# Is Michelin Pro 3 Race really that bad and are there any good reviews?



## fah35 (Sep 17, 2004)

I have been reading the past posts in the forum and seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race tire is not a very good tire and seems to flat a lot. Some people say any tire can flat but in the forum and the reviews this tire seems to get a lot of bad reviews and complaints. Other tires get some bad reviews here and there but it seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race gets a significant amount more. Is this beacuse a lot of people are buying this tire and the complaints are a small number or is this just a real bad tire? Is anyone having good results with this tire?


----------



## ljfran2383 (Aug 27, 2009)

I have a friend who loves em...haven't heard from anyone else though.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

I like mine a lot. Comfortable. Grippy. And notwithstanding what I say in the next paragraph, reasonably rugged. I'm on my second pair. 

I must say, though, (and a couple posters pounded me for saying this in a previous thread), that when my first pair started showing obvious wear they did become flat-prone. The rubber aged fairly quickly. It started to dry and crack. The tires also have a distressing tendency to pick up road tar, gum and such.


----------



## lot8con8 (May 17, 2006)

I suffered the flat experience with them. I won't buy them again. It wasn't a good experience.


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

I liked the tire but got some flats. I did pick some up super cheap pro3's so will use them again when my Contis wear out...then I will go back to Contis again.


----------



## BTSyndrome (Jul 21, 2008)

I'm in the Pro3's dislike club also. They were very good at getting cuts in the side wall. I would glue the cuts and more would appear. The roads I ride are very good roads too, no chip seal or lots of loose gravel. 
But they lasted only 750 miles. During a group ride I hear the person in front of me yell, "Oh sh%t Hole" as he went air born. I was behind him and hit the same pot hole. 
Pinch flat. Pinched the tube and the Tire. Nice big hole right through the tire. So since it was time for a new tire I got Conti 4000S new for both ends of the bike. 
I have nothing but praise for them. 750 miles later there is no side wall cuts at all. I also feel they have more grip especially going into corners then the Pro3's. Top speed so far 52.2 mph with lots of grip.
Love my Conti's!:thumbsup:


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Seems like a lot of ppl who've had both the Pro Race 2 and Pro Race 3 actually prefer the Pro Race 2, and wish they were still available. 

A step backward by Michelin? 
.


----------



## dtrancex (Jun 17, 2009)

*No problems*

We live in Bend Or. and do a lot of riding. We have a lot of chip seal here, and if you run appropriate pressure there are no problems. I have about 1600 miles, a few flats but they're no worse than any other. I would always like the grippy, soft ride-over a harsh slick ride for a couple less flats. They are fast and sure


----------



## teddysaur (Dec 30, 2004)

I'm on my 2nd tire of PR3 on my rear and having good luck with them.

This is probably the best tires I tried so far. Very comfortable and grip really well but wear pretty fast. I rode mainly mountain routes which cause the faster wear.

Previous Exp: PR1, GP4000s, Veloflex, SecaRS, Kenda wirebead, Specialized(cant remember the model).

I always run the tires at the lowest recommended air pressure.


----------



## Wines of WA (Jan 10, 2005)

I like my PR3's. I've had zero flats in a few thousand miles or a variety of roads. But I rarely get flats on any tire, possibly because I wipe glass off the rubber surface while riding before it penetrates, and I check between every ride for glass that has managed to start penetrating and pick it out.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

Wines of WA said:


> I rarely get flats on any tire, possibly because I wipe glass off the rubber surface while riding before it penetrates, and I check between every ride for glass that has managed to start penetrating and pick it out.


I do that, too. I'm sure it helps. But I still get flats.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

I have had a total of 3 flats in 10 years of riding.

Why ?

I look the road ahead and avoid obstacles and shiny things on it.

Some guys I know, ride looking at whatever else and manage to run over all glass and potholes they can find. they flat often.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Salsa_Lover said:


> I have had a total of 3 flats in 10 years of riding.
> 
> Why ?.


100 miles per year? :idea:


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

around 1800 road and 1000 off-road per year I guess

and one of my flats was off-road on the brand new Challenge CX tubie.


----------



## Keeping up with Junior (Feb 27, 2003)

*750*

Well I have 750 miles on a pair of ProRace3's and have been happy with them so far. I have been riding Michelins for years though so am probably a bit biased. Seemed a little grippier than the ProRace2 that the 3's replaced although have not raced them so not really able to evaluate fast cornering which is where grip really matters. It will be a few more thousand miles before I am ready to pass judgment but so far so good. 

A few weeks ago got a flat riding on wet roads where I picked up a piece of glass that would likely have flatted most other tires in the same class. Although this weekend road through a big pile of glass near my rides finish and when I checked my tires found an embedded piece of glass that did not cause a flat which I removed with tweezers. I think Salsa_Lover hit on the real issue with flats. The ProRace3's were tough to mount initially although I had no problems changing the roadside flat.



BTSyndrome said:


> ...During a group ride I hear the person in front of me yell, "Oh sh%t Hole" as he went air born. I was behind him and hit the same pot hole. Pinch flat. Pinched the tube and the Tire. Nice big hole right through the tire....


That is not the fault of the tire, it is the fault of whoever was leading your paceline. The person in front of you saw it and was able to lighten his bike and minimize the impact whereas you hit the hole full speed. Not the tire, its the people you ride with.



BTSyndrome said:


> ...I also feel they have more grip especially going into corners then the Pro3's. Top speed so far 52.2 mph with lots of grip...


Dang, you must wear extra large shorts to hold that pair if you are taking corners at 50 miles an hour.


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

??????????????

They are designed is a "race tire". Of course they will flat more often if you use them for just riding around. If you want a tire that is more sturdy, save some money and buy a heavier tire.
Do you have ultra low profile racing tires on your car???


----------



## tarwheel2 (Jul 7, 2005)

Here's the problem - The Pro2Race was a GREAT tire. It handled well, was reasonably light, and was very durable and flat resistant. Michelin decided to cut costs and increase their profits. So they lessened the amount of material in the tire, marketing it as an improvement because it's lighter. Unfortunately, this is par for the course in the cycling industry.

Michelin already had a race version of the Pro2Race that was lighter and less durable. The Pro3Race is essentially the race version. Michelin probably considers it a win-win because they can make the tires for less and sell them for more money. That strategy could work if consumers were all a bunch of suckers.


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

"That strategy could work if consumers were all a bunch of suckers."

But they are............at least most are.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

I have them on 3 of my bikes and really like them. I used Pro2s before that, still have them on on bike and when they wear out, I'll put the Pro 3s on that one too. Combined, I put about 7,500 miles a year on my bikes the last time I kept track of mileages.

I also have a set of wheels with Conti 4000s tires. The Contis are nice, but I prefer the Pro 3s. Yes, they are lighter than Pro2s and do wear faster, but they are basically a "race" tire so I don't think the wear is unreasonably fast. I did have a couple of sidewall flats last spring, I hit either a rock or tall piece of glass that caused the blowout. I think it would have happened with a Pro2 or the 4000s just based on where the cuts appeared. 

If I wanted super durable tires, I'd buy Gatorskins or Armadillos, but I don't, so I use the Pro3 and will continue to use them.


----------



## DeLuz (Aug 1, 2008)

I loved the Pro2 and then stayed away from the Pro3 because the bad reviews and higher price. Tried some Conti 4000s and the ride felt too harsh. Even tried a Vittoria Corsa and didn't care for it. I finally relented a got some Pro3s and enjoying the ride again. I have had a pair on my wife's bike for a while and no problems. I have one on my front and still wearing out a Pro2 on the back. I think Michelin should come out with a higher mileage version of the Pro series. I know they have the Krylion but from what I have read its not a smooth ride like the the Pro.


----------



## tconrady (May 1, 2007)

I like the Pro3 tires. I've run them all year and most of last year...about 8,000 miles or so. I've still yet to flat on any of the Pro3s I've had....and I've ridden all over the Southeast with them over that timespan (primarily in west GA, but also in AL, TN, NC, VA and MD). I do like a few of the others on here have recommended and wipe them down after ever ride...and actually I recall MichelinMan recommending they be wiped down as well. The rubber compound they use is very soft and while it grips and corners well, that soft compound also tends to pick up debris. I have been known to wipe them down when I stop for more water or food mid-ride too.

The only real issue I had wasn't the fault of the tires. I had to lock up the brakes when an idiot cut in front of me and those areas wore faster after that. They aren't super long lasting tires but I usually can get about 1500 miles out of rear tire and about double that from a front. They also do tend to get little dimples or divots but so far they haven't been a problem.

Oh, and don't pay for what most shops and performance wants for them. I think I paid about $35 each last time during a PBK sale. If you keep looking they do go on sale from time to time...then pounce.

I realize they are basically a racing tire and aren't necessarily built for long wear life but they have a great ride and corner nicely. For the way I ride I probably should be on Krylons but have no complaints about the Pro3s.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

tarwheel2 said:


> Here's the problem - The Pro2Race was a GREAT tire. It handled well, was reasonably light, and was very durable and flat resistant. Michelin decided to cut costs and increase their profits. So they lessened the amount of material in the tire, marketing it as an improvement because it's lighter. Unfortunately, this is par for the course in the cycling industry.
> 
> Michelin already had a race version of the Pro2Race that was lighter and less durable. The Pro3Race is essentially the race version. Michelin probably considers it a win-win because they can make the tires for less and sell them for more money. That strategy could work if consumers were all a bunch of suckers.


Well said. And, of course, if the new tire wears faster than its predecessor, you make even _more_ money (customer needs more tires long-term), as long as you don't do it to the extent that customers start to walk away. 
.


----------



## dave2pvd (Oct 15, 2007)

Using them for training is a complete waste of money. 

They are racing tires. Specifically, criterium tires, IMO.

Like race tires for a car, they are sticky and fast wearing. Ever see how much [email protected] gets adhered to a car race tire?

The threads do appear rather quickly. By then though, the tires have developed shoulders and need to be thrown out anyway.

Any clincher will pinch flat.

I use the PR3s for crits and some road races. Vittoria Zaffiro Pros for training (~$15ea).


----------



## BTSyndrome (Jul 21, 2008)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by BTSyndrome
> ...I also feel they have more grip especially going into corners then the Pro3's. Top speed so far 52.2 mph with lots of grip...
> 
> ...


Maybe I should have said curves instead of corners. But coming down the mountain the curves are sharp enough I consider them corners,there not really switchbacks, just 90 deg corvners. .my bad.


----------



## teddysaur (Dec 30, 2004)

DeLuz said:


> I loved the Pro2 and then stayed away from the Pro3 because the bad reviews and higher price. Tried some Conti 4000s and the ride felt too harsh. Even tried a Vittoria Corsa and didn't care for it. I finally relented a got some Pro3s and enjoying the ride again. I have had a pair on my wife's bike for a while and no problems. I have one on my front and still wearing out a Pro2 on the back. I think Michelin should come out with a higher mileage version of the Pro series. I know they have the Krylion but from what I have read its not a smooth ride like the the Pro.


I had the same dilemma on trying Krylion. I had a pair training wheel which goes on the trainer as well. The trainer eats PR3 like crazy so PR3 never goes on my training wheel. I am running Serfas RS seca now but the ride feels harsher.

My solution is to purchase 700x25 Krylion from PBK (wiggle is cheaper). With larger contact surface, that should help with comfort and wear resistance. They are on the way to me.


----------



## identifiler (Dec 24, 2005)

flat rate is not really a tire specification, I've ridden just about anything and my flat rate is completely random. You geta flat because you are at the wrong place at the wrong time, rarely is it the actual tire. Pinch flat is a question of bad inflation and the tire around your waist, or a combination of, including improper mounting...

pro race tires descend and corner like nothing else, they are a crit tire, they do not have the climbing roll of a conti or vredeshtein but they are lot less slipery. People see very little ina tire when they talk about flat rates, that's the least of a modern tires possible benefit, its not the tire, its the road.

I had probably 10 flats last year and 0 this year. I didn't do anything special and certainly do not hold it against my tires.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

I am not a racer anymore, but train exclusively on Pro3Race Tires and like them a lot.
Performance is great.
Wear and durability is good.
I do ride them on flat, clean roads.


----------



## tconrady (May 1, 2007)

PBK has them on sale now in twin packs for $71.22 USD.

Linky


----------



## Zachariah (Jan 29, 2009)

Good tire...but mounting them is a MOFO(think, LOTS of broken levers!). The Conti GP 4000s can mount using just bare hands...and the main reason why I went with Continental.


----------



## fast ferd (Jan 30, 2009)

*Excellent tire, but not as durable as their PR2*



fah35 said:


> I have been reading the past posts in the forum and seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race tire is not a very good tire and seems to flat a lot. Some people say any tire can flat but in the forum and the reviews this tire seems to get a lot of bad reviews and complaints. Other tires get some bad reviews here and there but it seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race gets a significant amount more. Is this beacuse a lot of people are buying this tire and the complaints are a small number or is this just a real bad tire? Is anyone having good results with this tire?


With a thin non-latex tube, these tires ride similar to an above average sewup, like say a Continental Competition. They grip much better than anything out there, IMO, including sewups. Sticky cornering, even in the rain.:thumbsup: 

I managed 2,200 miles with a front-to-back rotation at about 1,200. No cuts on this pair, but most of my rides cover good roads in mostly dry Socal weather. This mileage falls short of the 3,500-4,000 miles garnered on the previous-generation Pro Race 2's, which I consider my favorite tire of all-time. The durability bums me out, because I hoped they'd last at least close to the PR2, despite significant improvements in handling and ride. Suffered two flats over their lifespan - similar to PR2's one per every thousand.

With two more pairs in reserve, it looks like the PR3's got me covered for a while. (I put some new Veloflex Criteriums on my low-mileage Mavic GL 280/330 White Industries wheelset and will ride these until they wear out. Sweet ride!) My commuter, however, has lots of life left with its PR2's, with a couple sets in reserve, stored in my wine cellar. These tires are getting really hard to find.

Did Michelin ever issue the Pro Optimum? :skep:


----------



## Zachariah (Jan 29, 2009)

Fastest Clincher Tires:

1) Schwalbe Ultremo R.1
2) Veloflex Pave'
3) Vredestein Fortezza Tricomp
4) Challenge Forte
5) Gommitalia Targa K
6) Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX
7) Michelin Pro3 Race
8) Continental Grand Prix 4000s
9) Maxxis Columbiere
10) Hutchinson Fusion II Comp


----------



## edscueth (Jul 12, 2008)

As many mentioned they were designed as a racing tire, so if you use them for a training tire don't be surprised if you get a flat. I don't race and use them for my everyday tire, 2 flats in 3,000 miles, too some that maybe too many flats but I am pleased with them.


----------



## roadbike_moron (Sep 22, 2007)

tconrady said:


> IThey also do tend to get little dimples or divots but so far they haven't been a problem.


Yup, I have them as well....brand new tires, too.
No issues thus far with with durability or punctures.


----------



## tyjacks (Oct 21, 2006)

This is my second set of Michelin PR3's. The first set was purchased in early 2009, I purchased a second set (red) in Jan. 2010 to match my new frame, something must have changed cause this second set is holding up great . . .The first set that I purchased in 2009 were pure crap, flats, egg-shape, sidewall cuts and tread wear was terrible.

Michelin must have changed something in their production and/or design cause this second set is much better, no comparison at all...


----------



## tyjacks (Oct 21, 2006)

Zachariah said:


> Fastest Clincher Tires:
> 
> 1) Schwalbe Ultremo R.1
> 2) Veloflex Pave'
> ...



What methods did you use to determine these conclusions, ratings and results?


----------



## krocdoc (Mar 11, 2008)

Pro 3's are terrible. That's why 70% of the riders at the last road race were using them. Just sayin...


----------



## footballcat (Jul 8, 2004)

just buy 25c tires for training

Racing get something else

I ride kendas and love them


----------



## RC28 (May 9, 2002)

My team has been using Michelins for a while now as our "official" tire and I have to say that they have (at least in my case) not lived up to the hype at all. First couple of years, we used the PR2s...never really liked them. Only used them for my racing wheels, but the level of cuts and flats was frustrating. A bunch of my teammates use them for training and complain when they get a flat.We switched to PR3s when they came out and I only used them once on my race wheels. Mine were not true to size (measured around 21mm for the 23 version) , didn't ride much better than the PR2s and I did not even want to bother with flat resistance. 

I switched to Conti GP4000S for one of my clincher race wheels, and Michelin Pro Grips on the other. Now, those ProGrips (based on the PR2, not the newer ones based on the PR3) are AWESOME. Wonderful in corners, beautiful ride. Only downside is the baby blue sidewalls. Also, used some Krylions for training and liked those a lot.

Most of my team uses the PR3 still...in last weeks race, there were 3 punctures and yesterday there was one. The last 3 sets I've been given by my team are sitting, in their boxes, in my closet. I only use the GP4000S or ProGrips now if I'm racing on clinchers but the majority of the time I'm racing on tubulars.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I ride about 350-400 miles/week, switch between pro race 3, conti 400s, depending on prices - the michelins feel a bit more supple but don't have quite the durability of the Conti's. Pretty interchangeable in my opinion. Not many flats with either. The Conti is a slightly better training tire - sidewall a bit tougher and I like the wear indicators in them (they are about right in terms of when a tire is done).


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

I use Michelin P3R Tires exclusively and they are great.


----------



## mendo (Apr 18, 2007)

Mounting these tires was brutal, but they have held up. I had one flat but it was a big chunk of glass.


----------



## Bn74956 (Jan 3, 2009)

I havent read any other posts. I have owned 2 sets of PR3's and both wore INCREDIBLY too fast. MIchelin even gave me a refund and voucher for this problem.... i recommend the 2's they are tried and true. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

Bn74956 said:


> ........ i recommend the 2's they are tried and true. ......


BUT - where can you get 2's? 

Maybe some old stock on eBay?


----------



## Bn74956 (Jan 3, 2009)

Ebay and try google pro2 race tires. cambriabike.com has them, id imagine small online and local shops still have inventory.


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

Bn74956 said:


> Ebay and try google pro2 race tires. cambriabike.com has them, id imagine small online and local shops still have inventory.


Well surprise, surprise!

Ebay had none (at least in black) but Milwaukee Bicycle Co. • Ben's Cycle had some on sale for $34.99 and free shipping if you order over $100.

And they were the black/grey tire.

Hope they really had them in stock!


----------



## Zachariah (Jan 29, 2009)

tyjacks said:


> What methods did you use to determine these conclusions, ratings and results?



Lap times and pure feel...


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

fah35 said:


> I have been reading the past posts in the forum and seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race tire is not a very good tire and seems to flat a lot. Some people say any tire can flat but in the forum and the reviews this tire seems to get a lot of bad reviews and complaints. Other tires get some bad reviews here and there but it seems like the Michelin Pro 3 Race gets a significant amount more. Is this beacuse a lot of people are buying this tire and the complaints are a small number or is this just a real bad tire? Is anyone having good results with this tire?


Sorry if this is a bit OT but, for what it's worth:
More than any other, these are the tires that convinced me to go tubeless. I was getting flats on about every 4th ride (about every 300 miles). Since going tubeless with Stan's I've had one riding flat in 13,000 miles and that tire was worn into the cloth 55 miles before it went flat. I have had 2 overnight flats (they would not have been an issue if the bike had been moving until the stan's sealed the puncture).

It is true that I was getting a lot of flats on other brands as well but nothing near the frequency as with the Pro races (may have been pro 2 race--I just can't remember).

By the time you throw in a dependable tube and rim strip, The weight difference is just not substantial enough to ever consider clinchers with tubes again. Those non-tubeless rims that need Stan's tape to convert actually seem to hold air a bit better than tubeless rims (my Zipp 303's with holes for every spoke actually hold air better than my shimano tubeless rims.


----------



## Fogdweller (Mar 26, 2004)

tarwheel2 said:


> Here's the problem - The Pro2Race was a GREAT tire. It handled well, was reasonably light, and was very durable and flat resistant. Michelin decided to cut costs and increase their profits. So they lessened the amount of material in the tire, marketing it as an improvement because it's lighter. Unfortunately, this is par for the course in the cycling industry.
> 
> Michelin already had a race version of the Pro2Race that was lighter and less durable. The Pro3Race is essentially the race version. Michelin probably considers it a win-win because they can make the tires for less and sell them for more money. That strategy could work if consumers were all a bunch of suckers.


I agree with this. ProRace and ProRace2 were excellent wearing and I rode them for about 10 years and a 'go to' tire. Part of the change was material reduction and I think they also softened the compound to increase performance. This took some miles in wear away. Still great tires that handle incredible but last a third less. I haven't experience more flats with them.


----------



## Juanmoretime (Nov 24, 2001)

Alrighty, I like Pro Race 3's. The ride is very supple and grippy. I've been on them for two years now and only one flat. Plus for wear I'm getting about 2,000 miles and the front and then it goes to the back for another 800 to a 1000 miles. I can't ask anymore for a tire that, for me, rides and performs well and is flat resistant.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

Juanmoretime said:


> Alrighty, I like Pro Race 3's. The ride is very supple and grippy. I've been on them for two years now and only one flat. Plus for wear I'm getting about 2,000 miles and the front and then it goes to the back for another 800 to a 1000 miles. I can't ask anymore for a tire that, for me, rides and performs well and is flat resistant.


I could't agree with you more.
I ride only P3R's on my FG, 40 miles everyday, and have the same positive experience.
John


----------



## dave2pvd (Oct 15, 2007)

If I was to compare PR3s to a car racing tire, I might pick a racing tire like Michelin Sport Cup. Super sticky, but with a treadwear of 80. Car racers don't complain about them not lasting as long as non-racing tires. They are sticky (read: soft), so they aren't as durable. In fact, according to Michelin, the PR3's rubber was developed for MotoGP racing.

What I am trying to say is: use tires for their intended purpose. PR3s on a fixie is ridiculous. PR3s as training tires is wasting money. PR3s on [email protected] roads is asking for flats. PR3s for commuting, well...you get the point.

PR3 performance chart from Michelin's website:










For training, or general purpose use, the Krylion makes more sense:


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

I really don't think using a P3R-Tire on a FG is ridiculous.
The tire is for fast training and racing.
I only have FG's and do 45 miles of fast training on them 6 days a week with 1 rest day.
The P3R Tire works great.
Cost is $37 from PBK.
Mount on my rims easily, nice roll and cornering grip, durable, and seldom get a flat on the good roads on my training course.
I know everyone on RBR is a Tire Expert, but opinions do differ, and that doesn't make it ridiculous.
'It is OK to disagree, without being disagreeable', IMO.
John


----------



## dave2pvd (Oct 15, 2007)

jmlapoint said:


> I really don't think using a P3R-Tire on a FG is ridiculous.
> The tire is for fast training and racing.
> I only have FG's and do 45 miles of fast training on them 6 days a week with 1 rest day.
> The P3R Tire works great.
> ...


Krylion are even cheaper from PBK, yet roll just as well. Better puncture resistance too. In fact, why not try Lithion 2s - cheaper still?

Can't quite see you needing the cornering grip on your FG, unless you have 30mm cranks, sorry.

I'm sticking with ridiculous. Since it's an opinion, the IMO is implied. But hey, it's your money; you know how to spend it.


----------



## jmess (Aug 24, 2006)

To any starving bike racers out there I have 4 new Pro3s that I will let go real cheap to a real racer. PM me if you are interested.


----------



## jmess (Aug 24, 2006)

MerlinAma said:


> Well surprise, surprise!
> 
> Ebay had none (at least in black) but Milwaukee Bicycle Co. • Ben's Cycle had some on sale for $34.99 and free shipping if you order over $100.
> 
> ...


I called and confirmed black/grey Pro2s were in stock. They apparently bought out another business that had a bunch Pro2s. My Pro2 supply is now good for another couple of years of riding.


----------



## kini (Feb 19, 2010)

Zachariah said:


> Good tire...but mounting them is a MOFO(think, LOTS of broken levers!). The Conti GP 4000s can mount using just bare hands...and the main reason why I went with Continental.


My LBS owner/mechanic put a set on my new wheels without any tools in less than 5 minutes. 

Seems like a user problem. :blush2:


----------



## Balderick (Jul 11, 2006)

jmlapoint said:


> I really don't think using a P3R-Tire on a FG is ridiculous.
> The tire is for fast training and racing.
> I only have FG's and do 45 miles of fast training on them 6 days a week with 1 rest day.
> The P3R Tire works great.
> ...


I too have PR3 on my fixie/trackie, and do between 30 and 150 km per week on them. I have had two punctures (both in the wet or just after rain, and both skinny steel nails that would get through any tyre) in 18 months. Great tyre, and seems to wear well (note I do not skid).

However, I have used PR1, PR2 and PR3 on my road bike, from time to time. PR# and PR2 on my road bike seems to = punctures, so I use Bontrager XXXX Race Lite or Gators on that bike (and still get punctures!).

I have several friends who are recent converts to Tubeless and rave about them. One finished a race and he'd had a number of punctures through the race and not noticed them (could see where the sealant had patched the tyres). As a clydesdale they do seem the way to go...

Horses for courses, IMHO.


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

Simple: Pro "Race" 3's if you race. If they were a training tire I guess the would be called Pro "train" 3's. For racing they are supple, smooth and grip like a mo fo.
Gp 4000 s, for me did not live up to the hype. Ride feel not great, flats out the yinger and a huge chunk of rubber just flew off one day. Rode home about 25 mi. with white cords showing dodging everything on the road. White knuckled, sweaty 15 mi. per hour ride.


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

MerlinAma said:


> Well surprise, surprise!
> 
> Ebay had none (at least in black) but Milwaukee Bicycle Co. • Ben's Cycle had some on sale for $34.99 and free shipping if you order over $100.
> 
> ...


They arrived today and are "ProRace", not "ProRace2". 

And that's exactly what was on the website. I failed to notice and really can't believe the older version is what they still had.

Oh well, for that price I can live with it.


----------



## jmess (Aug 24, 2006)

Has anyone put any serious miles on the new Pro Optimums?

http://www.michelinbicycletire.com/michelinbicycle/index.cfm?event=optimum.view


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

MerlinAma said:


> They arrived today and are "ProRace", not "ProRace2".
> 
> And that's exactly what was on the website. I failed to notice and really can't believe the older version is what they still had.
> 
> Oh well, for that price I can live with it.


I also have some ProRace, not 2's or 3's and love them. Smooth and supple and definately more durable than the 3's. Enjoy.


----------



## 1natsfan (Oct 17, 2009)

Just flatted my PR3, which came on my new bike, after <350 miles.


----------



## Greg Smalter (Jul 16, 2005)

MerlinAma said:


> They arrived today and are "ProRace", not "ProRace2".
> Oh well, for that price I can live with it.


I had the original Pro Race tires, and I have never, ever flatted on them. And they've lasted for about 5000 miles each (I gave one away when my friend's Hutchinson kept flatting during a big charity weekend), the other is on an old bike and still going). This is compared to the Hutchinsons I had previous in which I got about a flat per week.

And to those who say it's stupid to train on, when I purchased my Pro Race tires to replace my "training" Hutchinsons, I got almost a 1mph benefit in average speed. I can't think of anything you could buy that would give that much of an increase for under 100 dollars. And, they were more durable (see above). I don't really describe to the "you're just training so you might as well ride a Walmart bike" idea.


----------

