JimQPublic

I'm indecisive over tires for my Trek 520 touring bike. I want a fairly plush ride with reasonable rolling resistance and good flat protection for riding bumpy roads and possibly some unpaved. I have settled on a 35-37mm width.

Since the rims are (not quite) Tubeless Ready, I'm very tempted to go tubeless. Of course that means $40-60 for new rim tape, valves, goo, and a learning curve. I bought (but can return since they're still wrapped up) Vittoria Terreno Zero 37-622 as they seemed a nice "all-road" tire and I've been happy with Vittorias in the past. They were on sale for $44.

In the meantime I bought and mounted some Continental Contact Urban wire-bead 47-559 with tubes on our tandem and am very impressed- considering mounting the same in size 37-622 on the 520. I have 50 years experience with tubes so this would be a lot simpler and cheaper as these are $34 each plus $6 for tubes.

Bicycle Rolling Resistance dot com has tested both of the these tires and it seems that the wire bead Continental with tube has lower or equal rolling resistance than the tubeless Vittoria, and much lower than the Vittoria with tube. Continental also has higher puncture resistance values. Am I missing something here? The Continental with tubes would be 200+ grams heavier than the Vittoria Terreno. I wouldn't run them low enough to risk pinch flats but there are always nails and thorns to puncture a tube.

Is there a different tubeless touring tire I should look at if the Vittoria is a stinker?

Continental Contact Urban 40-622 with tube 18.4 Watts @ 60 psi (4.1 bar), 26.7 watts @ 30 psi (2 bar)
Vittoria Terreno Zero 37-622 Tubeless 20.2 watts With tube 23.0 watts @ 60 psi (4.1 bar);
Tubeless 26.9 Watts, with tube 31.9 Watts @ 30 psi (2 bar)

shelbyfv

I just switched some 38mm Panaracer GravelKing Slicks to tubeless. No drama and I've enjoyed the tires in several sizes through the years. I've never checked the rolling resistance but the weight is reasonable.

JimQPublic

Follow up-
I went with the Continental Contact Urban in 35-622. Bicycle Rolling Resistance tested the 40-622 and they did very well. I suspect the 35-622 probably don't do quite as well as the sidewall, while supple, is pretty short compared to the stiffer tread section. (I also recently mounted the same tire in 47-559 on our tandem and those seem a dream.

Mounted on 18mm internal hooked tubeless ready rims they measure 33. (I wish I had gone with the 40 mm size!) All that said I really like these tires. I am riding pretty upright (bars level with seat) and with a fairly heavy rack and trunk, so I would guess my weight is probably 60% rear and 40% front (230 pounds or 105 kg gross). Silca tire pressure calculator suggests under 60 psi. Below 70 psi on the rear feel sluggish; I'm happy with 70 rear and 55 front.

Yesterday I rode through an industrial/port area for about 30 miles and hit lots of potholes, glass, bits of metal, etc. I was happy to have a durable tire. So far with about 200 miles they seem great.

JimQPublic

Update to the Continental Contact Urban: I put about 1000 miles on them last summer and nary a flat. I really like the way they feel. Thinking of going with 40 mm size when these wear down a bit more.