 Litespeed Tuscany and 2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO Hi-Mod
Posts: 16,445
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
700x35mm tires are made for touring, commuting and urban riding. Weight is usually not a concern for those folks.
__________________


The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. - Psalm 103:8
RonH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 06:49 PM   #3
JanMM
rebmeM roineS
 
JanMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In Central IN
Bikes: RANS V3, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
Posts: 13,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(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 - Ti, RANS V-Rex - cromo, RANS Screamer - cromo
JanMM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 06:55 PM   #4
knobster
.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Comp, Soma ES
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
knobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 08:11 PM   #5
Arcanum
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: 2010 Kona Dr. Dew, Moose Bicycle XXL (fat bike), Yuba Mundo V3
Posts: 903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(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.
Arcanum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 08:28 PM   #6
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Bikes:
Posts: 8,413
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 667 Post(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.
late is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-11, 11:26 PM   #7
Jeff Wills
Insane Bicycle Mechanic
 
Jeff Wills's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: other Vancouver
Bikes:
Posts: 7,972
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(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

Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
Jeff Wills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 12:21 AM   #8
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 20,358
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 633 Post(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.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 02:00 AM   #9
Rowan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Bikes:
Posts: 14,929
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 244 Post(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.
Rowan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 05:46 AM   #10
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 08:02 AM   #11
furballi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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).
furballi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 09:47 AM   #12
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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

Quote:
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
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 11:28 AM   #13
furballi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
furballi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 11:32 AM   #14
late
Senior Member
 
late's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Bikes:
Posts: 8,413
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 667 Post(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
late is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 12:52 PM   #15
knobster
.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Comp, Soma ES
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
knobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 01:25 PM   #16
Arcanum
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Rochester, NY
Bikes: 2010 Kona Dr. Dew, Moose Bicycle XXL (fat bike), Yuba Mundo V3
Posts: 903
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(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.
Arcanum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 02:36 PM   #17
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.

Quote:
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.)
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 02:50 PM   #18
knobster
.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Comp, Soma ES
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
knobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 02:52 PM   #19
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.)

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:01 PM   #20
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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...)

Quote:
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...
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:10 PM   #21
StephenH
Uber Goober
 
StephenH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas area, Texas
Bikes:
Posts: 11,280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(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'."
StephenH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:21 PM   #22
knobster
.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Comp, Soma ES
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(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.
knobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:28 PM   #23
meanwhile
Senior Member
 
meanwhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
PS This might help -

Quote:
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.
meanwhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:35 PM   #24
mercator
In the wind
 
mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Calgary AB
Bikes: Giant TCR Advanced Team, Lemond Buenos Aires, Giant TCX, Miyata 1000LT
Posts: 915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(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.
mercator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-11, 03:43 PM   #25
2manybikes
Dog is my co-pilot
 
2manybikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Bikes: 2 many
Posts: 15,621
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(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.
2manybikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:18 PM.