mcycle wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
sp1ke wrote:
Looks like Conti Force 24mm has lowest Crr and is the best combination of Crr and aero. So use it on both front and rear... I've been on supersonics and latex this year on FLOs and it looks like I wasn't too far off. When it's time to get new tires it will be force for me. Never had a flat on SS anyway but the fact that force have the puncture protection and are more aero at the same Crr is cool.
Anyway until the other manufacturers publish this kind of data I'll be staying with FLO. Great job guys! I'll order the new 60 CC to replace my aluminum 90 front in July.
On that particular rim, and assuming their yaw weighting (and that particular wheel load and ground speed)...just to be clear ;-)
The takeaway from the results as I saw them is that there is a handful of tires that give nearly equal performance over a fairly wide yaw range on the new Flo 60. That's a bonus for their customers. Choices :-)
Since you used mavic rim, that I imagine ends up with a different road contact shape than a flo 60 would have with the same tire, do you know if the rolling resistance order remains constant, irrespective of contact patch shape?
Much like the differences in contact patch shape between a flat surface and a roller result in the same percentage differences (and rank order), there's no reason to assume otherwise for differing rim widths.
Edit: I've done some limited testing on various rim widths and at various pressures. On perfectly smooth rollers, the rank orders (and % differences) hold.
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/