Jan Heine on wide tires for the road

[fourflys]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

How many paved course FKT? How many FKT on tires wider than the rest of the field?

I’ll answer because I looked last year; 0 and 0.

The tires are great, they’re also not nearly as fast as the marketing leads one to believe, the pseudoscience surrounding them is a joke.

so is there such a thing as an FKT for a paved course? I ask in all seriousness because I googled "road FKT cycling" and "paved course FKT cycling" (had to add cycling as FKT is a running thing too it looks like) and didn't really find anything that wasn't gravel or a trail..

[spoonrobot]

Originally Posted by fourflys

so is there such a thing as an FKT for a paved course? I ask in all seriousness because I googled "road FKT cycling" and paved course FKT cycling" (had to add cycling as FKT is a running thing too it looks like) and didn't really find anything that wasn't gravel or a trail..

Transam, Transcon, LEJOG, LEL, RAAM, PBP, etc. etc. - nobody serious uses much wider tires than you'd expect - 28s maybe 30s are the max.

FKT is the market differentiation term for "course record" so bikepacking racers could have their own thing too.

Interesting side note; the wider Heine's tires have gotten, the slower his PBP times have become, his fastest time being on 700cx30mm tires.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

TBF this is way worse than the Pegoretti

Worse in what way?

[palincss]

Originally Posted by fourflys

I don't remember the article, but I just don't get the unquestioning love for Pegs.. I'm sure they're nice bikes, but folks treat them like a mythical beast.. not sure I would have disagreed with Jan's take on one to be honest..

Post #38 has a link to the discussion across the hall. The review of the bike appeared in BQ 32, Summer 2010.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

Interesting side note; the wider Heine's tires have gotten, the slower his PBP times have become, his fastest time being on 700cx30mm tires.

And the older he has gotten, too. You think just possibly that might have something to do with it?

[tomato coupe]

I think it's humorous that he states this:

This road test alone doesn’t prove anything—it’s just anecdotal evidence.

But also makes several definitive statements, such as:

Had the course included any rough stretches, the wide tires would have been faster.

and

I know I wouldn’t have been any faster on narrower tires.

[spoonrobot]

Originally Posted by palincss

And the older he has gotten, too. You think just possibly that might have something to do with it?

No. We know from much research on the topic; the ability to finish long distance events consistently at high speed isn't predicated on age. Scott Dickson, Roger Baumann, and many others are examples. Jan's speed delta is well within a statistically significant probability wrt his tires, given the wealth of information about his bike, fitness, riding style, etc.

In 2019 he was probably in the best shape of his life, with the best bike and tires, no off-bike issues, good control discipline, and had a significant amount of time drafting a hot tandem - but still came in significantly slower than his narrow tire time.

The differences once he went to larger tires are easily quantified by the available data on aero, hysteresis losses, and weight increases from larger tires.

Worse in what way?

It's the equivalent of huffing paint.

[lavi]

We hobbyists like to overthink everything and then pound said topic deep into the ground.

I don't know for sure, but following Ted King's Insta, pretty sure dude rolls 32s/35s all the time. He surely has access to RH 26s and 28s...but I don't think I've seen those on his bikes. But what the hell do ex Pro Tour riders know about going fast anyhow?

For me, 32s are the new 28s...which were the new 25s.

[Pinned]

Jan Heine has a lot of opinions, I'm more interested in facts though.

[callmeishmael]

Assuming Jan genuinely believes what he says (principle of charity and all that), then his mind must be an interesting place. Who else does (even if unscientific) aero testing on fenders and handlebar bags, with the express intention of mounting them on a 50s style frame with a Nivex drivertrain? It's gloriously insane.

[palincss]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

It's the equivalent of huffing paint.

What utter nonsense.

[marciero]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

I try not to comment much on the Heine stuff because at this point it's obvious he gave up scientific credibility to sell product. Classic marketing methodology, boost the signals that align with your product, denigrate and dismiss those that don't.

His "experiments" (more generally studies) have not reliably replicated when performed by others. Rolldown tests have almost always favored narrower tires, his aero testing was debunked by multiple people, and the most damning result - almost nobody interested in riding far, fast, and in comfort is using his ideas. He's had to pivot to gravel racers to move product - road, triathlon, MTB, randonneurs, ultra-distance - by and large have found his ideas do not generalize to their riding style. Which begs the question, why the huge discrepancy between the Bicycle Quarterly Rene Herse laboratory with 1 tester, 1 statistician, and no peer review - and the laboratory of the open road with thousands upon thousands of testers?

The only people that ever win races on Rene Herse tires are using the same width as the rest of the field, and are only ever winning off road races? What means?

I wont comment on the validity of his experiments but I do note that their one statistician is one more than pretty much anyone else. I'd bet that no one else doing this type of testing has even an MS level stats person. This is basic stats NHST methods* people are using, and I dont think that you need a PhD stats person, but you brought it up, and, as I mentioned, abuses abound-crisis levels- in the peer reviewed science literature even with these simple methods. Speaking of peer review, expecting peer review or rejecting test results because they are not peer reviewed is just silly for simple product testing.

Sure there is an eye roll marketing edge to Jan's writing. But it is also worth noting that he was testing and touting wide tires for many years before he even formed Compass. That company was formed to sell products they liked, based on what their testing showed. The product and marketing came out of the culture of testing that existed, not the other way around.

*As I've pointed out elsewhere, "null hypothesis significance test" methods are ill-suited for detecting small differences such as those between different tire types.

[Black Dog]

Originally Posted by Michael D

I can't even

Yet reality says you should.

[witcombusa]

Originally Posted by fourflys

I don't remember the article, but I just don't get the unquestioning love for Pegs.. I'm sure they're nice bikes, but folks treat them like a mythical beast.. not sure I would have disagreed with Jan's take on one to be honest..

There are a number of 'mythical beast' bikes promoted hard in the cycling culture. Confente comes to mind (and other builders that died too young).
Serotta on PL (because of the site history), Firefly, etc.

In many cases it's the owners trying to justify their choices or to retain or even build the value. As stated above, there are LOTS of great bikes out there. Some of the best ever are being built today.(I'm talking metal bikes here)

Sometimes they need a little fun poked in their direction. Can't take it too seriously.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by fourflys

so amusing when someone posts a JH article.. it just beings out the "not in my club" mentality.. evidenced by the comment about the Peg "hurting my eyes... should not have zero bar drop, etc..." and we genuinely wonder why folks think cyclists are a-holes sometimes..

No kidding..same for Bardet bike build video...I think a interesting read, and video..Not brought down from the mountain top on stone tablets...bike stuff, stuff about toys..