Michelin P2R weights

[mcteague]

I was looking at the new probikekit.com catalog, thinking of buying some
Pro2Race 700x25 tires, and noticed they list the weight as 300 grams. I was
really surprised that they are 60 grams more than the 700x23s. Can anyone
verify this weight? Michelin's website lists them as 265 and 220. I like
the greater comfort of the 25s but perhaps only because I can safely run
them at 90-95 psi. I'm not racing so perhaps the weight is not a real issue
and I weigh 160lbs so even the 23s are big enough. Michelin's 25s seem MUCH
bigger than the 23s and I have a tough time removing the wheel. I have to
open the brake and loosen the cable to get them out. At this point I may go
back to 23s and just drop the pressure a bit.

Tim McTeague

[dirtdigger88]

ok Im sorry- dirt hasnt had enought coffee yet this morning- so let me get this straight-

you are concerned about 1.8 oz of added weight or should I say 3.6 oz total front and rear??????

really?????

i dont know you- but Im going to bet you could lose more than 3.6oz off yourself pretty easily-

i really dont understand what you are worried about-

Jason

[mcteague]

Jason,

Thanks for the help, I don't know what I would have done without it. I never said it would make a big difference I was just asking a question. The 25s are more comfortable but a bit of a pain getting their girth past the brake calipers. What a grump.

Tim

[davep]

Tim,

I just went into my garage and weighed a ProRace2 and it weighed 272 grams. Also, if you measure a PR2 25 you'll find out the actual width is much closer to 27mm.

Jason,

You'll never get into the weight weenies club with that attitude :) :)

Dave

[dirtdigger88]

hey man- sorry

the thread is titled Michelin P2R weights and the only question I saw was about weight- you commented about the tires being harder to remove :rolleyes:

but again- sorry

yes the 25s are bigger than other 25s- a set I have came in a 275g

Ive never had trouble getting them on or off rims- but I will say my DT 1.1s seem to make every tire a bit harder to remove- I wouldnt call it hard

the 25s wont work under an F1 fork

the are a tough tire- they hold up well to crappy roads

if you want a nicer riding tire in a near size look at the vittoria open pave -

Jason

[RPS]

I was looking at the new probikekit.com catalog, thinking of buying some
Pro2Race 700x25 tires, and noticed they list the weight as 300 grams. I was
really surprised that they are 60 grams more than the 700x23s. Can anyone
verify this weight? Michelin's website lists them as 265 and 220. I like
the greater comfort of the 25s but perhaps only because I can safely run
them at 90-95 psi. I'm not racing so perhaps the weight is not a real issue
and I weigh 160lbs so even the 23s are big enough. Michelin's 25s seem MUCH
bigger than the 23s and I have a tough time removing the wheel. I have to
open the brake and loosen the cable to get them out. At this point I may go
back to 23s and just drop the pressure a bit.

Tim McTeagueTim, I know this was discussed recently in a different thread, but at what pressure are you running your 23s? Your comment suggests much higher than the 90-95 PSI of the 25s. Is it possible you are over-inflatiing the 23s for your weight?

[mcteague]

Tim, I know this was discussed recently in a different thread, but at what pressure are you running your 23s? Your comment suggests much higher than the 90-95 PSI of the 25s. Is it possible you are over-inflatiing the 23s for your weight?

Yeah, I am thinking I was. I ran about 105-110psi on the 23s and, now that I have 25s at 95psi, I am wondering if the 23s at that pressure may be fine. The Michelin 25s seem HUGE and, as I mentioned, I cannot remove the wheel without opening the brake caliper and turning the adjustment knob to open them wider still. This is not a daily occurrence but a pain none the less.

Tim

[SoCalSteve]

Yeah, I am thinking I was. I ran about 105-110psi on the 23s and, now that I have 25s at 95psi, I am wondering if the 23s at that pressure may be fine. The Michelin 25s seem HUGE and, as I mentioned, I cannot remove the wheel without opening the brake caliper and turning the adjustment knob to open them wider still. This is not a daily occurrence but a pain none the less.
Tim

Isnt it worth it to have a much nicer, plusher ride?

Just sayin'

[RPS]

Yeah, I am thinking I was. I ran about 105-110psi on the 23s and, now that I have 25s at 95psi, I am wondering if the 23s at that pressure may be fine. The Michelin 25s seem HUGE and, as I mentioned, I cannot remove the wheel without opening the brake caliper and turning the adjustment knob to open them wider still. This is not a daily occurrence but a pain none the less.

TimThat problem depends on factors beyond just tire width; like how wide your rims are, the type of brake caliper, and how close you adjust brake pads to your rims. Some calipers (and I don't know which you use) don't open as much as others. Also, some people like to run the pads very close to the rim, others don't. It's all a matter of personal choices.

Personally I don't see myself running tires that wide on a single road bike (maybe a tandem). But like you, if I did, I wouldn't want to adjust brakes each time I installed a tire.

[LesMiner]

I use to ride on 25s all the time but went to 23s. Lower pressure bigger tire means more ballon effect. A softer ride but also more potential for pinch flats. I found when jumping up for a standing sprint or climb, the 25s made the bike seem more whimpy over the 23s. The frame, fork, and all had more snap with the 23s. Probably due to the ballon effect where a bigger tire and lower pressure gives more under increased load. A larger contact patch can give greater braking power and maybe better handling but rolling resistance goes up. I did read some where someone studied the differences in tire pressure and concluded low than the max pressure was beter all around. The author did cite Michelins as the example.

[dauwhe]

My standard tire is the Trimline, 650B x 37mm, ridden at 50psi.

Did quite well in BQ's rolling resistance test, on a par with the Pro2Race. And they are oh so comfortable!

Dave

[Wayne77]

I use to ride on 25s all the time but went to 23s. Lower pressure bigger tire means more ballon effect. A softer ride but also more potential for pinch flats. I found when jumping up for a standing sprint or climb, the 25s made the bike seem more whimpy over the 23s. The frame, fork, and all had more snap with the 23s. Probably due to the ballon effect where a bigger tire and lower pressure gives more under increased load. A larger contact patch can give greater braking power and maybe better handling but rolling resistance goes up. I did read some where someone studied the differences in tire pressure and concluded low than the max pressure was beter all around. The author did cite Michelins as the example.

This is my understanding: A wider tire (within reason) does not mean a larger contact patch. It results in a wider,shorter contact patch with the same surface area (assuming similar tire sidewall properties). The contact patch is largely determined by the rider+bike weight that must be supported by the tire. The tire has to deflect a certain amount against the ground to support a given weight. If it's a skinnier tire the contact patch is longer and thinner, a wider tire and the contact patch is wider and shorter. There's a physics formula in there somewhere... Tire pressure also determines the area of the contact patch - a wider tire allows a rider to run a lower pressure (more supple ride) for a given contact patch area. Therefore, keeping tire pressure constant, a skinnier tire will be more likely to "balloon", as you say, and pinch flat than a wider tire.

As far as straightline speed advantage on a smooth surface is concerned, the only documented advantage of skinnier vs wider is a slightly smaller aerodynamic profile (all else being equal). Sure, you can jack up the pressure on a smaller tire to decrease rolling resistance, but then the ride is harsh and you'll be bouncing around more to negate the advantages in decreased rolling resistance. One notable test in a German cycling mag seemed to confirm this - they found no measurable speed advantages between several brands of 25c and a 23c tires.


Anyway, that's my story for now. But I'm an open minded fellow and would love to be edukamated by someone if I am off-base.

:beer:

[Orin]

Tire performance assuming similar construction...

At the same pressure:

Narrower tire is more comfortable, more aerodynamic and more susceptible to pinch flats.

Wider tire is less comfortable(!), less aerodynamic, has lower rolling resistance and is less susceptible to pinch flats.


For the same width:

Higher pressure is less comfortable, has lower rolling resistance and is less susceptible to pinch flats.


So, you want comfort? You need a narrower tire (not a good idea due to pinch flats) or lower pressure in a wider tire. You might pay for it with higher rolling resistance and worse aerodynamics (not a worry unless you are time trialling).

You want speed? A narrower tire with higher pressure, but you will pay by it being less comfortable.


Tire construction:

Thinner tread and more flexible sidewalls give lower rolling resistance. Many wider tires currently available have neither and are built to take 100 plus psi, resulting in a harsh ride! If you count the Pro2 Race as wide, it's an exception as are Grand Bois Cypres 700x30 (I've been riding these and at most speeds find no disadvantage) and Panaracer Pasela.


Although the argument hasn't really finished about the recent Bicycle Quarterly tests, they did pretty much manage to separate tires out into groups with similar performance. At the top were Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX in 700x25 along with a now unobtainable Deda. Michelin Pro2Race were in the next best group as were the Grand Bois Cypres I mentioned. Other than aerodynamics and fitting them in the frame, there is no disadvantage to the Grand Bois Cypres that I'm currently riding (run at 80psi front, 85 psi rear). However, I don't think there is that great an increase in comfort over a Michelin 23 run at 100 or so psi.


Back in the past, I test rode an Atlanta which had Conti GP3000 tires and a Ti Rapid Tour with Axial Pros. My recollection is the Atlanta being HARSH. I bought the Rapid Tour. I now think it was the tires that made the Atlanta so harsh.

Orin.

[RPS]

This is my understanding: A wider tire (within reason) does not mean a larger contact patch. It results in a wider,shorter contact patch with the same surface area (assuming similar tire sidewall properties). The contact patch is largely determined by the rider+bike weight that must be supported by the tire. The tire has to deflect a certain amount against the ground to support a given weight. If it's a skinnier tire the contact patch is longer and thinner, a wider tire and the contact patch is wider and shorter. There's a physics formula in there somewhere... Tire pressure also determines the area of the contact patch - a wider tire allows a rider to run a lower pressure (more supple ride) for a given contact patch area. Therefore, keeping tire pressure constant, a skinnier tire will be more likely to "balloon", as you say, and pinch flat than a wider tire.

As far as straightline speed advantage on a smooth surface is concerned, the only documented advantage of skinnier vs wider is a slightly smaller aerodynamic profile (all else being equal). Sure, you can jack up the pressure on a smaller tire to decrease rolling resistance, but then the ride is harsh and you'll be bouncing around more to negate the advantages in decreased rolling resistance. One notable test in a German cycling mag seemed to confirm this - they found no measurable speed advantages between several brands of 25c and a 23c tires.


Anyway, that's my story for now. But I'm an open minded fellow and would love to be edukamated by someone if I am off-base.

:beer:I followed everything except for the highlighted areas. Could you please elaborate? I thought constant pressure equals constant area -- more or less (depends on tire). Obviously a skinnier tire with the same pressure doesn't have as far to deflect before the rim hits the ground -- hence more pinch flats.

[Wayne77]

Tire performance assuming similar construction...

At the same pressure:

Narrower tire is more comfortable, more aerodynamic and more susceptible to pinch flats.

Wider tire is less comfortable(!), less aerodynamic, has lower rolling resistance and is less susceptible to pinch flats.


Yes, this makes sense to me and is in line with the thought that you can run a wider tire at a lower pressure with less risk of pinch flats than a narrower tire. Imagine a car tire pumped up to 120 psi (if it could be) -rock hard and veeeeery uncomfortable!

[Wayne77]

I followed everything except for the highlighted areas. Could you please elaborate? I thought constant pressure equals constant area -- more or less (depends on tire). Obviously a skinnier tire with the same pressure doesn't have as far to deflect before the rim hits the ground -- hence more pinch flats.

I'm not sure that I stated it very clearly, but I was trying to illustrate that if one wanted to keep the contact patch area constant, a wider tire will do it with lower pressure. I think Orin pointed out that lower pressure in a bigger tire doesn't necessarily mean more comfort though..sounds like sidewall properties have more to do with overall comfort perception than tire thickness. However, if we were to agree that due the size of the tire (distance of rim to the ground), a larger tire is less likely to pinch-flat, then one could conceivably lower the pressure enough to result in a more comfortable ride than a skinnier tire. Anyway, Orin's post seems to illustrate the trade-offs nicely.

I have seen some convincing arguments that a short/wide contact patch has less rolling resistance over a less than perfectly smooth surface (asphalt) than a long skinny contact patch. I can also recall a study by an aerospace firm that supported the idea that there was actually a decreased rolling resistance for airplane tires that were slightly wider than a thinner model of equal construction properties. I don't have the source though so take it for what it is...

[Lifelover]

.....
Narrower tire is more comfortable......

Wider tire is less comfortable(!),.......


???

I don't get this at all.

What do you mean by comfortable?

[RPS]

???

I don't get this at all.

What do you mean by comfortable?He preceded his statement by saying "at the same pressure".

I happen to agree. A 23 at 95 PSI feels more comfortable to me than a 25 at the same 95 PSI. To me it makes perfect sense why it should be that way, but I know I'm in the minority on this.

[Lifelover]

He preceded his statement by saying "at the same pressure".

I happen to agree. A 23 at 95 PSI feels more comfortable to me than a 25 at the same 95 PSI. To me it makes perfect sense why it should be that way, but I know I'm in the minority on this.

I don't really mean to debate it. I think the same can be said for tire width and pressure as can be said about bike styles: We like what we like.

I'm just wondering what you mean by comfortable. Plusher? More confident cornering? Perceived feeling of being faster or maybe just more what you are used too.

Over the past 10 years I have spent much more time on slick MTb tires. I truly prefer the "perceived" feeling of more grip I have with fatter tires. Mostly it is about confidence for me. For whatever reason I'm more confident on fatter tires.

As far as "Comfort" (less harsh) goes it seems that at a given pressure it would be about volume and a larger tire has more volume.

I have similar discussions with friends that I ride with and it interest me how differently we like our tires to feel.

I assume that some of it may have to do with speed. I ride relatively slow compared to some and often suspect that to be the difference. If I went on rides where there were extended 26+ MPH pulls maybe I would prefer something different.

[LesMiner]

My reference between 23 and 25 mm differences was based on this quote from mcteague

Yeah, I am thinking I was. I ran about 105-110psi on the 23s and, now that I have 25s at 95psi

So Wayne77 when you say

Therefore, keeping tire pressure constant, a skinnier tire will be more likely to "balloon", as you say, and pinch flat than a wider tire.

was not what I meant, there would be difference because the tire pressure is not the same. The contact patch is more likely to look like an ellipse. As the load goes up the the contact patch will increase in length and width, if one changes both have to change. This is more a math problem where a plane intersects a circular tube, add in the distortion in the shape.

[RPS]

I don't really mean to debate it. I think the same can be said for tire width and pressure as can be said about bike styles: We like what we like.

I'm just wondering what you mean by comfortable. Plusher? More confident cornering? Perceived feeling of being faster or maybe just more what you are used too.

Over the past 10 years I have spent much more time on slick MTb tires. I truly prefer the "perceived" feeling of more grip I have with fatter tires. Mostly it is about confidence for me. For whatever reason I'm more confident on fatter tires.

As far as "Comfort" (less harsh) goes it seems that at a given pressure it would be about volume and a larger tire has more volume.

I have similar discussions with friends that I ride with and it interest me how differently we like our tires to feel.

I assume that some of it may have to do with speed. I ride relatively slow compared to some and often suspect that to be the difference. If I went on rides where there were extended 26+ MPH pulls maybe I would prefer something different.Lifelover, I consider the highlighted characteristics as performance oriented, not comfort.

At the same pressure we should have a contact area that is similar in size, and for me, a longer and narrower contact area "anticipates" and averages imperfections in the road much better. The skinnier tire at the same pressure rolls over expansion joints and the like much smoother for my taste.

In general I think we are splitting hairs anyway.

This subject reminds me of an experience I had a couple of years ago while looking for a small classic RV to restore (picture below). The owner had installed fat low-pressure tires (about 45 PSI) on the rear which looked odd – like an afterthought (normal tires would have matched the fronts and required 80 PSI).

A check underneath the empty unit revealed that there was less than ¾-inch of clearance between the axle and frame (I expected 4 to 6 inches for an empty unit). The owner had obviously used fat tires to “fix” a suspension problem. After that, I didn’t give it a second look – to much work to fix it right.

Tires are only tires -- their total impact on ride quality should be limited IMHO and not made the primary source of comfort.

[Orin]

I'm just wondering what you mean by comfortable. Plusher? More confident cornering? Perceived feeling of being faster or maybe just more what you are used too.


I was using 'more comfortable' in the sense of 'plusher'... less jarring over bumps, vibration from chipseal more muted and so on.

Orin.

[Orin]

Tires are only tires -- their total impact on ride quality should be limited IMHO and not made the primary source of comfort.

Then what is the primary source of comfort on a bicycle? Wheelbase? Chainstay length?

Orin.

[dawgie]

I use Michelin tires almost exclusively after trying many different brands over the years. A couple of years ago, I bought 3 Pro Race 700x25 tires to put on my bike for a tour that would involve some crushed limestone trails.

A few points:
-- The Michi 25s are much wider than advertised, more like 27s in fact.
-- They provide a very nice ride because you can run them at lower air pressures, but to be honest, the ride isn't that much different than 23s.
-- Because the tires are so wide, they can be difficult fitting through your brake calipers if set with tight tolerances. You may literally have to inflate the tires after putting fitting them under the calipers unless you readjust the brakes. One way or the other, you'll need to release the calipers.
-- The bike I am running the 25s on has a Serotta F1 threaded fork with steel steerer tube. The tires fit with the fork fine.
-- The Michi 25s wear forever. My tires have at least 2,000 miles on them and appear to have many more miles left before they'll need replacing. I still haven't had to use the third 700x25 tire that I bought.
-- Apparently because they run at lower pressures, I don't have to reinflate the 25s nearly as often as my 23s. I typically reinflate my 23 tires every time I ride, but will often go several rides before reinflating my 25s.
-- Regarding the weight, I don't have a clue. I am not a weight weenie and could care less if the 25s weigh a few grams more.

[RPS]

Then what is the primary source of comfort on a bicycle? Wheelbase? Chainstay length?

Orin.Orin, have you ever asked yourself what it is that we as riders can actually feel on a bike (as it relates to comfort)? If we ride the same bike with the same tires and the same air pressure on a very smooth road, why does it feel so great compared to riding it on a rough chip-and-seal surface?

Seriously, what do we feel differently between a smooth road and a rough one? Being outside the scope of this thread, IMO it should be discussed separately.

[93legendti]

Tire performance assuming similar construction...

At the same pressure:

Narrower tire is more comfortable, more aerodynamic and more susceptible to pinch flats.

Wider tire is less comfortable(!), less aerodynamic, has lower rolling resistance and is less susceptible to pinch flats.
...
So, you want comfort? You need a narrower tire (not a good idea due to pinch flats) or lower pressure in a wider tire. You might pay for it with higher rolling resistance and worse aerodynamics (not a worry unless you are time trialling).

...

Tire construction:

Thinner tread and more flexible sidewalls give lower rolling resistance. Many wider tires currently available have neither and are built to take 100 plus psi, resulting in a harsh ride! If you count the Pro2 Race as wide, it's an exception as are Grand Bois Cypres 700x30 (I've been riding these and at most speeds find no disadvantage) and Panaracer Pasela.


...
Orin.
I've snipped for brevity, but I am in the 1% of people who can't find the PR2 in a 25c comfortable. I've tried them on my 55cm lugged Rapid Tour, 52cm Strong Ti and 54cm Fierte Ti. I've tried them at 90, 85, 80 and today at 75psi. For me, they are jarring over broken pavement with a decided thunk that radiates right up my back. Tried them on 2007 Mavic K ES' and Dave Thomas Speeddreams (Velocity 18/28 Sapim spoke wheels). On both sets of wheels I then tried (and preferred) Conti 4000's in 23c at 95psi and Conto 4000's in 25c at 90psi to the Mich PR2's. I WISH the PR2's weren't so jarring, 'cuz they're fun to zip onto a dirt shoulder when traffic gets heavy or ride on the Nature Trail/walk path around my house. I simply can't ride the PR2's at any pressure because by the tiem I return home, my back is starting to ache.

I've said before and I'll say it again. I do not see how such a thick, stiff tire such as the PR2 (I do not mean as in width, but thickness of the tread) can be a comfortable ride. The Contis and Velofle Pave's, which I love, are much more pliable and malleable. For me, that seems to coincide with the increased comfort I notice when riding.

[vaxn8r]

I've snipped for brevity, but I am in the 1% of people who can't find the PR2 in a 25c comfortable. I've tried them on my 55cm lugged Rapid Tour, 52cm Strong Ti and 54cm Fierte Ti. I've tried them at 90, 85, 80 and today at 75psi. For me, they are jarring over broken pavement with a decided thunk that radiates right up my back. Tried them on 2007 Mavic K ES' and Dave Thomas Speeddreams (Velocity 18/28 Sapim spoke wheels). On both sets of wheels I then tried (and preferred) Conti 4000's in 23c at 95psi and Conto 4000's in 25c at 90psi to the Mich PR2's. I WISH the PR2's weren't so jarring, 'cuz they're fun to zip onto a dirt shoulder when traffic gets heavy or ride on the Nature Trail/walk path around my house. I simply can't ride the PR2's at any pressure because by the tiem I return home, my back is starting to ache.

I've said before and I'll say it again. I do not see how such a thick, stiff tire such as the PR2 (I do not mean as in width, but thickness of the tread) can be a comfortable ride. The Contis and Velofle Pave's, which I love, are much more pliable and malleable. For me, that seems to coincide with the increased comfort I notice when riding.
Interesting take on the Michelins. I love the 25's and use them exclusively on the tandem and now have them on my Co-Mo. They aren't a cushy tire but they wear well, they are fairly round so they handle great and they feel fast. My last experience on Contis was with 3000's. I don't know why I stuck with that tire so long. They wore out fast, were easily susceptible to cuts and they didn't feel fast (or comfortable). Because of that experience I've been afraid to waste any more money on Contis. Though I am willing to listen if other's experience varies.

[93legendti]

Interesting take on the Michelins. I love the 25's and use them exclusively on the tandem and now have them on my Co-Mo. They aren't a cushy tire but they wear well, they are fairly round so they handle great and they feel fast. My last experience on Contis was with 3000's. I don't know why I stuck with that tire so long. They wore out fast, were easily susceptible to cuts and they didn't feel fast (or comfortable). Because of that experience I've been afraid to waste any more money on Contis. Though I am willing to listen if other's experience varies.

I will say this, I rode in the rain with the PR2's today and I never felt so sure cornering in the wet. Maybe it was the Fierte (new in November 2006), the tires or a combination of the 2, but it was nicer ride than suaul in the rain.