Hi all:

I recently bought a used road bike, my first really nice one (Masi in my sig). It came with Hutchinson Atom tires (700x23)with black tread and grey sides. When I got the bike, they looked fine with no visible wear or damage. I keep them at 100psi, though they are rated for 115.

Yesterday, I went on a longish group ride; the longest ride I've done on this bike since I bought it. At one of the stops toward the end of the ride, I looked down and realized my front tire was splitting apart where the black and grey rubber meet. The splitting was occuring pretty much around the whole tire in a series of 2-5 inch long sections. I could see the cords inside the splits. I finished the ride, which was thankfully mostly uphill the rest of the way, worried I'd have a ka-boom and a wreck if I went too fast. Obviously, I'll be replacing the tire. The rear tire looks fine, but I'll replace it too.

Clearly, the tires could just be old, or have been damaged in some way. Not knowing their history, it's hard to say. But is this known to be a weakness of tires with colored stripes? I weigh 220lb (100kg) (and dropping). Are they just too weak for a Clyde to use? Did I have them underinflated? Any experience would be welcome.

Thanks in advance,
John.

If you post pics, we could probably tell you.

You were riding them a bit low for someone of your size, but that shouldn't have caused them to fail.

Hutches have fostered fear and loathing for decades!
BITD, you could always tell which Euro team was riding Hutches, by the in ordinate number of flats...

BITD, we all looked forward to rides and races, just to get to hob-nob with all the guyz we were competing against. Friendly but Fierce competition. But if anyone rolled to the bike inspection (yes, we had mandatory bike inspection - all classes) with hutches on, they didn;t get the thumb push treatment to check for proper tire adhesion, they got the whole palm of the hand push against that tire - usually rolled the tire off no problem....

having your skewers on the right side gave you a better chance of not getting laughed at, than riding a set of hutches to a group ride...

nickname of one of the guys on an old team of mine was ... 'Hutch' , well earned...

funny that they now have a huge print in the no-flat and tubeless arenas... still won;t ride em...

EDIT: should qualify that - inspection, up to and including Cat3 - Pro/1/2 had no inspection.

Here's a pic:


I wondered if it was my weight, too. But I would have thought the rear tire would have suffered far more than the front, and been first to fail.

That's a manufacturing defect. Get in contact with Hutchinson, they will more than likely replace it without question.

+1

The problem with dual compound tires is that the outer compound is bonded on and is usually a softer (more compliant) compound with better grip better faster wear. These problem occurs because the softer, outer compound flexes differently than the less compliant inner layer it is bonded to. The end result is that, at the molecular level, the bonds slowly break over time and the softer compounds pulls away.

This is what you are seeing.

It's much harder to make a durable dual compound tire than most people think which is why several brands abandoned the idea in the 90's.

I have had several sets of Atoms. I have seen the same occur in almost all of them. The atoms are actually a nice riding tire but they went through a bad round that all had this problem. For reference, I weigh 161 lbs so it isn't your weight that caused it.

Brian

I changed out both tires tonight. Upon closer inspection, I found the rear tire was exhibiting the same cracking. Once I had the tires unmounted, I found similar cracks between the sidewall and bead area on both tires, too. My conclusion is that these tires are crap. Whether I got a bad batch, or whether that brand is to blame, I'm convinced to look elsewhere for tires. I've got a set of Bontrager Race Lites (best my LBS had) on for Thursday's ride. I'll order some Continentals when I can find them on sale. Thanks for the help.

Regards,
John.

OP, See post #6.

These are not a bad batch. It was a bad concept.

Hutchinson bad, very very bad

Bob, I know what you say is correct. I spent a lot of career time associated with tire rubber tech service folks and picked up that same wisdom there. But does that mean everyone's two color tires are made that way and also not a good idea. Or are some two compound constructions better designed, formulated, and built. Like perhaps just a think color overlay (non-structural, just decorative). White wall auto tires, for example, never caused much of a problem during their hey day, and that was when tire compound formulation was much less sophisticated. Of course they were, like the two tone bike tires today, totally unnecessary, but they still worked pretty well. I have never heard of issues with Michelin or Conti two tone tires. Thanks for the input. - Robert

Well I prefer to think it was poor execution of a good concept. My new tires are dual-compound too. I hope Bontrager got it right. I guess I'll find out.

EDIT: Yes, I know Bontrager didn't actually make them. Hopefully Hutchinson didn't either, lol.

It's all about the chemistry. If that has been figured out all should be fine.

For a guy your size (I was there as well) I would look into getting 25c Conti's when you find them on sale. You'll enjoy the smoother ride, I'll never go back to 23c.

Sort of an aside. With age related failures (like tread separating from casing) the front tire normally exhibits the symptoms simply because the rear tire wears out much quicker. I've had to toss "unworn" but cracked front tires after a number of years while going through a few tires in the rear.

Now I try to rotate the tires so when I wear out a rear I move the front to the rear and mount the new tire to the front.

I did try "rotating" the tires but I didn't like looking down at a more-worn front tire. Personally I like seeing a proper profile front tire since the front tire is significantly more important safety-wise than the rear. So no squared off tread, no thin areas of tread, etc.