Optimal tire size
05-24-10 | 07:29 PM
#26
Banned
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,078
Likes: 6
I think the avocet tests were conducted on smooth drums.
I have not done very exhaustive comparisons but it does seem like a 23mm can be faster than a 28 if the asphalt is a little weathered and rough. the higher pressure at the smaller contact patch may allow the tire to conform better due to the fact that it seems to be vibrating the bike less. I am not referring to bumps or cracks but to unbroken pavement.
Anyway, you can't just trace a line up the Avocet graph because you wouldn't normally run a 25 or a 28 or a 20 at the same PSI.
I have not done very exhaustive comparisons but it does seem like a 23mm can be faster than a 28 if the asphalt is a little weathered and rough. the higher pressure at the smaller contact patch may allow the tire to conform better due to the fact that it seems to be vibrating the bike less. I am not referring to bumps or cracks but to unbroken pavement.
Anyway, you can't just trace a line up the Avocet graph because you wouldn't normally run a 25 or a 28 or a 20 at the same PSI.
Last edited by garage sale GT; 05-24-10 at 07:33 PM.
05-24-10 | 08:11 PM
#27
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
From: Texarkana, AR
Bikes: 2016 Giant Escape, Univega Viva Sport, Centurion Sport DLX, Trek 420, Schwinn Sierra, Schwinn Hurricane
Absolutely no scientist will accept data from such a test in a peer reviewed scientific publication. Small sample size and potential variables with individual tires (not to talk about the other variables).
To create a scientific test that would give you results with some statistic confidence and would be acceptable in the academic community, you would need to try at least 5-10 different copies of the same tire (hopefully of different batches and bought from different locations) in 2-3 sizes, and at least 50 different tires. That's 500-1000 tires x $35 = $17.5-30K + time and material and instruments and salaries. Let's round it up to an even $50K, maybe $100K depending on the instrumentation you need. That's why scientists need grands to do their experiments...
To create a scientific test that would give you results with some statistic confidence and would be acceptable in the academic community, you would need to try at least 5-10 different copies of the same tire (hopefully of different batches and bought from different locations) in 2-3 sizes, and at least 50 different tires. That's 500-1000 tires x $35 = $17.5-30K + time and material and instruments and salaries. Let's round it up to an even $50K, maybe $100K depending on the instrumentation you need. That's why scientists need grands to do their experiments...
I wasn't speaking of something to be published in a scientific journal, just a method that could possibly give some general insight for your own use.
05-24-10 | 08:14 PM
#28
sultan of schwinn
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,536
Likes: 17
From: Lehigh Valley, PA
A "scientist" is anybody that conducts a scientific evaluation to the best of their abilities. Controlling the variables to as great a degree as possible, and the ability to replicate results are key.
I wasn't speaking of something to be published in a scientific journal, just a method that could possibly give some general insight for your own use.
I wasn't speaking of something to be published in a scientific journal, just a method that could possibly give some general insight for your own use.
Back to the real point: As far as giving insight for one's own use, the best way would be to get out and ride and maybe try a different tire if not happy with the one that is on the bike when it wears out. And if one finds a tire that he/she loves get a bunch... That simple...
05-24-10 | 08:36 PM
#29
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
From: Texarkana, AR
Bikes: 2016 Giant Escape, Univega Viva Sport, Centurion Sport DLX, Trek 420, Schwinn Sierra, Schwinn Hurricane
Methinks that the definition of a scientist is a tad different
Back to the real point: As far as giving insight for one's own use, the best way would be to get out and ride and maybe try a different tire if not happy with the one that is on the bike when it wears out. And if one finds a tire that he/she loves get a bunch... That simple...
Back to the real point: As far as giving insight for one's own use, the best way would be to get out and ride and maybe try a different tire if not happy with the one that is on the bike when it wears out. And if one finds a tire that he/she loves get a bunch... That simple...
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
A scientist, in the broadest sense, is any person who engages in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge or an individual that engages in such practices and traditions that are linked to schools of thought or philosophy. In a more restricted sense, a scientist is an individual who uses the scientific method.
05-24-10 | 09:54 PM
#30
Thread Starter
What??? Only 2 wheels?
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 13,496
Likes: 940
From: Boston-ish, MA
Bikes: 72 Peugeot UO-8, 82 Peugeot TH8, 87 Bianchi Brava, 76? Masi Grand Criterium, 74 Motobecane Champion Team, 86 & 77 Gazelle champion mondial, 81? Grandis, 82? Tommasini, 83 Peugeot PF10
The problem I have with studies like the one from Bicycle Quarterly is that they end up as evaluations of brands and models rather than as conclusions which can be applied to any others. Perhaps that's one of the key conclusions in itself. And if there is so much difference between one specimen or batch and another of the same model then it is more a reflection on a buyer's likelihood of getting a good one when he goes shopping.
I must say I didn't expect this much diversity of opinion.
__________________
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
05-25-10 | 09:29 PM
#31
curmudgineer
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,417
Likes: 113
From: Chicago SW burbs
Bikes: 2 many 2 fit here
I don't know enough about tires (tyres) to do this myself, but someone that did should be able to identify the key variables for study, and design a statistically valid experiment that would separate the main effects & interactions from the noise. I suspect this goes on regularly at the more sophisticated tyre manufacturers, and I'm not surprised at all that they would keep the generated data to themselves. I also suspect that a great deal of modeling and analysis-led design goes on, that only sees the light of day in the finished product and associated (hyped-up)advertising.
This is an interesting & educational discussion. Thanks for the very detailed posts!
This is an interesting & educational discussion. Thanks for the very detailed posts!
05-26-10 | 06:35 AM
#32
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,930
Likes: 5
From: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Absolutely no scientist will accept data from such a test in a peer reviewed scientific publication. Small sample size and potential variables with individual tires (not to talk about the other variables).
To create a scientific test that would give you results with some statistic confidence and would be acceptable in the academic community, you would need to try at least 5-10 different copies of the same tire (hopefully of different batches and bought from different locations) in 2-3 sizes, and at least 50 different tires. That's 500-1000 tires x $35 = $17.5-30K + time and material and instruments and salaries. Let's round it up to an even $50K, maybe $100K depending on the instrumentation you need. That's why scientists need grands to do their experiments...
To create a scientific test that would give you results with some statistic confidence and would be acceptable in the academic community, you would need to try at least 5-10 different copies of the same tire (hopefully of different batches and bought from different locations) in 2-3 sizes, and at least 50 different tires. That's 500-1000 tires x $35 = $17.5-30K + time and material and instruments and salaries. Let's round it up to an even $50K, maybe $100K depending on the instrumentation you need. That's why scientists need grands to do their experiments...
Your probably right about the tire requirements, but you did miss two variables, and it could be insignificant to deal breaking, tire age. You would need to make sure that all of the tires tested were the same age. If one group of tires was fresh from the factory and another group of tires had been sitting in a warehouse for 2 years and then languishing on a dealer shelf for another year, they would have dried out to some degree, which could affect the results as well. Considering that most of the tires come from overseas, in huge containers, one brand of tires, even at a variety of dealers could be newer or older then another. For true scientific testing all tires would need to come from the factory made within say the same month. Tire diameter is another issue, a tire that is really good at 700C, may be less then stellar at 650B, 26" or 27".
What we usually see are not scientific tests, we see magazine style tests, which are much less scientific, and there usually we find it the same as with any other product test, the company that paid for $1,500,000 worth of advertising last year has the really good product, and the company that didn't advertise at all, has the really crappy one.
05-26-10 | 07:38 AM
#33
Thread Starter
What??? Only 2 wheels?
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 13,496
Likes: 940
From: Boston-ish, MA
Bikes: 72 Peugeot UO-8, 82 Peugeot TH8, 87 Bianchi Brava, 76? Masi Grand Criterium, 74 Motobecane Champion Team, 86 & 77 Gazelle champion mondial, 81? Grandis, 82? Tommasini, 83 Peugeot PF10
You were really convincing up until the last line, it's grant not grand...
If one group of tires was fresh from the factory and another group of tires had been sitting in a warehouse for 2 years and then languishing on a dealer shelf for another year, they would have dried out to some degree, which could affect the results as well.
If one group of tires was fresh from the factory and another group of tires had been sitting in a warehouse for 2 years and then languishing on a dealer shelf for another year, they would have dried out to some degree, which could affect the results as well.
As for tires aging on the shelf, that is just one factor in my comment about how a consumer buying a tire has a certain probability of getting a good one or a bad one. Manufacturing tolerance would be another factor, something the manufacturer can control. Shelf aging is not easily controlled by the manufacturer except via programs which would surely drive up the cost.
__________________
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
05-26-10 | 08:28 AM
#34
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Jim, welcome to bike forums, and the usual tenor of debate! Enjoy!
For rolling resistance predictions that would be useful for me, I think pressure, size, and weight (sorry, bike or tire loading!) need to be presented in balance. I tend to select tire pressure to assure a minimum level of rim protection. Beyond that, I tend to like cushiness these days. The best rule I've seen for selecting that pressure is this, though there are others:
https://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/TireDrop.pdf
I'd like to see a range of tire constructions, widths, and brands set up for different amounts of load (tour load and rider weight), and tested under those setup conditions. There's no way I'll choose a 28c tire and inflate it all the way up to nameplate (usually 125 psi for my Continental Gatorskins), or use my 21 mm tubulars at 140 psi.
For rolling resistance predictions that would be useful for me, I think pressure, size, and weight (sorry, bike or tire loading!) need to be presented in balance. I tend to select tire pressure to assure a minimum level of rim protection. Beyond that, I tend to like cushiness these days. The best rule I've seen for selecting that pressure is this, though there are others:
https://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/TireDrop.pdf
I'd like to see a range of tire constructions, widths, and brands set up for different amounts of load (tour load and rider weight), and tested under those setup conditions. There's no way I'll choose a 28c tire and inflate it all the way up to nameplate (usually 125 psi for my Continental Gatorskins), or use my 21 mm tubulars at 140 psi.
Last edited by Road Fan; 05-26-10 at 08:32 AM.
05-26-10 | 09:42 AM
#36
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
05-26-10 | 09:44 AM
#37
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,454
Likes: 9
SP
Bend, OR
05-26-10 | 10:23 AM
#38
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,930
Likes: 5
From: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Jim, welcome to bike forums, and the usual tenor of debate! Enjoy!
For rolling resistance predictions that would be useful for me, I think pressure, size, and weight (sorry, bike or tire loading!) need to be presented in balance. I tend to select tire pressure to assure a minimum level of rim protection. Beyond that, I tend to like cushiness these days. The best rule I've seen for selecting that pressure is this, though there are others:
https://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/TireDrop.pdf
I'd like to see a range of tire constructions, widths, and brands set up for different amounts of load (tour load and rider weight), and tested under those setup conditions. There's no way I'll choose a 28c tire and inflate it all the way up to nameplate (usually 125 psi for my Continental Gatorskins), or use my 21 mm tubulars at 140 psi.
For rolling resistance predictions that would be useful for me, I think pressure, size, and weight (sorry, bike or tire loading!) need to be presented in balance. I tend to select tire pressure to assure a minimum level of rim protection. Beyond that, I tend to like cushiness these days. The best rule I've seen for selecting that pressure is this, though there are others:
https://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/TireDrop.pdf
I'd like to see a range of tire constructions, widths, and brands set up for different amounts of load (tour load and rider weight), and tested under those setup conditions. There's no way I'll choose a 28c tire and inflate it all the way up to nameplate (usually 125 psi for my Continental Gatorskins), or use my 21 mm tubulars at 140 psi.
This is why we used to be able to put 80PSI into our 27x1¼ tires on steel straight sided rims, and still go like a bat out of **** all the time.
05-26-10 | 10:46 AM
#39
perpetually frazzled
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 9
From: Linton, IN
Bikes: 1977 Bridgestone Kabuki Super Speed; 1979 Raleigh Professional; 1983 Raleigh Rapide mixte; 1974 Peugeot UO-8; 1993 Univega Activa Trail; 1972 Raleigh Sports; 1967 Phillips; 1981 Schwinn World Tourist; 1976 Schwinn LeTour mixte; 1964 Western Flyer
Speaking anecdotally, I find 23c's to be really hard, hand numbing, and buzzy (at ~110-120 psi). on one bike, I run 700X28, and appreciate them quite a bit - at 90 psi, they're more comfy and rugged than the 23's, but are still pretty hard. another bike I've got runs 27X32's, and that one is ideal, IMO. The difference in drag is negligible between 28 and 32, and you can run them at 75-80 psi, get plenty of cushioning, and not have them wear you out. I've the feeling that most of my bikes from here on out are going to get tires somewhere around 28-32c range. Another thing to contend with is that the roads here are badly potholed and cracked. With 23's, the cracks will railroad your wheels into them, causing you to biff it. With 32's, I just roll right over them.
IME, I would say that for anything but smooth road riding (i.e. anything with any gravel, chip seal, cracks, etc), stick with 28's or higher.
IME, I would say that for anything but smooth road riding (i.e. anything with any gravel, chip seal, cracks, etc), stick with 28's or higher.
05-26-10 | 11:11 AM
#40
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
The article would imply that the heavier the load, "bicycle, rider, other gear", the wider the tires should be, to be able to get sufficient pressure to allow for the proper amount of drop. For example a 150kg rider should use a wider tire, then a 50kg rider. That makes a lot of sense, I weigh about 100kg (220lbs), a tire that has a tire patch of about 1" x 1", using the 60/40 weight distribution this would mean that 0% drop would be 120PSI for the rear tire and 80PSI for the front, so you need a tire that can handle 120PSI. If you use a tire that has a tire patch of 1¼ x 1¼ then it would be 1.5625 square inches, divide 120 by 1.5625 would be 76.8PSI, so for 15% drop you should be something less then that.
This is why we used to be able to put 80PSI into our 27x1¼ tires on steel straight sided rims, and still go like a bat out of **** all the time.
This is why we used to be able to put 80PSI into our 27x1¼ tires on steel straight sided rims, and still go like a bat out of **** all the time.
% drop refers to the compression of the tire at the contact area, and resulting "drop" of the axle. I believe it's calculated by dividing the unloaded radial thickness of the tire into the difference between that number at the contact and at an unloaded area. A 28 mm tire with 50% drop would be 14 mm from the rim dragging on the ground. I don't see any way of correlating a zero drop condition with a pressure, save to say it can only occur with infinite air pressure. In other words, there's no usable condition that correlates to zero percent drop. How Berto determined the pressures for 15%, and how precisely he did so, are questions that are not resolved. I can say I've used this chart to set pressures for my bikes and for Mrs. Road Fan, and we both like the result. At my 220# bike + rider, my 28c's at 90 rear/75 front feel a lot smoother than 23 mm tubulars at 130 psi/105 psi. If I had 32's (equivalent to 1 1/4 inch), I'd be filling at 70 rear/57 front. I'm assuming the weight distribution is 120/100, or 55/45.
You think the scaling rules by which the chart was calculated are based on the required contact patch area at different loads? Makes sense, good job!
I used 80/80 in the old days, too. I liked the sense of speed. I have no idea if it was really faster. Those old tires are not what we or the wide tire freaks would call an efficient tire, these days.
05-26-10 | 03:12 PM
#41
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,454
Likes: 9
You just want to argue. FYI, yes, I did and I did a lot more. The year was 1988, I was part of a tri clinic that I was to give a show and tell at. At the time there was a big deal going on over sew ups vs the new high pressure clinchers and which was the better choice for the triathlete. I owned at the time four sets of MA40 on Mavic (501?) hubs and yes, I ran numerous tests over several days on the Rice University parking lot and two things became quickly apparent:
1. The biggest difference was tire pressure. I ran tests starting 20psi over max rated all the way down to nearly flat. The higher the pressure, the further I rolled. The biggest declines occurred after about 20% pressure reduction and downward. Wow, you mean properly inflated tires matter--yes, they do.
2. The smaller cross section tires did roll further. Wow, you mean a minimal contact patch equals lower rolling resistance, yes, duh.
Yes, I corrected each tire/wheel for diameter into the old Solar Cateye which allowed you to input the exact rolling distance allowing me to keep my speed, 10MPH, over the start line consistent.
I tested Specialized Turbo R in three sizes, Michelin Pro in three sizes, also ran some sew ups for the fun of it and no, the 28mm tires was a different brand because nobody make at the time a racing tire in that size. The two in that size I used were the smoothest, lightest, I could find.
I crossed the start line 10X with each set at exactly 10MPH stable for 25 yards before the start line on smooth, fresh asphalt and rolled until my the bike fell over and where my foot touched is where we called the end mark. The ten runs were measured and repeated in the other direction and then averaged. Temp was about 94 degrees and zero wind and yes I had a hang glider hand held wind meter.
Go ahead, argue some more. Tire pressure was the biggest factor followed by the tire cross section.
I was concerned that the 19mm tire would sink into the asphalt, and roll less distance, this proved not to be an issue. Also, the Vittoria 180 psi sew up rolled slightly further than the Turbo 23mm but not as far as the 19mm high pressure clincher. I attribute this to the sew up not being as smooth and true as the clinchers.
1. The biggest difference was tire pressure. I ran tests starting 20psi over max rated all the way down to nearly flat. The higher the pressure, the further I rolled. The biggest declines occurred after about 20% pressure reduction and downward. Wow, you mean properly inflated tires matter--yes, they do.
2. The smaller cross section tires did roll further. Wow, you mean a minimal contact patch equals lower rolling resistance, yes, duh.
Yes, I corrected each tire/wheel for diameter into the old Solar Cateye which allowed you to input the exact rolling distance allowing me to keep my speed, 10MPH, over the start line consistent.
I tested Specialized Turbo R in three sizes, Michelin Pro in three sizes, also ran some sew ups for the fun of it and no, the 28mm tires was a different brand because nobody make at the time a racing tire in that size. The two in that size I used were the smoothest, lightest, I could find.
I crossed the start line 10X with each set at exactly 10MPH stable for 25 yards before the start line on smooth, fresh asphalt and rolled until my the bike fell over and where my foot touched is where we called the end mark. The ten runs were measured and repeated in the other direction and then averaged. Temp was about 94 degrees and zero wind and yes I had a hang glider hand held wind meter.
Go ahead, argue some more. Tire pressure was the biggest factor followed by the tire cross section.
I was concerned that the 19mm tire would sink into the asphalt, and roll less distance, this proved not to be an issue. Also, the Vittoria 180 psi sew up rolled slightly further than the Turbo 23mm but not as far as the 19mm high pressure clincher. I attribute this to the sew up not being as smooth and true as the clinchers.
SP
Bend, OR
05-26-10 | 06:17 PM
#42
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,930
Likes: 5
From: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
The article implies that the heavier teh load, the wider tires should be, to provide adequate air volume (NOT pressure) to protect the rims and to maintain a 15% drop. I don't know why 15% is magic, and actually Berto once said it wasn't. I do think it produces a nicely riding result.
% drop refers to the compression of the tire at the contact area, and resulting "drop" of the axle. I believe it's calculated by dividing the unloaded radial thickness of the tire into the difference between that number at the contact and at an unloaded area. A 28 mm tire with 50% drop would be 14 mm from the rim dragging on the ground. I don't see any way of correlating a zero drop condition with a pressure, save to say it can only occur with infinite air pressure. In other words, there's no usable condition that correlates to zero percent drop. How Berto determined the pressures for 15%, and how precisely he did so, are questions that are not resolved. I can say I've used this chart to set pressures for my bikes and for Mrs. Road Fan, and we both like the result. At my 220# bike + rider, my 28c's at 90 rear/75 front feel a lot smoother than 23 mm tubulars at 130 psi/105 psi. If I had 32's (equivalent to 1 1/4 inch), I'd be filling at 70 rear/57 front. I'm assuming the weight distribution is 120/100, or 55/45.
You think the scaling rules by which the chart was calculated are based on the required contact patch area at different loads? Makes sense, good job!
I used 80/80 in the old days, too. I liked the sense of speed. I have no idea if it was really faster. Those old tires are not what we or the wide tire freaks would call an efficient tire, these days.
% drop refers to the compression of the tire at the contact area, and resulting "drop" of the axle. I believe it's calculated by dividing the unloaded radial thickness of the tire into the difference between that number at the contact and at an unloaded area. A 28 mm tire with 50% drop would be 14 mm from the rim dragging on the ground. I don't see any way of correlating a zero drop condition with a pressure, save to say it can only occur with infinite air pressure. In other words, there's no usable condition that correlates to zero percent drop. How Berto determined the pressures for 15%, and how precisely he did so, are questions that are not resolved. I can say I've used this chart to set pressures for my bikes and for Mrs. Road Fan, and we both like the result. At my 220# bike + rider, my 28c's at 90 rear/75 front feel a lot smoother than 23 mm tubulars at 130 psi/105 psi. If I had 32's (equivalent to 1 1/4 inch), I'd be filling at 70 rear/57 front. I'm assuming the weight distribution is 120/100, or 55/45.
You think the scaling rules by which the chart was calculated are based on the required contact patch area at different loads? Makes sense, good job!
I used 80/80 in the old days, too. I liked the sense of speed. I have no idea if it was really faster. Those old tires are not what we or the wide tire freaks would call an efficient tire, these days.
05-28-10 | 07:09 AM
#43
Thread Starter
What??? Only 2 wheels?
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 13,496
Likes: 940
From: Boston-ish, MA
Bikes: 72 Peugeot UO-8, 82 Peugeot TH8, 87 Bianchi Brava, 76? Masi Grand Criterium, 74 Motobecane Champion Team, 86 & 77 Gazelle champion mondial, 81? Grandis, 82? Tommasini, 83 Peugeot PF10
Is there anyplace in the US, or the world, for that matter, where the roads are not potholed and cracked?
__________________
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
05-28-10 | 08:08 AM
#44
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 919
Likes: 3
I ride in urban traffic and bike trails. There are two main factors that dictate the speed of my bicycle:
1. Wind
2. Road condition
3. Road hazards
Unless I'm cycling competitively in the Super Dome, a tire's rolling resistance isn't that big of a deal. I prefer ride quality and handling over an extra 1 mph cruising speed anyday of the week.
My all-purpose R600 is equipped with Michelin City 32f/28r @ 60/65 psi. On an average 40 mile trip, I still manage to overtake 98% of the cyclists on the road. It's all about the MOTOR.
1. Wind
2. Road condition
3. Road hazards
Unless I'm cycling competitively in the Super Dome, a tire's rolling resistance isn't that big of a deal. I prefer ride quality and handling over an extra 1 mph cruising speed anyday of the week.
My all-purpose R600 is equipped with Michelin City 32f/28r @ 60/65 psi. On an average 40 mile trip, I still manage to overtake 98% of the cyclists on the road. It's all about the MOTOR.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Fahrenheit531
General Cycling Discussion
11
10-27-18 04:59 PM
