Interesting Tire Study. [Archive]

guido

10-29-2015, 06:54 AM

22-26mm tires at 116 pounds of pressure. Not very realistic for those of us who don't ride on drums...

Also interesting that they omitted Compass (or any of the other current Panaracer built tires...) from the test.

bcroslin

10-29-2015, 07:05 AM

Wonder what that cost Sinyard?

Zinn mentions Sinyard hired away the team that developed tires for Conti. So it sounds like it cost him plenty. :)

A buddy works at a LBS that sells Specialized and he accidentally grabbed a set of the S Works cottons for his bike. Within the first 3 days of riding them he had several flats. It doesn't really matter how "supple" a tire is if you're getting flats on every ride.

Also, I thought Zipp's tires were rebadged Vittoria's.

Joxster

10-29-2015, 07:16 AM

A large number of the pro peloton use Veloflex badged up with the sponsors logo. And the remember the best product I've every raced on, is the one that I currently paid to ride ;)

bobswire

10-29-2015, 07:31 AM

The fastest tire depends on who is riding on it.

zap

10-29-2015, 07:40 AM

edit

22-26mm tires at 116 pounds of pressure. Not very realistic for those of us who don't ride on drums...

ummm, it's the pressure (+/- pump accuracy) I use in the rear..........23C Conti's on wide Campy Bora wheels. These tires measure closer too 25 on Bora rims. The roads I ride most often in Maryland, USA are pretty smooth.

I still ride a lot on 22 tires pumped to 120psi.

Comfort is in the position. Tire pressure should be about maximizing performance on given roads.

sitzmark

10-29-2015, 07:49 AM

116 psi:eek:

Yes - the experiment is controlled for which tire has the lowest rolling resistance at 116psi, but doesn't guarantee the tires with the lowest rolling resistance have been identified.

Finding the lowest rolling resistance would have required orders of magnitude more time/work to be invested to optimize the condition(s) under which each tire generates the lowest rolling resistance and then compare all of the the optimized numbers. Still, that would only relate to the specific controls of the test. One tire might be more efficient on a 19mm rim and less efficient on a 24mm rim.

The results are (somewhat) interesting for general discussion, but to find what has lowest rolling resistance for me, the testing needs to be optimized and controlled using my wheelsets...

AngryScientist

10-29-2015, 07:54 AM

any study that says the conti GP 4000 is a faster tire than the veloflex tire is rubbish.

m_sasso

10-29-2015, 08:08 AM

Although the article was printed November 2015, no date as to when the data and testing was collected and completed.

I do not know about their tires however mine do not last forever and get replaced regularly.

Many of the tires tested are no longer produced and have already been replaced by newer and different models from various makers.

thwart

10-29-2015, 09:15 AM

ummm, it's the pressure (+/- pump accuracy) I use in the rear..........23C Conti's on wide Campy Bora wheels. These tires measure closer too 25 on Bora rims. The roads I ride most often in Maryland, USA are pretty smooth.

I still ride a lot on 22 tires pumped to 120psi.

Comfort is in the position. Tire pressure should be about maximizing performance on given roads.
Well, everyone has their own opinion and experience.

I think most would disagree with you, assuming 'normal' body weight.

Pretty good evidence now that on most real world roads (not drums, not brand new pavement) lower pressure is actually faster. Less 'micro-bounce'. Feels better too.

bcroslin

10-29-2015, 09:23 AM

Anyone notice the top 15 in the test use latex tubes? How much a difference would it make to run standard cheap butyl tubes?

And, a while back I was running tubeless C-24's exclusively with the Schwalbe tires and I can say I definitely felt a difference from the Pro 3/4's I've ridden forever.

andrew+

10-29-2015, 09:41 AM

Anyone notice the top 15 in the test use latex tubes? How much a difference would it make to run standard cheap butyl tubes?

Yes, this seems like a problem to me:

"To simulate the way we assumed most people will run these various models, we used 70-gram Bontrager XXX latex inner tubes in higher-end clinchers and 95-gram butyl tubes in less expensive ones."

zap

10-29-2015, 10:10 AM

edit

Well, everyone has their own opinion and experience.

Absolutely.

I experimented with pressures when I received the Bora clinchers with wide 23 tires. If it is the case that I'm sacrificing a watt due to increased rolling resistance but gain that connected feel when I'm sprinting or going around a fast compression bend at over 30mph, so be it.

My wife and I went through the same process (figuring best psi for our riding) when we put fat 25c tires on our tandem. There is a lot going on when speeds range from farting around to going over 50mph.

All I'm offering, don't dismiss higher tire pressures-even if you are lighter than the norm.

93legendti

10-29-2015, 12:32 PM

Well, everyone has their own opinion and experience.

I think most would disagree with you, assuming 'normal' body weight.

Pretty good evidence now that on most real world roads (not drums, not brand new pavement) lower pressure is actually faster. Less 'micro-bounce'. Feels better too.

Yup.

120 psi on roads are around here would be like riding a mini pogo stick, not to mention jarring.

Hindmost

10-29-2015, 02:02 PM

palincss

10-29-2015, 02:08 PM

A buddy works at a LBS that sells Specialized and he accidentally grabbed a set of the S Works cottons for his bike. Within the first 3 days of riding them he had several flats. It doesn't really matter how "supple" a tire is if you're getting flats on every ride.

Not only is anecdotal evidence like this worthless in judging the merit of a tire -- after all, he could be riding through a field of broken glass right outside his back door every time he leaves the house -- but he may even be getting the same flat again and again, if he didn't pick out the foreign object when he replaced the tube. And choosing a "non-supple" tire, even one with an armored belt, won't necessarily protect against every hazard.

druptight

10-29-2015, 02:23 PM

I don't get why they controlled for PSI, but then ran different types of tubes in different tires. If they were really going to try to simulate "how they'd be ridden" they'd have likely chosen a sliding scale of PSI dependent upon tire width. While I doubt it's causing the stratification, by using butyl tubes on tires that are cheaper and expect to perform worse, and latex tubes on tires that are more expensive and expected to perform better, you render the two different sets incomparable, IMO.

Also - the chart has starred items, I would have assumed there was a key somewhere to explain something to me related to those stars, but I don't see it unless I'm missing it.

saab2000

10-29-2015, 02:24 PM

I'd be curious to see where quality tubulars would fall into these charts.

VonTrapp

10-29-2015, 02:25 PM

I wish they would have tested on a 23mm wide rim since that's the current trend on the market. Oh well.

rain dogs

10-29-2015, 02:32 PM

Is the test procedure described in more detail somewhere?

Or is it just me? I don't see an explanation of what they actually measured and its significance. Do I have to expend from 60 to 100 watts to roll two tires down the road?

It's on the second page: tested at 40kmph, load 50kg, 116psi w/ 10 min warm-up.

It says "pushing a bicycle at 40kmph on a flat road demands 270-350W. Two tires with a rolling resistance of 50W will eat up 100W total to hold a 40kmph pace..."

Seems like a crazy huge amount. You can save 28Wx2 on tires and tubes alone? 56W is a lot!

txcid05

10-29-2015, 02:57 PM

Very interesting article, thanks for posting. I used Specialized Roubaix Pro tires (clinchers) on my "washboard commute" almost daily, and they have easily been the best ones to date. They are not the fastest tire but have damn good puncture resistance.

seajaye

10-29-2015, 03:04 PM

professerr

10-29-2015, 03:26 PM

I'd be curious to see where quality tubulars would fall into these charts.

Pretty sure they'd do worse than their clincher equivalent -- I recall somewhere a published test showing Vittoria Open Corsa clinchers doing better than the equivalent Corsa tubulars. Something to do with how the glue slows things down.

One of the testing details that seems off here is the use of the steel plate with a diamond tread to simulate an asphalt road. Those treads have numerous small sharp edges that don't fit the profile of any asphalt road -- I bet if you rode over such a surface it would feel very buzzy. Since so much of the advantage seems to come from how favorable the hysteresis loops are on the tread compounds used in the best tires, I wonder if the difference would be so pronounced on a more realistic, smoother surface, which surface might also have larger undulations and smoother rises that I suspect better reveal any differences in the hysteresis loops of the casings.

Wonder how the new Vittoria graphene tires would test.

rnhood

10-29-2015, 03:27 PM

Yes, I was getting ready to look this up but, I remember the Tour magazine running a test and the top clinchers (Specialized in particular) scored better than the tubulars, although not a big difference. Of course they were looking primarily at rolling resistance. Other factors may sway one's decision on what to run.

benb

10-29-2015, 03:55 PM

Yes.. haven't read the entire thing yet but 116psi is what I would run in the rear with 23c tires for many years.

I had gotten that recommendation for my weight (in the 170s) because Michelin very clearly recommends it.

If this test set the same load on all the tires the 116psi probably works fine... if you have a lower load & use a lighter pressure because you're lighter my guess is their results would still probably be valid, because if you reduce the pressure accordingly you should be flexing the tire a similar amount.

My guess is most people run too much pressure in their front tire assuming they are running the same pressure in each tire.. we don't have anywhere near 50/50 weight distribution so even tire pressures doesn't make a ton of sense IMO.

I thought it was well established for rolling resistance tubeless beat tubed clinchers and tubulars came in last... tubulars are for weight & maybe flat resistance in certain circumstances.

Tin Turtle

10-29-2015, 04:07 PM

Really a very interesting article. Thanks for scanning and posting.

benb

10-29-2015, 04:13 PM

Oh and the naysayers... read the whole article carefully.

They clearly did test the rolling resistance of quite a few of the tires at different tire pressures.

Gist of it was the better tires in their test also allow you to change the tire pressure more without a rolling resistance penalty.

Very interesting stuff.

Now I want to see it for a bunch of much bigger tires, MTB tires, Gravel Grinder Tires, Cyclocross tires, etc..

Personally the diamond plate seems reasonable for the roads I am stuck riding on, maybe not so much if you live in the South. Not many roads smoother than that diamond plate here, and the only ones that are only stay that way till their first winter.

bikinchris

10-29-2015, 05:36 PM

The article does mention the amount that a butyl tube adds to resistance.

No mention about how flat resistant these tirefinish.But that wasn't't what they were measuring. I know the GP 4000S is about average for cut resistance. I also know cotton sidewalls are amazingly easy to rip open. I think they are more useful as tubular on the track.

I would like to compare these numbers to top tubular tires.

Remember that before you can finish first, you must first finish.