# 2013 Giro: "90% of the field is on 25mm tires."



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

From the mouth of Caley Fretz, _Velo News _technical editor.

(4:26 in, if the video doesn't auto-start at that point for you)


----------



## lbkwak (Feb 22, 2012)

SystemShock said:


> From the mouth of Caley Fretz, _Velo News _technical editor.
> 
> (4:26 in, if the video doesn't auto-start at that point for you)


I heard even 2012 TDF had only one team with 23mm tires and the rest of the teams had 25mm tires for the race.


----------



## AlanE (Jan 22, 2002)

Well, if the pros do it, we all must follow. Baaaaah


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

When even 130lb tiny professional cyclists don't use 23mm tires on perfect racing roads, it says something.


----------



## AlanE (Jan 22, 2002)

Marc said:


> When even 130lb tiny professional cyclists don't use 23mm tires on perfect racing roads, it says something.


It says they get paid by their sponsors to help promote their latest products.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

AlanE said:


> Well, if the pros do it, we all must follow. Baaaaah


Yup... so be an individual and dump your carbon fiber frame. :wink5:

Or if you're not riding one, stop lusting after same.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

AlanE said:


> It says they get paid by their sponsors to help promote their latest products.


Nah. They might get sponsored to ride, say, Vittoria tires. But Vittoria doesn't much care if they ride 23mm or 25mm Vittorias. They both sell for about the same $$.

The width part would be the team's choice I'd think, and dependent on conditions and what works best.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Marc said:


> When even 130lb tiny professional cyclists don't use 23mm tires on perfect racing roads, it says something.


Yup. Another factor, as mentioned in the vid, is the popularity of the new wider racing rims.

In the old days, you put a 25mm tire on a 19mm rim, and the aerodynamics weren't going to be good. But a 25mm tire on a 25mm rim? Bueno.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Yup. *Another factor, as mentioned in the vid, is the popularity of the new wider racing rims.*
> 
> In the old days, you put a 25mm tire on a 19mm rim, and the aerodynamics weren't going to be good. But a 25mm tire on a 25mm rim? Bueno.


i think this is it. I'd be interested to know what psi difference they run from 23 to 25's...CX wrench?


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

This Giro has had the worst conditions of any GT I can remember. 
25's with soft compound or rain specific would be the only tire to use.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> This Giro has had the worst conditions of any GT I can remember.
> 25's with soft compound or rain specific would be the only tire to use.


Downright ugly riding... Especially for late May.


----------



## MrMook (Nov 18, 2007)

Marc said:


> When even 130lb tiny professional cyclists don't use 23mm tires on *perfect racing roads*, it says something.


Do they re-pave the courses prior to racing? The only "perfect" surface would be a velodrome. Otherwise, they all deal with public roads, no?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

MrMook said:


> Do they re-pave the courses prior to racing? The only "perfect" surface would be a velodrome. Otherwise, they all deal with public roads, no?


The grand tours always pick the best condition roads in the countries that they can along the desired route.

You'll not find roads like the grand tours get on any public road/highway in the USA. Our roads are built as dirt cheap as possible and wear out fast. Even our interstates.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

I have to say that the smaller bike friendly roads around here (NJ) have been repaved significantly in the last 4 or 5 years. It makes for noticeably more pleasant riding on my "old school" 23s. :wink:


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I have an Enve 2.5 with a 19mm tubular up front. I had a 19mm in back, but it lasted half of a test ride.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

And your point is?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

pulser955 said:


> And your point is?


That I shouldn't ride the Giro?


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

spade2you said:


> That I shouldn't ride the Giro?


Sorry was more of a question for the op.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

spade2you said:


> That I shouldn't ride the Giro?


What, are you God's gift to climbing?


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

pulser955 said:


> Sorry was more of a question for the op.


SystemSchock is our compact/25mm resident Lobbyist


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

SauronHimself said:


> What, are you God's gift to climbing?


I outclimb clydes like a spider monkey on cocaine+EPO! Woooop wooooooop!


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

I'd think it was for the conditions. The w i d e wheel manufacturers (Zipp, ENVE, HED) suggest 23's FWIW.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

woodys737 said:


> i think this is it. I'd be interested to know what psi difference they run from 23 to 25's...CX wrench?


from my recent experience a lot of pro racers are stubbornly sticking to somewhat higher pressures most of the time. they've always pumped their tires to XXXpsi, so that's what they continue to do. some of them are 'discovering' the lower pressure is better idea, and more will over time. 



Marc said:


> The grand tours always pick the best condition roads in the countries that they can along the desired route.
> 
> You'll not find roads like the grand tours get on any public road/highway in the USA. Our roads are built as dirt cheap as possible and wear out fast. Even our interstates.


what fantasy world have you been living in? sure, there are some great, freshly paved roads in _some_ parts of *some* big euro races, but they don't even come close to planning the whole route based on road quality or a regions likelihood of repaving before the race. if it were such an issue Paris would make sure the Champs was as smooth as a velodrome. if you've seen it, you'd know it's far from that.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

spade2you said:


> I have an Enve 2.5 with a 19mm tubular up front. I had a 19mm in back, but it lasted half of a test ride.


Yes, Spade. But you also weigh 120 lbs, IIRC from another thread. 

Ya fast-climbin' bastid. :incazzato:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> SystemSchock is our compact/25mm resident Lobbyist


SystemShock, as you know from other threads, has standard double on one of his bikes and compact on the other.

And far as tires go, I'm kinda digging 28mm now. :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

pulser955 said:


> Sorry was more of a question for the op.


Huh?

Personally, I don't think Spade should be riding anywhere, least of all the Giro. He's a public menace. :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

lbkwak said:


> I heard even 2012 TDF had only one team with 23mm tires and the rest of the teams had 25mm tires for the race.


If true, that kind of blows the "Ahh, it's only 'cuz the Giro conditions are so bad" thing out of the water.

Unless we want to say all the French roads/weather are beyond awful too? 

All I know is, if there's someplace where all the roads are awesome, I've never been to it.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

cxwrench said:


> from my recent experience a lot of pro racers are stubbornly sticking to somewhat higher pressures most of the time. they've always pumped their tires to XXXpsi, so that's what they continue to do. some of them are 'discovering' the lower pressure is better idea, and more will over time.
> 
> 
> 
> what fantasy world have you been living in? sure, there are some great, freshly paved roads in _some_ parts of *some* big euro races, but they don't even come close to planning the whole route based on road quality or a regions likelihood of repaving before the race. if it were such an issue Paris would make sure the Champs was as smooth as a velodrome. if you've seen it, you'd know it's far from that.


The Champs is a good example of an exception...as when you total all the circuits of it, those cobbles account for less than 1% of the total miles traveled. In Giro, and TdF they by and large stick to immaculate roads between cities...and even the mountain road passes tend to be pretty darn good. How many potholed and patched-to-hell roads do the organizers send the peloton over? I'd have to think a long time before I'd be able to name a stage with one. Apart from cobble stretches in cities...the most the peloton have to worry about from the road itself is in the wet when the lane markings get slick as hell.

Even the worst paved roads in those races are better than most average streets/roads in the USA. If they do use shitty streets other than cobble sections, they do a brilliant job keeping it off camera.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

Marc said:


> The grand tours always pick the best condition roads in the countries that they can along the desired route.
> 
> You'll not find roads like the grand tours get on any public road/highway in the USA. Our roads are built as dirt cheap as possible and wear out fast. Even our interstates.


Many sections of the Giro mountain roads looked only fair-to-mediocre. Not big potholes, but uneven pavement.

And ddi you watch any of the Amgen ToC this, or any, year? Roads were pretty good. This largely a function of climate, there is little of the freezing rain and snow that tears up northeastern or upper-midwest USA roads.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

I was lobbying people to ride 25's before it was cool. 

Of course, we've moved on; these days I'm really enjoying the plush ride of my 29x2.5 knobbies @ 40 psi as I hum down the MUP chasing Strava KOMs


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

MrMook said:


> Do they re-pave the courses prior to racing? The only "perfect" surface would be a velodrome. Otherwise, they all deal with public roads, no?


Have you been watching the Giro? Damn nice looking roads! Certainly puts anything in the PacNW to shame.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

I guess I don't get it. 

Velo News tech editor states in the vid that almost the entire field is on 25mm, and cites things like grip (traction/cornering), ride comfort, and lower rolling resistance as reasons why. Plus the fact that the 25s match up well with the new wider rims, there's no longer a big aero penalty (though 'big' is relative anyway, considering your body is most of your aero drag).

But somehow, the thread is now a big argument over how smooth the Giro's roads are/aren't? As if that was the entire sum total of why most of the Giro field is on 25s? As if most ppl have perfect roads to ride on where they're at anyway?

Uhmm... okey-dokey, I guess. 

If one wants to downplay how common 25mm is becoming in the pro ranks, maybe a better tactic would be to say "it's just a fad." I mean, that's hard to disprove, it'll be years before you can really say, "Oh look, 25mm is still going strong, all the teams are still using it, guess it wasn't a fad."

But, as it gives certain advantages, I don't see it going away any time soon. Wide rims too. For instance, ppl seem to dig the cornering and descending confidence they have on a wide rim + 'wide' tire combination. Better ride comfort is a bonus too, especially on longer rides. And if you want to get into it, bad-weather riding would be another reason.

some possibly interesting reading:

*Reinventing the wheel - the 25mm revolution

Bicycle Tires ? Puncturing The Myths - BikeRadar

Review of Michelin Pro 3 Race 700x25 Clincher Tire - Competitive Cyclist*


FWIW, I don't see 23mm going away either. There's plenty of light guys out there, and women, and about a bazillion 'old school' 19-20mm width rims in circulation (nor are they gonna stop producing new rims in that width I'd imagine). 

If you love 23mm, great, keep on keepin' on. I'm just noticing, somewhat to my surprise, that 25mm is starting to come on strong, especially in the pro ranks. 

If you'd asked me even three years ago if that would ever happen I would've said, "LOL nope, sad to say", but these new wide rims are like a gateway drug to 25mm, looks like.

And I don't think that's a bad thing. Choice is great. A lot of awesome tires available in both 23mm and 25mm? Yes, please. :yesnod:

Anyhow, food for thought. 





.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I'm holding out for 27.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Interesting to note that Campagnolo is still run on 23mm tubies. Boras and Hyperons, and the same goes for Corima

If I am not mistaken they took at least 6 stages

It is no wonder that Zipp and Shimano that have a market saturated by narrow rim racing wheels designed for 21-23c tyres are interested in pushing the 25c/wide rim trend into the market, like that lots of riders will need to switch to wider rims, that means a lot of sales.

funny enough, Mark Cavendish their most notorious rider, uses Specialized Turbo Tubular Team tyres on his 808s and those are well 23mm tubies.

so add 4 more stages to my count, I guess looking at other stages will also increase that count


----------



## rayej68 (Sep 18, 2011)

SystemShock said:


> Nah. They might get sponsored to ride, say, Vittoria tires. But Vittoria doesn't much care if they ride 23mm or 25mm Vittorias. They both sell for about the same $$.
> 
> The width part would be the team's choice I'd think, and dependent on conditions and what works best.


Shimano requires 25mm tires for all their wide rim wheels.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Add to those 8 stages 

4 - Cavendish on 23 tubies
4 - Movistar on Boras / 23 tubies
2 - Nibali on Corimas / 23 tubies

1 - Bardiani / Enrico Bataglin / Boras / 23 tubies
1 Lotto Belisol / Adam Hansen /Boras / 23 tubies
1 Garmin Sharp / Navardauskas / Mavic Cosmic, narrow rims / 23 tubies
1 Vini Fantini / Santambrogio / Ursus Wheels, narrow rims / 23 tubies

and the jerseys ?

Pink Jersey won by Nibali on Corima wheels / 23 tubies
Blue Jersey won by Pirazzi on Campagnolo wheels / 23 tubies
Red Jersey won by Nibali ( or Cavendish today ? ) on 23 tubies


hardly a sweep for wide rims/25mm tyres this Giro right ?


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Huh?
> 
> Personally, I don't think Spade should be riding anywhere, least of all the Giro. He's a public menace. :smilewinkgrin:


I wont be buying 25s any time soon. 23s rub at times on my Ridley. But my winter/dirt road bike has 25s.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Personally, I don't think Spade should be riding anywhere, least of all the Giro. He's a public menace. :smilewinkgrin:


Perhaps that's why I'm only allowed to ride solo. That and my odd schedule. Not many 2pm group rides on a Thurs or 7pm on a Mon, plenty going on right now while hammering away at the hospital.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> Add to those 8 stages
> 
> 4 - Cavendish on 23 tubies
> 4 - Movistar on Boras / 23 tubies
> ...


Ok, Salsa. But the Giro is 21 stages. Do the math... how many stages won on 25mm? Quite a few.

And compare that to how many won on 25mm just a few years ago?

The trend is clear, my old-school friend. :wink5:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

rayej68 said:


> Shimano requires 25mm tires for all their wide rim wheels.


Yep, I know, it was in the vid I put up in post #1 of the thread.

But far from everyone in the field is on Shimano wheels, so I'd say the point stands.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> Ok, Salsa. But the Giro is 21 stages. Do the math... how many stages won on 25mm? Quite a few.
> 
> And compare that to how many won on 25mm just a few years ago?
> 
> The trend is clear, my old-school friend. :wink5:


yes, do the math indeed. 10% were on 23, they won 14/20=70% of the stages. 
that is using the number from your headline. how does that work with a whole list of teams having riders on 23?


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Marc said:


> The grand tours always pick the best condition roads in the countries that they can along the desired route.


Is this how it really works? Are you guessing this or basing it on any real info. Having been to twelve grand tour stages, I know they race on bad roads as well as good roads. I can't tell you how routes are selected, but more often than not they ride the roads that are available in the mountains. You don't pick and choose roads when they go through the mountains as there aren't a lot of options. I also seem to remember Contador losing a lot of time a few years ago on a dirt road section. Cities put bids in to get the grand tours to come through their area. Part of this is showing the tour directors that they have improved roads and can provide a safe route as well as pay huge fees for the tour to pass through.


----------



## rkdvsm (Jul 15, 2006)

The truth according to Jan Heine
Tire Width: how much difference do a few millimeters make? | Off The Beaten Path

The Dangers of Narrow Tires | Off The Beaten Path

The Downsides of Wide Tires | Off The Beaten Path


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Add to my List

1 More Win for Cavendish
1 Stage cancelled

Also I was wrong, Katusha is on Mavic Cosmics, which come integrated with the Yksion tubies ( 23mm too )

so 2 more wins on Mavic/23mm


So that leave us with 3 wins for 25mm tyres

2 wins Sky TTT/Uran on Shimano wheels
1 Win Argos-Shimano/Degenkolb on Shimano wheels


----------



## Zeet (Mar 24, 2013)

Salsa_Lover said:


> Add to my List
> 
> 1 More Win for Cavendish
> 1 Stage cancelled
> ...


+1 ^ Hey, listen to Salsa! He knows things that many others don't! :thumbsup:


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

So the domination of the pro peloton by 25 mm tires appears to be somewhat less than complete, Is what you're saying.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

den bakker said:


> yes, do the math indeed. 10% were on 23, they won 14/20=70% of the stages.
> that is using the number from your headline. how does that work with a whole list of teams having riders on 23?


Do you honestly believe that it worked out that way solely because of some alleged tremendous advantage imparted by 23mm? Does anyone rational think so?

And if 23s are such an alleged amazing advantage, why then did so many pro teams evaluate them vs 25s, and go with 25s? 

I think you'd have to agree the sample size here is pretty small here. And if it had gone the other way, with guys on 25s winning not just a few stages but most of 'em, you'd likely be pooh-pooh'ing that as "just 1 tour", right? :wink5:

It just a different tire width, guys. Don't fear it.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Fireform said:


> So the domination of the pro peloton by 25 mm tires appears to be somewhat less than complete, Is what you're saying.


Considering that 25s were quite rare in the pros just a few years ago (aside from Paris-Roubaix and the like), I think more what I'm saying is, "Whoa, 25s are making big inroads in the pro peloton. Who'da thunk it?"

Don't fear change, FF. It'll be okay.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Zeet said:


> +1 ^ Hey, listen to Salsa! He knows things that many others don't! :thumbsup:


Salsa's also the guy who says you're on a 'touring bike' if you have a gear lower than 39x27 (i.e. _his_ own stated personal lowest gear), run tires wider than 23mm, or have long-ish chainstays, flipped-up stems, too many spacers under your stem, or anything else that remotely whiffs of 'touring bikes', IIRC. :lol:

So basically, guys in Giro climbing stages were competing and winning on 'touring' bikes (including Contador in years past), much of the current Giro and Paris-Roubaix fields are on 'touring' bikes, etc. etc. 

I like Salsa, but he draws lines in the sand in interesting and arbitrary places. 

For the Ultimate Example of the Wisdom of Salsa™, there is this very entertaining thread: :thumbsup:

*http://forums.roadbikereview.com/lounge/rbr-needs-htfu-222698.html*


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Kimber8idin said:


> I heard even 2012 TDF had only one team with 23mm tires and the rest of the teams had 25mm tires for the race.


Salsa just fainted.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> Do you honestly believe that it worked out that way solely because of some alleged tremendous advantage imparted by 23mm? Does anyone rational think so?
> 
> And if 23s are such an alleged amazing advantage, why then did so many pro teams evaluate them vs 25s, and go with 25s?
> 
> ...


I just did what you said. "Do the math". now you don't like the result and get all defensive putting words in my mouth. 
funny.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

den bakker said:


> I just did what you said. "Do the math". now you don't like the result and get all defensive putting words in my mouth.
> funny.


Just like how you put emotions on me... "getting all defensive." Uh huh. 

Well if we're going there, by the same token, it's amazing to me that a tire size just 2mm wider than what's traditional is causing some ppl such apparent angst and distress.

Again, relax fellas. Worst-case scenario, most of your favorite tires will be available in both 23 and 25 in the reasonably near future (some already are). Not sure I see a downside here.

*shrug*


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> Just like how you put emotions on me... "getting all defensive." Uh huh.


"Do you honestly believe that it worked out that way solely because of some alleged tremendous advantage imparted by 23mm? Does anyone rational think so?"
I never said anything in that direction so why would you make it look so? 

"
And if 23s are such an alleged amazing advantage, why then did so many pro teams evaluate them vs 25s, and go with 25s?"
again, I just "did the math" and it was what is was. I never said one was better or worse than the other. 

"
I think you'd have to agree the sample size here is pretty small here. And if it had gone the other way, with guys on 25s winning not just a few stages but most of 'em, you'd likely be pooh-pooh'ing that as "just 1 tour", right?"
then why bring up the sample if it's so small and ask people to "do the math" on it? when it's done then it's dismissed. 
Yes that is indeed rather defensive of you.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

den bakker said:


> "Do you honestly believe that it worked out that way solely because of some alleged tremendous advantage imparted by 23mm? Does anyone rational think so?"
> I never said anything in that direction so why would you make it look so?
> 
> "
> ...


You asked me a direct question: "_H__ow does that work with a whole list of teams having riders on 23?". 
_
I answered it.

Now you're upset over how I answered it? Or that I asked you questions in response?

Uhh... okay. 

This is rapidly becoming a pretty silly conversation. Wanna give it a rest? I'm happy to.

'cuz I sure can't see how a pissing match over this is a productive use of your time or mine.

*shrug*



.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> You asked me a direct question: "_H__ow does that work with a whole list of teams having riders on 23?".
> _
> I answered it.
> 
> ...


sorry a line fell out of original post. When quite a few teams are riding 23mm how can 90% ride 25mm?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

den bakker said:


> sorry a line fell out of original post. When quite a few teams are riding 23mm how can 90% ride 25mm?


How many are 'quite a few'? And are those teams entirely on 23, or do they have a number of riders also on 25s? Just throwin' some possibilities out there.

But if you're concerned about the absolute accuracy of Caley Fretz's "90% of the Giro field is on 25s" statement, my feeling is you should go straight to the source, and ask Caley himself:

*https://twitter.com/CaleyFretz*


For sake of argument, let's say the # ends up being a bit below 90%. I think we can agree it'd still mark a tremendous upsurge in 25mm usage among the pros.

But definitely ask Caley, and share what he says with us.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> How many are 'quite a few'? And are those teams entirely on 23, or do they have a number of riders also on 25s? Just throwin' some possibilities out there.
> 
> But if you're concerned about the absolute accuracy of Caley Fretz's "90% of the Giro field is on 25s" statement, my feeling is you should go straight to the source, and ask Caley himself:
> 
> ...


or just assume it's as usual velonews talking out of their ass (and apparently it's 95% in the subtitles, and apparently 25mm tyres have lower rolling resistance (only true if run with the same pressure as 23mm tyres, which does not make much sense if one wants better comfort)). That's normally a good assumption. Not that it matters you are the one giving us the number out there not me. 
so without the numbers, what are we left with? yes 25mm on pro tour teams. we knew that. 
riders seems to be doing fine on both. 
well we knew that. 
so what are we left with here besides old news?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

den bakker said:


> or just assume it's as usual velonews* talking out of their ass*


Well, that's certainly an aggressive statement. Given your obvious strong feelings on the matter, what could it hurt you to go ask Mr. Fretz, since you're this emotionally invested in confirming the precise figure? 

Again, let us know what he says. 

In any case, the main point is pretty clear... 25mm usage in the pro peloton is on quite an upswing. I haven't heard anyone serious maintain that isn't the case. Wider rims + wider tires = the new trend.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

SystemShock said:


> Salsa's also the guy who says you're on a 'touring bike' if you have a gear lower than 39x27 (i.e. _his_ own stated personal lowest gear), run tires wider than 23mm, or have long-ish chainstays, flipped-up stems, too many spacers under your stem, or anything else that remotely whiffs of 'touring bikes', IIRC. :lol:
> 
> So basically, guys in Giro climbing stages were competing and winning on 'touring' bikes (including Contador in years past), much of the current Giro and Paris-Roubaix fields are on 'touring' bikes, etc. etc.
> 
> I like Salsa, but he draws lines in the sand in interesting and arbitrary places.


Nibali won the uphill time trial on a 53/42 11-26, and look at those skinny tyres !

http://www.cyclingfans.com/node/8057


Don't sweat it SystemShock, that PR news was only to help Shimano and Zipp to sell us their new and improved wide rims.

Wasn't him the same who did the article about all the bad things about carbon clinchers and then came with the PR about the new Mavic Cosmics?

BTW I have also my wide rims, they are called Mavic A319 and I mount 32c Vittoria Randonneurs on them


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Yes Salsa, I'm sure Velo News was _lying_. Yep, that's the ticket! :idea: :frown2:

Why not ask Mr. Fretz yourself?

And after what I showed you about Giro moutain-stage setups a season or two back, you really want to get into gearing again, Mr. 'Anything Less Than a 39x27 Is The Devil™'? :smilewinkgrin:

Hokay Salsa, don't say I didn't warn ya. Try not to faint (click pics 4 bigger pic):


.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

serious question SystemShock 

Are you Caley Fretz ? rrr:

Do you realize that "1 or 2 years ago" was the moment where Shimano/SRAM/Campagnolo put stock 52/36 cranks on the market right ? some help from the pros to sell it was well, desirable, right ?

Recently they asked Eddy about the Compact, if he wished he had it back then.

His answer was, "all that I had and needed was a 52/42, so no, back then I didn't need it, now that I am old yes."


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> serious question SystemShock
> 
> Are you Caley Fretz ? rrr:


I am not. 

And just the fact that you asked that question makes me worry about you, Salsa. 





Salsa said:


> _Do you realize that "1 or 2 years ago" was the moment where Shimano/SRAM/Campagnolo put stock 52/36 cranks on the market right ? some help from the pros to sell it was well, desirable, right ?_



I don't think you get to have it both ways, Salsa.

Die-hard traditionalists like yourself insist on things like standard doubles and 23c tires in large part because "that's what racers use."

But now you're saying that it's all about sponsorship/$$$? If so, then 'what racers use' is invalid, and 53/39 and 23c are no better a standard than anything else. 

I personally think what racers use is not and has never been The Hand of God™. But they do influence/carry weight in the marketing, that's for sure.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

SalsaLove said:


> Recently they asked Eddy about the Compact, if he wished he had it back then.
> 
> His answer was, "all that I had and needed was a 52/42, so no, back then I didn't need it, now that I am old yes."


Far as Eddy goes, well, Eddy didn't use an 11t or 12t cog either. 

You willing to give up yours, Salsa, based on what Eddy used?


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

You know, you are missunderstanding the thing again.

There is nothing wrong with the equipement side of things, a compact, triple, wide rims or tyres are all good and dandy, depending on the rider, kind of ride of application, all are good. 

I have nothing against, myself I have a triple 50/39/28 with a 13-29 and wide rims 32c tyres on my touring bike. and they are great.

What deserves criticism is the attitude I see about road "racing" bikes.

Let's take an example, of a new rider, let's call him Alfred, he comes to the sport attracted by the races, the incredible 7 yellow jerseys feat or whatever.

So he buys an expensive superlight racing bike, a high $$$ Madone or Pinarello, that comes with a standard crank, small cassette, slender saddle and a generous drop.

He soon realizes this thing is harder than what he thought, when things go uphill he gets droped like a bad habit, and his back and ass hurts after 10 Kms on it.

He would benefit from good advice, like, get propper fit, learn to seat right on a level saddle and then train progresively your back flexibility so you curve your back and ride the drops, put some miles on to develop endurance on lungs and seat, train the strenght progresively until you develop the core and leg muscles and cardiovascular capacity to be able to climb etc.etc.


No, he just want it now, instant gratification, so he logs in RBR looking for advice and what he gets ?

the Compact/Wide Tyres/Flipped Up Stems/Selle SMP Lobbyists that tell him to lower down the specs of his überbike to he can still ride it slowly while having the illusion he is doing it still like the pros 

you get it now ?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> You know, you are missunderstanding the thing again.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with the equipement side of things, a compact, triple, wide rims or tyres are all good and dandy, depending on the rider, kind of ride of application, all are good.
> 
> ...


Salsa, I understand your POV very well. You've only been beating me over the head with it for, what, the past three years, at least? 

But the biking world evolves. You need to get *that*. 

Even your example of Alfred the Fred buying a new Madone isn't really accurate anymore. Because new Madones now often come with (oh noes!) compact cranks. Srsly, look it up. $5000 Madones with compact.

And I'll bet that, going forward, a number of 'em will start coming with 25mm tires too. Maybe not this August, but next? Probably. And if not them, some other big manufacturer(s) will start doing it.

And y'know, there's nothing about either compacts or wide tires that would keep someone from getting proper bike fit, learning that improving your flexibility and strengthening your core is a good thing, learning proper cadence, becoming an aggressive descender, etc. etc. 

You are as hardcore as you wanna be, and no 34t inner ring or 25c tire is going to change that.

Even flipped-up stems and 'too many spacers' (whatever that means) don't necessarily preclude that. Some ppl are just built in a way that they're not going to have tremendous saddle-to-bar drop. Older riders aren't as flexible. Some ppl have shorter arms. Should those folks arbitrarily put themselves into a position that doesn't work for them to satisfy someone else's idea of 'whats right'? :skep:

Even the pros are using compact, semi-compact, and 25c tires sometimes now. 'Right tool for the right job'. Ppl should just get what works for them, and hang what anyone else thinks. If that's 53/39 and 23c for a particular person, great. But if not, why use it?

Y'know Salsa, you can kill yourself on a climb running compact too. You can do hill repeat intervals. You can do threshold training. Gears are just gears, it's not about them, it's about what YOU do WITH them. 

The funny thing is, you tell others to HTFU, but I'm sure all the fixie riders are looking at you going, "He has a 39x27 low gear? He has more than one gear? What a wuss. He really should HTFU."

Would they be accurate in that criticism? No, because they don't know how hard you ride or how you use your equipment. They shouldn't judge or assume, they're not in a position to.

You should extend that same courtesy to others.

Now add to that, there are some ppl who don't WANT to 'be all they can be'. They don't WANT to emulate the pros. They just want to ride and have fun. Is their kind of riding any less valid than yours or mine?

To me, anyone who gets on a bike and loves it, anyone who loves to ride, is a bike rider. And I'm not going to judge them, or tell them that "they're doing it wrong", unless they make it clear they want to change the way they ride/have certain goals. 

YOU had certain goals (as you've told me) and they revolved around a certain way of riding (as you've told me). But the mistake you keep making is that you think everyone is you.


.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> Yup... so be an individual and dump your carbon fiber frame. :wink5:


I did.


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

So what I am hearing is that we need a lot more info on the goals and aspirations of OPs before we should delve into which bike, stem, wheel, etc an OP should try out. I think that makes tons of sense even if it almost never happens.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

I'm not a pro. I have been riding road bikes since about 1984 or so. In all those years the only thing that has ever really helped me ride better and faster has been nutrition and better training. Carbon fiber frames, wheels, 11 speeds, electric shifting, 25mm tires, it's all fine and dandy. Ride whatever you like and can afford, but the only way to make yourself faster is to spend more time spelunking in your personal pain cave than plopping down cash on carbon wheels.
I ride 25mm tires btw, figured as soon as I started doing it the pros would soon follow suit. Dang


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Salsa_Lover said:


> Nibali won the uphill time trial on a 53/42 11-26, and look at those skinny tyres !
> 
> 2013 Giro d'Italia: Stage 18: Nibali's bike set up for the mountain time trial | www.cyclingfans.com
> 
> ...


So, what you're trying to say is that you'll now be upgrading that wimpy 39x27 to Nibali's gear ratio?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

I like apple pie





j/k..

In typical RBR fashion, a thread has turned into a pissing (but fun) match with sideshows comedy and off-topics. lol

For a decade, I was running 46mm tires on my Chinese commuter beat. Looks like the "pros" are finally catching on.

we need to realize that the number 1 reason manufacturers push these new products is to sell them. Take Zipp and Shimano. They have to push for the wider rims. If they push rims with the same widths (20-22mm) as existing rims,... people aint gonna upgrade! But make the rim 23mm, uuuuu..aaahhhh... now it's must-haves. Blah!

The fact is, the pros who win on 23mm tires will also be the same pros winning on 25mm tires. And vice versa, the winners on 25mm tires will also win on 23mm. They win not because of the tires, but because of their athletic ability and doping (oops, sorry my bad I shouldn't touch "doping" in here hehe). But they are pros and they can win on anything. I wouldn't go judging the ability of equipment ridden by pros. But sadly in life, we like to mimic the pros, we aspire to perform like them... and the marketers know this. The marketers have us by the balls.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

aclinjury said:


> The fact is, the pros who win on 23mm tires will also be the same pros winning on 25mm tires. And vice versa, the winners on 25mm tires will also win on 23mm. They win not because of the tires, but because of their athletic ability and doping (oops, sorry my bad I shouldn't touch "doping" in here hehe). But they are pros and they can win on anything. I wouldn't go judging the ability of equipment ridden by pros. But sadly in life, we like to mimic the pros, we aspire to perform like them... and the marketers know this. The marketers have us by the balls.


Say it ain't so!


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

Which manufacturers are pushing wider rims? I really do not see any of them actively pushing them, although they do have them available.


----------



## skitorski (Dec 4, 2012)

Marc said:


> You'll not find roads like the grand tours get on any public road/highway in the USA. Our roads are built as dirt cheap as possible and wear out fast. Even our interstates.


Not true my friend. Our roads get traffic like nothing in Europe. And most of our wear is caused by commercial trucks. You know, the 80,000 pound ones. And that's not counting the illegal overweight loads. The interstate is not built cheap at all. Our trusted leaders let it rot. Bad roads doesn't mean they were built bad or with inexpensive materials. The original US Route 40 is 4 blocks from my residence. I ride it every time I leave for the hills. The original paving panels, Portland cement concrete, are still there in perfect shape, and it is stamped 1929 in several places. Using Italy for example, or France, except for the Alps, they don't have freezing ground and frost heave like the Midwest and northern USA.

Sorry, Caltrans public servant blowing off steam.  You should see how much money is looted by the California legislature from the Highway fund here by the politicians. It's BILLIONS of dollars a year in this state alone.

Edit: had a flat and cut my ride short today ^&%$


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

Europe does build thicker highways that last longer than here in the USA. Our roads are not sub standard but they are not as good as W Europe. I am not sure if smaller roads are the same.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Maximus_XXIV said:


> Which manufacturers are pushing wider rims? I really do not see any of them actively pushing them, although they do have them available.











And ENVE, Zipp, HED and others too...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

spade2you said:


> So, what you're trying to say is that you'll now be upgrading that wimpy 39x27 to Nibali's gear ratio?


Bam_!! :smilewinkgrin:

_


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

nOOky said:


> I ride 25mm tires btw, figured as soon as I started doing it the pros would soon follow. suit. Dang


Rep'd.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Quick...let me run out and get 11 Speed, disk brakes, wide tires and one of those aero helmets. 

I don't want to get left behind on my next club ride.


----------



## D&MsDad (Jul 17, 2007)

DrSmile said:


> I have to say that the smaller bike friendly roads around here (NJ) have been repaved significantly in the last 4 or 5 years. It makes for noticeably more pleasant riding on my "old school" 23s. :wink:


I've noticed. 5 or more years ago, I'd be able to tell when I went from NY to NJ on a ride because the road surface would deteriorate significantly. Now, it is the other way around.........

Back then, we had a Rep. governor, and you had a Dem. Now, it is the other way around..........

(For the "things that make you go 'hmmmm'" file.)





--------------------


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

RkFast said:


> Quick...let me run out and get 11 Speed, disk brakes, wide tires and one of those aero helmets.
> 
> I don't want to get left behind on my next club ride.


LOL. That is how marketing works, yes.

But if you think about it... of all the things you mentioned, which one actually is of no real added cost to you, the rider?

A: The tires. Because most ppl would just wait 'til their 23s wore out to try 25s. 
You have to get a new tire or tires anyway, and they cost the same. 

The wide _wheels_, of course, are a diff'rent story (but are optional).

Everything else you mentioned is, yep, a significant expense.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Maximus_XXIV said:


> So what I am hearing is that we need a lot more info on the goals and aspirations of OPs before we should delve into which bike, stem, wheel, etc an OP should try out.
> 
> I think that makes tons of sense even if it almost never happens.


+1. It's just good common sense, agreed.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

I hear next year 26c tyres will be the new groundbreaking standard


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> I hear next year 26c tyres will be the new groundbreaking standard


But... but... I was hoping to introduce 25.5c first_! _:lol:

Joking aside, you might be on to something. If 25c does become the 'new standard' or co-standard, someone in the industry might eventually see dollar-signs and try to push even WIDER rims, and their corresponding wider matching tires (27-28c?). 

Don't think it'll work though, because 25c has enough air volume at the right pressure(s) for most riders. You'd have to be a pretty big boy to truly *need* 28c, though even some who don't need it like having the extra comfort and being able to run even lower pressures.

Heck, there's ppl who love running 650B wheels on road with 38-42c tires. 
Try not to faint at the thought, Salsa.


----------



## ToffieBoi (May 1, 2011)

What you guys think about 24C tires? 
I'm riding on them an quite happy. Actually happier than my 23C tubeless tires.


----------



## MTBDad (Jan 27, 2003)

I am finding my new Open Corsa EVO 25's more comfortable than the 23's I ran last year. Could be my imagination, but more likely just a slightly wider tire that I'm running at a slightly lower pressure. Enjoy the ride!!


----------



## clydeone (Oct 25, 2011)

SystemShock said:


> But... but... I was hoping to introduce 25.5c first_! _:lol:
> 
> Joking aside, you might be on to something. If 25c does become the 'new standard' or co-standard, someone in the industry might eventually see dollar-signs and try to push even WIDER rims, and their corresponding wider matching tires (27-28c?).


Hey get off my 28c cloud I was here first 



SystemShock said:


> Don't think it'll work though, because 25c has enough air volume at the right pressure(s) for most riders. You'd have to be a pretty big boy to truly *need* 28c, though even some who don't need it like having the extra comfort and being able to run even lower pressures.


"How big of a boy are you"

Being 6' 6" and near permaclyde (the lowest I've been is 230 since High School) I have never ran anything smaller then a 25 since getting back into biking in 2005. My first road bike was a trek 1500 and it had 25s on it did some research when it became time to replace tires and I decided to stick with the 25s. Last 2 years I have been running 28c tires (But then I got rid of the road bike in 2011 and now just ride my cross bike on the road :O)

I have also run 32s and 35s in fast road rides as well... so again the Engine is far greater determination of speed then any equipment.


----------



## phoehn9111 (May 11, 2005)

All this is wonderful, quite wonderful, and I would be happy to try 25c but they
will not fit past my Force brake calipers. And that is the end of my option.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

clydeone said:


> Hey get off my 28c cloud I was here first


Dammit. 




> _"How big of a boy are you"
> 
> Being 6' 6" and near permaclyde (the lowest I've been is 230 since High School) I have never ran anything smaller then a 25 since getting back into biking in 2005.
> 
> ...


Well said. Yep, there are some riders who definitely need 28c (or perhaps even larger) and they should not feel the least bit bad or peer-pressured against getting what they need. :thumbsup:

I mean what, is the poseur squad paying for your tires? Nope. So why would they have any say in what you buy?

And srsly, you "23c is the ONLY tire size to get" ppl out there... do you *really* want to get between a really big guy and the tires he needs/wants?


----------



## L_Johnny (Jul 15, 2006)

I only have a pair of tubies on one bike. I run regular clinchers on the rest. I find that 25 tubies are more like 23 regular clinchers... I don't know if this observation has been touched upon on this discussion, yet.


----------



## Barteos (Apr 8, 2008)

There's no research proving that 23mm or even 25mm tyres are, as many people claim, "the best compromise" for an average amateur cyclist. 
The only reason why 23mm tyres dominate the consumer market is very effective marketing targeting pro-wannabies. 
It's irrational to assume that the tyre size optimal (?) for winning pro races will offer the same benefits to a typical amateur cycling on worse surfaces at much lower speeds. 

The research on rolling resistance is pretty conclusive. 
Wider tyres roll faster (*not just at the same pressure*). The only aspect which is debatable is at which point the increased aero drag and extra weight will negate the benefits of lower rolling resistance. For a regular guy not being paid for cycling that point is certainly closer to 30mm than to 20mm.




SystemShock said:


> ...because 25c has enough air volume at the right pressure(s) for most riders. You'd have to be a pretty big boy to truly *need* 28c...


What is or isn't enough volume depends on the individual and their riding conditions and preferences. Everything is relative and depends on the scale of reference used. For a traditional die hard roadie 28mm is fat while for a someone on 42mm 650B tyres 28mm is skinny.
Without testing the extremes you won't have any idea what wide, narrow or comfortable really is.


I think anyone dismissing wider (than 23-25mm) tyres as slower should have a proper go on some wide fast lightweight tyres like Grand Bois 700x32mm or 42mmx650B and time their runs. You could be very surprised and confused... especially by discrepancy between perceived and actual speed. 
You could even go to the extreme and purely as an experiment get some high end 120TPI XC tyres like Racing Ralph or Furious Fred, remove the tread with side cutters and use them on the road.
Err... no I don't believe that road tyres should be 2" wide but commuting/training on MTB tyres at 20,30PSI at speeds typical for a regular road bike is an eye-opening experience and shows how far you can push the tyre width before increased air resistance and extra weight becomes a problem. 

Fast tyres don't end on 23mm or 25mm just because the marketers and jurnos say so or because narrow tyres "feel" faster.


----------



## flatsix911 (Jun 28, 2009)

Just ordered a pair of 25mm Michelin Pro 4 tires :thumbsup:


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

L_Johnny said:


> I only have a pair of tubies on one bike. I run regular clinchers on the rest. I find that 25 tubies are more like 23 regular clinchers... I don't know if this observation has been touched upon on this discussion, yet.


Thank you! And no... I'm pretty sure you are the first to state the obvious. 

*Pros ride tubulars. * Tubular tires do not get bigger on a wide rim... but clincher tires *do* get bigger. Most 23s are 25mm wide when put on a 23mm rim. 

*So if pros really are running 25mm tires, and you'd like to emulate them with your clinchers, then you'd be running 23s. 
*


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

rruff said:


> Thank you! And no... I'm pretty sure you are the first to state the obvious.
> 
> Pros ride tubulars. Tubular tires do not get bigger on a wide rim... but clincher tires *do* get bigger. Most 23s are 25mm wide when put on a 23mm rim.
> 
> So if pros really are running 25mm tires, and you'd like to emulate them with your clinchers, then you'd be running 23s.



Shimano doesn't seem to think so. They tell the teams running Shimano wide rims to run nothing smaller than a 25:


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Are they riding clinchers?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

rruff said:


> Are they riding clinchers?


Many pros train on clinchers. But come race time, yes, most are on tubies.

Still, it's fun when they're not. Shakes up the traditionalism  :

Specialized Introduces New Clincher TT Tire In Tour De France Prologue | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

And that isn't a 25mm clincher...

You've been repeatedly using the claim that pros are riding 25mm tubulars on wide rims... and that to emulate them we should be riding 25+mm clinchers. 

But on a wide rim, a 25mm tubular is like a 23mm clincher... not a 25. So "what the pros are riding" gives you no support at all.


----------



## Kristatos (Jan 10, 2008)

If the manufacturers wanted to sell more narrow carbon wheels all of a sudden I'm sure VN/Caley would write up an article about how rad the 23mm "standard" is that has served the peloton so well over the years blah blah blah.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

rruff said:


> And that isn't a 25mm clincher...


It's not a 23 either... 24mm, in fact.



> You've been repeatedly using the claim that pros are riding 25mm tubulars on wide rims...


Didn't personally 'claim' anything... just posted a vid of the Velo News tech editor, who was in a position to see what the 2013 Giro field was using. He stated that 90% of the field was on 25s. 



> and that to emulate them we should be riding 25+mm clinchers.
> 
> But on a wide rim, a 25mm tubular is like a 23mm clincher... not a 25. So "what the pros are riding" gives you no support at all.


Do all or most 23s measure @25mm on all or most wide rims? I think that's hard to say, considering that 1) 'wide rims' vary in width themselves, from say 23mm on up to at least 27mm, and 2) a lot of '23mm' tires don't even measure in at 23mm on traditional narrow rims.

To expand on point #2 a bit...

Tire makers in general are pretty infamous for their tires NOT measuring what they say they do on the box. The reason, as it often is, comes down to $$$.

Say you make a 23c tire. It's a good tire, and you're proud of it, it has a lot to offer. But a lot of people will just go out and buy the LIGHTEST 23c tire they can, and hang all other considerations. So, what's a tire maker to do?

You can do things like using a thinner/less tread, lighter casings, etc., but that only goes so far before ppl start complaining about durability and wear issues, and way too many flats. 
So why not just make a good 22 or 21mm tire, and *label* it as '23mm'? :idea:

You'll have one of the lightest '23mm' tires in its class, that's for sure. And how many ppl actually take the time and trouble to measure their mounted tires? Few.

This sort of practice used to be the norm, pretty much. In recent years things have gotten a bit better, with some tires actually running true to size, and a few even running larger (such as Michelin Pro Races in 700x25c). 

But there's still plenty of tires that measure LESS than what they list as. For example, the 23c Schwalbes in this chart actually measured in at 21.9mm. They also had higher rolling resistance than wider tires in the same line:

https://velonews.competitor.com/files/2012/03/RR-data-Schwalbe.jpg

Or how about this from WeightWeenies- a guy actually measured his tires, mounted. Turned out his '23c' Michelin tire was actually 22mm, mounted on a narrow rim, and it was 23.5mm when he mounted it on a wide rim. 

So, 23s don't automatically become 25s 'cuz you put 'em on a wide rim (in part because they may not be '23s' to begin with):










And it's not even just 23s, or just tires from one or two makers. For instance:

Continental 700X28 actual width? 


So, to sum up... I definitely see what you're saying, but you may be overgeneralizing a bit (well okay, you are). I think you do have a valid point in some cases, though.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Barteos;4369059
The research on rolling resistance is pretty conclusive.
Wider tyres roll faster ([B said:


> not just at the same pressure[/B]). The only aspect which is debatable is at which point the increased aero drag and extra weight will negate the benefits of lower rolling resistance. For a regular guy not being paid for cycling that point is certainly closer to 30mm than to 20mm.


I strongly disagree with this premise. To wit:










Not exactly evidence that your claim is true.

There are also many items rolling resistance tests do not take into account. Any turns will undoubtedly scrub more speed on a wider tire. When you consider that you're likely to be turning a significant amount of the time when it's important (exit out of turns) because you're applying maximum power, the whole thing becomes much more nebulous.


----------



## Barteos (Apr 8, 2008)

DrSmile said:


> I strongly disagree with this premise. To wit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is this really the only piece of research you managed to find?
Many more tests were carried out after... 1999? and all pretty conclusive. That even includes the leading bicycle tyre manufacturers. 

Steel drums (used in this test) are very handy for comparing rolling resistance (hysteresis only) of different tyre models but won't tell you how the same tyres in different widths will perform on real roads.
You need roll-down tests for that.
Bicycle Quarterly carried out pretty extensive tests doing just that (and many other interesting things).
They've analysed performance of tyres in different widths on smooth and typical surfaces, tested the effect of pressure on rolling resistance (very small...), compared clinchers and tubs and even spent some time in a wind tunnel... 
Most of their work is a paid content but it's well spent money.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

DrSmile said:


> I strongly disagree with this premise. To wit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Then again... (click on chart below for full-size pic):

Also, thank you for reminding me that Avocet still makes tires. I had a pair 'back in the day', they were my first 'good' tires. :thumbsup:


.
View attachment 281715


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Oh, and what do the premiere tire-testers in the industry have to say? Hmm... :

_*Wider tires roll faster than narrower ones:* Riders have argued for years that narrower tires – especially on the road – roll faster and are more efficient than wider ones when in fact, the opposite is true. 

According to Wheel Energy, the key to reducing rolling resistance is minimizing the energy lost to casing deformation, not minimizing how much tread is in contact with the ground. All other factors being equal, wider casings exhibit less 'bulge' as a percentage of their cross-section and also have a shorter section of deflected sidewall.

How big a difference are we talking about here? For an equivalent make and model of tire, Wheel Energy claims the 25mm-wide size will have five percent lower rolling resistance on average – the supposed average limit of human detection – than the more common 23mm one. 

However, 23mm and narrower tires do still have the advantage when it comes to aerodynamics, and to a lesser extent weight. If you're selecting a tire for drag strip time trials, narrow is the way to go, but if you want a better handling tire for road racing and crits, go wider – particularly for rough road surfaces.


_Interesting article, and they talk about a lot more than just tire width:
_
_*Bicycle Tires - Puncturing The Myths - BikeRadar*


----------



## Barteos (Apr 8, 2008)

Just to add:

Advantages of wider tyres are typically small on perfectly smooth surfaces but ability to run them at lower pressure without the risk of pinch flats is a major advantage on more or less imperfect road surfaces and will result in reduced overall rolling resistance.

Overall rolling resistance isn't just about tyre deformation but also about vibrations transmitted through the body, extra energy required for climbing tiny imperfections of the road, potholes, cracks etc.


----------



## clay-walk (Feb 8, 2013)

I've been running 25's at 85 psi for about 2 years in Atlanta and love them. the roads are terrible which was a large influence of my decision to switch from 23's


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Barteos said:


> Just to add:
> 
> Advantages of wider tyres are typically small on perfectly smooth surfaces but ability to run them at lower pressure without the risk of pinch flats is a major advantage on more or less imperfect road surfaces and will result in reduced overall rolling resistance.
> 
> Overall rolling resistance isn't just about tyre deformation but also about vibrations transmitted through the body, extra energy required for climbing tiny imperfections of the road, potholes, cracks etc.


+1. Another disadvantage of going the 'very skinny tire pumped up insanely hard' route is that on bad roads, you'll bounce on the ruts and small potholes (i.e. go vertical) instead of having the tire conform more and sort of 'flow' over the road's imperfections, as a wider tire run at lower pressures can. 'Bouncing'/going airborne isn't exactly an aid to going fast.

So it's kind of funny every once in awhile to see the 'uber-high-pressure' guys meet reality on crap roads. I still know one or two ppl who are like, "Ermahgerd, isn't 130psi just faster ALWAYS?" :lol: 

If all the world were a velodrome, my friend...


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> Then again... (click on chart below for full-size pic):
> 
> Also, thank you for reminding me that Avocet still makes tires. I had a pair 'back in the day', they were my first 'good' tires. :thumbsup:
> 
> ...


Argh...Nobody runs 25s (and especially not 28s) at 8bar in the real world. Why do they never show these tests at correct, real-world pressures for each size?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

nhluhr said:


> Argh...Nobody *smart* runs 25s (and especially not 28s) at 8bar in the real world. Why do they never show these tests at correct, real-world pressures for each size?
> 
> http://fcdn.roadbikereview.com/atta...iro-90%-field-25mm-tires-rr-data-schwalbe.jpg


^ Fixed. :thumbsup:

And you're right, most ppl on most roads probably shouldn't run 25s, 28s, and larger tires @8bar (~115psi). 

But those Schwalbes (in 25c and 28c) are actually rated to run that high, and there's *always* somebody who'll run ANY tire at max pressure no matter what, because they think "that's fastest." Even though, on many roads, it won't be. Derp. :skep:

Two interesting things about the chart, IMO...

1) Rolling resistance kept dropping with increasing tire size, all the way through to 32c(!). 25c had lower rolling resistance than 23c, 28c was lower still, and 32c was lowest of all.

2) EVEN BEING RUN AT LOWER PRESSURE (6.5 bar), the 32c tire STILL had lower rolling resistance than ALL of the narrower tires, *even though* those tires were being run at higher pressure (8 bar).

This is surprising even to me, I thought it would've been more like a tie, given the 20psi differential.

I guess one caveat would be that the tires involved are not as wide as advertised. As noted on the chart, the '23c' was actually more like a 22, the '25c' was really a 24, the '28c' was a 26, and the '32c' was a 29.

Still, a 29mm tire @6.5bar (95psi) having lower rolling resistance than a 22mm @8bar (115psi)?? That definitely messes with some pre-conceived notions, my own included.

Of course, the 22mm should still be faster overall than the 29mm, due to aerodynamics (well, depending on the rim and rim width each tire is paired with), and the 22's obviously lower weight. 

But perhaps the overall margin is less than we all like to think. And that's with a 29mm tire(!), much less a 25. 

Add to that the wider tires' better comfort and grip, and you've got some trade-offs to ponder. 







.


----------



## clydeone (Oct 25, 2011)

SystemShock said:


> ^ Fixed. :thumbsup:
> 
> And you're right, most ppl on most roads probably shouldn't run 25s, 28s, and larger tires @8bar (~115psi).
> 
> ...


I ran my 28c duranos last night at 80 front and 90 rear and had no troubles at all in a fast group ride running 25-30 mph on the downwind legs. I have run them lower on mixed surface rides and have not had a problem with pinch flats. and I am currently 245 lbs. We wound up on some very rough roads which was an advantage for me since I would ride the gravel shoulder while the rest were trying to stay on the marginally paved sections of the road. This scenario is one of the reasons I have been exploring wider tires. I have seen a steady deterioration of the roads in my area and knew this would be an issue. The only down side I can see to wider tires is additional aero drag and I believe that is a marginal difference.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

I know a bunch of you are convinced, but may I offer these two counterarguments:

1) Trains are tremendously heavy. They roll on extremely thin contact patches and wheels. The wheels are steel, about as "inflated" as you can get. Train wheels have the lowest rolling resistance out of any wheels utilized period.
2) VW engineers just announced European production of the XL1 which gets over 200mpg. There was a LOT of empirical testing done over 15 years development. The car rolls on 115 width (4.5 inch) front and 145 (5.7 inch) rear tires inflated to 44psi. 

Given these two examples clearly at the extreme ends of the scale, I think it extremely likely that the bicycle tire claims are somewhat specious. When you look at the claims they are often combined, such as "lower rolling resistance at lower pressures than 23c tires" which is a rather interesting claim because it means different things depending how you read it. There are many other things that affect rolling resistance besides tire width of course, so there are ways to get a larger tire to roll better, but simply as a matter of size it is difficult to refute that a smaller contact patch will win. There are several studies that show that increasing pressure can improve the rolling resistance of a tire by up to 40%, and that this improvement is greater with narrower tires. This begins to explain the "lower rolling resistance at lower pressure" claims.

Of course the reason to ride larger tires is that you can be more comfortable on them. This is an excellent legitimate reason to ride these tires.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

DrSmile said:


> 1) Trains are tremendously heavy. They roll on extremely thin contact patches and wheels. The wheels are steel, about as "inflated" as you can get. Train wheels have the lowest rolling resistance out of any wheels utilized period.


They are also on extremely smooth roads. Without the smooth rail under under those wheels things'll start to go sideways real fast. A rail car will bounce right off the rail under the wrong conditions.

You're comparing apples and oranges. If you want to compare a rail car to a bicycle the closest comparison would be to a track bike on a velodrome, where both are on "groomed tracks", so to speak.

There's a reason that bicycles went from wood wheels with steel tires to solid rubber tires to pneumatic tires at the earliest opportunities.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

velodog said:


> They are also on extremely smooth roads. Without the smooth rail under under those wheels things'll start to go sideways real fast. A rail car will bounce right off the rail under the wrong conditions.
> 
> You're comparing apples and oranges. If you want to compare a rail car to a bicycle the closest comparison would be to a track bike on a velodrome, where both are on "groomed tracks", so to speak.
> 
> There's a reason that bicycles went from wood wheels with steel tires to solid rubber tires to pneumatic tires at the earliest opportunities.


The reason was NOT that they rolled slower. That's the whole point!


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

DrSmile said:


> The reason was NOT that they rolled slower. That's the whole point!


They roll fast because the steel wheels are made to roll on steel rail.

Mount steel wheels on your road bike, and take it for a ride, and they're not so fast. That's the whole point!


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

And I thought comparing bike tires to airplane tires was bad... Are we seriously comparing steel railroad trucks to pneumatic bike tires???? 

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

You guys seriously can't be that obtuse. The fundamental physics behind the principle are demonstrated by the railroad wheels. The practical application for pneumatic tires are illustrated in the VW car. If you read any rolling resistance research these principles are invariably confirmed over and over again. Perhaps a review of Robert B. Laughlin's essays on how to lie in commercial research would be in order...


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Marc said:


> And I thought comparing bike tires to airplane tires was bad... Are we seriously comparing steel railroad trucks to pneumatic bike tires????
> 
> :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:


Only DrSmile is making that comparison.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

AlanE said:


> It says they get paid by their sponsors to help promote their latest products.


Tires are disposable. It's not like a significant number of people are going to dump their tires until it's time to replace anyway. I see no marketing ploy here.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Tires are disposable. It's not like a significant number of people are going to dump their tires until it's time to replace anyway. I see no marketing ploy here.


The marketing ploy is not about the tyres.

It's about you dump your perfectly fine current racing wheels and buy the new and improved wide rimmed carbon clinchers and tubulars wheels.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Salsa_Lover said:


> The marketing ploy is not about the tyres.
> 
> It's about you dumping your perfectly fine current racing wheels and buy the new and improved wide rimmed carbon clinchers and tubulars wheels.


As with most everything else, the marketing/advertising can only do so much, and _the market _itself will be what ultimately decides what sticks around.

If wider tires and wheels offer enough of a benefit to enough ppl, they'll thrive and become mainstream (I'd say they're halfway there already). If not, they'll die out, or rather, go back to being niche.

In the meanwhile, no one can really_ force you_ to sell your old narrow wheelsets and tires, right? Nor is everyone suddenly going stop making them.

But the market, while not perfect, usually shakes things out. 

Remember the early '90s, and how the tire-makers and their marketers were pushing ultra-narrow tires, like 20c, 19c, even 18c on us? Even a lot of new midrange and entry-level bikes started to have tires like that, as OEM spec. All the marketing kept saying this was 'better'.

But then, guess what? The ride quality sucked. Performance on bad roads sucked. And TONS and TONS of ppl got pinch flats all over the place. I myself remember flatting on the majority of my rides. WTF?! :mad5:

The 'super skinny' push wound up not working out and being reversed, because it just didn't function well in the real world for a lot of ppl/wasn't practical. Most everyone wound up going back to 23c, while shaking their heads and going, "700x18C? What was I _thinking_??". :skep:

So don't fear, Salsa, my uber-traditional friend. If wider doesn't offer enough real-world benefit to enough ppl, it'll ultimately fail. 

But, if it *does* offer a good level of benefit to a sufficiently broad base of riders, it'll be popular for a long time to come. As it would deserve to be. 

YMMV, but I wouldn't bet against it.







.


----------

