Hello, world!

I am considering replacing my current commuter tires with something a bit more comfortable.

My current tires are Panaracer Pasela 26 x 1.25, which I keep inflated between 80 and 100psi. The bike is a fully rigid Trek 4300 - which originally came with 26x2.0 knobbies. Between my svelte weight of 250lbs, the lack of suspension, the high-PSI tires, and the rough roads we get from the freeze / thaw cycles during the Chicago winters, you could imagine how rough the ride can get

My commute is only 5 miles round-trip, and I do ride commute year-round in all weather conditions. However, these Pasela's have gotten me through nearly two years of riding without any hiccups. The roads here are kept pretty clear in the winter, so riding on fresh powder or ice is a pretty rare occurrence.

I have heard good things about the Big Apples with regards to their low rolling resistance and comfort, so that is one direction I was initially leaning towards. The Big Bens also appear to be a good option for comfort and may be better suited to riding in the winter. However, I don't know if they offer the same rolling resistance as the BA's, and if the extra cost and weight would be worth having *slightly* better traction during a (very) limited number of rides through snow / ice.

I am still very much open to other options at this time as I am still researching what is available. Any questions or input would be greatly welcomed!


Woody

With a tire that wide, even with your large size, I'm sure you can get away with lower pressure than 80 psi.

I'm a huge fan of the Pasela tire. I have never tried it in 26" though. I've used it in 27" and 700c. I've used 28, 32, and 35mm size. I don't think I've used the 25mm size. I haven't tried the Big Apple, so I can't comment on it.

If you're looking for a softer ride, increase the width of tire you choose, in any model or brand.

There are quite a few highly recommended tires, every one of them has people that are pleased with them and folks that would not buy them again. Tires, saddles, mandolin picks and guitar strings all fall into the same group of items where people tend to chase the elusive rainbow of pleasure that comes from the "perfect" product choice.

You have been satisfied with the Paselas. "these Pasela's have gotten me through nearly two years of riding without any hiccups" Use and tire size then adjust within the given range. It will probably be smaller than "80 and 100psi". That will probably do as much for overall performance as changing from a tire that you are happy with to a different one because someone on the internet likes it.

There's no trouble with generalizations---wider is generally more comfy and things like that. Just apply them to trimmin the horse you rode in on and you should remain quite happy.

Yeah, that's one thing I could probably do a better job with in the meantime. I am still in the habit of inflating these things to 100psi like I used to when I was trying to make my commute more efficient, and squeeze out every last MPH from the bike.

I am still only checking into the available options at this time, I am not sure whether I will be pulling the trigger on new tires any time soon. With that said, my bike originally came with 26x2.0 knobby tires, and I currently have the Planet Bike Hard Core ATB fenders mounted comfortably. Therefore, I was thinking about going with 26x2.15 (or possibly 2.35?) for the widest tire I can cram on this thing.

Isn't that half of the fun??

My Big Dummy came with BA's;between myself,the bike,and the 45lbs or so I haul to my bike clinic,I'm rolling about 265lbs. The BA's roll well and give a good ride. I run them at 50/60psi fr/r;I've found the bike gets wallowy below 50. Zero flats,despite riding down alleys with glass and crap. Good traction in the rain. Can't speak to tread life,since I only ride it up and down the hill once a week(insert little old lady from Pasadena joke).

Two other bikes have 2" Marathon Supremes. These also ride really well(one bike is all alloy,including fork),roll great,have excellent puncture protection,and have super traction,but they're pricey and at your weight I think you'd wear them out quick. But if you're looking for sportbike radials for your bike,these are the tires.

I've also got a couple bikes with Kojaks(not 26x2",but they come in that size). Again,these are light,fast rolling tires,and they also ride good(my Hooligan is all alloy with a solo fork). I've never had any flats,but I've heard other people complain about them. They're basically cheaper versions of the Supremes,and if you don't have to deal with alot of glass/debris,you might want to consider them.

Thanks for the reply, dyna!

How would you compare the BA's to the Marathons? That is another option I was considering. From what I heard they are not as pliable and comfortable a ride as the BA's, as they seem to be more setup for touring and durability. I was looking into the Mondial more specifically as I am attracted to it's apparent go-anywhere, do-anything design, it's grip in all weather conditions, and it's durability. (Most likely overkill for my commute, but it's good to know I can if I wanted to! )

I've used regular marathons, BA's and the Pasela on various commuters. The BA's gave a very comfortable ride, put about 45 psi in them - seemed to wear well, however never riden them on snow. You and others have had better luck with Paselas, than I have. Among those getting year around use, 50 mm regular Schwalbe marathons are the equivalent of "all season radials", have run them around 50 psi - work well on various road surfaces and conditions, plus last a long time.

I've ridden a few panaracer tires and schwalbe marathons among others. I would recommend the schwalbes to anyone as a commuting tire. They are killer in the comfort and durability dept which for a commuter is high on my priority list. While other tires I have had have cracked and frayed in the sidewall area from wear and tear, the marathons are in really great shape after being outside for a few years in all kinds of weather and on and off road riding.

yes 26x1.25 " is pretty skinny, 32mm, ish, Big Apple widths are 5 & 6 CM.


Schwalbe makes Studded tires too for Winter-Ice for that season.

In the order of increasing performance, lower to higher in 26" fat tires I have used.

26x50 Big Apple<Schwalbe Kojak 26x2<Pasela 26x1.75<Compass 26x1.175.

I would say each is one step above the other except the Compass is say 1/2 step over the Pasela.

You know, the easiest thing to suggest is simply to buy a bigger tire. 1.25" tires on a bike that came with 2" knobbies is a substantial reduction in tire size. When I bought my brother tires for his upright bike, I wouldn't go below 1.5" because I felt that the ride would become to rough.

Schwalbe rate their own tires with a scale on their site. The Big Apple and the Big Ben only get a 4/5 for speed.
Big Apple HS 430 | Schwalbe North America
Big Ben | Schwalbe North America

Also, at a quick glance, I don't believe either tires comes in smaller size than 2".

Their "luxury" tire is the Marathon Supreme, it's smallest size is 1.6" (also comes in a 2") -
Marathon Supreme HS 382 | Schwalbe North America

But it gets a 5/5 for speed. Basically it's more expensive, but does everything better than the previous two - faster, lower weight, better grip, maybe a better ride as well.

If you're looking for a cheaper tire with an emphasis on speed, the Marathon Racer looks good to (note that it's not actually a race tire in any way, but it rated tops for speed) -
Marathon Racer HS 429 | Schwalbe North America

It comes in 1.5 and 1.75.

(All sizes are for 26" wheels which the OP said they had).

According to the Schwalbe website, Kojaks are faster than Supremes and they are also lighter if they are both folding. They show Supremes as having better grip and protection.

I don't see Kojaks as cheaper Supremes but as tires designed with different priorities with each being better in some respects.

The Kojak ratings are a little weird compared to the racer, though, if speed is your priority. The Racer has the same 5/5 (blue) rating for speed, but gets 2 points more for grip (5 vs 4 and it's blue rather than grey), 1 point more for protection, and same durability. The site rates the kojak slightly better for speed/weight, but rates the Racer slightly better for rolling resistance.

So I think the Racer is a better tire for commuting. One advantage of the Kojak is that it does come in 1.35", whereas the Racer comes in 1.5" as the smallest in a 26" tire. But off the top of my head at the specs, I think the Racer sounds better.

It is a bit confusing.

We have 40-355 wire bead Racers and 32-355 folding bead Kojaks on our Birdy folding bikes. The Kojaks feel a lot faster. They also feel smoother despite the smaller size and more secure on the road. The differences are not subtle.

I also have Kojaks (35-559) installed tubeless with Stan's sealant on my Devinci hardtail (UST rims). These feel noticeably faster and smoother again though I've not been able to do an A-B test as the Devinci is in BC and the Birdy with Kojaks is in California.

Schwalbe now rate the tires as follows:

Tire / Speed - Grip - Protection - Durability
Kojak / 6-5-4-4
Racer / 6-6-5-4 (I'm not sure what the second row in the Racer ratings means)
Supreme / 5-6-5-4

Note the ratings now go up to 6. IIRC, I used to only see ratings up to 5. I think that they have added faster tires /versions and handled this by adding a level 6 rather than downgrading existing tires that have not changed.

The other thing I noticed is that the folding bead Racer differs from the wire bead Racer in construction and Compound as well as in Bead and Weight.

I assume that the performance characteristics are also significantly different and as I'm confident that my Kojaks are faster than my wire bead Racers, the Schwalbe ratings for the Racer can't be for the wire version.

Tire pressure makes a big difference. I find that most people over inflate thinking it will make them go faster, but it doesn't do much other than make the tire harsh after a certain point.

I tend to blow up my front tire to the lowest recommended pressure, and the rear tire to something in between the lowest and the max pressure. I tend to commmute on 25 or 28 mm tires, and that works good, although I commute on tires up to 55mm.

Marathon tires are nice, but boy are they heavy. If you really are concerned about speed, you need low weight (especially for stop/start or hills) and a soft sidewall that won't suck your energy out. Michilen has a good looking fast big tire:

Michelin Pilot Sport (26-inch) - Dedham Bike | Dedham, Massachusetts - Bikes Bicycling Cycling

Amazon.com : Michelin Pilot Sport HD Folding Bicycle Tire - w/Protek HD Reflective Sidewalls : Bike Tires : Sports & Outdoors

It is hard to find them in the 26" size though. They used to have a 26x2.35 that looked to be a great alternative to the Big Apple, but I can't find it any more.

If you don't want to go biger than 2.0" I have found these to be great tough fast commuter tires:
Continental Sport Contact Tire 26 Inch) at BikeTiresDirect

I have had both the 1.75 paselas and 2.0 big apples on my troll and have 2.1 BAs on my Dummy. I liked both of them a little differently. I like the BAs better for comfort but the Paselas are much lighter and feel faster. I really like BAs but I swap to winter tires and would not feel comfortable with them on snow. I wouldnt be much happier on the Paselas in winter either though but would maybe give them an edge.

You missed the Supermoto, which is the Big Apple with a thinner carcass and no flat protection. It's very light for its huge size, half a pound less per tire than the Big Apple.

I quite like the idea but since they are sold as a MTB racing tire they have removed features and charged a higher price. In Italian this is spelled "superleggera", in Scroogish it's spelled "stupid"

Interesting. I'm comparing based on their own ratings on their website, I haven't used either. My local shop tried to talk me into the Racers, but I was looking for a tire closer to the gp4000's and the racers were neither that skinny or that light.

I think what you wrote for the ratings is what I described looking at the site -
Kojak HS 385 | Schwalbe North America
Kojak HS 385 | Schwalbe North America

It's a little confusing because "5" is "5 grey boxes" whereas "6" is "5 blue boxes".

Fair enough, I don't have experience with either other than browsing the site. Schwalbe seems to think the Racers are faster and better than the Kojaks, but I could believe they have it mixed up.

Lol. While I hadn't heard of it, I personally don't recommend any tires to anyone that don't have flat protection. Even in my broke college days I didn't think it was worth money savings to deal with several times more flats, and that hasn't changed. The only scenario's I find it worth it are if someone is actually racing on a race course, or perhaps if they use a tire liner though I personally think having it built into the tire is better.

The grey boxes are up to 5 with the applicable number being the ones that are filled in. Where the boxes are blue, I count 6 of them.

I think that the folding Racers (Evolution Line) are a very different tire from the wire bead Racers and I note that the write up below the ratings describes the folding bead Racer construction, not the wire bead Racers.

You mean regular Marathons? Never used them,just Supremes. Schwalbe really needs to do something about their naming conventions;Supremes are completely different tires from all the other Marathons except the Racers.

I do,I consider them to be budget Supremes;less cost,less grip,less protection. They only make Kojaks for 16" wheels,so that's why I run them on my Brompton. But I run Supremes on my commuters because they're grippier and have better puncture protection.

Sounds like a good choice if your priorities are protection and the most grip.

On the other hand if your top priorities are low rolling resistance, low weight and smooth ride, with good grip and some puncture protection as significant but secondary considerations, wouldn't the Kojak be better as well as less costly?

Interesting, it could be.

Zero issues with either weight or rolling with the Supremes,and they ride just fine. I've got mild CT and my all-alloy Pt Reyes does just fine on DC's crappy roads with 2" Supremes. Given the extra safety,both from grip and protection,they're well worth the money.

I'm a little heavier than he is and have been running 26 x 2.15" Big Bens for the past 6 months or so, also on a full rigid. I settled in to usually running the front at 40-42 PSI and the rear at 48-52. They're pretty fast at these pressures, just prone to a little bobbing under hard acceleration. I can lower the pressure a touch more and get even more cush versus the rougher stuff on the roads, but I'd swear they feel a little slower then, not bad at all, I just like them fairly taut. At ~37 PSI on the front and about 46 on the rear the bobbing with acceleration pretty much goes away and they are very cush vs bumps in the road. I feel like these big tires largely eliminated the "chatter" from my rough roads and the lessened (nearly completely?) vibration means my hands and wrists last longer and I get less fatigued. IIRC, the 2.15" Big Bens are rated for 30-55 PSI. I started out with them around 30 in the front and 35 in the rear, and although they worked okay, they felt like they required a bit more energy to motivate under my weight at the lower end of their PSI band.

I was surprised with how fast these tires are. They aren't as heavy as I feared they would be when I ordered them, and as far as I am concerned, all the good things new balloon tire fans said are true. I'm not a total convert, I'm setting up one of my two main bikes (commuter and tourer) with 1.5" tires, but they are staying on the other bike. I like them.

Haven't rolled the Big Apples to compare, sorry. My understanding is the only real difference between them is the depth of the tread for better off road performance on the Big Bens. I like that they are available in colors as well (red "brick" color, a tan, and a nice grey), I got the grey ones. I can say that Big Bens have handled gravel, dirt paths, a little bit of light singletrack, and some loaded touring (all conditions) all very well. Although, I think I was a little more surefooted on 1.5" tires in deep gravel. I wholeheartedly recommend them as a tire. They corner amazingly well, I think the only tires I've regularly put such a lean on were the 1 & 1/8th" Conti Gatorskins. The round overall profile of the tires seems to make me feel comfortable getting the bike pretty far over in aggressive cornering, not something I was expecting from a tire this size.

I've gotten one flat in 6 months of 3 + days a week of riding, 60 miles a week minimum just commuting, usually some extra miles on the way home, sometimes 30 milers, say about 1,500 miles on them at this point, including four days loaded touring. Flat tire was in the front, spotted a few cuts in the tread from non-fully penetrating glass shards, but interestingly, no shards stayed in the tire. I'm used to having to pick glass out of some of my tires with a knife. Outer belt of the tire is a little soft and natural rubbery, reminds me of my ~1.5" Panaracer T-Serv Pro-Tex's, as does the tread actually, although deeper/taller.

FWIW, I'm moving the balloon tires over to my touring bike (converted 80's MTB), which will be the bike I ride here on any snowy days we have, in addition to when I want to ferry in a weeks worth of work clothes all at once. I've got a pair of good studded tires, but unless we actually end up with compacted snow here (very rare), I'll probably just roll the Big Ben's. After riding 1.5 inchers for a few months on my commuter again, I'll decide if I prefer the bigger tires for commuting or I want to keep them on the tourer.