|
Originally Posted by davester
(Post 18521855)
OK, did that. On our usual descents I now coast faster than my riding buddy (who has not changed his equipment) with the 32s than I did with my previous 23/25 F/R tires. I can also fly through switchbacks with confidence much faster than I could previously. However, I do acknowledge that the skinny tires "feel" faster despite being provably slower. I think that is why there are arguments here. The skinny tires clearly "feel" faster whereas the available data show that fat tires are actually faster, all other things being equal. Some people prefer the faster feeling, while other people want to actually go faster (or at least go faster with less effort). I also understand that at speeds over about 25 mph the lower wind resistance of skinnier tires can have a significant effect which counteracts their higher rolling resistance. However, I seldom go that fast.
|
Originally Posted by davester
However, I seldom go that fast.
Originally Posted by embankmentlb
(Post 18521939)
In a world without gravity.
|
I'm confused how one incredibly unscientific article has so many people convinced that wider tires are faster. It wasn't a bad article or a bad idea, but one ride with your buddy does not a scientific test make. Personally, I think wide tires feel just right on a 3 speed with 26" tires. On a racing bike I'll take 21's.
|
I'm not sure which single incredibly unscientific article you're referring to. But if you look you'll find that current testing by the tire manufacturers themselves, as well as bicyclerollingresistance.com, VeloNews, BQ, and more, show that wider tires have less rolling resistance. Wider is faster until you reach speeds where the extra aerodynamic drag slows you down. You'll find this reflected in the pro peleton, where usage of 25s and 28s is increasing, and in the wider tire clearance being designed into high-end race-oriented bicycles.
By all means, ride what you like. But current testing does show that wider is faster.
Originally Posted by devinfan
(Post 18521997)
I'm confused how one incredibly unscientific article has so many people convinced that wider tires are faster. It wasn't a bad article or a bad idea, but one ride with your buddy does not a scientific test make. Personally, I think wide tires feel just right on a 3 speed with 26" tires. On a racing bike I'll take 21's.
|
When I brought my Trek 760 (racer) home it had these Conti "ultrasport" 25's on it. I couldnt get them off quick enough. They were replaced with Michelin Krylion 23's. Less mass, much less weight. I just dont need 25's nor the weight that tags along with it.
|
Originally Posted by OldsCOOL
(Post 18522108)
When I brought my Trek 760 (racer) home it had these Conti "ultrasport" 25's on it. I couldnt get them off quick enough.
Seriously, I will pay shipping plus reasonable value. |
Originally Posted by old's'cool
(Post 18522155)
If you're done with them, please send to me for proper disposal ;)
Seriously, I will pay shipping plus reasonable value. |
Originally Posted by devinfan
(Post 18521997)
I'm confused how one incredibly unscientific article has so many people convinced that wider tires are faster. It wasn't a bad article or a bad idea, but one ride with your buddy does not a scientific test make. Personally, I think wide tires feel just right on a 3 speed with 26" tires. On a racing bike I'll take 21's.
Ryder Hesjedal's racing bike, 25mm - Ryder Hesjedal's Trek Madone 9 Series - Gallery | Cyclingnews.com Marcel Kittel, 25mm - Race tech: Giro d'Italia 2014 road bikes | Cyclingnews.com Matt Goss's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Matt Goss's Scott Foil | Cyclingnews.com Jens Voight's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Jens Voigt's RadioShack-Leopard Trek Madone 7-Series | Cyclingnews.com Mark Renshaw's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Mark Renshaw's Blanco Giant Propel Advanced SL | Cyclingnews.com Steele von Hoff's racing bike, 25mm - Steele von Hoff's Factor One S superbike | Cyclingnews.com |
Originally Posted by iab
(Post 18521807)
25s are the sweet spot for the professional race types.
Ride what you like. I read comfort plays a role in the long stage rides but I wonder what they use for the time trials. |
Add me to the 25mm class. I'd go 28s if my frames would fit them. My roads are pretty much all chipseal, cracked, and otherwise in poor shape. Comfort is paramount and GP 4000s in 700 x 25 have been my tire of choice for comfort and durablity. I tried some other tires in larger sizes and while a bit more comfortable they just weren't as flat resistant. I track all my rides and for me the trend has been faster and longer rides on the 25mms. They just help to absorb the rough roads and allow my body to stay fresher and faster on my rides. I can't see any reason to ever go smaller than 25mms now.
|
Originally Posted by clubman
(Post 18522190)
That's what my 10 minutes of online research revealed. Not 32's.
I read comfort plays a role in the long stage rides but I wonder what they use for the time trials. |
For TT usage, its apparent manufactures offer in tubular 18 to 24mm width.
|
Another one of those individual 'subjective' debate. If you want your cake, best is to have a few other tires (or wheels) on hand per bike. The variables are way too many including advice between pro's, the amee's, magazine writer, terrain, climate, temperature, where one will ride, canyon carver or flat land desert, yada, yada. Only you should decide what YOU want out of the ride. The best I could do is just soak up what they say and make a best conclusion(s). The beauty today is having many choices plus the technology has greatly advanced.
I'm really impressed by the technology today in all types of vehicle tires. Some of it so good it actually could be bad for vintage motorcycles and performance cars. Ain't getting into here. Sorry Charly ;) |
Originally Posted by crank_addict
(Post 18522247)
For TT usage, its apparent manufactures offer in tubular 18 to 24mm width.
|
I like 25's vs 21-23 because I have to do less wheel truing. Real 25's that is, not the 25's that measure as 20's like the old Specialized Turbo's did.
28's work for certain terrain (just the thing for early spring), but I found the 28c Conti 4000s2's a hair slower than the 25's in my opinion (aka completely unscientific testing protocol) |
Originally Posted by iab
(Post 18522171)
Ride what you like, but do you really have a "racing" bike?
Ryder Hesjedal's racing bike, 25mm - Ryder Hesjedal's Trek Madone 9 Series - Gallery | Cyclingnews.com Marcel Kittel, 25mm - Race tech: Giro d'Italia 2014 road bikes | Cyclingnews.com Matt Goss's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Matt Goss's Scott Foil | Cyclingnews.com Jens Voight's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Jens Voigt's RadioShack-Leopard Trek Madone 7-Series | Cyclingnews.com Mark Renshaw's racing bike, 25mm - Pro bike: Mark Renshaw's Blanco Giant Propel Advanced SL | Cyclingnews.com Steele von Hoff's racing bike, 25mm - Steele von Hoff's Factor One S superbike | Cyclingnews.com |
For what it's worth, I've ridden 20mm tires and even 18mm tires. Thank goodness they're not in production any more.
|
Originally Posted by iab
(Post 18521807)
25s are the sweet spot for the professional race types. 27s or 30s for cobbles.
But I'm not a professional race type. I suspect no one around these parts is. Ride what you like. In my I'm doubtful my 1982 Trek 957 frame will even take a 25 given the ~3mm of clearance between the current 23 tire and derailleur clamp on the downtube. http://i1382.photobucket.com/albums/...psvspw1966.jpg http://i1382.photobucket.com/albums/...psomtkdqj9.jpg |
The thing is, contact patch is way more affected by tire pressure than tire width. A wider rim accounted for an area difference of 0.5%. Going from 120psi to 80psi accounted for a difference in 24%. This implies that tire pressure matters the most. All you dorks running 32mm tires are probably inflating to 80psi!
FLO Cyling - The Contact Patch... Why Wider is Better FWIW, I'm running the Archetype rims which are 23mm wide with 23mm tires. Probably the same contact patch area as a 25mm tire on a 19mm rim. |
Somewhat on topic, for those riding hooked bead rims and concerned of pinch flats, might consider the Tufo C S33 tubular clincher. Blind as I am, done some bone jarring idiot smacks on pot holes. Quite amazing the abuse they take and NEVER a pinch flat. Riding the 21 mm width, this version also seems to have a slight heavier sidewall and can run much lower PSI than recommended. Only complaint is the awful and loud logo on the sidewalls.
|
Originally Posted by jamesdak
(Post 18522233)
Add me to the 25mm class. I'd go 28s if my frames would fit them. My roads are pretty much all chipseal, cracked, and otherwise in poor shape. Comfort is paramount and GP 4000s in 700 x 25 have been my tire of choice for comfort and durablity. I tried some other tires in larger sizes and while a bit more comfortable they just weren't as flat resistant. I track all my rides and for me the trend has been faster and longer rides on the 25mms. They just help to absorb the rough roads and allow my body to stay fresher and faster on my rides. I can't see any reason to ever go smaller than 25mms now.
|
I suspect the pros are riding 25 for one reason and one reason only. They work better on carbon rims. Follow the money. I have been around long enough to spot the trends. In another ten year if rims make a case for 19s they will be the fastest best thing going.
Meanwhile, I live in a place with lots of hills. My low tech bike works best with relatively light weight tires. I ride 25s or 28s most of the time because the roads are so bad. However 28s, 32s, 38s, 4?s will never be faster going up hill know matter what test Jan rigs up. As for the flat and down hill coasting tests, what real world difference does that even make? |
Originally Posted by embankmentlb
(Post 18522499)
I suspect the pros are riding 25 for one reason and one reason only. They work better on carbon rims. Follow the money. I have been around long enough to spot the trends. In another ten year if rims make a case for 19s they will be the fastest best thing going.
Meanwhile, I live in a place with lots of hills. My low tech bike works best with relatively light weight tires. I ride 25s or 28s most of the time because the roads are so bad. However 28s, 32s, 38s, 4?s will never be faster going up hill know matter what test Jan rigs up. As for the flat and down hill coasting tests, what real world difference does that even make? |
Oh boy, another tire tread! I mean thread.
Originally Posted by 79pmooney
(Post 18520663)
(Well, OK, a lottle weight
Count me in the smaller, light group. I don't race and don't really care how fast I go. I do care how the bike feels. I like road feel. I can feel the difference in weight between a 28 and a 25 and a 23. So can you. |
Originally Posted by vanguardx3
(Post 18522466)
Your frame can accommodate 28's. Conti 25's are actually 28's. Measure them for yourself.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:32 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.