Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2
Quote | Reply
FLO has put up part 2 of their tire study (study at this link) and I have a question about it. When they combine aero drag and rolling resistance in step 2, the aero drag part is from the wind tunnel measured drag I guess, right? So that means that the graph in step 2, and the chart in step 3, are likely most relevant for a front wheel -- though maybe still not even perfect for that. You'd get a slightly different ordering for a rear wheel I think, since aero is less important and CRR more important in the rear. If so, I'd love to see two charts: one for front, and one for rear. Or maybe you should just go lowest CRR for rear (step 1) and ignore aero.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [lanierb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Last edited by: sp1ke: Jun 8, 16 14:24
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [lanierb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Punch line:



Suffer Well.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [sp1ke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sp1ke wrote:
Looks like Conti Force 24mm has lowest Crr and is the best combination of Crr and aero.


I'm a little surprised at that. The Force loses to the Supersonic at aero until around 11 degrees of yaw. But kicks Supersonic's ass after that.

That means the Force victory is entirely based on the NDRV weighting of higher yaws.

And 35km/h is extremely slow for me (pure roadie). I bet Supersonic wins at higher speed.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [sp1ke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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 :-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Jun 8, 16 14:45
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Curious as to why no one tests Conti Grand Prix TT?
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did you do a new batch of testing for these tyres or use your existing data?
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
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 :-)


I think the takeaway is that the more aero tires are winning even at slow speed (given the yaw profile and load). But Flo's yaw profile is fairly aggressive towards low yaw compared to some others, right?

Really not good news for the Specialized tires.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [ErickBar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ErickBar wrote:
Curious as to why no one tests Conti Grand Prix TT?

Right!? I'm very disappointed they didn't.

Honestly, picking apart the study, I would still go:
SS23 front
TT25 rear
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
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 :-)

Correct! With FLO at least you now know what you're getting. For me paying $1000s more for big claims and no data doesn't make sense
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [ErickBar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ErickBar wrote:
Curious as to why no one tests Conti Grand Prix TT?

Thanks to Eric Reid, I've had one to test for a bit, but life situations have conspired against me having a chance to roll it. That said, Flo didn't aero test it.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [cyclenutnz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
cyclenutnz wrote:
Did you do a new batch of testing for these tyres or use your existing data?

They sent me their box of tires. I roller tested the ones I hadn't rolled yet. It still was a crap ton of tires ;-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
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 :-)


I think the takeaway is that the more aero tires are winning even at slow speed (given the yaw profile and load). But Flo's yaw profile is fairly aggressive towards low yaw compared to some others, right?

Really not good news for the Specialized tires.

On the Flo rim.

See the similar analysis on my blog for other wheel/tire combos.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:

See the similar analysis on my blog for other wheel/tire combos.

I have - the one where the Flo90/Supersonic is the outlier, right?

A direct comparison is a little hard because you didn't integrate over yaw like Flo did with the NDRV. Which is nice, because there's more information to see. But, visually, it looks pretty similar to me, like the more aero tires are going to annihilate the Turbo Cotton if run through any but the most aggressively low-yaw profile.

The CLX64 + SW Turbo 22m ends up looking "OK" but not the best at anything, nor the best at any combination of things. Unless maybe grip or flat resistance is taken into account.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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?
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
trail wrote:
Tom A. wrote:

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 :-)



I think the takeaway is that the more aero tires are winning even at slow speed (given the yaw profile and load). But Flo's yaw profile is fairly aggressive towards low yaw compared to some others, right?

Really not good news for the Specialized tires.


On the Flo rim.

See the similar analysis on my blog for other wheel/tire combos.


Why are Slowtwichies so obsessed with Flo wheels... and now tires? I don't get it.
Outside of this microcosm, no one has head of Flo, nor rides them.

Tested and proven: Zipp. Enve. Mavic. Hed.

The rest of us—the world, at large—basically ride Specialized tires and bikes, on Zipp wheels. Race proven, not only wind tunnel tested. That's all.

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here
Last edited by: philly1x: Jun 8, 16 17:23
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [mcycle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Jun 8, 16 18:11
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [philly1x] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
philly1x wrote:
Tested and proven: Zipp. Enve. Mavic. Hed.

The rest of us—the world, at large—basically ride Specialized tires and bikes, on Zipp wheels. Race proven, not only wind tunnel tested. That's all.

There is very little independent testing of Enve. Mavic always tested badly, new generation stuff looks to change that but no proof yet.
Zipp and Hed, yes - tested and proven.

A lot of people using something usually shows that it is easy to get hold of and well marketed, not that it's the best.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [philly1x] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
philly1xWhy are Slowtwichies so obsessed with Flo wheels... and now tires? I don't get it.
Outside of this microcosm, no one has head of Flo, nor rides them.

Tested and proven: Zipp. Enve. Mavic. Hed.

The rest of us—the world, at large—basically ride Specialized tires and bikes, on Zipp wheels. Race proven, not only wind tunnel tested. That's all.


Because they are owned and operated by real people, who are smart, accessible, innovative and committed to transparently developing a quality product and educating their customers on how to maximize the benefits of that product.

Edit: the study isn't about Flo's tires....it's about what tires to use on Flo rims.

Scott
Last edited by: GreatScott: Jun 8, 16 17:52
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [philly1x] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that 1. Flo is a good story about a start up doing it right. 2. The data is educational and is presented in a way that many people find clear. 3. Its interesting.

You have a wheel system 50% cheeper than the big boys that works.

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [lanierb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lanierb wrote:
FLO has put up part 2 of their tire study (study at this link) and I have a question about it. When they combine aero drag and rolling resistance in step 2, the aero drag part is from the wind tunnel measured drag I guess, right? So that means that the graph in step 2, and the chart in step 3, are likely most relevant for a front wheel -- though maybe still not even perfect for that. You'd get a slightly different ordering for a rear wheel I think, since aero is less important and CRR more important in the rear. If so, I'd love to see two charts: one for front, and one for rear. Or maybe you should just go lowest CRR for rear (step 1) and ignore aero.

Force for the win! I did not expect that outcome but I am pleased by it :)
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [ErickBar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ErickBar wrote:
Curious as to why no one tests Conti Grand Prix TT?

Aerodynamically it should be identical to the Super Sonic but it should be just a tad slower in crr because of the vectran breaker. It's basically a Super Sonic with a puncture protection layer.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
ErickBar wrote:
Curious as to why no one tests Conti Grand Prix TT?


Thanks to Eric Reid, I've had one to test for a bit, but life situations have conspired against me having a chance to roll it. That said, Flo didn't aero test it.

I'm going to guess it will be just a touch slower than the Super Sonic. It's basically a SS + Vectran.
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
sp1ke wrote:
Looks like Conti Force 24mm has lowest Crr and is the best combination of Crr and aero.

I'm a little surprised at that. The Force loses to the Supersonic at aero until around 11 degrees of yaw. But kicks Supersonic's ass after that.

That means the Force victory is entirely based on the NDRV weighting of higher yaws.

And 35km/h is extremely slow for me (pure roadie). I bet Supersonic wins at higher speed.

So SS / Force combo for the win?

Scott
Quote Reply
Re: FLO Cycling - A2 Wind Tunnel Tire Study Part 2 [jmh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jmh wrote:
Punch line:


So what you are saying is that I should run the 25mm gatorskin instead of 23mm?
Quote Reply

Prev Next