Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => The Knowledge => Topic started by: Jethro on 12 May, 2024, 12:13:52 pm
-
What size (width) tyres do you use and why please?
I personally prefer to use 700x23mm or 700x25mm on all of my bikes but many years ago (1980's) I purchased a pair of Assos bladed time-trial wheels with 16mm wide rims. The only suitable tyres (then) were either Wolber Record 18mm or the Soyo 35 which was 17mm. I did all of my PB's using these wheels which were my favourite by far.
More recently I began using Vittoria Florida 19mm tyres for Audax rides of all distances up to 600k and never had a problem with them. So I just dont get it with the latest thinking of using much wider tyres now.
-
Conti GP5K in 32mm. Wouldn't want to go any narrower.
Have done a ride where was with 3 others, they had 28, 25, & 23mm tyres. The moment we hir anything that wasn't perfect tarmac I just left them behind, hardly slowing at all.
Modern tyres there's little reason for most of us to go super narrow. 32mm or 28mm are a great sweet spot
J
-
Wide. Currently on 38mm tyres, also have some 32s.
Partly for reduction in road buzz, but also because they 'float' over road imperfections.
The last time I rode on 28s, I hit so many cracks that caused my wheels to tramline. Absolutely terrifying.
-
Carbon PlanetX - 25 - dictated by fork/rear stay clearance
Van Nic Ti road - 25 - I just like them
Van Nic Ti tourer - 28 - dictated by mudguard clearance
Boardman ebike - 32 - no problem with mudguards
. . all are Schwalbe in various models
-
Usually somewhere between 35c and 40c. (Cross-Check, LHT, Raleigh Trace e-bike)
My Genesis Equilibrium and Henry Burton (retro) have 28c but don't ride either regularly
-
32mm Gatorskins on the Airnimal, but I really don't like the ride and the winter grip is awful
Faran has 40mm 650b Terravail Canonball - i originally bought them by mistake but I like them so have stuck with them. Nice and floaty on the crap roads round here and good on the back lanes in summer.
I rewheeled the S40 recumbent with 650b's and put Panaracer Gravelking slicks on that at 38mm, biggest I could fit but running at lower pressure than the Canonballs on the Faran makes up for the lack of suspension.
My previous choice on 700c wheels was a 28mm Conti GP 4seasons
-
I have 28mm for all year commuting (and Audax) and even with those you can still feel it if you get the wrong line through a pothole. Tempted to go up to 32mm next time.
-
Currently 28mm rear (622) and 32mm (406) front on recumbent. I normally run 32mm rear as well. I just prefer to float over rough road surfaces, rather than pick up vibrations. I’m relatively light, 69kg, and can run front at 50 psi, and rear 55-60 psi which gives a smooth buttery ride with no loss of speed.
-
35mm Pirelli Cinturato on the general purpose bicycle - commuting and any other ride at risk of being wet. Wouldn't want anything much narrower for London road surfaces. I run those at 50 / 45 psi front and back.
-
28mm on the bike I would ride audaxes on if I was still riding audaxes, 38mm (or maybe 40 – the markings are ambiguous) on the bike that does far more miles nowadays.
-
Off the top of my head...
Tourer: 40mm Marathons. (Good all-rounder.)
Do-it-all hybrid: 40mm some discontinued Marathon variation intended for tandems, I think. (Sluggish, but less harsh than M+ and never had a visitation! Had something 32mm Marathons previously, and it was awful with the rigid fork.)
Brompton: 35mm Marathons. (Anything lighter would be too prone to visitations. Anything skinnier would be awful on crap road surfaces. Not sure there's anything wider that will fit.)
Racer in racing mode: 28mm Schwalbe One and Conti Grand Prix. (Fastest rolling tyres I can find in the wheel sizes. Pro One tubeless won't cooperate with the rims.)
Racer road wheels: 28mm Duranos.
Mountain bicycle: 55mm Rocket Ron and Racing Ralph. (Roll well, reasonably good at mud.)
Barakta's trike has ?50mm Big apples on the front (for comfort) and a 28mm Marathon Plus on the back (for not having to remove the motor wheel at the roadside). There's a set of 28mm Kojaks in the cupboard for non-motorised use.
-
As with Jethro's OP, I'd be interested in why wider tyres are now recommended and adopted. Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones? Or has there been some technology change that means what was true in the 1980s is no longer the case? Or are wider tyres because of disc brakes and gravel bikes and manufacturers like to keep product lines focussed?
I've just changed by Brompton Kojaks (28mm) for Schwalbe Ones (32mm) and was surprised at how much more comfortable they are without any noticeable reduction in rolling resistance. If anything they feel speedier.
-
Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones?
Yes
The aero benefits were overstated. Matching rim and tyre width matters more.
A shorter, wider contact patch creates less rolling resistance.
-
Why? My guesses in no particular order:
Disc brakes allow wider rims (because no need to get a brake around the rim itself).
Deteriorating road surfaces.
Increasing traffic volumes, leading to greater interest in riding away from surfaced roads, even without going mountainbiking.
Influence of seeing wider tyres on mountain bikes.
Technological improvements in tyre manufacturing, leading to tyres having lower rolling resistance and less weight for the same width.
Greater disposable income (compared to the '80s) to afford more expensive tyres.
General shift away from racing-inspired bikes to various other genres.
Fashion, the ever constant.
-
Perhaps this might add insight:
https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/are-wider-tyres-faster?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0XkgNi6a9_9cUXrINGnWGPPb1If1O1946tAo1MfTtrwAijwZDHRlnXJ8c_aem_AYLy4aQXpZN_MK8g6KL7FjeEUtPBKxjdoPQoBYM9PfanF7dIr7QisJAQ8uoIWGiYa6SRjvtVRicoj5yXY6_7anrI#:~:text=Grand%20Tour%20stages%20are%20routinely,rode%20on%2025mm%2Dwide%20tyres (https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/are-wider-tyres-faster?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0XkgNi6a9_9cUXrINGnWGPPb1If1O1946tAo1MfTtrwAijwZDHRlnXJ8c_aem_AYLy4aQXpZN_MK8g6KL7FjeEUtPBKxjdoPQoBYM9PfanF7dIr7QisJAQ8uoIWGiYa6SRjvtVRicoj5yXY6_7anrI#:~:text=Grand%20Tour%20stages%20are%20routinely,rode%20on%2025mm%2Dwide%20tyres)
-
I was thinking about this recently and had planned a thread entitled " How obsolescent is your bike".
Still have 3 bikes with rim brakes but only one has tyres that are less than 28mm
Would agree that 28 mm upwards is the future and that 32mm would be the ideal for something's all our.
Mind you, when I started out on this lark we rode 27×1 1/2 and when 700c arrived it was mostly 28mms that I toured on; probably on 17mm rims.
Anything above was exotica or non existent, unless of course if you were the newly arrived MTBs..
-
27 x 11/2 would be equivalent in width to 700 x 38, so going from that to 700 x 28 was definitely making progress, by the standards of the day. But going backwards, by today's standards.
-
Schwalbe 28mm P one (tubed) on the alloy bike and 30mm S-One (tubed) on the steel bike.
I'd change to fatter tyres on both bikes if both tyres ever wore out at the same time but I'm too tight to throw one part used tyre away.
-
many bikes, the tyres range from 27...40mm, measured. i've always run lower pressures than the "norm", plenty fast and comfortable for my weight.
-
27 x 11/2 would be equivalent in width to 700 x 38, so going from that to 700 x 28 was definitely making progress, by the standards of the day. But going backwards, by today's standards.
Wasn't the bog standard tyre size back in the day 27 x 11/4? So 32mm.
Basically, narrow tyres were a fad :P
-
27 x 11/2 would be equivalent in width to 700 x 38, so going from that to 700 x 28 was definitely making progress, by the standards of the day. But going backwards, by today's standards.
Never saw 27 x 1 1/2, my first racer bought in the 1980s, had 27 x 1 1/4 aka 32mm in metric.
-
Yes, 27× 1 1/2 is way too big
Think it was 27× 1/4
But don't remember then as being as big as modern 32mms.
-
As wide as the clearance allows pretty much. All tires are not equal though and friendsshouldnt make friends ride on armadillos unless they work in a drawing pin factory.
-
27 x 11/2 would be equivalent in width to 700 x 38, so going from that to 700 x 28 was definitely making progress, by the standards of the day. But going backwards, by today's standards.
Wasn't the bog standard tyre size back in the day 27 x 11/4? So 32mm.
Basically, narrow tyres were a fad :P
27 x 11/4 (or on the old roadsters we inherited off elderly neighbours, 26 x 13/8) would fit my memory too, but Joy of Essex mentioned riding 27 11/2.
-
I remember it as 1 1/8" for fast club riders, 1 1/4" for tourers, so that would be 28.5mm for club, 31.5mm for touring.
-
25s on my summer bike , but ! They’re on wide rims and come up quite fat 27.5mm to be precise. Also they’re tubeless so less than 80psi. They’re quite comfortable really. The n construction winter bike has 30mm tyres with tubes and they’re definitely a little more compliant. And I currently have a project that’s not quite finished that has luvvvvly 28s which for me is the sweet spot
-
Going back to the discussion on Imperial tyre sizes, it's also worth pointing out that we rarely had any idea what the pressure of our tyres was. Track pumps were mostly to be found in shops or on Tracks; hence their name.
Measurement was by feel and I do doubt if the pumps we used could inflate the tyres to anything near the max recommend pressure.
-
Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones?
Yes.
J
-
Grunhilda has 38mm (1.5) Marathon Greenguards front and rear (26” and 20”) , and Olive has, at present a 32mm green guard on the rear and an earlier incarnation of marathon in 28mm on the front. Trying to use up my old tyres, but when you want to, they don’t seem to wear out! About to refit last summers 35mm Marathon supremes fr and rr to Olive, for the upcoming wee Belgium tour. Those 28mm fronts do seem very harsh tho.
-
30-something on my bike (I think I've had from 34 to 38 depending on tyre choice). Because:
It's what the rims were designed for.
I like to get off the tarmac.
I recall feeling decidedly low on comfort and control on 25s once I'd added any weight to the bike and got myself anywhere hilly.
Comfort beats aero for me and the riding I do. I'm not doing this to win or to improve my character.
Sent from my SM-S911B using Tapatalk
-
I believe the tyre construction (suppleness) is more important than width. I tend, unfashionably, towards the narrower end of the range because you can guarantee lighter weight and reduced air resistance, even if RR may be higher than an equivalent tyre of additional width. Also, narrower tyres are mathematically* less prone to punctures from penetrating objects, all other things being equal. My experience bears this out - I barely ever suffer a visitation.
*they sweep less road width and are less likely to hit a thorn or shard of glass than a wider or lower-pressure tyre
-
The contact patch of a narrow tyre may be thinner than a wide tyre, but it is longer. It will depend on exact widths, but a narrow tyre could have a larger contact area than a wide tyre...
-
Air resistance of tyres is minor compared to the rider.
-
The contact patch of a narrow tyre may be thinner than a wide tyre, but it is longer. It will depend on exact widths, but a narrow tyre could have a larger contact area than a wide tyre...
Yes, but a wider contact patch will still roll over all the same road that a narrow one does, plus more at each side. The length of the patch is irrelevant to punctures.
-
The contact patch of a narrow tyre may be thinner than a wide tyre, but it is longer. It will depend on exact widths, but a narrow tyre could have a larger contact area than a wide tyre...
Yes, but a wider contact patch will still roll over all the same road that a narrow one does, plus more at each side. The length of the patch is irrelevant to punctures.
Fair point. But is it really significant enough to make a difference?
-
Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones?
Not necessarily wrong, but the differences between tyres are so small (especially on overall speed) that one may believe whatever fanciful bollocks one likes about why one’s own choice is the best.
-
As a teenager in the early 70s I remember riding thousands of miles on my gas-pipe Raleigh Tour of Britain on 27 x 11/4 tanwall tyres. Wore the buggers right down to the carcass. I suppose I was commuting and touring. I recall the combination of steel frame and those tyres providing a comfortable ride, but my youthful body was likely more tolerant of abuse than my present shrivelled husk. As mentioned upthread, using a simple frame pump I have no idea what pressures I used. Possibly lower than most?
FFWD to 2007 when after a dalliance with mountain bikes I returned to road cycling aged 50. Bad timing; 23mm tyres were still common and even the Racelight Tk I bought would only take 25s. 5 years later I compounded my blunder by buying one of the CR1-SL frames Wesbtrooks were selling off cheap. Marvellous frameset but it takes a max of 25mm tyres, and even then the chainstay clearance is so tight I have frequently run a 23 on the rear.
If I was buying a bike tomorrow it would likely have disc brakes and I'd spec 32mm tyres purely for the comfort. Speed is of no concern to me, but it sounds like they'd be no slower than the 25s...
-
Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones?
Not necessarily wrong, but the differences between tyres are so small (especially on overall speed) that one may believe whatever fanciful bollocks one likes about why one’s own choice is the best.
Empirical measurements say that it isn't fanciful bollocks if you are racing or TT (or indeed, doing audax).
The differences can be many watts. Even tens of watts really adds up over the course of a race.
-
Decathlon - 28mm Conti GP4000, full mudguards
Spa fixed - 28mm Schwalbe One, full mudguards
Elan - 35mm Marathon Surpreme, full mudguards.
The 28mm are quicker than the 35mm. But they have nowhere near the grip of the 35mm, and get easily tram lined by long cracks in the road.
I run full redshift suspension seat post and stem - without those 28mm would be too small: My hands go numb after just 100km.
32mm is my ideal compromise size, but the fixed and decathlon don't have room for that width and run full mudguards.
-
Spa Wayfarer - 38mm
Pub bike and CX/gravel bike - 35mm, both set up for roads mainly.
Singlespeed and Road Bike - 25mm
although I've hardly ridden recently as life/family have got in the way.
I prefer the wider tyres at a lower pressure as although they don't feel as fast, because they are smoother, in general the speed (or lack of) is about the same and they are more comfortable. The two bikes with 25s are caliper brakes and 28s are a struggle to fit, especially on the singlespeed with guards.
As well as changing road surfaces and gravel cycling's current enthusiasm, I think there's something to be said for changing geometries and frame properties between the 1980s and now. Bikes are much stiffer than they used to be, especially around the head tube, fork and steerer. I used to have an old 501 road bike from the mid-80s, and that felt relatively smooth even on 23s. The bike had a 1 inch threaded steerer, 26mm bar diameter and quite a relaxed geometry. If you put some work into that bike you could feel the frame flexing.
Compare to my other road bike (a 2014 CF Merida Scultura, which is supposed to be a slightly more endurance focussed bike), which has a beefy head tube (I think it's 1 1/8" - 1 1/4", buit the taper may even be bigger), and a much steeper set of angles. That bike on 25mms feels much harsher, but it also feels more responsive because of the stiffness in the frame. I wonder if some of the migration to larger tyres and lower pressures is to mitigate the other trends towards stiffer less compliant bikes?
-
20 years ago I had 28s on my bike because 28 or 32 is what the CTC hive-mind suggested. I'm on the light side so opted for the slightly sportier version.
Since then I have tried as small as 20 tubulars which were okay and not as tooth jarring as you would think (but still as practical as you would expect tubulars to be; it was an old skool frame so possibly something in what mcshroom suggests) and up to my current 38 tubeless (Override front, G-One at the back after more punctures than I wanted).
I don't go fast enough for that to be important but the comfort is.
On the other biketrike I have whatever size MRaces come in 18" at the front and 28 at the back because I haven't invested in a 650b rear wheel yet.
-
Imperial Tyre Sizes.
Just been looking at pics on the Rough Stuff Archive of 27" wheels being taken through the snow and mud.
Assuming they are 27 x 1 1/2, though I am sure I rode 27x 1 3/8s , they do look less wide than modern 32s on 19mm rims
So, assuming I was riding 17mm rims, which I think I was, then I think they come up smaller than a modern type 32mm on 700c 19mm rims.
-
I had 24 x 1 3/8 before 27 x 1 1/4
-
My oldest (1982 Mercian, 18mm) and newest (2020 Brompton, 32mm) tyre setups.
(https://staff.city.ac.uk/~jwo/acf/tyresOldAndNew.jpg)
-
Were we wrong in the 1980s to assume 18mm tyres would be faster than wider ones?
Not necessarily wrong, but the differences between tyres are so small (especially on overall speed) that one may believe whatever fanciful bollocks one likes about why one’s own choice is the best.
That just isn't true.
-
Two of my bikes have 700x28. They are audax bikes and I think they are faster than my tourer which 600x1.75"s. However, the tourer is more comfortable which is very important on the crappy road surfaces we now endure. Tyres that can iron out more potholes may well be faster, like the tortoise and the hare and I also think that the construction of the tyre might be more important than the width factor.
Tyres can make a big difference to how much I enjoy the ride, faster or not.
Regarding old frame stiffness, I found a large 531 frame too compliant for hill climbing, 531st is much better. My height and weight is the same as Eddie Merckx was in his day, but there is no other similarity!
-
I've been riding Marathon Plus exclusively since before the millennium. At one point there was a lot of towpath in my life and I was up to 700x38s; now
I think they're 700x32 they are 700x35. Tyres that never make you stop and fix a puncture are the quickest of all.
-
Yes. They are called tubeless. ;)
-
Yes. They are called tubeless. ;)
Hmm, not always reliable
I've had 2 non sealing punctures, both slashes
-
Dawes Galaxy 32mm marathon or vitoria Randonneur tyres - flippin heavy and slow.
LeMond Zurich 851, 21 or 23 hp or Tubs - light and flippin fast.
Audax bike - somewhere in between.
As previously said. You need to consider the history to fully understand where we were 20 years ago. Back in the day (up until the 80s say) the options for road bikes were heavy 27" wheels and low pressure tyres 60psi max or light weight continental 700 'sprint' wheels with sew-up tubular tyres which could take much higher pressures. Hence the old photos of cyclists riding to races with their best sprint wheels strapped to the handlebars. This explains the prevailing wide - slow, narrow - fast philosophy.
-
Yes. They are called tubeless. ;)
Hmm, not always reliable
I've had 2 non sealing punctures, both slashes
Sure, but no tyre will survive a slash.
I reckon a fair proportion of my tubed punctures have been snakebites, which are next to impossible with tubeless. Given the state of local roads I'm quite grateful for tubeless, especially on club rides in a tight pack.
Anyway, on width, I resisted the trend for fatter tyres but I'm heading that way these days, probably because of road conditions.
-
Don't misunderstand me, I'm very much a tubeless convert, but under no impression that they are infallible
-
My road bike, (Thorn Audax), is running 30mm on the rear and 28mm up front as that the biggest I can go with mudguards. It currently runs on Panaracer Gravel Kings, (the almost slick one with the fine file tread), which are the nicest, (narrow), tyres I've run. Given the state of the roads these days if I could go wider I would.
-
As mentioned by a couple of people, tyre construction is more important than width.
On my 80s steel racing frames, I use:
Veloflex "open tubulars" marked as 25 but actually 22.7mm on my 20mm wide rims (outside measurement).
Panaracer Pasela, again marked as 25 but actually 22.7mm on the same rims.
The Veloflex is for dry roads and the Pasela for wet.
On a bike which I don't use much, I've 21.5mm tubulars (Vittoria Corsa) on 20mm and 18mm rims (Mavic GEL280, CX18).
A long time ago, I had 28mm tyres on a 26mm rim and I thought they were huge!
Having said all that, my ebike has 42mm tyres that are similar to the Marathon Plus, but they don't really count as I wouldn't ride them unassisted.