Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

How much of a difference does tire width make on road bike performance?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

How much of a difference does tire width make on road bike performance?

Old 10-01-19, 08:42 AM
  #51  
sheddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,438

Bikes: my precious steel boys

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked 603 Times in 359 Posts
F1 tires are spec, they run the tires that are supplied to them. The tires are actually very specifically not ideal- this was done in a weird attempt to make race strategy involving tire degradation more complicated.


e) misread a post

Last edited by sheddle; 10-01-19 at 08:53 AM.
sheddle is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 08:44 AM
  #52  
subgrade
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Saulkrasti, Latvia
Posts: 898

Bikes: Focus Crater Lake

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 391 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times in 204 Posts
Once more: friction is not related to contact area. Simply put, larger contact area means also less normal force (pressure from weight), thus it cancels itself out of the equation.

See here the explanation for wide tires on racecars (spoiler - aclinjury has it right): https://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae200.cfm
subgrade is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 08:44 AM
  #53  
rm -rf
don't try this at home.
 
rm -rf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N. KY
Posts: 5,918
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 964 Post(s)
Liked 496 Times in 343 Posts
Originally Posted by aclinjury
I'm afraid you really don't know what you're talking about. You don't understand traction, grip, and rubber.

Please go here for a simple explanation of grip:
Friction Formula

"contact patch size" doesn't come into the equation of grip, it's in fact all dependent on the frictional coefficient of the rubber.

Somtimes, intuitions can get you into trouble. Here's something to think about friction and grip.
Let us suppose that we're sliding a square block of ice across the floor. The block of ice has certain contact-patch area with the floor.
Now, suppose we cut the block of ice into 2 halves so now that each half has 1/2 the contact-patch area of the original block.
Question: so do the 2 smaller blocks have less friction grip than the original larger block? The answer is no. All three blocks have exactly the same frictional grip. In other words, grip does not depend on the size of the contact-patch at all.

Now, there are reason why you'd want to use a larger tire (for traction, longevity, etc), but "larger contact patch gives better grip" is not one of them. I'm merely pointing out your false fact that you seem to hell bent on embracing, and doing the community a disservice. I hope you get this.
Sorry, I'm not following your physics arguments. Maybe you can elaborate?

Three tires, with 80 pounds of weight on the wheel. Sane rubber compound on the tire.
The contact patch would be ( 80 lbs / psi ) square inches.

38mm at 48 psi. 1.6 sq inch contact patch
23mm at 100 psi 0.8 sq inch
20mm at 125 psi (I'm guessing) 0.64 sq inch

Are you saying that all these would have the same cornering grip?
Because there is the same cornering force on all of these? Up to the limits of the rubber material? What about real world rough surfaces?
rm -rf is offline  
Likes For rm -rf:
Old 10-01-19, 08:46 AM
  #54  
JasonD67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 157

Bikes: BMC Teammachine SLR02 Disc, Cannondale CAAD 4

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times in 10 Posts
My old Cannondale CAAD 4 can't fit anything larger than 25's due to brake clearance issues. With most rim brake bikes 25's are going to be about the max you can fit. IMO, one of the biggest advantages of disc bikes is the ability to run wide tires.
JasonD67 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 08:48 AM
  #55  
subgrade
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Saulkrasti, Latvia
Posts: 898

Bikes: Focus Crater Lake

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 391 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times in 204 Posts
Originally Posted by rm -rf
Sorry, I'm not following your physics arguments. Maybe you can elaborate?

Three tires, with 80 pounds of weight on the wheel. Sane rubber compound on the tire.
The contact patch would be ( 80 lbs / psi ) square inches.

38mm at 48 psi. 1.6 sq inch contact patch
23mm at 100 psi 0.8 sq inch
20mm at 125 psi (I'm guessing) 0.64 sq inch

Are you saying that all these would have the same cornering grip?
Yes, because the smaller contact patch supports the same weight as the larger one, and thus there is more pressure applied onto it.
subgrade is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 08:56 AM
  #56  
sheddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,438

Bikes: my precious steel boys

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked 603 Times in 359 Posts
I think I expressed this wrong but iirc contact patch is sort of an indirect effect of rolling friction - i.e. at lower air pressures, you lose more energy to tire deformation than if you run rock hard 120psi 700c23s. i.e. "stiffness".


"rolling resistance" is a better term than "rolling friction" since it's really more a case of mechanical efficiency than actual "friction". to put it another way, tire grip is an enormously complicated process with a huge number of variables, not just coefficient of friction.

Last edited by sheddle; 10-01-19 at 09:04 AM.
sheddle is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 08:57 AM
  #57  
Cougrrcj
Senior Member
 
Cougrrcj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 3,891

Bikes: A few...

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 620 Post(s)
Liked 370 Times in 256 Posts
When I bought my '86 Miyata 710 a few years ago, it had a 23 front and 25 rear. Too skinny for the rough roads I ride on, so I went with 28s front and rear.





The rear fits fine, but...

BUT the front tire barely clears the fork bridge!


That's only about one millimeter clearance. I'll probably have to knock the front size down to 25, and keep the 28 rear.


.

Last edited by Cougrrcj; 10-01-19 at 09:01 AM.
Cougrrcj is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:09 AM
  #58  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by subgrade
Yes, because the smaller contact patch supports the same weight as the larger one, and thus there is more pressure applied onto it.
You're right but only if you're lucky enough not to have small pebbles, sand, mud, water, anything which interferes with the tire's interaction with the pavement between the tire and that very small contact patch.

That's why it's better to not pretend to be Isaac Newton, put down the text books and look at what works 99% of the time and also eliminates efficiency losses due to vibrations from the road making their way up to the rider's body.
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:10 AM
  #59  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by JasonD67
My old Cannondale CAAD 4 can't fit anything larger than 25's due to brake clearance issues. With most rim brake bikes 25's are going to be about the max you can fit. IMO, one of the biggest advantages of disc bikes is the ability to run wide tires.
You're absolutely correct, also with cantis but disc brakes are a quantum leap in this area of focus!
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:12 AM
  #60  
sheddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,438

Bikes: my precious steel boys

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked 603 Times in 359 Posts
Originally Posted by Cougrrcj
When I bought my '86 Miyata 710 a few years ago, it had a 23 front and 25 rear. Too skinny for the rough roads I ride on, so I went with 28s front and rear.





The rear fits fine, but...

BUT the front tire barely clears the fork bridge!


That's only about one millimeter clearance. I'll probably have to knock the front size down to 25, and keep the 28 rear.


.
The best I can do with mine is 25 front, 28 rear. Old racing bikes and their zero fork clearances...

I'm fine with 23-23s run under the limit. Don't plan to go on dirt any time soon.

Last edited by sheddle; 10-01-19 at 09:15 AM.
sheddle is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:18 AM
  #61  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by sheddle
I think I expressed this wrong but iirc contact patch is sort of an indirect effect of rolling friction - i.e. at lower air pressures, you lose more energy to tire deformation than if you run rock hard 120psi 700c23s. i.e. "stiffness".


"rolling resistance" is a better term than "rolling friction" since it's really more a case of mechanical efficiency than actual "friction". to put it another way, tire grip is an enormously complicated process with a huge number of variables, not just coefficient of friction.
So improved traction/grip/friction, whatever you guys want to call it is improved with a larger tire, also is efficiency. The loss in energy caused by the deforming of the tire casing is MIMIMAL compared to the gains from minimizing the wattage lost from transferring vibration to the rider. Bike tires (unlike car tires, etc) are actually very flexible - so the loss of energy from compression and rebound is pretty small. What's NOT small is the loss of energy each time you go over a little pebble or rock. Each time you hit an imperfection on the road (which is constant), very hard tires have no alternative but to ''lift" the rider's body and bike over the imperfection and down the other side. This also leads to fatigue from your body being subjected to constant vibration.

Wide tires at lower pressures have better dampening abilities; they ride OVER small imperfections (and some big ones) without having to "lift" the bike and rider over them and without transferring vibrations to the rider.

A very hard tire is much better on a glass-smooth surface but a wider tire is better on everything else.
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:31 AM
  #62  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by sheddle
The best I can do with mine is 25 front, 28 rear. Old racing bikes and their zero fork clearances...

I'm fine with 23-23s run under the limit. Don't plan to go on dirt any time soon.
You could switch over to 650b rims with long-reach calipers - you may be able to get up to the 42-47mm range in the front/rear, respectively. That would make a HUGE difference
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:46 AM
  #63  
subgrade
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Saulkrasti, Latvia
Posts: 898

Bikes: Focus Crater Lake

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 391 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times in 204 Posts
Originally Posted by davei1980
Wide tires at lower pressures have better dampening abilities; they ride OVER small imperfections (and some big ones) without having to "lift" the bike and rider over them and without transferring vibrations to the rider.
No arguing with that; however, it is wrong to assume that this advantage continues infinitely with ever larger tire volumes and lower pressures (like you did before in this thread). At some point the contact patch becomes long enough for the rolling ressistance that comes from deforming the tire to outweigh the gains in efficiency from dampening small surface irregularities. A certain sweet spot exists for any given combination of rider+bike weight, riding surface, tire, and tire pressure. Decreasing pressure below that point results in more rolling resistance, even if pinch flats/rim damage are of no concern. Not to mention the greater weight of larger tires and the clearance issues.
subgrade is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 09:52 AM
  #64  
Metieval
Senior Member
 
Metieval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857

Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times in 214 Posts
wide tires are for wide riders.
Metieval is offline  
Likes For Metieval:
Old 10-01-19, 09:54 AM
  #65  
Caliper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 990

Bikes: Many

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 385 Post(s)
Liked 58 Times in 43 Posts
Originally Posted by aclinjury
I'm afraid you really don't know what you're talking about. You don't understand traction, grip, and rubber.


Please go here for a simple explanation of grip:

Friction Formula


"contact patch size" doesn't come into the equation of grip, it's in fact all dependent on the frictional coefficient of the rubber.

Originally Posted by subgrade
Once more: friction is not related to contact area. Simply put, larger contact area means also less normal force (pressure from weight), thus it cancels itself out of the equation.


See here the explanation for wide tires on racecars (spoiler - aclinjury has it right): https://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae200.cfm

Sorry, there is more to tires than physics 101. The simple friction equation is all well and good when you have fairly rigid smooth bodies in contact with each other. Rubber and tires are not this however, they are very dynamic and flexible. If contact patch didn't matter, drag racers wouldn't drop their tire pressures. But, lower pressures on the same sticky tire DO result in more grip because of the larger contact area. More rubber interfacing with the road means that there are more points of mechanical interface where the rubber is physically interlocking with the pavement surface and to make the tire slide, those pieces of rubber must be physically sheared off (the source of skidmarks)


Width, even at the same tire pressure also influences lateral traction on because of tire slip angle while cornering and the contact patch shape, it all has to do with how the contact patch deforms due to lateral forces. Simply, a long/skinny contact patch cannot support the same slip angle because the tire sidewall must deflect more and at some point cannot. I'm not sure how much this carries over to bikes due to the different tire shapes vs cars, but in cars wider tires of the same compound do most certainly increase cornering grip.
Caliper is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:00 AM
  #66  
subgrade
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Saulkrasti, Latvia
Posts: 898

Bikes: Focus Crater Lake

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 391 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times in 204 Posts
Originally Posted by Caliper
Sorry, there is more to tires than physics 101. The simple friction equation is all well and good when you have fairly rigid smooth bodies in contact with each other. Rubber and tires are not this however, they are very dynamic and flexible. If contact patch didn't matter, drag racers wouldn't drop their tire pressures. But, lower pressures on the same sticky tire DO result in more grip because of the larger contact area. More rubber interfacing with the road means that there are more points of mechanical interface where the rubber is physically interlocking with the pavement surface and to make the tire slide, those pieces of rubber must be physically sheared off (the source of skidmarks)


Width, even at the same tire pressure also influences lateral traction on because of tire slip angle while cornering and the contact patch shape, it all has to do with how the contact patch deforms due to lateral forces. Simply, a long/skinny contact patch cannot support the same slip angle because the tire sidewall must deflect more and at some point cannot. I'm not sure how much this carries over to bikes due to the different tire shapes vs cars, but in cars wider tires of the same compound do most certainly increase cornering grip.
The point is that friction does not depend on contact area, while grip indeed does. They are not the same.
subgrade is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:01 AM
  #67  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by subgrade
No arguing with that; however, it is wrong to assume that this advantage continues infinitely with ever larger tire volumes and lower pressures (like you did before in this thread). At some point the contact patch becomes long enough for the rolling ressistance that comes from deforming the tire to outweigh the gains in efficiency from dampening small surface irregularities. A certain sweet spot exists for any given combination of rider+bike weight, riding surface, tire, and tire pressure. Decreasing pressure below that point results in more rolling resistance, even if pinch flats/rim damage are of no concern. Not to mention the greater weight of larger tires and the clearance issues.
I agree completely - I just think the "sweet spot" is at a MUCH wider width than conventionally thought. I think it's in the 2.5-3" range, the dropoff in "performance" in the plus platform isn't nearly as steep as you think. And yes, you do have to worry about pinch flats, which is another reason wider tires are better, they hold more air volume regardless of pressure, to keep you up. Also, tubeless technology is helping this.

I ride 33mm very high TPI (120, ish?) tubular CX race tires on my everyday bike (very long story how that came to be). I just put flat bars on it (also different thread) which shifts my weight back, so I am now running about 21 psi in the front and about 38 in the rear (I am about 173 [sheesh!] and my computer bag weighs another 19 lbs). I have ridden 29+ bikes and they ride WAY better than my current setup, even with wider-than-average tires at very low pressure. My next bike will be a 29+ platform for sure.
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:11 AM
  #68  
Metieval
Senior Member
 
Metieval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,857

Bikes: Road bike, Hybrid, Gravel, Drop bar SS, hard tail MTB

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1218 Post(s)
Liked 298 Times in 214 Posts
My 28's are definitely faster than my 38's on pavement.

on gravel my 40's are faster, but on pavement the 40's are draggy. Both the 38's and the 40's push wind, and have a weight penalty.

As for my road bike, I probably can't tell any difference in speeds/power/watts, but the comfort of the 28's is noticeable over the 25. Just because I can, I'll probably go tubeless on the road bike and go back to a 25. or leave it at a 28. A 28 in a paceline is effortless!!
Metieval is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:15 AM
  #69  
sheddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,438

Bikes: my precious steel boys

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked 603 Times in 359 Posts
one of the funnier things I've heard is that 23s/high tire pressure have a psychological speed effect over lower air pressure tires specifically because of the road vibration, which is why racers took a while to use wider tires
sheddle is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:28 AM
  #70  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by sheddle
one of the funnier things I've heard is that 23s/high tire pressure have a psychological speed effect over lower air pressure tires specifically because of the road vibration, which is why racers took a while to use wider tires
I believe that 100% - makes you feel like you're riding right on the ragged edge!

I also heard most grand tour teams have gone to 25mm tires and some Specialized-sponsored teams with 26s, again, WAY too narrow for everyday riding but efficiency doesn't always win races. They're made for a sprint-finish not for pedaling efficiency or comfort.
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:32 AM
  #71  
sheddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,438

Bikes: my precious steel boys

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked 603 Times in 359 Posts
I mean, yeah, at this point if I showed up at an A group ride with 23s people would probably think I'm wacky and out of date for using narrow tires when everyone knows that the pros are using wider tires these days.

I really don't care because I have fairly heavy bomb-proof wheels, and also you can just ride around potholes. If I cared that about "plush", I'd be a downhill MTB racer, instead of a doofus riding a 40 year old bicycle.
sheddle is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:40 AM
  #72  
davei1980
Very Slow Rider
 
davei1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: E Wa
Posts: 1,274

Bikes: Jones Plus LWB, 1983 Centurion Japanese CrMo bike

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times in 101 Posts
Originally Posted by sheddle
I mean, yeah, at this point if I showed up at an A group ride with 23s people would probably think I'm wacky and out of date for using narrow tires when everyone knows that the pros are using wider tires these days.

I really don't care because I have fairly heavy bomb-proof wheels, and also you can just ride around potholes. If I cared that about "plush", I'd be a downhill MTB racer, instead of a doofus riding a 40 year old bicycle.
Now you're getting in to the dampening characteristics of steel (old bike) vs composite, etc! That's a whole new thread! I think the key is not caring what the group thinks.
davei1980 is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:48 AM
  #73  
aclinjury
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 660
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 497 Post(s)
Liked 170 Times in 128 Posts
Originally Posted by davei1980
Thanks for showing you are as clueless about racecars as you are about bikes. They run wide tires for CORNERING TRACTION. Not longevity (they change tires frequently).

And don't worry, you obviously lack the chops to debate with me! The friction equation doesn't control for NUMEROUS variables at work in a tire's interaction with the road in real-life conditions.
I have already said that mechanical grip and traction are not the same. You still don't seem to get this. Traction involves much more variable than just tire width. It involves tire carcass, weight of car, wheel camber, surface, etc.
But hey like you said, it's a free country, so you're free to babble on without any evidence.
aclinjury is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 10:56 AM
  #74  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,538

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10902 Post(s)
Liked 7,393 Times in 4,148 Posts
Originally Posted by Metieval
wide tires are for wide riders.
That makes no sense at all. I ride with men and women who are in the 120-160 weight range and use 32-35mm tires on their drop bar bikes, which are wide sizes for drop bar road bikes. All are quality tires that are light and roll well- the riders love em.
None are wide riders though.
And I see countless healthy/fit cyclists riding pavement on gravel tires all the time.

...perhaps you mean 2+ inch tires when you claim that wide tires are for wide riders? Even then I wouldnt agree, but at least that would eliminate all the stated and examples of wide tires being used by fit cyclists.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 10-01-19, 11:00 AM
  #75  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by davei1980
And you probably won't until you go north of 50. 32 is too narrow for most of us on here, although the spandex-clad, TDF wannabe crowd will argue that's too wide
By "spandex-clad, TDF wannabe crowd" you mean cyclists who actually ride and corner at high speed?
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.