Drillium Dude 

My puncture issues mirror most of what you posted; bold italics are mine. Being fastidious has its benefits

How often do those of you running low pressures - regardless of tire diameter - experience snake-bite flats? Snake-bite flats are the main reason I run higher pressures today, and I haven't experienced one in over a decade as a result.

DD

El Chaba

Here is a brief history of bike tire rolling resistance from my point of view- mostly from the racing side as that is where it matters most, but also with notes about non-racing. In the post ww2 period, tires were selected for speed ( which factored in rolling resistance) strictly based on feel. Tubulars for racing we’re in the 24-25 mm range with wider ones for races like Paris-Roubaix. Many roads were war torn or like many mountain passes had never been paved. As road conditions improved, the standard tire width got narrower until it settled in the 23 mm range by the 1970s. On the non racing side, there were companies like Wolber who made clincher tires with nice and light casings. They had no application for touring, but were popular for brevets, etc. There was demand for these tires for events that called for clinchers by discerning riders who were accustomed to the ride of tubulars for less demanding ( from the tire’s point of view) events. By the mid 1970s, Michelin had introduced its Elan clincher which was marketed as a reasonable alternative to tubulars for shorter brevets or century type events. Other companies soon joined in, notably Specialized and Avocet. These companies took direct aim at the tubular using racing market. This was the first time that I recall reading anything about test results for rolling resistance. Commissioned by the clincher makers, shockingly, the results indicated that their clinchers had the lowest rr values. The original aero craze was also at its peak, so the clinchers being hyped were generally in the 18-20 mm range, with recommended pressures at 120 psi and higher. On the professional racing side, all of this was ignored, but tire widths further reduced to 21-22 mm. Longer brevets and the sport of randonneuring in Europe was in decline and most of the companies making wider tires with lighter casings either went out of business or simply quit making those tires. In Japan, the sport never completely died, and an almost religious level of reverence for the classic French randonneur bikes remained alive. At some point about 25-30 years ago, the Japanese enthusiasts recognized that the missing ingredient for their classic randonneuses was supple tires. Grand Bois was the company that first commissioned tires matching the description from Panasonic. Bicycle Quarterly/Compass/Rene Herse used to sell these tires, but eventually commissioned their own versions. They were not the originators. Along the way, there was some demand for the widest clinchers that could be crammed in the space available of existing carbon bikes, not from a rolling resistance standpoint but to do something….anything….to mitigate for the horrifying ride qualities of a carbon bike with Uber oversized tubes. All of this coincided with an interest in riding on unpaved roads, so there was demand for wider tires and bikes to accommodate them. With a market for wider tires, rolling resistance tests followed affirming that there was no real downside to larger volume tires if not a marginal advantage. On the racing side, tire widths have settled in the 25 mm range which seems to be a sweet spot for rolling resistance with increased tire volume for some extra comfort against the horrifying bikes that are supplied to professional racers today.

HTupolev

I've only had one snakebite flat in the normal process of paved riding ever, and it was while riding tubed 25mm tubed tires at around 100r/90f with bike+rider weight of ~195lbs, which is higher than I usually run these days. Today I was on ~26mm tubed tires with a ~185lb bike+rider weight at ~80r/70f.

Bad Lag

When I mentioned variables, above, I forgot the almost obvious one - rider size/weight.

HTupolev is 185 lb. By contrast, I am probably close to 250 lb. He and I could never compare tire sizes or pressures directly - I outweigh him by 1/3. I haven't been his weight since 9th grade.

Bad Lag

Could not read the wall of text above, so here it is with a few paragraph added. It was worth the effort and is worth reading:


Here is a brief history of bike tire rolling resistance from my point of view- mostly from the racing side as that is where it matters most, but also with notes about non-racing.

In the post ww2 period, tires were selected for speed ( which factored in rolling resistance) strictly based on feel. Tubulars for racing we’re in the 24-25 mm range with wider ones for races like Paris-Roubaix. Many roads were war torn or like many mountain passes had never been paved. As road conditions improved, the standard tire width got narrower until it settled in the 23 mm range by the 1970s.

On the non racing side, there were companies like Wolber who made clincher tires with nice and light casings. They had no application for touring, but were popular for brevets, etc. There was demand for these tires for events that called for clinchers by discerning riders who were accustomed to the ride of tubulars for less demanding ( from the tire’s point of view) events.

By the mid 1970s, Michelin had introduced its Elan clincher which was marketed as a reasonable alternative to tubulars for shorter brevets or century type events. Other companies soon joined in, notably Specialized and Avocet. These companies took direct aim at the tubular using racing market.

This was the first time that I recall reading anything about test results for rolling resistance. Commissioned by the clincher makers, shockingly, the results indicated that their clinchers had the lowest rr values. The original aero craze was also at its peak, so the clinchers being hyped were generally in the 18-20 mm range, with recommended pressures at 120 psi and higher.

On the professional racing side, all of this was ignored, but tire widths further reduced to 21-22 mm. Longer brevets and the sport of randonneuring in Europe was in decline and most of the companies making wider tires with lighter casings either went out of business or simply quit making those tires.

In Japan, the sport never completely died, and an almost religious level of reverence for the classic French randonneur bikes remained alive. At some point about 25-30 years ago, the Japanese enthusiasts recognized that the missing ingredient for their classic randonneuses was supple tires.

Grand Bois was the company that first commissioned tires matching the description from Panasonic. Bicycle Quarterly/Compass/Rene Herse used to sell these tires, but eventually commissioned their own versions. They were not the originators.

Along the way, there was some demand for the widest clinchers that could be crammed in the space available of existing carbon bikes, not from a rolling resistance standpoint but to do something….anything….to mitigate for the horrifying ride qualities of a carbon bike with Uber oversized tubes.

All of this coincided with an interest in riding on unpaved roads, so there was demand for wider tires and bikes to accommodate them. With a market for wider tires, rolling resistance tests followed affirming that there was no real downside to larger volume tires if not a marginal advantage.

On the racing side, tire widths have settled in the 25 mm range which seems to be a sweet spot for rolling resistance with increased tire volume for some extra comfort against the horrifying bikes that are supplied to professional racers today.

GhostRider62

Avocet was the first company that I recall commissioning rolling resistance tests of its wide and narrow clincher tires. They were very fast tires. I actually raced on 32mm version about 40 years ago. The casings were very supple. The tires were made in Japan. Gee, I wonder by whom? These tires predated Grand Bois and Jan Heine's relabeling by a decade or more.

stevel610 

Actually think it might just sit there😝

ThermionicScott 

IRC, according to Jobst Brandt. The smaller sizes were 127tpi, but 66tpi for the bigger sizes wasn't shabby: https://web.archive.org/web/19970108....18/tires.html

It's funny how the basic recipe for fast tires of thin, preferably high-tpi, sidewalls with a thin tread on top seems to need to be "rediscovered" over and over again.

GhostRider62

I rode them with the kevlar bead and IIRC, they were 32 mm wide and no protection under the tread. Maybe I measured them at 32 mm? I remember them being porky compared to the tubulars of the day. I did find the rolling resistance chart of the Avocet tires that i remembered and sure enough, it shows 28 mm being the widest. Almost 40 years ago is a long time....but I do remember winning the club championship on them!

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/...e-tubular.html

beicster 

I have been riding wider tires for about 22 or so years now based on the advice of Grant Peterson. At that time he didn't make any claims about rolling resistance. It was all about comfort. I went from 23's to 27's on my Trek 1100 and I only vaguely recall that it was more comfortable. Since about the year 2003, I haven't ridden anything smaller than 32's. This thread and the fact that a used wheelset I bought that came with some 25's inspired me to give skinny a try again. It definitely feels faster. I am by no means fast and I don't even try to be fast, but the feeling of being directly connected to the road is nice. I'll keep 32's and 38's on my other bikes, though so I can have a choice.

ThermionicScott 

Any chance you had the "Duro Plus" model? Those were nominally 35mm but I've read that Avocet's tires measured about a size small. (I got back into cycling around the time Avocet was going defunct, so I didn't get to try them myself.)

GhostRider62

It is possible that is what I used for touring. I had the Avocets on my Dawes Super Galaxy, which I used to commute and sometimes I rode it 40 miles each way to the races on the weekend. That bike also got a lot of touring duty. I honestly don't know other than that bike always had Avocets on it and they were fast. I remember coming home from a Sunday race and I could not drop these two wheelsuckers with bare shoulders and black painted numbers on their shoulders. Turns out there as an Ironman, first time I heard of triathalon. Cheaters. Those tires were faster than my Clement Criterium Silks.

SkinGriz

On the street the surface digs into the tire.
Off road the tire digs into the surface.

It’s a gross over simplification but there’s something to it.

v8powerage

New bike people are full of contradictions first they want everything lightest and then they buy wider tires which are heavier. I would not recommend 25 over 23 ever because of terrible cornering that they have, I like to take 90 degrees corners fast here in my city and with 25s it was very iffy to say the least.

79pmooney

Yup. The old steel wire beaded tires were so much faster! And if you run beside it and steady it until it hits a good speed, it may well roll all the way to the bottom.

Now we need to add sewups to the challenge. Inflated, no rim (to keep the testing fair, you are welcome to inflate those clinchers and tubeless; also without rim if you can figure out how). From the wired-on vs sewup we can deduce on thing that should be very enlightening. Should the sewup be faster we will know once and for all that rubber tread isn't fast. (That sewup will do all its rolling inside out, on the fabric basetape.)

Who knows? The fast guys might start gluing basetape to their tire tread.

SurferRosa

But let's test sewups alongside glazed donuts. I know the donuts are a lot smaller, but, scientifically, that shouldn't play a factor. I think we'll find the sugar make them faster ... by a lot.

smd4

Actually, it seems to me that many of the cyclists espousing bigger, squishier tires are older and have been riding for a while. And the no. 1 reason they seem to want these tires is for “comfort.” I get this when it comes to touring bikes, but for some reason, people have been putting them on racing bikes. Which makes about as much sense to me as putting a spring gel saddle on one.

Then they try to tell me I’m crazy to inflate my 700 x 23 Veloflex Masters to 140 psi. It doesn’t compute with them that, like a fine performance car, I want to feel every imperfection in the road surface. They prefer their racing bikes to be the equivalent of Lincoln town cars.

repechage

Long ago there was a rider in the club who rode Clement Del Mundos - pumped "hard"
when he got a flat it sounded like a gunshot.
one day he came into the shop and a Clement gauge was employed- 160 psi - near 11 bar!
he bought a gauge and went more normal - 100-110 psi, fewer flats.

I have accumulated clinchers in various ways.
my conclusions are that light supple clinchers now get darn close to tubulars. Kevlar bead tires are a pain to install when new. Narrower tires in front provide more confidence in the corners. 23c being pretty good.
I liked the Avocet tires also- only one left.
a few "open" tubulars. Nice, the wider tires, like the Challenge PR, nice but less confidence when up front.
probably like 23/28 as a way to go.
85 psi min.
usually 95-105 less if it's wet.
I am 150#

I still have a Michelin Elan in service!
I liked a set of Clement criterium Seta open tubulars - retired now as the casing bond at the bead started to creep and fail.
I was sad when I lost an Avocet tire- the casing coming apart under the tread.

the larger crossection tires became intriguing when I bought a set of 1.5" - 1.75" 26" slicks for my mtb for road service- they do roll very well!

mikekone

The Veloflex masters at 140psi may actually be going slower. There is a non-linear relationship between pressure and rolling resistance. As pressure is increased in the lower range, the contact patch becomes smaller and rolling resistance is lessened as less energy is used for contact patch formation. However, at some point as pressure is increased, energy loss from contact patch formation while minimal is overshadowed by the tire "bouncing" over the surface. This is why if there are any old time skate boarders here, the sticky soft wheels were faster than the hard ceramic wheels skateboards originally came with.

Tires at high pressures, though, don't deflect flex under rider movement and they make the bike feel like it is handling more crisply. It's a great feel. It feels more responsive. But it may not be faster. I love the feel of 21.5mm tubulars, but they really aren't faster for me than the wider ones.

Also for historical record - a few folks well before Jan Heine and myself knew about wide tires being faster all-else-equal. Years go when Jan Heine and I were noting how wider tires seemed faster, I bounced the idea off Matt Wiebe who was tech editor of Bicycle Retailer and Industry News. Matt said "come on Mike, you should know wide tires are faster". This was roughly 1999 or 2000.

In fact, the eye opening moment for many of us was when I owned Bicycle Classics decades ago and was selling Clement tubulars - 21.5mm Clement Criterium, 24mm Paris Robaix, and 30mm Del Mundo. The Clement Criterium felt great. The 24mm Paris Robaix felt slow (it also had a heavier casing), and I didn't bother with the 30mm (called 28mm) Del Mundo which used the same casing as the Paris Robaix. But one day I did try the Del Mondo - and oh my gosh - it was like a rocket ship! So with the same casing, the wide tire in actuality was really fast.

Interestingly, if I recall, when Jan Heine did his tire test, the Del Mundo also tested as rolling down hill much more quickly then almost every other tire. Not necessarily much faster than the narrow criterium, but about as fast and way more comfortable.

There is a caveat to this. Many of the simple roll down tests of BQ do not consider rider's flexing the casings when sprinting or the rider's bouncing. Wider tires do give up some of their rolling resistance advantage when flexed.

I disagree with the comment that wide tires don't corner well. Some other equipment interaction or tire pressure thing is going on. Folks I know report nearly universally that wide tires corner faster. Back in the 70's, a racer friend used wide Del Mundo tubulars as he was faster through the corners in criterium races.

smd4

I’m no racer. Not interested in speed. Want the feel of the road. Wheelbarrow tires don’t do that for me.

Thanks

smd4

Probably not.

repechage

it is what one feels the most confidence with.
confidence can be speed.
I am making no claim about absolute performance, just what inspires confidence.
it will not be the same for all.

smd4

I’m no racer. Not interested in speed. Want the feel of the road. Wheelbarrow tires don’t do that for me. Thanks.
Thanks

Andrew_G

Tire rolling resistance varies significantly based on the quality of the tire (construction) , the tire size (diameter, i.e. "section"), and the pressure used.

I find the website https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com
very interesting and useful. I paid for a personal subscription so I can read all of the data.

This BRR article does a good apples-to-apples comparison of rolling resistance. The same model 700c road tire, with different diameters (sections), and both fixed and variable air pressures: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance...000-comparison

Silca also has on their blog a series of 5 articles about rolling resistance. Here's part 1 of 5: https://silca.cc/blogs/silca/tire-si...mfort-and-more

v8powerage

I don't understand folded tires it's not like I'm gonna carry spare, it's not tube what's the point and they always come back to the folded shape, unless they're inflated 100% then you can feel those folds when you ride, wire tire always keeps round shape so it will be faster because the rounded the better.