Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires
Quote | Reply
I have not seen anything on slowtwitch yet about these tires.
The claims brought forward by the company are quite amazing.
Better grip, better puncture resistance, and much better rolling resistance, with claims of 40% less rolling resistance than any tire 'previously measured'



I am eager to see independent tests and/or the actual data. These could be the no-brainer silver bullet choice for tubular/clinchers.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looking forward to their release and reception.

But the design of the video is upsetting at best.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
WTH? All these bike tech guys at euro bike this past week and this is the first I hear about this?

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When I was thinking about independent tests, I indeed had in mind Tom's fantastic website and resources. :)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tires have the lowest ratio of technisex appeal to actual importance ever. Not surprised the news wasn't carried anywhere.

I am a bit reserved as the big savings might only be within comparing tubeless tires and the general marking hype around the term Graphene.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Pantelones] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pantelones wrote:
Tires have the lowest ratio of technisex appeal to actual importance ever. Not surprised the news wasn't carried anywhere.

I am a bit reserved as the big savings might only be within comparing tubeless tires and the general marking hype around the term Graphene.

Me too, though Vittoria has some tires with low Crr, so there is a chance these might be quite good. It would have been nice with a pure clincher version and not a clincher that is also tubeless-ready, since I assume some weight and hence maybe Crr will be added to make it tubeless-ready - not sure, though.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [MTM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Vittoria has some more information (or at least vague marketing talk) on their website. If we make the (rather large) assumption that the numbers they give are even close to right, I think they'll be better than just "quite good".

Taking a quick look at Tom A.'s RR spreadsheet, Vittoria has two Corsa models at about 0.0031 CRR. If they're actually able to get 20% better than that with their new Corsa Speed, we're going to see ~0.0024-0.0025 CRR and maybe 3-4 watts saved per pair versus the Specialized Turbo Cottons, and 5-6 watts over the 23mm Conti GP4000s at 40 kph. If the tubular version has a latex tube and has more supple sidewalls than that tubeless-compatible clincher, it seems reasonable to put it in the same ballpark (or better?). If you cut that improvement in half, they'd be about on par with the Turbo Cottons.

I think some independent verification is in order, don't you?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [MTM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It would have been nice with a pure clincher version and not a clincher that is also tubeless-ready, since I assume some weight and hence maybe Crr will be added to make it tubeless-ready - not sure, though.

The graphene part is in the tread compound so I really don't see a reason to launch only a tubeless ready tire. At the very least it will need a carbon bead. At only 205g the carbon bead might be the only thing that makes it different from a regular tire.

Also only 23mm which is a fat tire if it is the same as the Corsa, and probably not so great for aero.

Price? Haven't seen any mention of that, but I bet they are very expensive.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [RunningChoux] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
RunningChoux wrote:
Vittoria has some more information (or at least vague marketing talk) on their website. If we make the (rather large) assumption that the numbers they give are even close to right, I think they'll be better than just "quite good".

Taking a quick look at Tom A.'s RR spreadsheet, Vittoria has two Corsa models at about 0.0031 CRR. If they're actually able to get 20% better than that with their new Corsa Speed, we're going to see ~0.0024-0.0025 CRR and maybe 3-4 watts saved per pair versus the Specialized Turbo Cottons, and 5-6 watts over the 23mm Conti GP4000s at 40 kph. If the tubular version has a latex tube and has more supple sidewalls than that tubeless-compatible clincher, it seems reasonable to put it in the same ballpark (or better?). If you cut that improvement in half, they'd be about on par with the Turbo Cottons.

I think some independent verification is in order, don't you?

I agree. I definitely want to see some third party confirmation of their numbers before I believe them. If they are correct the Crr should indeed be very low.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
It would have been nice with a pure clincher version and not a clincher that is also tubeless-ready, since I assume some weight and hence maybe Crr will be added to make it tubeless-ready - not sure, though.

The graphene part is in the tread compound so I really don't see a reason to launch only a tubeless ready tire. At the very least it will need a carbon bead. At only 205g the carbon bead might be the only thing that makes it different from a regular tire.

Also only 23mm which is a fat tire if it is the same as the Corsa, and probably not so great for aero.

Price? Haven't seen any mention of that, but I bet they are very expensive.


On their site they only have a tubular and a clincher version that is tubeless-ready (TLR) listed, so it seems for now that is the two options there are going to offer. If a slight weight hit is the only disadvantage to being tubeless-ready I don't personally really mind it - but the roadie crowd and marketing department might not necessarily agree.

23mm is deinifitely not in the super aero category, but I'm wondering how much the newest very wide rims might be able to compensate - like the 25mm HED Jets or the new Roval wheels. Is the standard Vittoria Corsa 23mm on the wide side like e.g. GP4000S is?

Probably not going to be cheap, but IF their claims are correct I would be willing to pay for it unless they price it at something completely ridiculous like $1000 per tire.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
It would have been nice with a pure clincher version and not a clincher that is also tubeless-ready, since I assume some weight and hence maybe Crr will be added to make it tubeless-ready - not sure, though.

The graphene part is in the tread compound so I really don't see a reason to launch only a tubeless ready tire. At the very least it will need a carbon bead. At only 205g the carbon bead might be the only thing that makes it different from a regular tire.

Also only 23mm which is a fat tire if it is the same as the Corsa, and probably not so great for aero.

Price? Haven't seen any mention of that, but I bet they are very expensive.

My initial reaction was "if they're actually using graphene these will be quite expensive... maybe 2x a normal tire in this category. If these aren't significantly more expensive then they're not likely using enough graphene to make a difference and it's just marketing fluff."

I'm guessing that graphene of a consequential amount would drive up the bill of materials 4x and that materials are ~25% of the cost of the tire.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [MTM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is the standard Vittoria Corsa 23mm on the wide side like e.g. GP4000S is?

A little wider, not as tall. More round. Not aero.

Unless I get a new frame I won't have room on the rear and I'm pretty sure it won't be the best option on the front.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [MTM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Their website has been updated and the model lines trimmed. They are offering a significant number of models with graphene though.
With Graphene:
5x - off road tires (enduro and XC)
2x - urban tires
9x - road tires (tubular/clincher and race/training tires)

It looks like the entire Corsa line (fast race tire) will be gumwall. Might ruffle some peoples aesthetic feathers.

If the HYPE is real this will be an awesome technological shift. How soon until conti and michelin get on board with graphene tech?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Pantelones] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pantelones wrote:
Tires have the lowest ratio of technisex appeal to actual importance ever. Not surprised the news wasn't carried anywhere.

I am a bit reserved as the big savings might only be within comparing tubeless tires and the general marking hype around the term Graphene.

Not surprisingly, updates that may actually improve performance get minimal attention, while the thread on disc brakes keeps growing exponentially.

I called a few shops yesterday and these don't aren't even listed on their distributors' sites yet, so it may be a while before these are actually available.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
they're in the Canadian distributor's catalogue for 2016... Open corsa Cx is $92, the new graphene tire is $132 (all prices CAD retail)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rainmaker] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are they dropping the Cg Pave tubular?

That is the only Vittoria tire I use.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
is there any news on these? Have they come out? Any reviews or thoughts on them yet?

Insta: Trihennessy - Out Rival Racing Elite Team
- Roka - WattieInk - NormaTec - QUINTANA ROO - Profile Design - Pioneer - Gatorade Endurance
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Hennessyr] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hennessyr wrote:
is there any news on these? Have they come out? Any reviews or thoughts on them yet?

Just a bump to see if anyone has tried the new Vittorias (Graphene or otherwise) yet.
The Corsa Elite looks like it should work as a daily/trainer tub - anyone ridden one yet?
Also, the Magic Mastik glue that they use on the glueing demo - has anyone tried that yet? Does look pretty nice and simple.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [PT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Came across this: http://cyclesetforme.blogspot.com/

So if I'm interpreting the results correctly - about 10% lower rolling resistance going from GP 4000S 23mm to Corsa Speed 23mm. Average size rider at 25mph and you're looking at about 3W lower rolling resistance I believe.


Last edited by: cmeeks: Nov 21, 15 13:20
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ok so we have a first BALLPARK test: Alban Lorenzini tested and posted results on his blog. It's in french and I'm not sure google translate will come up good so I'll make a brief summary and hopefully if one has more questions maybe he will step up here.
He could not do his usual outdoor test due to weather conditions so he settled for a test on rollers and made an estimate of the effect on the road.
He controlled for room temperature, roller temperature, warm up conditions for a set of different tires including conti gp4000s II and Corsa Speed 23. Once he has results he uses a ballpark approximation on the effect on the road (because he knows difference on road between the GP4000 and the Conti TT, and the difference the roller test gives, so we can use the relative results to estimate the Corsa Speed on road).

The Corsa speed is estimated to be 3W faster than the Conti TT 23mm and 4.5W faster than the Conti GP4000 25 mm (and 6.5W faster than the Conti GP4000s 23mm) (all at 35 km/h)

Obviously this won't replace a more precise test but that's about where we can expect things to be. Easiest watt gain ever if as they claim the tire is very grippy and more puncture puncture resistant than anything else.

link to the study
http://cyclesetforme.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/test-de-rendement-gamme-vittoria.html


TL;DR first estimate the Corsa Speed circa 6.5W faster than the crowd favorite Conti GP 4000S2 (both 23 mm)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the interpretation. So a rough estimate would maybe be a 2 watt improvement per wheel over the cotton turbo at 45+ Kph. I will take that any day.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
grumpier.mike wrote:
Thanks for the interpretation. So a rough estimate would maybe be a 2 watt improvement per wheel over the cotton turbo at 45+ Kph. I will take that any day.


If that's true ST will be throwing money at Vittoria.



Last edited by: trail: Nov 21, 15 16:17
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
howlingmadbenji wrote:
Ok so we have a first BALLPARK test: Alban Lorenzini tested and posted results on his blog. It's in french and I'm not sure google translate will come up good so I'll make a brief summary and hopefully if one has more questions maybe he will step up here.
He could not do his usual outdoor test due to weather conditions so he settled for a test on rollers and made an estimate of the effect on the road.
He controlled for room temperature, roller temperature, warm up conditions for a set of different tires including conti gp4000s II and Corsa Speed 23. Once he has results he uses a ballpark approximation on the effect on the road (because he knows difference on road between the GP4000 and the Conti TT, and the difference the roller test gives, so we can use the relative results to estimate the Corsa Speed on road).

The Corsa speed is estimated to be 3W faster than the Conti TT 23mm and 4.5W faster than the Conti GP4000 25 mm (and 6.5W faster than the Conti GP4000s 23mm) (all at 35 km/h)

Obviously this won't replace a more precise test but that's about where we can expect things to be. Easiest watt gain ever if as they claim the tire is very grippy and more puncture puncture resistant than anything else.

link to the study
http://cyclesetforme.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/test-de-rendement-gamme-vittoria.html


TL;DR first estimate the Corsa Speed circa 6.5W faster than the crowd favorite Conti GP 4000S2 (both 23 mm)

Hey! I recognize that Crr vs temperature plot in the blog...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
grumpier.mike wrote:
Thanks for the interpretation. So a rough estimate would maybe be a 2 watt improvement per wheel over the cotton turbo at 45+ Kph. I will take that any day.


If that's true ST will be throwing money at Vittoria.



Darn toot'n. I will take any 2 watt improvement. Better tires are great because you don't really need to try testing whether they are faster. My Chung-ability isn't going to reliably detect a 2 watt improvement in aerodynamics and I am at the point of pretty marginal gains.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
grumpier.mike wrote:

Darn toot'n. I will take any 2 watt improvement. Better tires are great because you don't really need to try testing whether they are faster. My Chung-ability isn't going to reliably detect a 2 watt improvement in aerodynamics and I am at the point of pretty marginal gains.


Just curious...but we do know some tires are more aero than others. If the tire rolled fast and was slow aero, would you still want it?
I guess it's like the Turbo Cottons. The rolling resistance is better than the increased aero drag

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/
Last edited by: BryanD: Nov 21, 15 19:38
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BryanD wrote:


Just curious...but we do know some tires are more aero than others. If the tire rolled fast and was slow aero, would you still want it?
I guess it's like the Turbo Cottons. The rolling resistance is better than the increased aero drag


From what I've seen the separation between the least aero and most aero tires of similar width is about 50g, or about 5W at the 40kph standard for Crr testing.

And usually it's must less than 50g near zero yaw. Most of the Conti 4000SII magic occurs at higher yaw.

If two Corsa Speed save ~4W vs. the Turbo Cotton at that speed it'd have to be *really* bad at aero to make it not worthwhile. And the Crr benefits occur at both wheels vs. aero which is likely more important up front.
Last edited by: trail: Nov 21, 15 20:16
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Curious, but have people done the math on the effect of weight of rider on relative importance of rolling resistance to aero? (Significant enough that a 100lb rider should consider different tires than a 200lb one? 150?)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [BryanD] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BryanD wrote:
grumpier.mike wrote:

Darn toot'n. I will take any 2 watt improvement. Better tires are great because you don't really need to try testing whether they are faster. My Chung-ability isn't going to reliably detect a 2 watt improvement in aerodynamics and I am at the point of pretty marginal gains.


Just curious...but we do know some tires are more aero than others. If the tire rolled fast and was slow aero, would you still want it?
I guess it's like the Turbo Cottons. The rolling resistance is better than the increased aero drag

Assuming the Crr results hold up, I will certainly switch out the cotton turbo I am using on my disc. The front is trickier because I am using a TriSpoke/20mm Conti SS. I doubt they will make 20-21mm version, so I need to consider if the Crr saving offset the difference in aero drag and watts to spin. I am also riding an old nose cone Shiv and a wide rim really makes the arms on the TRP brakes stick out in the wind. That frame was designed before wide rims became popular so wheels like my HED Stinger don't even fit without shaving down the brake pads or modifying the stops on the brakes.

If I ever get to do an ERO session I will definitely spend some time on front wheel choice.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
anyone knows when the graphene corsas will be available?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [R2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
R2 wrote:
anyone knows when the graphene corsas will be available?


February.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [R2] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
R2 wrote:
anyone knows when the graphene corsas will be available?
My LBS in Houston has them in stock
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [cmeeks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How much are they at your local shop?

cmeeks wrote:
R2 wrote:
anyone knows when the graphene corsas will be available?

My LBS in Houston has them in stock
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [sun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
around $90 I think
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Assuming the Crr results hold up, I will certainly switch out the cotton turbo I am using on my disc. The front is trickier because I am using a TriSpoke/20mm Conti SS. I doubt they will make 20-21mm version, so I need to consider if the Crr saving offset the difference in aero drag and watts to spin.

Every "open tubular" aero test I've seen shows pretty abysmal aero performance. The only viable place to use them is on the rear. Stick with your Supersonic.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:

Every "open tubular" aero test I've seen shows pretty abysmal aero performance. The only viable place to use them is on the rear. Stick with your Supersonic.


I don't know. I've probably seen less than you, but this plot from Flo is one data point that the "abysmal" doesn't really start until around 7.5 degrees yaw. (Vittoria Open Triathlon EVO)

The 20mm SS is, I believe, roughly equivalent to the 23mm GP4KSII in Crr? So if we believe the (still to be verified) 6.5W @ 40kph Crr difference between the GP4KSII and Corsa Speed, then the Corsa Speed is a clear winner over the 20mm SS out to 7.5 degrees.

Average-yaw-experienced is rider and course dependent, and still an open topic even then, but, personally, I'd prefer to optimize from 0 to 7.5 deg. Unless I knew my course had a big-ass pure sidewind leg or something.
Last edited by: trail: Nov 23, 15 11:47
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The 20mm SS is, I believe, roughly equivalent to the 23mm GP4KSII in Crr?

The 20mm SS is consistently better in my testing. Worst SS (5 samples) is better than best GP4000 23mm (3 samples), with ~10% on average.

Note the Vittoria 22mm is very narrow. It might actually be the old 20mm casing size. Tom A and Specialized have some good data posted on this forum somewhere. Don't think they tested a 20mm SS, but the 23mm SS was very good in aero, and the 24mm Turbo Cotton was very poor.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
Assuming the Crr results hold up, I will certainly switch out the cotton turbo I am using on my disc. The front is trickier because I am using a TriSpoke/20mm Conti SS. I doubt they will make 20-21mm version, so I need to consider if the Crr saving offset the difference in aero drag and watts to spin.

Every "open tubular" aero test I've seen shows pretty abysmal aero performance. The only viable place to use them is on the rear. Stick with your Supersonic.

Yaw sweep tests show that the higher yaw angles are rare in practice.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So ignore it? Bad idea for longer course tris. Pretty clearly a consideration for the recent IM Kona and IMAZ races. It will be this weekend at IM Coz too. There are other examples for HIM such as Honu, StG and Silverman. These are all popular races with plenty of ST participants. Bottom line is use suitable equipment for typical race conditions. It's pretty easy to punch your race into BBS and see predicted yaw.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [SummitAK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I may be a bad example, but BBS tells me that 100% of my race at IMAZ was under 10% yaw.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [sentania] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lol. Yes! You are the side of the equation where high speed, on and of course early, etc reduce yaw. Last year's conditions may have yielded different results, though the wind does seem to align somewhat along Beeline.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [SummitAK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SummitAK wrote:
So ignore it? Bad idea for longer course tris. Pretty clearly a consideration for the recent IM Kona and IMAZ races. It will be this weekend at IM Coz too. There are other examples for HIM such as Honu, StG and Silverman. These are all popular races with plenty of ST participants. Bottom line is use suitable equipment for typical race conditions. It's pretty easy to punch your race into BBS and see predicted yaw.


Unless BBS changed their models, they're still using weather station yaw distributions, which are generally not taken at ground elevation and overestimate yaw angles.
Last edited by: aravilare: Nov 24, 15 18:30
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In this case it reads like the graphene their using is pretty much, in effect, fancy carbon black.

Proof in the eating of the pudding. Goodness knows I've got enough tires around right now as it stands, though.

The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important.

-Albert J. Nock
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [aravilare] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yaw sweep tests show that the higher yaw angles are rare in practice.

I didn't say anything about yaw.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It isn't looking good for Vittoria Corsa Speed.

Still wishing they'd test the Supersonic and Veloflex Record...

http://bikeboard.at/...-Welt-Pt.-2-th217501



Last edited by: rruff: Nov 25, 15 8:17
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
It isn't looking good for Vittoria Corsa Speed.


That looks like it's just the Corsa, not the Corsa Speed. From the text and from looking at the sidewall of the tire in the picture. But maybe you meant it's not looking good for the Speed if the graphene Corsa didn't do as well as the regular Open Corsa EVO.

Though I'm feeling my stash of 23mm SuperSonic is staying safe from irrelevance.
Last edited by: trail: Nov 25, 15 8:23
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My bad. You are correct, that apparently isn't the Corsa Speed. It appears that the Corsa has a thicker tread with a different construction than the Corsa Speed. It has kevlar in the casing also, and looks like more a replacement for the Pave. The anti-puncture layer looks different as well.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks rruff for the link.

Testing with two different manufacturers is an excellent idea in this test ! Results are quite similar but it really gives a lot of credibility to this test ! Kudos to the magazine for taking the time to do it this way !
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That graph raises some interesting points.
1. Wow those Mavics suck!
2. At 12-13 watts for the Specialized 24, there just isn't that much room for improvement. The graphene is going to have to be some pretty special secret sauce to get down to 10 or 11 watts.

I wonder what the physical limits of a bike tire are?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wait... there's two versions of the Attack? Minor existential crisis here...
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Clincher vs tubular.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe those mavic tubulars have butyl tubes?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Pantelones] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pantelones wrote:
Maybe those mavic tubulars have butyl tubes?

Those Mavic tubulars are made by Tufo...so, technically they don't have a separate tube, but are actually a single, large butyl "hose"...'nuff said :-/

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Oh good.... phew... I didn't notice the legend in the chart.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
It isn't looking good for Vittoria Corsa Speed.

Still wishing they'd test the Supersonic and Veloflex Record...

http://bikeboard.at/...-Welt-Pt.-2-th217501



It's a shame they test tubulars at higher pressure than clinchers. My favorite thing about tubulars is I can race them at lower pressure than clinchers with less risk of flat, and in my testing on real world roads I have not found a situation where higher pressure is faster than lower pressure (tested between 60 and 120 psi).

Edits to fix auto-correct issues.
Last edited by: tetonrider: Nov 26, 15 18:53
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Anyone know if the new graphene tire is supposed to be more puncture resistent than Turbo Cotten? Doubt they will be much quicker than the 12-13 watts for the Turbo cotton :)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not surprised by the result for vittoria graphene 25 mm...in my test on roller, corsa graphene 25 mm and gp 4000s 2 25 mm was very close ...and corsa speed 23 mm tlr was the best in rolling résistance, better than conti TT.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wish I'd known about the Mavics when I bought a set a few months ago. Thought I was having a bad spot in training...
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [A.Lorenzini] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
and corsa speed 23 mm tlr was the best in rolling résistance, better than conti TT.

Did you try a Supersonic? Veloflex Record?

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tetonrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's a shame they test tubulars at higher pressure than clinchers. My favorite thing about tubulars is I can race them at lower pressure than clinchers with less risk of flat, and in my testing on real world roads I have not found a situation where higher pressure is faster than lower pressure (tested between 60 and 120 psi).

I'm interested in your protocol for that testing, and what your roads are like.

IME clinchers with latex tubes can be run at low pressure also. I've been running 70 psi on the chipseal, 23mm front and 25 rear, 170 lb.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Have you done any field testing to determine the rolling resistance on chip seal at 70 psi versus higher pressures?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:


IME clinchers with latex tubes can be run at low pressure also.

IME they can't. I pinch-flatted in a road race at ~75PSI (172lbs.) And it was just a minor bump in the road.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Gjadams] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nope. Feels smoother though.
Last edited by: rruff: Dec 1, 15 8:13
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What tubes?

I don't run that kind of pressure in races because you can't maneuver around stuff. But in probably >40k miles on latex the only tubes I've pinch flatted are 2 times on the really thick Vredesteins that they don't make anymore. That was hitting sharp rocks with 20mm SS. I once smacked into a pothole hard enough to wreck both rims and nearly crash, but didn't hurt the tubes.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
What tubes?

Vittoria. But I "misremembered". The road race pinch flat was an installation mistake early in my latex days. The low pressure flat I got was when I cornered hard enough for the bead to momentarily pull away from the rim, and the latex tube slipped through just enough to pinch flat. At least that's what I believe what happened based on the timing of the flat and the forensics. That's why I don't go under 90PSI.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
It's a shame they test tubulars at higher pressure than clinchers. My favorite thing about tubulars is I can race them at lower pressure than clinchers with less risk of flat, and in my testing on real world roads I have not found a situation where higher pressure is faster than lower pressure (tested between 60 and 120 psi).

I'm interested in your protocol for that testing, and what your roads are like.

IME clinchers with latex tubes can be run at low pressure also. I've been running 70 psi on the chipseal, 23mm front and 25 rear, 170 lb.

i've done indoor Crr testing on rollers using Tom A's formulas (thank you). indoors, i can run things in a much more controlled fashion.

for the outdoor testing, i had to be a little bit looser. my competitions tend to be on chip-sealed road, so i picked a road with what i felt was representative/decent chip seal. (i race in CA, OR, UT, NV, AZ, NM, WA, CO, WY.....and less often east of the mississippi.)

i picked a steep climb (~10%) in a relatively protected area on a low-wind day. not all wind could be eliminated, but i figured the low speeds of climbing this grade would further minimize any effect of wind.

i'm pretty good at riding in a relatively narrow power band. i did 10' repeats at a pretty reasonable power (think it was 4w/kilo, something that was easy to keep consistent).

i started out at high pressure (something like 115 psi -- don't have my notes in front of me) and then let out air with each run...i think it was 15psi.

i simply noted how far i made it on each run. every time i dropped pressure, i made it farther -- and not just a couple meters. again, i don't have my data in front of me (this was 3 years ago), but the effect was fairly linear. small data set, sure, but the results for each step were pretty close if memory serves.

what i found was that there was no pressure too low where i did not travel further than the prior step -- even pressures that i would NOT race (~60psi).

i got the results i was interested in. for me, the message was to always race as low as i can get away with. this is a balance of road hazards (e.g. potholes--though i race tubulars so pinch flats aren't really a thing), the type of race (in a RR with 100 racers i'm more likely to hit stuff vs, say, an uphill time trial), and handling.

hope that helps.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tetonrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that is a decent protocol for testing the effect of psi on climbing a chipseal road. Did you do repeats? If you start at high psi and only reduce pressure, and don't repeat, then you can experience an obvious bias. Could be wind, PM drift, changing temperature, changing weight, etc. Plus your power output will never be the same, and that needs to be normalized as well. I know it's more work and you'll need to bring a pump. What you did is at least as good as the "testing" that many hacks are posting on the internet!

I'd advise shorter intervals of say ~5 min or less, with distance held constant, 3 repeats, and calculate Crr from your data. You need to establish repeatability. If you want to test 60, 80, and 100 psi, do 60,80,100,60,80,100,60,80,100 for instance. If you (or anyone else) doesn't wish to reduce the data, I'll do it.

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rruff wrote:
I think that is a decent protocol for testing the effect of psi on climbing a chipseal road. Did you do repeats? If you start at high psi and only reduce pressure, and don't repeat, then you can experience an obvious bias. Could be wind, PM drift, changing temperature, changing weight, etc. Plus your power output will never be the same, and that needs to be normalized as well. I know it's more work and you'll need to bring a pump. What you did is at least as good as the "testing" that many hacks are posting on the internet!

I'd advise shorter intervals of say ~5 min or less, with distance held constant, 3 repeats, and calculate Crr from your data. You need to establish repeatability. If you want to test 60, 80, and 100 psi, do 60,80,100,60,80,100,60,80,100 for instance. If you (or anyone else) doesn't wish to reduce the data, I'll do it.
my protocol wasn't perfect; sorry. i do take exception to 'at least as good as the hacks' comment, though! :)

i agree i could have changed things up a bit, but i wanted to collect information while performing a workout. my power was within a couple watts every time (AP & NP), so, yes, there was a variance, but it was as minor as my indoor roller tests (keeping cadence and power within a tight band).

your point about an obvious directional bias is one i considered. it was a still day when i did it (intentionally), so whatever minimal wind there was was fairly constant. the low speeds reduced any impact of wind and aero--or so i thought. i also checked total system weight between runs.

i made it substantially further each time--there was no question in my mind that lower was better for my race scenarios. ymmv.

calculating Crr would have been nice, for sure, and i'd aim for that if i ever repeated the test. i'm not terribly inclined to repeat it, though, as unlike comparing brands of tires where the relative difference is important for me to know, the limiter here is the terrain, type of race, and handling. i *know* for my setup that lower is faster.

(i agree that more information, quantified, is always better, and perhaps you can coach me through it the next time -- just saying that personally for a TT when i'm choosing tire A vs tire B i want to know how much better X is than Y as there might be other trade-offs (aero, handling) that i'm balancing against, whereas regardless of which tire i select, x-n psi is faster than x psi for any tire i choose.)

in the 3 years since i did it, it remains the best test i've seen experimenting with varying pressures on a real-world surface. someone has probably done it better, but i haven't come across it.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tetonrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tetonrider wrote:

in the 3 years since i did it, it remains the best test i've seen experimenting with varying pressures on a real-world surface. someone has probably done it better, but i haven't come across it.

This was quite a few years ago now...it was one of my first VE ("Chung") test sessions, and used the same tires AFM used in his roller testing (he sent them to me). As can be seen, the results (blue diamonds) match fairly closer to the roller testing up to a certain pressure, after which the "resistance to forward motion not attributable to aero drag" (lumped as Crr) dramatically increased.



One difference between this testing and your hill climbs was the fact that the "half pipe" course it was done on naturally featured a wide range of speeds...something I think is important in this type of test due to the higher vibration energy produced by a given road roughness at higher bike speeds. It's my suspicion that is what causes such the dramatic "break point" in the Crr at higher pressures.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tetonrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tetonrider wrote:
rruff wrote:
I think that is a decent protocol for testing the effect of psi on climbing a chipseal road. Did you do repeats? If you start at high psi and only reduce pressure, and don't repeat, then you can experience an obvious bias. Could be wind, PM drift, changing temperature, changing weight, etc. Plus your power output will never be the same, and that needs to be normalized as well. I know it's more work and you'll need to bring a pump. What you did is at least as good as the "testing" that many hacks are posting on the internet!

I'd advise shorter intervals of say ~5 min or less, with distance held constant, 3 repeats, and calculate Crr from your data. You need to establish repeatability. If you want to test 60, 80, and 100 psi, do 60,80,100,60,80,100,60,80,100 for instance. If you (or anyone else) doesn't wish to reduce the data, I'll do it.
my protocol wasn't perfect; sorry. i do take exception to 'at least as good as the hacks' comment, though! :)

i agree i could have changed things up a bit, but i wanted to collect information while performing a workout. my power was within a couple watts every time (AP & NP), so, yes, there was a variance, but it was as minor as my indoor roller tests (keeping cadence and power within a tight band).

your point about an obvious directional bias is one i considered. it was a still day when i did it (intentionally), so whatever minimal wind there was was fairly constant. the low speeds reduced any impact of wind and aero--or so i thought. i also checked total system weight between runs.

i made it substantially further each time--there was no question in my mind that lower was better for my race scenarios. ymmv.

calculating Crr would have been nice, for sure, and i'd aim for that if i ever repeated the test. i'm not terribly inclined to repeat it, though, as unlike comparing brands of tires where the relative difference is important for me to know, the limiter here is the terrain, type of race, and handling. i *know* for my setup that lower is faster.

(i agree that more information, quantified, is always better, and perhaps you can coach me through it the next time -- just saying that personally for a TT when i'm choosing tire A vs tire B i want to know how much better X is than Y as there might be other trade-offs (aero, handling) that i'm balancing against, whereas regardless of which tire i select, x-n psi is faster than x psi for any tire i choose.)

in the 3 years since i did it, it remains the best test i've seen experimenting with varying pressures on a real-world surface. someone has probably done it better, but i haven't come across it.

If you check out the presentation slides that go with Dr Chungs virtual elevation method (I.e., the Chung method), he has a climbing based method that allows simultaneous CdA and Crr calculation. You do need an elevation profile for the climb, or at least surveyed endpoint a, but it would work well for this application. I wrote up R code to implement it if you are interested.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
tetonrider wrote:


in the 3 years since i did it, it remains the best test i've seen experimenting with varying pressures on a real-world surface. someone has probably done it better, but i haven't come across it.


This was quite a few years ago now...it was one of my first VE ("Chung") test sessions, and used the same tires AFM used in his roller testing (he sent them to me). As can be seen, the results (blue diamonds) match fairly closer to the roller testing up to a certain pressure, after which the "resistance to forward motion not attributable to aero drag" (lumped as Crr) dramatically increased.



One difference between this testing and your hill climbs was the fact that the "half pipe" course it was done on naturally featured a wide range of speeds...something I think is important in this type of test due to the higher vibration energy produced by a given road roughness at higher bike speeds. It's my suspicion that is what causes such the dramatic "break point" in the Crr at higher pressures.

your test results, if I'm reading them correctly, are the opposite of mine. (i tested <=120 psi.) you found that Crr increased with a decrease in pressure, right?

it seems that varying speed and power is valuable in VE testing.

when i did the test i actually had a particular hill climb in mind, and for that i was able to run low pressure (no pack issues, no chance of hitting potholes, etc.) -- and while my all-out effort was harder (more w/kg), the duration was longer and the speeds were in the same ballpark. that is, i didn't test at 8mph and then race at 25 or 30 -- i was testing at 8 and racing at 10 (or similar).
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
grumpier.mike wrote:
tetonrider wrote:
rruff wrote:
I think that is a decent protocol for testing the effect of psi on climbing a chipseal road. Did you do repeats? If you start at high psi and only reduce pressure, and don't repeat, then you can experience an obvious bias. Could be wind, PM drift, changing temperature, changing weight, etc. Plus your power output will never be the same, and that needs to be normalized as well. I know it's more work and you'll need to bring a pump. What you did is at least as good as the "testing" that many hacks are posting on the internet!

I'd advise shorter intervals of say ~5 min or less, with distance held constant, 3 repeats, and calculate Crr from your data. You need to establish repeatability. If you want to test 60, 80, and 100 psi, do 60,80,100,60,80,100,60,80,100 for instance. If you (or anyone else) doesn't wish to reduce the data, I'll do it.

my protocol wasn't perfect; sorry. i do take exception to 'at least as good as the hacks' comment, though! :)

i agree i could have changed things up a bit, but i wanted to collect information while performing a workout. my power was within a couple watts every time (AP & NP), so, yes, there was a variance, but it was as minor as my indoor roller tests (keeping cadence and power within a tight band).

your point about an obvious directional bias is one i considered. it was a still day when i did it (intentionally), so whatever minimal wind there was was fairly constant. the low speeds reduced any impact of wind and aero--or so i thought. i also checked total system weight between runs.

i made it substantially further each time--there was no question in my mind that lower was better for my race scenarios. ymmv.

calculating Crr would have been nice, for sure, and i'd aim for that if i ever repeated the test. i'm not terribly inclined to repeat it, though, as unlike comparing brands of tires where the relative difference is important for me to know, the limiter here is the terrain, type of race, and handling. i *know* for my setup that lower is faster.

(i agree that more information, quantified, is always better, and perhaps you can coach me through it the next time -- just saying that personally for a TT when i'm choosing tire A vs tire B i want to know how much better X is than Y as there might be other trade-offs (aero, handling) that i'm balancing against, whereas regardless of which tire i select, x-n psi is faster than x psi for any tire i choose.)

in the 3 years since i did it, it remains the best test i've seen experimenting with varying pressures on a real-world surface. someone has probably done it better, but i haven't come across it.


If you check out the presentation slides that go with Dr Chungs virtual elevation method (I.e., the Chung method), he has a climbing based method that allows simultaneous CdA and Crr calculation. You do need an elevation profile for the climb, or at least surveyed endpoint a, but it would work well for this application. I wrote up R code to implement it if you are interested.

i don't really know what the last sentence means, but it sounds impressive.

i don't have a surveyed course -- i'd be subject to using whatever barometric and/or bps-based elevation estimates are available.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
seems that in the independent testing the vittorias CRR is even worse than GP4000sII; wonder where did such differences in results arise? anyone with the most recent ones?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [A.Lorenzini] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The outdoor tests from Alban are out. The Corsa Speed open TLR is the fastest tire he ever tested being about 3 W better than the conti TT.

I hope he will come here and talk about his results. First question: are these results are aero + rolling resistance given that they are outdoor tests ?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Was that testing done with a inner tube?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [sun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
both with an inner tube and tubeless with 30 ml sealant. Mind that on the table of he had to re-do the tests for the tubeless due to a large drift in external conditions (re-did all the test on the 19th)



Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the info. Definitely looks good. Do you think they will be harder to mount as they are intended for tubeless?
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tetonrider] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tetonrider wrote:
grumpier.mike wrote:
I wrote up R code to implement it if you are interested.


i don't really know what the last sentence means, but it sounds impressive.

i don't have a surveyed course -- i'd be subject to using whatever barometric and/or bps-based elevation estimates are available.

R is a programming language for statistics.

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd really like to see a better testing protocol than this. Rollers would be better.

Also, a little confused by the nomenclature.

howlingmadbenji wrote:
both with an inner tube and tubeless with 30 ml sealant. Mind that on the table of he had to re-do the tests for the tubeless due to a large drift in external conditions (re-did all the test on the 19th)



Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [ericM40-44] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericM40-44 wrote:
I'd really like to see a better testing protocol than this. Rollers would be better.

Also, a little confused by the nomenclature.

I agree that rollers are vastly better than field testing for isolating rolling resistance. The only advantage I can see for field testing is that it could theoretically factor in the aerodynamics of the tire as well as RR. I'm not sure about his testing protocol, but if he's comparing wattage over a fixed course that's fraught with error. VE testing could be used for this but you'd need optimum conditions and protocol to get good results.

And there are gotchas to roller testing. One thing I've found in my testing is that for it to be valid you have to compare tires with comparable mileage. A mediocre tire that's very worn can roll way better than when new.

Looking forward to Tom A. testing a set of these as I trust his methodology. And I'll probably pick up one and test it myself.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [sun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sun wrote:
Thanks for the info. Definitely looks good. Do you think they will be harder to mount as they are intended for tubeless?
Hello ! yes TLR version is difficult to mount with innertube...optimize for tubeless rim ...!
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tttiltheend] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tttiltheend wrote:


And there are gotchas to roller testing. One thing I've found in my testing is that for it to be valid you have to compare tires with comparable mileage. A mediocre tire that's very worn can roll way better than when new.

Looking forward to Tom A. testing a set of these as I trust his methodology. And I'll probably pick up one and test it myself.

You raise an issue I have always wondered about. When Will a tire stop getting get faster with use and then does it reach an age when the Crr starts to increase? I have an old Bonty aero-wing that I have been riding forever on my backup TriSpoke.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [ericM40-44] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericM40-44 wrote:
I'd really like to see a better testing protocol than this. Rollers would be better.

Also, a little confused by the nomenclature.

howlingmadbenji wrote:
both with an inner tube and tubeless with 30 ml sealant. Mind that on the table of he had to re-do the tests for the tubeless due to a large drift in external conditions (re-did all the test on the 19th)



Hello! first time i can compare Field and roller version in my experience....So next time i will only test on roller, it's easier ..no need to wait perfect weather condition...
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [A.Lorenzini] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
what is the theoretical watts and how was that determined?

haven't seen the protocol, so not sure how these were run
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [jeffp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jeffp wrote:
what is the theoretical watts and how was that determined?

haven't seen the protocol, so not sure how these were run

Theoretical watts are with awsoft, my explain are here ( in french), i hope you will anderstand with a translater.. http://cyclesetforme.blogspot.fr/...t-du-salbert_22.html
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [A.Lorenzini] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eh, I see too many variables to use this data as anything but anecdotal at best. slightest variation in riding lines up a switchback climb yields different course lengths as well as different pavement bumps, not to mention we don't know how well you hold position, as it still matters even at slower speeds
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [jeffp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jeffp wrote:
eh, I see too many variables to use this data as anything but anecdotal at best. slightest variation in riding lines up a switchback climb yields different course lengths as well as different pavement bumps, not to mention we don't know how well you hold position, as it still matters even at slower speeds

yes i know, always same position, same riding, same distance...but i'm not a robot i agree ...to compare tire or equipment who are very close ( < 1 watt) , it's doesn't work but only 2 watts between tires can be detect, i'm sure...
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [A.Lorenzini] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
looking at December 17, is shows the SS took 1.1 less watts to climb than the corsa speed, but was calculated to require 0.9w, therefore the SS was actually 0.2w faster, but if the tome of the thread is correct it is saying the corsa is faster, but that is not what your data is showing. you have some formula errors in your spreadsheet, not all the numbers add up
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [jeffp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jeffp wrote:
looking at December 17, is shows the SS took 1.1 less watts to climb than the corsa speed, but was calculated to require 0.9w, therefore the SS was actually 0.2w faster, but if the tome of the thread is correct it is saying the corsa is faster, but that is not what your data is showing. you have some formula errors in your spreadsheet, not all the numbers add up
no test of SS the 17 th...1.1 watts for corsa TLR vs GPTT, bad résult due to the temperature drop during test at end ...i explain that in my test
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
grumpier.mike wrote:

You raise an issue I have always wondered about. When Will a tire stop getting get faster with use and then does it reach an age when the Crr starts to increase? I have an old Bonty aero-wing that I have been riding forever on my backup TriSpoke.

I really have no idea in terms of Crr, but I would hazard a guess that there is never a point where Crr increases with a worn tire. Maybe if it got so worn that the cords were showing? On the other hand I have heard that as the tire flattens out with wear its aerodynamics deteriorate. And of course a tire stops getting fast pretty quickly when you get a flat due to excessive wear ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tttiltheend] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bump. Wondering if anyone has seen any more rolling resistance data for the new Vittoria Speed. I'm specifically interested in the tubular. Anyone have experience with the new tubie? I'm wondering about the puncture resistance for races.

Thanks,
Patrick
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [tttiltheend] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wonder if flat spotting a tire might change things as well? Probably not, though, and most flat spots do result in cords showing.

My YouTubes

Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [howlingmadbenji] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
howlingmadbenji wrote:
I am eager to see independent tests and/or the actual data.


http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...ria-corsa-speed-2016
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [dangle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So ~25% less rolling resistance than Conti GP TT and Spe Turbo cotton. Impressive.

Blog | Twitter| Bike CdaCrr app
Last edited by: bugno: Jun 20, 16 8:28
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [bugno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bugno wrote:
So ~25% less rolling resistance than Conti GP TT and Spe Turbo cotton. Impressive.
Actually, if you standardize to using a latex tube, it's 9.2W-9.7W for the Corsa Speed (he says add 1.5-2W for a latex tube vs tubeless), and 8.4W for the GP TT, so that makes the Corsa Speed look like a slow tyre, i.e. the data say something different to the words he has written to describe the data.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [bugno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bugno wrote:
So ~25% less rolling resistance than Conti GP TT and Spe Turbo cotton. Impressive.

Well, that guy tests tires with a 100g butyl tube. Using latex tubes will knock off 1.5 watts from the Turbo Cotton. That puts them about 1 watt apart. The Corsa Speed also looks like the thinnest tread that he's ever tested too.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Steve Irwin wrote:
bugno wrote:
So ~25% less rolling resistance than Conti GP TT and Spe Turbo cotton. Impressive.

Actually, if you standardize to using a latex tube, it's 9.2W-9.7W for the Corsa Speed (he says add 1.5-2W for a latex tube vs tubeless), and 8.4W for the GP TT, so that makes the Corsa Speed look like a slow tyre, i.e. the data say something different to the words he has written to describe the data.


Indeed, I concluded too fast without reading enough, as I was hoping for this result :-)

Blog | Twitter| Bike CdaCrr app
Last edited by: bugno: Jun 20, 16 10:29
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Steve Irwin wrote:
bugno wrote:
So ~25% less rolling resistance than Conti GP TT and Spe Turbo cotton. Impressive.

Actually, if you standardize to using a latex tube, it's 9.2W-9.7W for the Corsa Speed (he says add 1.5-2W for a latex tube vs tubeless), and 8.4W for the GP TT, so that makes the Corsa Speed look like a slow tyre, i.e. the data say something different to the words he has written to describe the data.


Why would you add a latex tube to a tubeless tire? Even if somebody did find some weird reason to run an inner tube in it, 9~9.5 watts would not be a 'slow' tire.
Last edited by: dangle: Jun 28, 16 7:22
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [dangle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mine just arrived, man these things look and feel fragile!
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [zedzded] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've ridden on them in torrential downpour, fine.
I've ridden on them on a road that would have been better suited for MTB tires, fine.

They are solid tires.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [RBeck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
RBeck wrote:
I've ridden on them in torrential downpour, fine.
I've ridden on them on a road that would have been better suited for MTB tires, fine.

They are solid tires.

sweet, that's what I want to hear!
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [zedzded] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thought I'd post my experience this morning. First flat since having a tubeless setup - all on this tire. So tire has been mounted since January and while it was damn near impossible to mount initially I was able to get it off and on with little bit of effort today on the side of the road. Not Zipp easy where they just fall of the rim (Alto wheel, FYI) but a tire lever popped it off and got it back on. The biggest pain was the sealant everywhere. A paper towel in the flat kit would have been nice. It was also cold and fingers a bit numb. I ran over a slice of broken glass and it gashed across the front of the tire. Instantly flat and no way the sealant could handle that size. Also because gash the Tom A approved flat kit, which I had, also wasn't an option.

I'm glad I got the opportunity to run thru this drill not on a race day. My big takeaway is that the Corsa stretches over time making a roadside tube swap possible despite the perception. Just don't flat before it can stretch.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Jnags7] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I bought a pair to try out last year and bailed after I wasn't able to mount the stupid things with latex tubes without pinching the tube and having it flat on inflation. I decided to give them another try to use as training tires since it pained me to have them sitting on the shelf. Managed to get them mounted on a different set of rims with butyl tubes, but I'm a little worried about what the heck I'm going to do if they ever flat and I have to try to change a tube. I sure am hoping I get in enough miles that they stretch enough before I flat.
Quote Reply
Re: Vittoria corsa speed graphene tires [Jnags7] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jnags7 wrote:
Thought I'd post my experience this morning. First flat since having a tubeless setup - all on this tire. So tire has been mounted since January and while it was damn near impossible to mount initially I was able to get it off and on with little bit of effort today on the side of the road. Not Zipp easy where they just fall of the rim (Alto wheel, FYI) but a tire lever popped it off and got it back on. The biggest pain was the sealant everywhere. A paper towel in the flat kit would have been nice. It was also cold and fingers a bit numb. I ran over a slice of broken glass and it gashed across the front of the tire. Instantly flat and no way the sealant could handle that size. Also because gash the Tom A approved flat kit, which I had, also wasn't an option.


I'm glad I got the opportunity to run thru this drill not on a race day. My big takeaway is that the Corsa stretches over time making a roadside tube swap possible despite the perception. Just don't flat before it can stretch.


Yeah I didn't have much luck with them. Flatted in my 2nd race with them after 2 seasons of no flats during races and 2 flats in total including training using Conti TTs for racing and GPs for training. I tried to fixing it with sealant and it seemed to hold, but went down 3km into my next ride. I couldn't find a hole or gash in the tyre at all, but it was obviously a bin job so I cut it up curious to see where the hole was, I found a small hole and then further along found a huge tear about an inch long? How can that have happened without the tyre getting damaged?? Anyway, you only have to hold these tyres in your hands to realise they're not suited to anything other than sprints or TTs on perfect roads. They're quick, but they are incredibly light weight and incredibly fragile.

To be fair on Vittoria's website, there is no mention of puncture protection for the Cross Speed. I'm sure Vittoria would agree with me that these are not suited to triathlon.

Corsa:


  • The world’s best tire
  • 4 compounds for best speed, grip, durability and puncture protection
  • Reinforced Corespun K casing for increased sidewall protection



Corsa Speed:


  • The world’s fastest tire
  • Perfect for wide aero-rims
  • Very low rolling resistance



Last edited by: zedzded: Mar 3, 18 0:58
Quote Reply