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

will slicker tires make a notable difference?

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!

will slicker tires make a notable difference?

Old 01-14-21, 06:33 PM
  #51  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
Fine, then I will ask you again: Show me the tests that demonstrates that drum tests can accurately predict RR in real world road conditions across various types of tires.

Still waiting....
So you don't accept anything that you can't understand and confirm yourself? Time dilation affects satellites in a way that I don't understand and can't confirm with my math skills, but I accept that GPS satellites need to compensate for this so that I can use my phone to reliably locate the nearest Starbucks. Are you telling me to throw out the baby with the bathwater?
WhyFi is offline  
Likes For WhyFi:
Old 01-14-21, 06:50 PM
  #52  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
It should be simple to infer from the second plot. https://blog.silca.cc/part-4b-rollin...-and-impedance
I've responded to this particular article many times over the years. I will try to find my response so I do not have to re-type.

But three things for now:

1- The chart you refer to is a sample size of one. One tire.

2- look at the 5th chart (the one with the 25mm Continental GP4000s II tires). The roller drum data is different that the real world data (even the brand new asphalt)

3- The point of that article and the tests shown were not to validate the roller drum data as a reliably accurate for real world values, and they do not claim it does.

Last edited by Kapusta; 01-14-21 at 07:03 PM.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 06:52 PM
  #53  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,142
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 231 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
I've responded to this particular article many times over the years. I will try to find my response so I do not have to re-type.

But three things for now:

1- The chart you refer to is a sample size of one. One tire.
Which is why I wrote you can infer the rest.
asgelle is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 06:58 PM
  #54  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
So you don't accept anything that you can't understand and confirm yourself? Time dilation affects satellites in a way that I don't understand and can't confirm with my math skills, but I accept that GPS satellites need to compensate for this so that I can use my phone to reliably locate the nearest Starbucks. Are you telling me to throw out the baby with the bathwater?
Actually, what I have confirmed to myself is that the data from BRR.com for two tires I have actually owned is very different from how they worked on the road.

Also, take a look at the link to the German magazine test linked to earlier that contradicts the drum test for the Bon Jon Pass.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:00 PM
  #55  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
Which is why I wrote you can infer the rest.
No, actually you can't infer the rest with a sample size of one.

Plus, as I said, look at the chart down farther showing results for the 25mm Continental GP4000s II.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:21 PM
  #56  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
Actually, what I have confirmed to myself is that the data from BRR.com for two tires I have actually owned is very different from how they worked on the road.
Show me.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:22 PM
  #57  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Show me.
I mean, it's besides the point, but why not?
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:36 PM
  #58  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,142
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 231 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
No, actually you can't infer the rest with a sample size of one.
Itís not a sample size of one. Itís validating the model to translate from roller data to road Crr. While that might not be ideal, since the model has no tire dependent parameters, itís strongly indicative. Put that together with several experts all saying the correlation holds and Iíd say itís convincing.
asgelle is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:36 PM
  #59  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
I mean, it's besides the point, but why not?
Yes, it is beside the point. We agree an something
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:43 PM
  #60  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
Yes, it is beside the point. We agree an something
It's not beside the point that you don't believe anything that you didn't confirm yourself, so... I don't believe you.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:46 PM
  #61  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
It’s not a sample size of one. It’s validating the model to translate from roller data to road Crr. While that might not be ideal, since the model has no tire dependent parameters, it’s strongly indicative. Put that together with several experts all saying the correlation holds and I’d say it’s convincing.
A sample size of one does not validate anything.

Are you purposely avoiding looking at the 5th chart (the one with the 25mm Continental GP4000s II tires)? The roller drum data is different from the real world data (even the brand new asphalt). So for one tire the drum data is the same as smooth asphalt and another tire it is different on smooth asphalt, and then VERY different on rougher asphalt.

How can this possibly be interpreted as validating drum data as a accurate predictor of real world results?

The authors make several conclusions in this article. What you are claiming is not one of them.

Last edited by Kapusta; 01-14-21 at 07:56 PM.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:56 PM
  #62  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
It's not beside the point that you don't believe anything that you didn't confirm yourself, so... I don't believe you.
Ask literally anybody who has owned a Bon Jon Pass if they think that data on BRR for that tire makes sense.

Also, take a look at this: https://www.renehersecycles.com/test...res-isnt-easy/ The German test also has issues, but when you look at the tires the Bon Jon Pass is hanging with, the results are very, very different from the roller drum tests in terms for where the BJP ranks.

And heck, just follow the discussion I am having with asgelle about that Silca article. Look at the result in the two plots we are talking about (well, I am talking about both, he is ignoring the second). Contrary to proving that the roller drum tests can be accurately used for comparisons, it actually shows the limitations.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 07:58 PM
  #63  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,142
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 231 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
A sample size of one does not validate anything.

Are you purposely avoiding looking at the 5th chart (the one with the 25mm Continental GP4000s II tires)? The roller drum data is different that the real world data (even the brand new asphalt). So for one tire the drum data is the same as smooth asphalt and another tire it is different on smooth asphalt, and then VERY different on rougher asphalt.

How can this possibly be interpreted as validating drum data as a accurate predictor of real world results?

The authors make several conclusions in this article. What you are claiming is not one of them.
Are being purposely obtuse? The second plot applies a model to translate roller data to road. The sample size is not one, but three for number of data points taken on the road. The lower plot does not apply the model to the roller data and just shows the roller and road results as is.
asgelle is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 08:02 PM
  #64  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
How can this possibly be interpreted as validating drum data as a accurate predictor of real world results?
This whole off-shoot of a conversation is about relative performance of tires as predicted by roller data. How is the 5th chart contradicting this? It only shows the impedance break point that was mentioned in the RChung quote that I'd copied.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 08:08 PM
  #65  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
How can this possibly be interpreted as validating drum data as a accurate predictor of real world results?
It's also worth noting that this test, which you claim invalidates RChung's statement, was performed with RChung's method -

"We decided to turn this opportunity into a tire pressure and Crr test using the Chung Method to determine Crr from field testing. ​​​​​​"

So yeah, I guess you're right - totally shouldn't take that guy at his word.
​​​​​​​
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 08:10 PM
  #66  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
It's also worth noting that this test, which you claim invalidates RChung's statement, was performed with RChung's method -

"We decided to turn this opportunity into a tire pressure and Crr test using the Chung Method to determine Crr from field testing. ​​​​​​"

So yeah, I guess you're right - totally shouldn't take that guy at his word.
​​​​​​​
You are taking a bunch of disparate information and molding into a conclusion that none of it supports.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 08:19 PM
  #67  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
You are taking a bunch of disparate information and molding into a conclusion that none of it supports.
Lol. No - looking through your posts, it's clear that you don't understand what's being discussed. We're not talking about roller drum accurately predicting rolling resistance, we're talking about roller drums predicting relative rolling resistance performance. IOW, if Tire A performs better on the rollers than Tire B, you can expect A to perform better than B in real life, too (unless they were very close to begin with and their impedance break points were slightly different and the tests were performed under conditions that would favor the break point of B, in which case the two [already close] results might be inverted).
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 08:29 PM
  #68  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,142
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 231 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Lol. No - looking through your posts, it's clear that you don't understand what's being discussed. We're not talking about roller drum accurately predicting rolling resistance, we're talking about roller drums predicting relative rolling resistance performance. IOW, if Tire A performs better on the rollers than Tire B, you can expect A to perform better than B in real life, too (unless they were very close to begin with and their impedance break points were slightly different and the tests were performed under conditions that would favor the break point of B, in which case the two [already close] results might be inverted).
and to go one step further, when asked for proof of this, I posted a link to Tom Anhaltís results showing roller data can be translated to road without any tire-dependent parameters implying that below the break point, the relative position of tires is the same on road as rollers.

As to the Heine write up, itís intriguing, but I donít know how much weight to put behind someone saying a test in which his product performed poorly is flawed.
asgelle is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 09:29 PM
  #69  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
Are being purposely obtuse? The second plot applies a model to translate roller data to road. The sample size is not one, but three for number of data points taken on the road.
Are we talking about the same graph?

From the description, the roller data (dark blue with data points) is there along with the predicted CRR (light blue line). And the real world data. The authors even note there surprise at how close the real world data was to the ROLLER DATA.

And yes, this is a sample size of ONE TIRE. They even specify the tire (23mm Vittoria). This shows the roller data accurately predicting the RR of ONE TIRE.

You mention three data points taken for the road. Sounds logical, but where is this described? And where is it specifying that the roller data is being presented differently here than in the chart below. Is there a "methods" link that I have missed?

The lower plot does not apply the model to the roller data and just shows the roller and road results as is.
And here is the fifth chart:


Again it shown the roller data (dark blue with data points) along with what I think is the predicted CRR (it is a light blue line but not labeled). Where is it specified that the roller data is being presented differently than for the 23mm Vittoria?

If the debate here is whether drum tests can be a reliable predictor of how tires will rank, I really don't get why we are arguing over this study. It does not address that question. It never asks it (except in the background describing a single test that led to a surprising conclusion that led to the study described in the article), and it never mentions any conclusion regarding it. And the only relevant info I see to he question does nothing to support it (unless you consider the validation of a single tire to be meaningful support). If anything the differences between the two graphs shown casts some doubts... though I am still open to an explanation of how you know from that article that the roller data is presented differently in the two graphs.... if that is the case, I will cede that the second graph does is not counter-indicative to the conclusion of the earlier graph.

Last edited by Kapusta; 01-15-21 at 08:52 AM.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 09:36 PM
  #70  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post

As to the Heine write up, itís intriguing, but I donít know how much weight to put behind someone saying a test in which his product performed poorly is flawed.
Forget his write up, just look at the results of the other test.

And again, ask anybody who has spent time an a Bon Jon Pass. The BRR.com results don't make sense.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 09:39 PM
  #71  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Lol. No - looking through your posts, it's clear that you don't understand what's being discussed. We're not talking about roller drum accurately predicting rolling resistance, we're talking about roller drums predicting relative rolling resistance performance. IOW, if Tire A performs better on the rollers than Tire B, you can expect A to perform better than B in real life, too (unless they were very close to begin with and their impedance break points were slightly different and the tests were performed under conditions that would favor the break point of B, in which case the two [already close] results might be inverted).
Actaully, I was talking about comparisons. That is why I brought up the difference between the second and fifth graphs. Graph shows the real world data for a 23mm Vittoria on smooth pavement very consistent with the roller data (in fact that authors even mentioned that they were surprised by this) but the other (25mm Continental GP4000s II at on different surfaces) shows the drum and real world data differing from each other for a different tire. If you want to be able to use the drum results for relative comparisons, then the differential between drum test and real world needs to be the same.

But more on the 5th graph of the 25mm Continental: there is a differential between the roller drum test and the various road surfaces. Your assumption is that this differential for the different surfaces will be consistent across all types of tires. THIS is what I have yet to see anyone demonstrate.

You are quoting RChung as saying he has demonstrated that this assumption is valid, but you are not specifying what context he is working in. Is he referring to all types and sizes of tires? Everything from superlight 23s to 42mm gravel tires? Differing road conditions? Or is he focusing on something more specific? This is why I said that without knowing more about what he is testing, you can't assume it applies to all tires.
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-14-21, 09:41 PM
  #72  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
OK, I have spent way more time on this than I ever meant to. If you want to have full faith in drum tests for all tires, have at, and enjoy.

More RH tires for the rest of us
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-15-21, 07:07 AM
  #73  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 32,965

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 342 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15441 Post(s)
Liked 4,303 Times in 2,263 Posts
Originally Posted by Kapusta View Post
More RH tires for the rest of us
Oh, good gravy - is that what this is all about? You're an acolyte and the tests don't heap enough praise your deity? If the relative rankings don't include the superiority of your rover tires bounding over lunar craters, it must be fundamentally flawed?

I'm a big believer in (relatively) wide and (relatively) low pressure - I'm ~180 lbs and ride 28mm tires at ~60psi on wide rims. I understand suspension losses and appreciate the comfort of lower pressure on ****ty roads, yadda, yadda. But, for every individual, there comes a point where more of a good thing involves too big of a trade-off. I like the feel of a spritely bike - I like to change speed and direction. I spent several thousand miles with supple, oversized 30mm tires. While they were a magic carpet ride, they felt too sluggish for me when I transitioned to more punchy group rides. Horses for courses. So, yes - if your "real world" conditions involves riding on rumble strips, by all means, you can have my share of RH tires.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 01-15-21, 08:32 AM
  #74  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,097
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Liked 1,022 Times in 614 Posts
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
Oh, good gravy - is that what this is all about? You're an acolyte and the tests don't heap enough praise your deity? If the relative rankings don't include the superiority of your rover tires bounding over lunar craters, it must be fundamentally flawed?
.
Well that is one way to handle a technological debate. Not my cup of tea, but if it works for you.....
Kapusta is offline  
Old 01-15-21, 10:59 AM
  #75  
RChung
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,672
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 419 Post(s)
Liked 294 Times in 117 Posts
Yikes.
RChung is offline  
Likes For RChung:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.