What's the optimal tire width for maximum speed on roads?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
IF EVERYTHING ELSE IS EQUAL at low speeds a wider tire will have less rolling resistance because, at equal air pressure, it has to deform less. On a bumpy road a larger, lower pressure tire will be faster than a narrow, hard one because it bounces upward less. The energy expended to lift you up with each bounce, isn't moving you down the road.
As your speed increases, aero drag becomes progressively more significant. That favors narrow tires for folks who average greater than 15 MPH and wider tires for people who average less. As you progress beyond 15 MPH the benefit of narrower tires increases.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#27
Banned
42
Wheel sucking behind a Big Guy on a motor bike, will make you faster as they will push the air resistance aside..
AKA Motorpacing ... it's a thing in the training tradition..
AKA Motorpacing ... it's a thing in the training tradition..
#28
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,635
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4733 Post(s)
Liked 1,532 Times
in
1,003 Posts
What's the optimal tire width for maximum speed on roads?
26.5mm
#30
Disco Infiltrator
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,105 Times
in
1,369 Posts
#32
Newbie racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,406
Bikes: Propel, red is faster
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1575 Post(s)
Liked 1,569 Times
in
974 Posts
I did a century ride recently where I passed almost the entire field, and I am not that strong. I was riding an allroad bike with 44mm tires, while everyone else was riding typical road tires between 23-28mm, many with aero rims. The roads were rough, everyone was complaining bitterly, and I was grinning ear to ear.
A 44 is freaking massive. Were you guys riding through a third world country, or Detroit? I only use 32's for gravel grinding, including a patch of single track to get there and back.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 29,549
Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r, Marin Muirwoods 29er, Trek FX Alpha 7.0
Mentioned: 112 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5224 Post(s)
Liked 3,581 Times
in
2,342 Posts
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,877
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6963 Post(s)
Liked 10,962 Times
in
4,688 Posts
The optimal tire width is 26.27839mm.
Next question.
Next question.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NE Tennessee
Posts: 917
Bikes: Giant TCR/Surly Karate Monkey/Foundry FireTower/Curtlo Tandem
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked 84 Times
in
62 Posts
I've always ridden 700x23 or 25. My Hutchinson tubeless tires are starting to show their age so I ordered a new pair of fusion 5 tubeless 700x28 today to see how they behave.
They are likely to spin up a bit slower than 700x23 but that's not a huge concern.
They are likely to spin up a bit slower than 700x23 but that's not a huge concern.
#36
Senior Member
Super helpful and informative posts, all. Thank you! Given the kind of riding I do, long-distance recreational, and not at pro race speeds, sounds like any speed gains I might get from going with narrower tires aren't going to be great enough to merit giving up the increased comfort of riding on wider tires inflated to relatively lower pressures. I'm currently riding on Bontrager H2 Hard-Case Lite tires and AT-750 alloy rims. Very interested to hear more on what folks have found to be high-quality, fast 32 or 35 mm tires and rims, and will post a new thread on that.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,410
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Allez Sprint Comp
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked 344 Times
in
247 Posts
my prevous roadbike had 28.
now i have 25.
i feel noticeably faster on 25 and less fatique.
and 25 feels just as cimfortable as 28.
just came back from group ride. i was just barely able to keep up. if i still have 28,... i would have been dropped fir sure. for sure.
difference in speed may not be much...but its diff btn winner and loser.
now i have 25.
i feel noticeably faster on 25 and less fatique.
and 25 feels just as cimfortable as 28.
just came back from group ride. i was just barely able to keep up. if i still have 28,... i would have been dropped fir sure. for sure.
difference in speed may not be much...but its diff btn winner and loser.
One thing that I don’t think I read anyone say: Aero wheels are way faster in flat races. But your rim width needs to be proportional to your tire width. If you wanted a 35mm tire, you’d need a rim that was 37mm at the bead and probably 40mm at its widest to achieve a toroidal shape. This wheel and tire combination would be significantly heavier than a 25mm tire on a 28mm rim. This explains why pros tend to ride narrower tires than may be appropriate for slower riders.
That being said, if you’re not running aero rims, the benefits of narrower tires go down considerably since you can just put a wide tire on a narrow rims.
#38
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, UK
Posts: 433
Bikes: Gitane Course, Paris Sport, Peugeot AO8, Peugeot Bretagne, Peugeot Premiere 85, Peugeot Premiere 86, Peugeot ANC Halfords Team Replica, Peugeot Festina Team Replica, Motobecane Grand Sport, Motobecane Super 15, Raleigh Pro Race, Raleigh Stratos, BSA
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked 427 Times
in
90 Posts
Just a few thoughts on this. Firstly, the surface you're riding on will determine the optimum tyre type. A long time ago, when roads were maintained and not continually cut up by the volume of traffic they carry now, we had wonderful smooth tarmac. In the 1980s I had 19mm tyres for time trialling, with 120psi in them. On today's roads a tyre set up like that would be almost unrideable.
Secondly, the bike construction has a part to play. I ride 23mm tyres on steel framed bikes, but find that I need 25mm tyres on aluminium framed bikes to get the same balance of comfort and speed.
Third factor is the construction of the tyre - a good quality 28mm tyre is likely to be lighter, roll faster, and be more comfortable to ride than a cheap 23mm. (The exception to this is a Gatorskin tyre which is neither cheap nor nice to ride on).
If you've not read Laurent Fignon's autobiography incidentally itsi well worth reading - there's a passage in it detailing how wider tyres were initially not wanted by the pro's on his team until they were tried and proved to be faster.
Secondly, the bike construction has a part to play. I ride 23mm tyres on steel framed bikes, but find that I need 25mm tyres on aluminium framed bikes to get the same balance of comfort and speed.
Third factor is the construction of the tyre - a good quality 28mm tyre is likely to be lighter, roll faster, and be more comfortable to ride than a cheap 23mm. (The exception to this is a Gatorskin tyre which is neither cheap nor nice to ride on).
If you've not read Laurent Fignon's autobiography incidentally itsi well worth reading - there's a passage in it detailing how wider tyres were initially not wanted by the pro's on his team until they were tried and proved to be faster.
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
With the increase in tire sizes from 23 to 28, the newer rim sizes are also changing to accommodate it all. Pro riders like the one's in the Classics are asked by the bike manufacturers the two things: speed and comfort. So it does matter and eventually filters down to the mass market.
The older Shimano brake calipers like the 6600 & 6700 may not open up wide enough to accommodate the newer rim widths.
The older Shimano brake calipers like the 6600 & 6700 may not open up wide enough to accommodate the newer rim widths.
Last edited by Garfield Cat; 03-14-19 at 07:04 AM.
#40
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: 1789 Post(s)
Liked 1,629 Times
in
933 Posts
Like most here, I have a mix of 23's to 47's on my bikes.
My race bike has 25 rear, 23 front. On only one ride did I feel the need to lower the psi. 114 miles & 7000 feet elevation on chip seal has a way of taxing the backside.
The 47 bike is noticably slower in all aspects & benefits from being at maximum pressure for road. This is an extreme case with a hard smooth center ridge in an otherwise agressive knobby tread pattern. The high pressure keeps the knobs from dragging down the whole.
The bike with 41's & less agressive knobbies is noticably slower at maximum pressure (80) than with a more sensible pressure (45-50) for on road use. I think it comes down to "bounce" being transferred to "bum" & not back to road. It really shines at ~40 for gravel.
Like others have said, it comes down to the surface you are riding on, your weight, the pressure in the tire & a host of other factors like aerodynamics, tread pattern, casing construction, etc...There is an optimal for every situation. Be dynamic. On rough surfaces like chip seal it's ok to run a slightly wider than average tire bit lower. How much depends on the local riding conditions. Much cycling dogma came from velodrome type surfaces or absolutly perfect street found only in laboratory conditions where skinny & high pressure often make sense, but doesn't translate well to the real world.
As for me, I weigh185-200 pounds, on my race bike, I run about 110 on a 25 rear, & 100 on the 23 front. Some would scoff at that, but if I know where I'll be riding I'll adjust down accordingly, but never less than the 95psi minimum recommendation on the sidewall.
Not that I'm any more or less qualified than anyone else here, but I hope that helps.
Aaron
My race bike has 25 rear, 23 front. On only one ride did I feel the need to lower the psi. 114 miles & 7000 feet elevation on chip seal has a way of taxing the backside.
The 47 bike is noticably slower in all aspects & benefits from being at maximum pressure for road. This is an extreme case with a hard smooth center ridge in an otherwise agressive knobby tread pattern. The high pressure keeps the knobs from dragging down the whole.
The bike with 41's & less agressive knobbies is noticably slower at maximum pressure (80) than with a more sensible pressure (45-50) for on road use. I think it comes down to "bounce" being transferred to "bum" & not back to road. It really shines at ~40 for gravel.
Like others have said, it comes down to the surface you are riding on, your weight, the pressure in the tire & a host of other factors like aerodynamics, tread pattern, casing construction, etc...There is an optimal for every situation. Be dynamic. On rough surfaces like chip seal it's ok to run a slightly wider than average tire bit lower. How much depends on the local riding conditions. Much cycling dogma came from velodrome type surfaces or absolutly perfect street found only in laboratory conditions where skinny & high pressure often make sense, but doesn't translate well to the real world.
As for me, I weigh185-200 pounds, on my race bike, I run about 110 on a 25 rear, & 100 on the 23 front. Some would scoff at that, but if I know where I'll be riding I'll adjust down accordingly, but never less than the 95psi minimum recommendation on the sidewall.
Not that I'm any more or less qualified than anyone else here, but I hope that helps.
Aaron
#41
Newbie
Most strong rec riders are still way too heavy to be riding a 23mm tire. Not too heavy versus the general public, but relative to cycling.
A 44 is freaking massive. Were you guys riding through a third world country, or Detroit? I only use 32's for gravel grinding, including a patch of single track to get there and back.
A 44 is freaking massive. Were you guys riding through a third world country, or Detroit? I only use 32's for gravel grinding, including a patch of single track to get there and back.
#42
Lopsided biped
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 737
Bikes: 2017 Day 6 Cyclone (the Buick); 2015 Simcoe Deluxe (the Xebec); Street Strider 3i (the not-a-bike); GreenSpeed Anura (the Black Swan)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked 160 Times
in
97 Posts
42
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Large enough to keep the rim off the ground is optimal. I know that sounds snarky and unhelpful but I've been round and round with this question, and eventually I come to: the tire width within reason does matter all that much for speed.
My larger tires have typically been designed more for durability, or flat protection, or even grip, and are hence heavier and slower than my narrower tires which are typically more performance-orientated. So it's tempting to say that narrower tires are faster, but the fact is the tires are faster period. Less to do with width.
I don't want a big block in the wind or the feeling that I have to push it to spin up. But seriously, we're only looking at 6 or 7 square inches more, and given all of the things on my bike or body that take up an extra 6 or 7 square inches it's hard to take the aerodynamic penalty very seriously. So given a particular brand or style of tire, and the particular surfaces I roll on, at enough pressure that it's in that smooth rolling range, it just needs to be big enough to keep the rim from bouncing and that's it. Anything from 23 to 32 is optimal for me, if it's the right tire.
My larger tires have typically been designed more for durability, or flat protection, or even grip, and are hence heavier and slower than my narrower tires which are typically more performance-orientated. So it's tempting to say that narrower tires are faster, but the fact is the tires are faster period. Less to do with width.
I don't want a big block in the wind or the feeling that I have to push it to spin up. But seriously, we're only looking at 6 or 7 square inches more, and given all of the things on my bike or body that take up an extra 6 or 7 square inches it's hard to take the aerodynamic penalty very seriously. So given a particular brand or style of tire, and the particular surfaces I roll on, at enough pressure that it's in that smooth rolling range, it just needs to be big enough to keep the rim from bouncing and that's it. Anything from 23 to 32 is optimal for me, if it's the right tire.
#45
Lover of Old Chrome Moly
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NW Minnesota
Posts: 2,949
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 23 Times
in
17 Posts
Rolling resistance is only part of the equation. As far as physical quality of the tire, weight, tread compound, suppleness, and aerodynamics also need to be considered. You still don't have the full story as there are rider factors that come into play. When I started out 23mm on narrow rims was all the rage, even for Clydesdales who had to pump them up rock hard to prevent snakebite. I hated the ride and the feel but put up with them because they were "faster". Then I tried Bontrager AW3 lites in 25mm and found that my speed actually increased on medium to long rides through the hills of MN lakes country. Part of it might have been rolling resistance, aerodynamics, etc, but IMHO the more important factor is that the tires were more supple and didn't have to be inflated to rock hard. The net result was that I felt more comfortable for longer and was more confident on corners and less than perfect road surfaces, so I rode faster and had less fatigue. Now I ride 25mm on a moderately wide rim on my road bike and 28mm in the same tire on a slightly wider rim on my mutt. Way more fun, very comfortable and hasn't hurt my overall speed at all. I might lose a minutia of speed on climbs but make up for it on descents and corners, and (added bonus) at the end of the day my hands aren't numb from road buzz.
#46
Banned.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Bikes: The Good Book of bicycling
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 535 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times
in
29 Posts
Rolling resistance is only part of the equation. As far as physical quality of the tire, weight, tread compound, suppleness, and aerodynamics also need to be considered. You still don't have the full story as there are rider factors that come into play. When I started out 23mm on narrow rims was all the rage, even for Clydesdales who had to pump them up rock hard to prevent snakebite. I hated the ride and the feel but put up with them because they were "faster". Then I tried Bontrager AW3 lites in 25mm and found that my speed actually increased on medium to long rides through the hills of MN lakes country. Part of it might have been rolling resistance, aerodynamics, etc, but IMHO the more important factor is that the tires were more supple and didn't have to be inflated to rock hard. The net result was that I felt more comfortable for longer and was more confident on corners and less than perfect road surfaces, so I rode faster and had less fatigue. Now I ride 25mm on a moderately wide rim on my road bike and 28mm in the same tire on a slightly wider rim on my mutt. Way more fun, very comfortable and hasn't hurt my overall speed at all. I might lose a minutia of speed on climbs but make up for it on descents and corners, and (added bonus) at the end of the day my hands aren't numb from road buzz.
anyone try this? does a wider tire up front make more sense?
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
i have been thinking of going 28mm on my road bike front tire and leaving the rear tire at 25mm. reason for that would be extra handlebar comfort and steering traction up front. the back wheel comfort for now is handled by the padding in the bikes padded seat.
anyone try this? does a wider tire up front make more sense?
anyone try this? does a wider tire up front make more sense?
#48
Banned.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Bikes: The Good Book of bicycling
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 535 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times
in
29 Posts
I've often done that, mainly when I have 1 of each and I think the greater width and lower pressure gives better grip on looser stuff which I prefer on the front as opposed to the rear. But what really is the advantage as opposed to 28 on both front and rear, if you like the 28?
this would also be a good time to try different brands on the front without changing tires on the whole bike which may be disappointing.
at the moment i have quite a few 25mm tires on the shelf so really don't need tires, been hoping to tame my road bike vibrations some. 28mm may just do it. no doubt many here have a few skinny tires on the shelf, so how to make the best of it perhaps is to experiment with the steering a bit.
Last edited by Duo; 03-15-19 at 04:29 PM.
#50
Senior Member
i have been thinking of going 28mm on my road bike front tire and leaving the rear tire at 25mm. reason for that would be extra handlebar comfort and steering traction up front. the back wheel comfort for now is handled by the padding in the bikes padded seat.
anyone try this? does a wider tire up front make more sense?
anyone try this? does a wider tire up front make more sense?
Of course you get all these benefits and saddle comfort too if you put a matching big one in back.