veganbikes

Let's say a Lamborghini Countach with tires pumped to the max.

Now I like a fast vehicle as well but you can be fast without feeling jarred to death. It doesn't have to be a Countach or a Town Car. There is stuff in between and on the outside of that. Yes there are always going to be the cars that someone just turns into a pure out and out race car, they delete the heat and A/C and any comforts and then get beat by a Tesla which is a comfortable car and fast as heck. It is not to say the race car isn't cool and maybe cooler than the Tesla but I would rather have the comfort and the speed.

smd4

I know you've noticed, because you've said it, but I have zero interest in breaking down my riding scientifically. I have no interest in riding faster than I already do, and I no interest in cornering to a greater degree than I already do.

Eric F 

Empirical testing may prove that a wider tire has less rolling resistance and larger contact patch, resulting in being faster in a straight line, and better cornering grip, but keep in mind that the machine is still being operated by a human. A lack of familiarity with the response of the machine might result in less confidence pushing into the zone where those advantages exist, and the net performance isn't actually improved.

genejockey 

It's not about happiness - ride what you love! I know I do! - but rather about accepting the reality. smd4 knows that his preference for 23s at 140 psi is not faster than 28s at lower pressure, and on a lot of roads will be slower. But it's what he likes.

But it turns out that those two things are less diametrically opposed than we'd thought, and that smoother may also be more efficient

But again, ride what you like. Last Sunday I felt like riding my CF bike with discs and 28s at 80/85. Yesterday I felt like old steel, rim brakes, and 25s at 90/95. I had a blast both rides.

smd4

I DON'T FEEL THAT WAY. Why do you persist in insinuating that I do?

In my analogy, it does. So now you're telling me which analogy I can or can't use? Sheesh.

Yes. You would.

genejockey 

Yeah, but you're the one who made the analogy. I merely pointed out the flaw in it. It's not so much Ferrari vs. Lincoln Town Car. More like old Ferrari vs new Ferrari.

veganbikes

No you are making a bad analogy, you are trying to compare two vastly different things. You are trying to say that an ultra high pressured skinny tires or a road bike is like a sports car and the properly pressured wider tire on the same road bike is a boat on wheels. That doesn't make sense that is why that analogy doesn't work. I guess you can make it but why would you make such a bad one? It is apples and oranges not apples and red rubber balls.

I just cannot believe that a 140psi 23c tire is not going to be jarring, maybe you are used to it. Having ridden 23c tires pumped to 100 I found them a bit jarring I couldn't imagine going higher than that. Maybe you have some really cushy joints or less feeling in your limbs or something. Or that bike you have is really plush in all other ways or your roads are smooth and perfect which if you have that you are lucky lucky!

smd4

Our roads are pretty nice, mostly newer paving. I mentioned I ran my 23s at 100 psi a while back, and hated the ride. Too soft.

3alarmer 

...nonetheless, they are opposed. Smoother as more efficient arguments are always couched in terms of riding surface. That's why you still see 23's on track bikes. The current crop of "more comfortable" CF frames like your Canyon are simply a recognition that bicycle frame design (for most of us non pro athlete users), has been needlessly stiff in the interests of eliminating losses due to frame flex.

The whole history of steel frame design treated this issue, using different frame tubing designs, and geometries for construction. Some of the last of the steel frames (before makers decided to abandon the effort), used oversized tubing with very thin walls...in the interest of minimizing flex so they might be "more efficient". Again, I'm not trying to argue that anything is "better" or "worse". Only that "smoother" faster" "more efficient", and "laterally stiff, but vertically compliant" are relative terms that are meaningless in choosing what to ride and how to ride it (in terms of enjoyment).

My Cannondale touring bike convinced me that I could probably ride anything enjoyably, if I introduced enough flex into the system using wider tires. But it was not a convincing argument for a personal transition to CF reinforced plastic as a frame material I enjoy riding. The few cycles made from it I've ridden convinced me it was going in the wrong direction for my own enjoyment.

But to take the thread back on topic, I don't need discs either. If I though I was going to do any more loaded touring, I might experiment with them. But I enjoy sleeping in a bed too much now. It is a firm mattress, though.

Eric F 

Another flaw is that (most) race cars do not run the highest pressures they are allowed, they run the lowest.

smd4

The analogy has more to do with comfort v. road feel, but whatever.

genejockey 

And that right there is the key. I love riding my Canyon. It's the fastest bike I own, and the cushiest, and the second best descender. But if I had to have only one bike, it'd be the Litespeed, which is slower, harsher, and doesn't corner quite as well. I can't even exactly say WHY, I just know it's the bike I like riding most.

tomato coupe

I feel cheated — I opened this thread looking for some good disc brake bickering, but it’s just an argument about tire width and tire pressure. Soooooo bummed.

Eric F 

You have a very specific way you like to set up your bike(s), and you want your bike to have a certain feel in response to the road and your input. A deviation from that - even one that makes your bike more efficient/faster - is not of interest to you because it disturbs the familiar feeling. Excellent! Have at it, and enjoy the ride the way you want to enjoy it.

genejockey 

Lord knows nothing like that ever happened before.

veganbikes

100psi too soft wow...you love it hard but good roads help a lot on that front.

genejockey 

I have some tubular wheels for my Lotus Supreme. Mounted 22mm tires, pumped 'em up to 140. They were great on the smooth pavement! Unfortunately, that was only the first 4 miles of a 25 mile ride on them.

Now I run them at 100-110. Much better, but I prefer the clincher wheels with 25mm tires at 90/95.

georges1

700-23c and 700-25c are comfy and some older rims width are not allowing wider tires than 700-23c, I don't like large tires on a road bike 700-28c or 700-32c, 700-25c is the maximum I can accept, also the rear and front tire clearance should be taken in consideration when buying tires and when having a not so new frame. If I want to gravel I have 700-35c schwalbe marathons on my hybrid. The comfort is also due to the saddle you have chosen to ride, the wheels and tires as well as what is the bartape stem and bar combination you have chosen to ride with. I used to ride in my very first road bike on 700-19c and 700-20c tires before switching to 700-23c and some tires are larger than their indicated sizes. Not everyone is into disc brakes , di2, 11 speeds, 12 speeds and large tires.

Eric F 

No one is insisting that everyone needs to be.

3alarmer 

...we'll always have Paris.

veganbikes

The rims will generally allow a wider tire, they aren't so picky up a point. It is usually the frames on vintage bikes and older aero bikes that are the problem with wider tires. Going from 19s a 23 is a wider tire but it is 2024 wider tires have been a thing for a while and really have always been a thing but old "knowledge" though that a super narrow skinny tire has got to be faster because you feel the speed (speed in that case being bumps and vibrations that are slowing you down) because aero at that point was lets make it thin and narrow to cut through the wind because they thought that was practical and a lot more testing has been done to find that is all hooey.

Yes there is comfort in other things but I think in terms of real ride comfort tires probably have the biggest impact to the point I would rather have an aluminum bike (which I wouldn't really want) with 700x32c tires than a steel bike (which I would want) with 700x23c tires. I used to be part of the old school club of it's gotta be faster we can feel it and then I went wider and haven't really looked back much I have a vintage race bike that can clear only 25c tires it can fit 28s but it is a super tight fit and caused some rubbing and I don't want to damage the paint. I love the look of vintage bikes and some of them do have proper tire clearance and some are just fun to look at and work on but just putting on some bar tape and a saddle can only do so much with skinny tires. Certainly yes a more supple tire will help as well but it won't be as good as a wider supple tire.

In terms of Di2 or anything else not relevant here. You can have a 2x5 bike with wider tires and be more comfortable on it. In terms of disc brakes there are fewer and fewer draw backs as time goes on. I do have plenty of rim braked bikes and will continue to have them for a while so it is not a treatise against them but they are great for wider tires and other issues.

ScottCommutes

I do respect this particular opinion.

However, your record here of over 5000 posts, including some in this thread, might lead some to logically conclude that you have more interest than you admit.

Kapusta

Yeah, I read the OP and then skipped to page 5, and…. I’m not going to bother figuring out how it ended up on tire size..

rossiny

I read through some of these comments and all I can add is "no comment".
ok , I'll comment, what ever floats your boat., or stops your bike. hehehe