teambhultima

On so many of the modern raod bikes now-a-days, I see these amazing, minumum spoked wheels mounted with 700x23 tires. Why the switch to a larger/wider tire size? We used to shop for the narrowest clinchers we could find. I'm currently riding my 1976 AD Ultima with Continental 700x20's and can't imagine going up to 23's. Years ago I even had a wonderful pair of 700x18's on it. They were amazing - beat the snot out of you on rough pavement, but pumped up to 130psi, they were like ice skates on good roads. Almost like sewups.

I admit I've been out of the loop on recent bike technolgy. Could anyone please shed some light on the following?
1. Why are all these modern top-end bikes using 700x23's? What changed?
2. When it's time to buy new tires for my AD, can I still find narrow ones online?

Many thanks! As an old wheel-builder, this new stuff is fascinating, but not for me and my old bike.

Fred Smedley

My 700 x23 Fortennza's inflate to 145 psi and are way faster than my 700x 20 Michelins. They ride & corner much better also , at least this is my perception.

caotropheus

This is a problem that I am also facing. Up until middle 90's I could find my favorit Vittoria tires 700c x 19. Then they vanished and the best aproximation that I found was a cheapo 700 C x 20 that I overinflate to 120 psi and so far so good

r-dub

though there are other things in play, it is generally true that at a given pressure, wider tires give lower rolling resistance. This is purely academic for the most part, but modern high-pressure clinchers can make use of the fact. My schwalbe stelvios in 23mm are rated to 145psi, resulting in practically no rolling resistance, and significantly higher air volume than a more narrow tire. On the track I've been riding 25mm tires (inflated to 165psi!) and am no slower than I used to be on 20's.

alanbikehouston

The bike industry has decided to promote road bikes as being "racing bikes". So the frames, forks, wheels and tires are designed as imitiations of what pro stage racers are using. Makes as much sense as mom driving to the grocery store in an Indy 500 race car, but marketing has never been about common sense.

Grant Peterson, of Rivendell, makes convincing arguments that MOST real world riders should be riding on bikes with tires in the 27mm to 35mm range. That width of tire is more stable, gets better traction, absorbs road shock better, and is less likely to get flats, compared with a 23mm tire.

But, Grant points out, many road bikes in 2006 are built with forks that make a 27mm tire a "tight" fit, and make a 32mm tire an impossible fit. One industry report claimed that in 2005, Americans bought two million road bikes. Of those two million folks, maybe 2,000 will ever get a license, and enter a bike race. But, they all are gonna ride "racing" style tires, if the industry gets its way.

roccobike

OK, I'll take the other side of the discussion and make some positive comments about the bike industry. In my opinion, everything that was said about the racing bikes on the previous posts seems to be correct. So no argument there. But, the bike industry, especially the big firms, offer every conceivable 'hybrid' one can think of. I saw a bike at my LBS where I made a comment, 'nice road bike' and I was corrected by a mechanic. 'No that's a hybrid'. He proceeded to explain the differences. My point is, if the LBS does its job correctly and explains the different types of bikes available, then the cyclist is making the decision to buy a 'racing' bike. We are certainly not limited by the industry. You can add that the LBS will change tires on a bike to fit a customers wishes, usually at no extra cost.
I can't and won't defend the issue related to the industry abandoning older designs. I just purchased a pair of Kenda 27X1.25 gum walls for an old 10 speed, grumbling about that's all that was available only to find out I purchased the last Kenda tire the store had. The next batch were made by some firm I never heard of.

alanbikehouston

Well, we ARE limited by the industry. If someone wants a 2006 bike with drop bars in the $500 to $900 price range (where most LBS customers are) they will get a bike with chainstays too short for full size saddlebags, no room for fenders, and no room for 32mm tires (and especially no room for BOTH fenders and 32mm tires).

The customer who wants to use 32mm tires with fenders is directed to hybrids, which have flat bars, and generally have wheels and other components designed for "light duty" riding.

Trek offers over a hundred different bike models for 2006. The number of "drop bar" models with long chainstays for carrying large saddlebags, room for 32mm tires and fenders? Just one.

Trakhak

If we're limited by the industry, the industry is limited by us as well. The bike manufacturers produced plenty of drop-bar bikes with long chainstays and clearance for 32mm tires and fenders all the way up to the late '80s, when customer interest abruptly turned elsewhere - principally to mountain bikes. Sales numbers tanked for all road bikes, not just long-chainstay loaded touring models. Companies like Trek were savvy enough to respond nimbly to the seismic shift; some others, principally the Japanese and European brands, were slower on the uptake and lost major U.S. market share.

Strange how sniffy people (and not just those who cleave to the Rivendell party line) are about hybrids, which are, precisely, long-chainstay bikes with room for BOTH fenders and 32mm tires, quote unquote. The flat bar is an oddly effective disguise, it seems, like Clark Kent's glasses. Aesthetics of flat versus drop bars aside, I would argue that the hybrid (even with its "light-duty" components, although I'm not sure what that means) is superior to the drop-bar touring bike for almost any rider and that the smartest and most affordable setup for an all-purpose bike is a hybrid with a set of aero bars slapped on - more efficient at speed than its drop-bar counterpart and yet safer and more stable for city riding and casual use.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the original post except that 18mm tires and touring bikes both disappeared for the same reason - the market changed. And the racing tire market changed because people came to understand that the tires could weigh (nearly) as little as tubulars or ride (nearly) as well as tubulars - but not both at once. The 23mm tire is the current pick for the best compromise with respect to weight and ride, but this fashion, like all fashions, is by definition subject to change.

John E

Measure your tires. I have always regarded 700Cx25 as the absolute upper size limit for tires for my Bianchi, but I am currently running a pair of Continental Ultra-2000 700Cx28s, which are only slightly bigger than my old Continental 700Cx23s. My new Conti 700Cx28s are ALOT smaller than my older Specialized Armadillos of the same callout dimensions.

John E

Besides being cheap, I strongly prefer road bikes of the 1960s and 1970s because the bike industry currently makes VERY few bikes which suit my needs. My Bianchi is so tight/twitchy/stiff that I consider it a fair weather toy for fast and fun recreational riding, yet most of today's new road bikes are even more hard-core criterium-oriented. For general transportation or for long rides on less-than-perfect roads, I want drop bars and enough frame clearance for REAL 28mm (or even 35mm) tires. The Capos have this, as does the UO-8. The PKN-10 is a good all-round compromise, with room for 700Cx28mm tires (as long as I am willing to deflate the rear for removal and installation), but a stiff enough frame for loaded touring.

John E

I strongly challenge your assertions regarding efficiency, safety, and stability. Give me a set of traditional drops, perhaps with barcons for riding in traffic.

John E

My alternative to the hybrid:

cudak888 

My own opinion of the modern hybrid (at least the leisure hybrid) design is not too flattering. The current trend of using straight or minimal-rake MTB-derived forks (whether with shocks or not) delivers very twitchy handling that does not lend itself to comfortable, relaxed riding.

Neither do I care for the use of MTB bars with a 5" rise stem for comfort. They simply contribute to the poor handling, not to mention that the positioning puts a strain on your elbows.

My alternative to the hybrid? English three speeds. Lots of fork rake + North Road bars = A design that has proved for over 100 years that it is the design for comfort upon a bicycle.

-Kurt

Trakhak

Strongly challenge on what grounds? Aero bars = maximum efficiency (that's why they're used in time trials and triathlons); flat bars = upright position whose safety and stability is perhaps only exceeded by those of the swept-back English 3-speed handlebar. I do agree that barcons allow for somewhat safer use of drops in traffic, as do integrated brake and shift levers (with a still greater improvement in safety). I do most of my noncommuting mileage on drop bars, by the way; I never said riding drops wasn't fun, only that they're not necessarily the best choice when efficiency, safety, and stability are more important than aesthetics.

cudak888 

I have to side with Trakhak here - drop bars are nice for smooth, unobstructed riding, but bring dense, agressive traffic into the mix and their effectiveness drops severely.

I've found that the best compromise between drops and uprights are inverted North-Roads (surprise!). The additional width gives you a much more confident feel when driving in traffic/commuting.

Take care,

-Kurt

r-dub

I'm a little disappointed that beginning with comment #5 it seems that no one read the OP's question. This was not a discussion about why tires are so narrow or what is the best setup for joe bicycler to navigate city traffic. This was a discussion about why tires have generally gone UP in size from the 19-20 range to the 22-25 range for RACING and fast road riding bikes. I appreciate the other discussion, really, honestly, I promise. I'm a rivendell subscriber and am on 2 riv email discussion lists. Only one of my five bikes used for urban riding has drop bars. I was enjoying the other, less-oft-discussed topic, though.

roccobike

Yes, you are correct, but it seems the current discussion is rather inspired.

John E

I did address this directly, by observing the inverse size-creep I have seen firsthand. Today's 700Cx28mm Conti Ultra 2000s are narrower than yesterday's 700Cx25mm Contis.

John E

Back on the handlebars (I guess we need two or even three threads here: tire dimensions, frame geometries, and handlebars ), the huge nonaesthetic advantage of drops over everything else is the wide variety of hand positions they provide. My second choice is the straight Ritchey bars on my mountain bike, to which I have added a short straight extension perpendicular to each end. The extensions are great, because they support an orthopedically neutral "handshake" forearm orientation. At 52cm, my bars are shorter than most, which I see as a plus, and my 4-finger motorcycle-style brake levers let me easily work the brakes from my favored hand position on the extension pegs. However, during today's 30mi/50km ride, I did get a few familiar tingles in one hand, a problem I only rarely experience when riding with drops.

roccobike

Good point Kurt. Given that every bike company is trying to fill every niche their marketeers can think of, I find it amazing that Raleigh has not thought of its roots and gone back to basics to produce the classic three speed upright commuter/tourer. Given the improved internal gears that are now available, it seems they could produce a reasonably priced steel frame, upright bike with fenders and, say, 7 speeds. If the beach cruiser can find a market niche why can't a bike that was the backbone of Europe for years and successfully invaded the US in the 50's and 60's? Heck, Raleigh can even bring back the old classic names. Given Raleigh's position in bicycle sales, what do they have to lose?

John E

You should work in marketing, roccobike. (Maybe you do. ) With aluminum rims, cranks, mudguards, and bars and modern brakes which can actually stop the bike, your concept has alot of merit. Black and British racing green would be logical colors ...

I suppose the current owners of the Raleigh marque figure that hybrids and comfort bikes have pretty much usurped their traditional market.

A nutty side thought, probably not economically feasible, would be to salvage old Raleigh frames and to outfit them with updated wheels, brakes, cranks, pedals, etc. It could be a fun project for someone, and it takes me back to my starving student days of putting Cyclo-Sturmey Archer hybrid derailleur/epicycle transmissions on old 3-speeds, turning them into 9-speeds and 12-speeds.

roccobike

I see from many of the posts the definition of a hybrid is a cross or middle ground between the classic road bike or racer and the hardtail, 26 inch rim, mountain bike. This hybrid typically has flat bars and sometimes a limited front suspension. In most instances the cyclist sits in a more upright position. However, my Cannondale SR500 with headshock (attached below) is also listed as a hybrid. When I referred to the broad range of hybrids available, I included some of the current modified frame bikes that have drop bars like the SR500. I guess I should have defined my interpretation of the term 'Hybrid' in my earlier post.

teambhultima

WOW!

Just checked back in to see what I might learn about tires after posting the original last night (actually early this AM). What a suprise... I suppose it is appropriate to add some remarks.

First, I've enjoyed reading what this thread has become and it has even shed some light on tire choices, but I'm still in a quandry as to what to do when it's time to buy new tires for my bike. My Ultima is a vintage road racing frame that originally came with sewups. When I bought the frame, I did not get the original wheels. In the interest of keeping the bike as age-appropriate as I can , I'll continue to look for narrow clinchers, but I may well eventually build a set of wheels for tubulars, if I can justify the cost. (I borrowed a set once and it was very nice!) BTW, I was never a licensed racer, just an avid cyclist that was lucky enough to buy/build a really nice road bike while in college and then enjoy the snot out of it.

Second, it's interesting to see the various opinions on touring-type bikes. Back in '84, I worked at the LBS wrenching/selling for a summer. Mountain bikes were getting popular but road bikes were still selling well and as a Trek dealer, we sold a lot. I wish I had one of the old long wheelbase Trek touring frames(720?). They were really nice bikes and had many of the good traits people have commented on above. Someone posted pics of a very nice one here recently - congrats to him! I can't comment about what's happened since to the bike market, as I've pretty much been out of it.

Third, I appreciate the differences in bike design and tire design mentioned. My recently aquired and restored 1974 Schwinn Suburban has upright bars and rides on 27 x 1 1/4 tires. It is a great neighborhood cruiser. I'd love to find an old Raleigh 3-speed to go with it. But no, I won't be forcing 700 x 28's on my AD.

Fourth & Last, I had to laugh, as I thought of an older thread that proposed the most excellent handlebar solution for all of us! No more debates... Gain instant stabilty and style all in one move! Just turn your drop handlebars upside down! (How many of you remember that thread?)

Best wishes to all. Keep riding those vintage bikes and sharing pictures!
Drew
1976 Austro Daimler Ultima
197? Raleigh Grand Prix
1974 Schwinn Suburban

cudak888 

Don't expect the current Raleigh USA management to provide them. It's quite obvious that they're only interested in filling the current trends - C-F & Alum. roadbikes, MTBs, Hybrids and 'Beach Cruisers' - with a dozen variants on each of these. Heck, just HOW many Raleigh Retroglide variants do they need? Frankly, the current Raleigh line is fleshed out with a considerable number of overpriced cheapo machines, IMHO.

Oh, Raleigh has tried bringing back the old names on their road machines though - note the Super Course, Grand Prix, Grand Sport, Competition and Prestige.

Surprisingly, Cannondale does carry one model that can be considered based loosly on the classic English design - their Street 600. The Street is still plauged with a derailer drivetrain though, when the only proper modern substitutes are either the Shimano Nexus-3 (or 7) or one of the current Sturmey-Archer hubs.

That's not to say that reasonably priced, steel frame, English style designs are not being produced. There are tons of Chinese and Tawanese companies producing various traditional and modernized forms of the English Roadster right alongside modern MTBs. Guess which ones are imported to the U.S...the MTBs.


See above about modernized variants of the English machines.

I love the idea of upgrading vintage Raleigh machines, and have considered doing such conversions before, but monetary restrictions (and a lack of local Raleighs) have prevented me from doing so.

However, if some folks here could cough up a few frames, another some alloy rims, and we'd share the profits...well, it still wouldn't work, for shipping costs would eat out our profits!

Oh well...

-Kurt

alanbikehouston

Most of the posts in this thread assume that the "Bike Industry" is in tune with the general public. That is certainly not the case with the "general public" that I know. The BI is obsessed with $4k and $2k versiions of Lance's bike. The GP that I know want a bike that is comfortable, and easy to ride in their own neighborhood. The BI specs bikes for the 20,000 Americans that will enter a bike race this year, and have only foggy notions about the 200 million Americans who will not go near a bike this year.

The 23mm tire has become THE tire in the Performance catalog and the Nashbar catalog. The most common size on road bikes selling for more than $600. The fact that 99 % of potential riders would be better off with a 28mm tire or 32mm tire has no meaning. Lance rode on a 23mm tire. So YOU will ride on a 23mm tire. So says the BI.