Originally Posted by
eduskator
This. There are so many ''real world'' factors and other relevant factors to consider. For instance, air resistance: Wider tire = increased resistance. Mass: Narrow tire = lighter = faster acceleration when needed.
Research may have shown that wider equals less RR, but it's not the only thing to consider if your goal is to shave a few seconds off your century trip.
This. There's reasons we don't ride fat bikes in crits.
OP - 25.
We used to consider 25's wide. Not it's not wide until you're over 32 apparently. That's ridiculous. I know a lot of really fast guys that rode 28's even back in the day who now feel like they've been validated but let's be real: It's a bit like saying some day recumbent riders will be validated for having the faster bikes.
At some point we have to stop putting monster truck tires on supercars.
You guys have fun on your Barcaloungers though. I'll be waiting for the kids to bring back narrower tires, triples, smaller cogs, bigger chainrings, rim brakes, etc. It's not like we haven't covered all of this multiple times in the ~140 years of bicycle development, manufacturing and use.
OP - seriously just pick a tire size. In that range you're not missing anything even remotely ground breaking or life changing in either direction.