Schwalbe Marathon Supreme..poof..gone
#26
Senior Member
No tire is perfect, I found the hurricanes to be ok on the road, slower than the supreme 2in and 1.6 in , and while I've ridden those and other slicks on lots of dirt, something like the hurricanes really are worth it on lots of loose stuff.
But everyone's opinion is different, so you just have to try different tires and figure out what you prefer.
But everyone's opinion is different, so you just have to try different tires and figure out what you prefer.
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,873
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 598 Post(s)
Liked 283 Times
in
194 Posts
This is a shame as I've happily toured on the Supremes for about 3 years now. Wish I had known this was coming so I could have picked up another pair of 32's.
#28
Palmer
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 8,627
Bikes: Mike Melton custom, Alex Moulton AM, Dahon Curl
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1671 Post(s)
Liked 1,827 Times
in
1,063 Posts
On the "you can't find quality 26-inch touring tires anymore" front*, I see Schwalbe offers 14 different models in 1.50/1.60/1.75 widths and Continental offers 7. Panaracer, Vittoria, René Herse... I don't think I'll have to mount Pyramids on the Disc Trucker anytime soon.
*Not that any of the solons here have claimed as much.
*Not that any of the solons here have claimed as much.
Likes For tcs:
#29
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,116
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1790 Post(s)
Liked 1,631 Times
in
934 Posts
No, you're right. I should have added the parenthetical "(if any)" to my prose. But, I thought it wouldn't read as well if I had.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.
Car dependency is a tax.
#30
Junior Member
Distressing. Got my first set in 2007, and have been using them ever since (for touring, plus everything else). Several years ago, after bicyclerollingresistance.com showed the Almotion to be even faster, my wife (who needs to eke out every bit of efficiency to help our combined speed) got a set of those, but experience showed that in practice they were still inferior to the Supremes. I suddenly started catching her on every hill we'd coast down, and once we switched her back to the Supremes we got right back to the same speed. Perhaps that was due to the greater width (and consequently, weight) of the Almotions (700x38C vs the 700x35C Supremes), but given that the Almotions don't come in any narrower widths, that still makes them a slower tire. And now the Efficiencies also come in nothing narrower than a 700x38C, so they can hardly be called a proper replacement for the Supremes either. I know Schwalbe is all about "wider is actually better!", and they're probably right, but I'm an old man stuck in my ways, dammit!
Over a year ago when it already seemed like the Supremes were on their way out, we ordered a couple of 700x35Cs through Amazon (the only place that listed them) to be sent to us on the road, but they ended up being even-narrower 700x32Cs. Still put 'em to use on our front wheels though (and noticed no negative result), and then I carried around our two partly-worn 700x35Cs for at least 1000 miles (still have one of them!) to make them last as long as possible. I have a problem!
Over a year ago when it already seemed like the Supremes were on their way out, we ordered a couple of 700x35Cs through Amazon (the only place that listed them) to be sent to us on the road, but they ended up being even-narrower 700x32Cs. Still put 'em to use on our front wheels though (and noticed no negative result), and then I carried around our two partly-worn 700x35Cs for at least 1000 miles (still have one of them!) to make them last as long as possible. I have a problem!
Last edited by Neil G.; 02-28-23 at 10:04 PM.
#31
Partially Sane.
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Sunny Sacramento.
Posts: 3,559
Bikes: Soma Saga, pre-disc
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 972 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 643 Times
in
468 Posts
I think they missed the sweet spot on sizing, which should be 700x45. 🙁
I'd sure like to see someone make a super tough tire, that lasts a few years worth of serious touring. I'd pay more (within reason), for a little more peace of mind. Going to a less endurable tire, is going the wrong way. 👎
I'd sure like to see someone make a super tough tire, that lasts a few years worth of serious touring. I'd pay more (within reason), for a little more peace of mind. Going to a less endurable tire, is going the wrong way. 👎
#32
Junior Member
700x40 Supremes in stock here. Ł37.
https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/tyres/70...-tyre-700-622/
Limited stock 26x2 and 26x1.6 here.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_d...thon%20supreme
They are a genuine company I have used several times before. Also have a standard website.
https://bankruptbikeparts.co.uk/page...ry-information
https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/tyres/70...-tyre-700-622/
Limited stock 26x2 and 26x1.6 here.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_d...thon%20supreme
They are a genuine company I have used several times before. Also have a standard website.
https://bankruptbikeparts.co.uk/page...ry-information
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,595
Bikes: 1992 Serotta Colorado II,Co-Motion Speedster, Giant Escape Hybrid, 1977 Schwinn Super Le Tour
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 455 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 112 Times
in
85 Posts
I just ordered 4 26x2 tires from them yesterday.
#36
Junior Member
Some good news: I bought a new set of the Marathon Efficiencies for my wife, and after a preliminary test, they aren't slower than the Supremes, and may be a smidge faster (which corroborates the data from bicyclerollingresistance.com)
Previously she had:
Front: Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 32-622 (360g)
Rear: Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 38-622 (440g)
Now:
Front: Schwalbe Marathon Efficiency 40-622 (520g)
Rear: Schwalbe Marathon Efficiency 40-622 (544g)
The "test" was a 43-mile loop under similar conditions and effort levels, mostly on smooth asphalt, some slightly-rough asphalt, and a 15-mile stretch of well-groomed gravel rail trail (the Snoqualmie Valley Trail outside Seattle, WA). It's mostly-flat, but has several 50-100 ft. up-and-downs, and a 200 ft. 4% climb on gravel.
I always ride behind her, and generally when we coast down hills (and I move clear of her draft), the extra weight of me + my bike means that I need to use my brakes to keep from passing her. The first thing I noticed with her new tires was that I could brake less (or not at all) without passing her, suggesting a faster rolling. At a minimum, the Efficiencies didn't roll slower than the Supremes.
This is in startk contrast to our disappointing experience with the Almotions a couple years back (partly inspired by bicyclerollingresistance.com's super-low 17.1 watt measurement vs. 19.1 for the Supremes), where, with the Almotions on her bike, I definitely needed to brake more on the downhills vs. the Supremes. At the time, I attributed it to switching from the narrower 38-622 Supremes to the wider/heavier 40-622 Almotions, but now that the same 38->40 transition with the Efficiencies didn't result in the same downgrade, I'm now pretty sure that we ended up with the Addix-compound Almotions (tested at 19.4 watts) rather than the OneStar version that BRR initially tested.
Our average speed for the 43 miles ended up being 12.75mph with the Efficiencies vs. 12.62mph with the Supremes. It's just one test, and it's not a huge difference, but again, the heavier (by 264g) Efficiencies weren't obviously slower than the Supremes.
And the main reason for trying out the Efficiencies was the hope that their shoulder blocks and extra width/volume would give my learned-to-ride-a-bike-at-age-35 wife more confidence on gravel than the entirely-smooth Supremes. The rail-trail was a bit too smooth to make a great test, but she took an up-and-down section of loose stuff crossing a drainage about twice as fast as her previous two traversals, and made it through an unexpected section of new loose stuff upright that she said she might have lost it on with her old tires. And when I was testing them out myself on some hiking trails, I powered up a 15 foot ~20%-grade rough-gravel hill without any slipping, something I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done on the Supremes. They also felt qualitatively more comfortable over bumps to me (not surprising changing a 32-622 to a 40-622), though I don't have a lot of experience on her bike to be sure.
So getting those extra benefits without any performance loss would be a genuine win. Of course it was just one test on one day, so far from a final conclusion, and we know nothing yet about puncture resistance and durability, but it's at least an encouraging start.
Previously she had:
Front: Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 32-622 (360g)
Rear: Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 38-622 (440g)
Now:
Front: Schwalbe Marathon Efficiency 40-622 (520g)
Rear: Schwalbe Marathon Efficiency 40-622 (544g)
The "test" was a 43-mile loop under similar conditions and effort levels, mostly on smooth asphalt, some slightly-rough asphalt, and a 15-mile stretch of well-groomed gravel rail trail (the Snoqualmie Valley Trail outside Seattle, WA). It's mostly-flat, but has several 50-100 ft. up-and-downs, and a 200 ft. 4% climb on gravel.
I always ride behind her, and generally when we coast down hills (and I move clear of her draft), the extra weight of me + my bike means that I need to use my brakes to keep from passing her. The first thing I noticed with her new tires was that I could brake less (or not at all) without passing her, suggesting a faster rolling. At a minimum, the Efficiencies didn't roll slower than the Supremes.
This is in startk contrast to our disappointing experience with the Almotions a couple years back (partly inspired by bicyclerollingresistance.com's super-low 17.1 watt measurement vs. 19.1 for the Supremes), where, with the Almotions on her bike, I definitely needed to brake more on the downhills vs. the Supremes. At the time, I attributed it to switching from the narrower 38-622 Supremes to the wider/heavier 40-622 Almotions, but now that the same 38->40 transition with the Efficiencies didn't result in the same downgrade, I'm now pretty sure that we ended up with the Addix-compound Almotions (tested at 19.4 watts) rather than the OneStar version that BRR initially tested.
Our average speed for the 43 miles ended up being 12.75mph with the Efficiencies vs. 12.62mph with the Supremes. It's just one test, and it's not a huge difference, but again, the heavier (by 264g) Efficiencies weren't obviously slower than the Supremes.
And the main reason for trying out the Efficiencies was the hope that their shoulder blocks and extra width/volume would give my learned-to-ride-a-bike-at-age-35 wife more confidence on gravel than the entirely-smooth Supremes. The rail-trail was a bit too smooth to make a great test, but she took an up-and-down section of loose stuff crossing a drainage about twice as fast as her previous two traversals, and made it through an unexpected section of new loose stuff upright that she said she might have lost it on with her old tires. And when I was testing them out myself on some hiking trails, I powered up a 15 foot ~20%-grade rough-gravel hill without any slipping, something I'm pretty sure I couldn't have done on the Supremes. They also felt qualitatively more comfortable over bumps to me (not surprising changing a 32-622 to a 40-622), though I don't have a lot of experience on her bike to be sure.
So getting those extra benefits without any performance loss would be a genuine win. Of course it was just one test on one day, so far from a final conclusion, and we know nothing yet about puncture resistance and durability, but it's at least an encouraging start.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 1,612
Bikes: Corvid Sojourner, Surly Ice Cream Truck, Co-Motion Divide, Co-Motion Java Tandem, Salsa Warbird, Salsa Beargrease, Carver Tandem
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Liked 435 Times
in
227 Posts
I probably have 3-4 pairs ... in case anyone is nostalgic enough to get a pair ... I'm your sugar daddy
#38
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,852
Bikes: Lemond '01 Maillot Jaune, Lemond '02 Victoire, Lemond '03 Poprad, Lemond '03 Wayzata DB conv(Poprad), '79 AcerMex Windsor Carrera Professional(pur new), '88 GT Tequesta(pur new), '01 Bianchi Grizzly, 1993 Trek 970 DB conv, Trek 8900 DB conv
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 759 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 810 Times
in
471 Posts
Some good news: I bought a new set of the Marathon Efficiencies for my wife, and after a preliminary test, they aren't slower than the Supremes, and may be a smidge faster (which corroborates the data from bicyclerollingresistance.com)
... but it's at least an encouraging start.
... but it's at least an encouraging start.
Good news..thanks!