Skinny or fat tires for my commuter?
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,496
Likes: 6
From: SoCal
Skinny or fat tires for my commuter?
I have now had my Cross Check for a few months. I have some cheap CST 700x38 tires that I ride at 75-80 psi. I had the tires on another bike so I put them on this because they seemed better then the cross tires that it came with for road riding. On an average week I ride about 25 miles commuting and 60 miles group/training rides. I feel like I might benefit from thinner high pressure tires when I'm riding for performance. But my commute is in an urban area with road debris and potholes and I don't want to be changing flats all the time. Would I get benefit from something like a 700x25/28 gator skin for example? I hear that most of the skinnier high pressure tires with good flat protection are going to be heavy and slow so I don't know if it would be a huge upgrade over the 700x38 tires in that respect. Curious on feedback from people that have road both types on their commuters
#2
ouate de phoque
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,781
Likes: 1
From: La Prairie, Qc, Canada
Bikes: Bianchi, Nakamura,Opus
I ride a 55 kms R/T commute 4 days a week on a rural road with a lot of pothole and débris and I'm on 700X23. I don't get a lot of flats, maybe 3 this year so far after 5300 kms (approx.) I prefer skinnier tires as I feel that they're quicker than fat tires but that's just me.
A lot of people will now tell you how wrong I am.
But that's the feeling I get on the road.
By the way Gatorskin is the worst tire I ever bought, I had better mileage and better flat protection from cheap serfas seca tires and cheap michelin tires.
A lot of people will now tell you how wrong I am.
But that's the feeling I get on the road.By the way Gatorskin is the worst tire I ever bought, I had better mileage and better flat protection from cheap serfas seca tires and cheap michelin tires.
#3
tougher than a boiled owl
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 1
From: Rocky Coast of Maine
Bikes: Fetish Cycles Fixation / Fuji S12S / Gary Fisher MTB / Raleigh Grand Prix / Ross Professional / Kent comfort cruiser
Generally, the larger tire will provide better service on rough potholed roads. It will give a better ride provided they are not too bulky as weight can become a penalty. Also choose a smooth and shallow tread pattern if possible as this will aid in the rolling resistance. Narrower road bike tires will always be faster and more efficient but your mileage is not very high so you wouldn't realize much benefit.
#4
Senior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,928
Likes: 3
From: Brodhead, WI - south of Madison
Bikes: 2009 Trek 1.2
Get two sets of wheels, one with skinny tires, the other with fat for commuting. With the same cassette on both wheelsets you're swapping wheels instead of tires.
Personally I have two bikes ... one for commuting/CX and the other a roadie.
Personally I have two bikes ... one for commuting/CX and the other a roadie.
#6
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 1
From: SF Bay Area
Bikes: 2012 Specialized Sirrus
I have two sets of tires - 700x28 Kenda Kwick cross tires and the stock 700x32 Specialized Nimbus. For riding on rough roads, I much prefer the 700x32 tires. I've never gone above 700x32, so cannot comment on that - but I'm planning to stick to 32 and get 700x32 Panaracer Paselas in a next week.
#7
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,496
Likes: 6
From: SoCal
I do have two bikes but for me one is my CC and the other is a track/fixed gear. Don't want to use the fixed gear on group rides with big hills. I fully plan on getting a dedicated road racer but that's probably a year away because my bike budget is blown for a while because both of my current bikes were purchased in the last 6 months
#9
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,982
Likes: 11
From: Puget Sound
Bikes: 2007 Rocky Mountain Sherpa 30 (bionx), 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra
It all depends on the condition of the road (or other) surface that you are commuting on. I commute on my road bike (23 mm) and on a touring bike (28 mm.) Both work just fine since the surface I'm commuting on is in excellent condition for the most part.
#10
I personally think the sweet spot is about 32mm. I have ridden sizes from 23mm up to 38mm on my commute (about 6 miles each way from Brooklyn to Manhattan), and have settled on the 32's. Below 32, I feel like I am lacking stability and cushion for the unevenly paved portion of the ride. Over 32, and I start to feel like the tires are heavy (YMMV, depending on the tire itself!). For me, 32 is the way to go.
#11
Galveston County Texas
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 33,335
Likes: 1,286
From: In The Wind
Bikes: 02 GTO, 2011 Magnum
__________________
Fred "The Real Fred"
Fred "The Real Fred"
#12
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 919
Likes: 15
From: South Austin, Texas
Bikes: 2010 Origin8 CX700, 2003 Cannondale Backroads Cross Country, 1997 Trek mtn steel frame converted commuter/tourer, 1983 Univega Sportour, 2010 Surly LHT, Others...
I would try these in the 32's, based on your riding conditions.
I have had excellent results with the panaracer urban/touring tires in 700c size.





[h=2]RIBMO PT[/h]RiBMo is the newest addition to our urban tire line. Aside from a plethora of sizes, the news on RiBMo is PT puncture resistance technology. PT delivers 3x the puncture resistance of Aramid belted technologies.
[TABLE="width: 313"]
[TR]
[TH]SIZES[/TH]
[TH]BEAD[/TH]
[TH]ETRO[/TH]
[TH]TPI[/TH]
[TH]WEIGHT[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 23c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]23-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]300g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 25c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]25-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]330g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 28c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]28-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]370g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 32c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]32-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]400g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 35c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]35-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]490g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.25[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]32-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]330g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.50[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]38-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]440g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.75[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]42-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]490g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 2.0[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]48-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]540g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 23c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]23-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]360g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 25c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]25-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]390g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 28c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]28-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]420g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 32c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]32-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]450g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I have had excellent results with the panaracer urban/touring tires in 700c size.





[h=2]RIBMO PT[/h]RiBMo is the newest addition to our urban tire line. Aside from a plethora of sizes, the news on RiBMo is PT puncture resistance technology. PT delivers 3x the puncture resistance of Aramid belted technologies.
[TABLE="width: 313"]
[TR]
[TH]SIZES[/TH]
[TH]BEAD[/TH]
[TH]ETRO[/TH]
[TH]TPI[/TH]
[TH]WEIGHT[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 23c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]23-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]300g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 25c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]25-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]330g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 28c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]28-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]370g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 32c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]32-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]400g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 35c[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]35-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]490g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.25[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]32-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]330g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.50[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]38-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]440g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 1.75[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]42-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]490g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26 x 2.0[/TD]
[TD]Aramid[/TD]
[TD]48-559[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]540g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 23c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]23-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]360g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 25c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]25-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]390g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 28c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]28-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]420g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]700 x 32c[/TD]
[TD]Steel[/TD]
[TD]32-622[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[TD]450g.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
#13
Perm Newbie

Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: Seattle
#14
Member
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Bikes: Surly LHT, Novara Flyby, Seven Odonata, Trek beach cruiser
I had 700x23 and went up to 700x25 Vittoria Randonneurs. I like the feel much better on the 25's, and I don't think I've increased my rolling resistance (at least not enough for me to worry about).
#17
Senior Member


Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,497
Likes: 4,570
From: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
38s at 75lbs (or lower if you don't pump them for a week) sounds like a slow option
you might feel better with 28s at 110 (and keep them pumped)
you might feel better with 28s at 110 (and keep them pumped)
#18
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,496
Likes: 6
From: SoCal
I do pump every 2 days at the minimum. But the tires are rated 65-80. I pumped to 80 before my ride today and did 20 miles and they look flat when I'm riding. Definitely adding to my rolling resistance.
#19
Senior Member


Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,497
Likes: 4,570
From: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
yeah try the 28s I think you will be very happy. I started commuting on a mountain bike with knobbies, then got slicks, then got a 700c hybrid with wide textured tires then got wide tires with less texture then got 28 slicks and loved them for years. I only recently moved to 23s cuz they came with a new/used road bike and honestly don't really notice a difference from the 28s, so who knows maybe you'd be happy with 23s! I weigh about 225 lbs. FWIW
#20
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,689
Likes: 2,609
From: northern Deep South
Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee
I'm another commuter who uses one (of a few very similar) bikes for just about everything, who's settled on 32s. The incremental increase, if any, between 28 and 32 tires is more than balanced by the increased cushion of the fatter 32s. Anything wider doesn't seem to buy me anything. YRMV (your roads...)
#21
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,496
Likes: 6
From: SoCal
My other bike has 700x28 Thickslicks. I might swap those onto the Cross Check and see how it goes. Then put my other set of cheapo Forte 25s on the fixed gear. Anyone have any negative experience with the Thickslicks? They are very new and don't have a lot of miles on them so I can't tell how they will hold up commuting
#23
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
From: Chicago, IL
Bikes: Crossrip Elite, Bikesdirect tarck bike custom build
The thing I've always heard is that while wider tires are definitely heavier than narrower tires (no way around that), the decreased rolling resistance and increased traction of the larger tires more than makes up for the weight penalty.
The best I can do to back this up is: https://www.schwalbetires.com/tech_in...ing_resistance. The conclusion seems to be: if you're racing, go smaller tires. If you're not, the fatter the better.
The best I can do to back this up is: https://www.schwalbetires.com/tech_in...ing_resistance. The conclusion seems to be: if you're racing, go smaller tires. If you're not, the fatter the better.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Eyedrop
Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling
10
03-31-19 04:08 PM
asiamj
Cyclocross and Gravelbiking (Recreational)
7
09-19-10 04:18 PM





