Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data

Apr 1, 19 15:14

Post #1 of 79 Views: 11888

The lineup of Graphene 2.0 tires has been out for some time and still no rolling resistance data. Either that, or it exists and it's being hidden from view (at least from mine, I can't find anything every). So many unanswered questions.

Is the 2.0 version of the Corsa Speed TLR even faster than the original?

Is the GP 5000 TLR the fastest "everyday" tire or is it the Corsa G2.0 TLR?

What about the rest of the Graphene 2.0 lineup, how much faster is it than the originals?

If we need to crowdfund this, let's get it started.

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 1, 19 15:57

Post #2 of 79 Views: 11826

Just a heads up that I've ordered one of each of these tires and should be able to roller test them sometime in the next week or two.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 1, 19 16:11

Post #3 of 79 Views: 11802

As a part of the tester program, I got a pair of 25mm Corsa Graphene 2.0 tires. I have one in the box still as it was a bit wide for my Nitrogen Pro, it's available for testing.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 1, 19 17:01

Post #4 of 79 Views: 11745

I am going to take a leap of faith with some armchair logic:

If the tires were faster than the new conti stuff, vittoria marketing would be all over this by now. Apples to apples of course.

Last edited by: Rocket_racing: Apr 1, 19 17:01

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 12:19

Post #5 of 79 Views: 11500

Vittoria makes a huge claim that Graphene 2.0 tires have 40% less rolling resistance when compared to the first generation. Until someone proves me wrong, I find this claim very hard to believe.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 12:36

Post #6 of 79 Views: 11468

Vittorias have always ridden well, but durability and puncture resistance?

I found the Terreno CX tires with Graphene good, but not great.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 13:54

Post #7 of 79 Views: 11393

how the grip though...

CorsaSpeed scared me with lack of grip .. I would only use them in the heat of summer

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 15:36

Post #8 of 79 Views: 11315

I've been on Pro Ones for three years now and while I'm quite pleased with their dry grip, they can be be pretty sketchy when wet. Thankfully I live in SoCal and am quite soft and stay indoors when there is a threat of drizzle, but on the few occasions where I've ended up riding on wet roads, the Pro Ones were less than confidence inspiring.

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 20:34

Post #9 of 79 Views: 11222

If you read the press release closely, graphene 2.0 was already being used in the Corsa and Corsa speed. It just expanded to nearly the entire line, which makes sense that their tires took a big leap forward in RR when the new corsa and corsa speed were released.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Nigel] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 20:51

Post #10 of 79 Views: 11213

Where in the press release does it say that? I don’t see it.

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 22:16

Post #11 of 79 Views: 11164

https://bikerumor.com/2019/02/27/vittoria-claims-big-performance-gains-with-graphene-2-0-tires/

Seems it was only the topend corsa and corsa speed that had it and it has been expanded to rest of the line.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Nigel] [ In reply to ]

Apr 2, 19 22:32

Post #12 of 79 Views: 11149

I think you are interpreting incorrectly. They are just saying the 2.0 versions of the Corsa and Speed are currently available. It was right before the photo below:

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [ In reply to ]

Apr 14, 19 7:43

Post #13 of 79 Views: 10827

Any data yet?

I'm thinking either vittoria corsa graphene 2.0 or conti 5000 to put on my HEDs...

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Triingfrog] [ In reply to ]

Apr 14, 19 8:04

Post #14 of 79 Views: 10808

I think data is coming soon.

But the graphene 2.0 might not be the best option for training. Vittoria graphene v1 is well know for not having a huge lifecycle.

They claims that the v2 is better in every aspect less durability. I ran 1100 km on my last pair of v1 .... so i wouldnt expect this ones expect those to be all round :)

Just my take on the claims....

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 16, 19 18:01

Post #15 of 79 Views: 10483

lanierb wrote:

Just a heads up that I've ordered one of each of these tires and should be able to roller test them sometime in the next week or two.

Any update on this?

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Triingfrog] [ In reply to ]

Apr 16, 19 21:22

Post #16 of 79 Views: 10377

I've seen some emails from Hed recommending the 5000 as the fastest current tire on their wheels

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

Apr 16, 19 21:33

Post #17 of 79 Views: 10365

refthimos wrote:

lanierb wrote:

Just a heads up that I've ordered one of each of these tires and should be able to roller test them sometime in the next week or two.

Any update on this?

Yeah, I finally tested the 2.0 tires last night and they were *identical* in CRR to the 1.0 tires, so no changes there.

Since it was mentioned above, I also tested the GP5000 and GP5000TL (both with latex tubes because I didn't want to bother with setting up tubeless, and also coincidentally on Hed rims). The 5000s are very good but still ~3w slower than the Corsa Speeds (with the 5000TL an additional ~3w slower, though also seemingly more robust).

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 16, 19 22:29

Post #18 of 79 Views: 10325

3 watts per tyre with one watt error is up to 8 watt savings per bike?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lacticturkey] [ In reply to ]

Apr 16, 19 23:01

Post #19 of 79 Views: 10312

lacticturkey wrote:

3 watts per tyre with one watt error is up to 8 watt savings per bike?

Sorry - no that's 3 watts for 2 tires at 40kph, so not huge.

Also I don't think the error is even one watt, at least when comparing across tires in one testing session. I've never tried to calculate the sd of the error, but I run the test twice on each tire and always get the same answer. (I mainly run it twice to make sure I didn't screw anything up and to make sure the tire was fully heated up before the test - also if there's a weird result I remount the tire and clean everything and try again, but that almost never happens.) There would be some error that's due to the power meter, but I use the same power meter at the same point in time, same temperature etc, so that error should be the same for all the tires I test on a given night.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 2:25

Post #20 of 79 Views: 10235

Great to have a scientific and thorough myth buster source! Do you have a site?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 5:08

Post #21 of 79 Views: 10146

lanierb wrote:

...with the 5000TL an additional ~3w slower, though also seemingly more robust.

More robust? How so?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [jstonebarger] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 9:48

Post #22 of 79 Views: 10029

jstonebarger wrote:

More robust? How so?

It has the lower tpi casing so probably stiffer sidewalls.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 9:53

Post #23 of 79 Views: 10021

lanierb wrote:

Yeah, I finally tested the 2.0 tires last night and they were *identical* in CRR to the 1.0 tires, so no changes there.

Thanks for the info, but damn.. was hoping for an improvement. I heard 3rd hand of someone else getting the same result. Have you ever tested the Pista? Thinking that might be the best choice if you aren't doing tubeless anyway.

When you say 3W at 40kph vs GP5000, what is the weight?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [jstonebarger] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 12:00

Post #24 of 79 Views: 9933

jstonebarger wrote:

lanierb wrote:

...with the 5000TL an additional ~3w slower, though also seemingly more robust.

More robust? How so?

In addition to what rruff said, it's a touch thicker as well.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Triingfrog] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 12:15

Post #25 of 79 Views: 9916

Triingfrog wrote:

Any data yet?

I'm thinking either vittoria corsa graphene 2.0 or conti 5000 to put on my HEDs...

I'd go with the Contis. I got a set of the 2.0 TLRs (not speeds) and they feel slow. The treads also cut easily and I hit something and blew a hole on in the center of the tread. I have no idea what it was but I've never had that happen before. I was out of town so I booted the tire. I pulled them off as soon as I got home.

I did some A-B roller testing. They rolled way slower than the Corsa Speed Tubular I compared them too. I'm not going to drop any numbers, but there was a significant difference.

I wanted them to work, because I like the speeds so much. The TLR casing is just thick. Not sure why they didn't just overlay a thicker tread on the speed casing.

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [NordicSkier] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 12:17

Post #26 of 79 Views: 5306

NordicSkier wrote:

Vittorias have always ridden well, but durability and puncture resistance?

I found the Terreno CX tires with Graphene good, but not great.

I absolutely loved the Torreno dry tires. They are like velcro in the grass, but their durability SSSSSSUUUUUCCCCCCKKKKKSSSSS. That said, it's a race oriented tire, so I wasn't expecting them to last that long, but I only got about half a season out of them. To be fair though, I ride a cross bike as my main bike, so I'm probably putting a lot more miles on those tires in a short period of time than most people do.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 16:00

Post #27 of 79 Views: 5227

rruff wrote:

lanierb wrote:

Yeah, I finally tested the 2.0 tires last night and they were *identical* in CRR to the 1.0 tires, so no changes there.

Thanks for the info, but damn.. was hoping for an improvement. I heard 3rd hand of someone else getting the same result. Have you ever tested the Pista? Thinking that might be the best choice if you aren't doing tubeless anyway.

When you say 3W at 40kph vs GP5000, what is the weight?

A few answers for you and others:
-- I've never tested the Pista but heard it's a bit faster than the CS. I can't really imagine using one myself given the roads I race on so never bothered to get hold of one.
-- The watts saved is calculated at my weight, so 85kg for total system weight (on both wheels together)
-- On the TL version of the 5000, yes the main difference seems to be a thicker sidewall and bead, but that's simply eyeing it. I'm thinking of using them for races on bad roads and that have some dirt road sections.
-- On the regular Corsa (not Speed), I tested that too. The 2.0 is a bit better than the 1.0 but they're both dogs (IMO - sorry for people that like them). I actually kind of screwed that one up (the roller drum got dirty and I didn't notice at first) so would have to redo it to get it exactly right, but I'm confident in saying it costs another 5-7watts above the 5000TL (at 40kph for two tires and at 85kg).

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 17, 19 18:37

Post #28 of 79 Views: 5178

Thanks for the info. I suppose i am happy to have opted for gp5000, even if it was done with no knowledge of the 2.0 options

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 7:33

Post #29 of 79 Views: 5078

Are these the regular corsa or the corsa speed that Joe Skipper appears to be planning to race on?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Sean H] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 7:39

Post #30 of 79 Views: 5069

Regular..

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 7:41

Post #31 of 79 Views: 5064

lanierb wrote:

rruff wrote:

lanierb wrote:

Yeah, I finally tested the 2.0 tires last night and they were *identical* in CRR to the 1.0 tires, so no changes there.

Thanks for the info, but damn.. was hoping for an improvement. I heard 3rd hand of someone else getting the same result. Have you ever tested the Pista? Thinking that might be the best choice if you aren't doing tubeless anyway.

When you say 3W at 40kph vs GP5000, what is the weight?

A few answers for you and others:
-- I've never tested the Pista but heard it's a bit faster than the CS. I can't really imagine using one myself given the roads I race on so never bothered to get hold of one.
-- The watts saved is calculated at my weight, so 85kg for total system weight (on both wheels together)
-- On the TL version of the 5000, yes the main difference seems to be a thicker sidewall and bead, but that's simply eyeing it. I'm thinking of using them for races on bad roads and that have some dirt road sections.
-- On the regular Corsa (not Speed), I tested that too. The 2.0 is a bit better than the 1.0 but they're both dogs (IMO - sorry for people that like them). I actually kind of screwed that one up (the roller drum got dirty and I didn't notice at first) so would have to redo it to get it exactly right, but I'm confident in saying it costs another 5-7watts above the 5000TL (at 40kph for two tires and at 85kg).

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 7:48

Post #32 of 79 Views: 5051

That’s what I thought 🤦🏼‍♂️

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Sean H] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 7:56

Post #33 of 79 Views: 5040

Has anyone mounted the corsa speed tlr 2.0 onto enve 7.8 disc wheels? in either 23 or 25? how hard are the new ones to mount? also curious what their mounted width is.

I tried the original corsa speed tlr, and my 2 gripes were how hard they were to get on and how paper thin they were (my tire was ruined with the first flat I got). I could get over the poor flat resistance, but I was barely able to even get those tires on the wheels tubeless (hed jet+). Couldn't imagine trying to get a latex tube in there. I'm not interested in tubeless at this time, so need to be able to mount a tire with latex tube.

I currently have the conti 5000 25 (non-tubeless), and just eyeballing it they look a little larger than I'd like. I need to get the calipers on them though. Good news was I able to get them on easily with just my hands.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Sean H] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 8:06

Post #34 of 79 Views: 5027

They've had a running change with the Speed TLR's. The first ones are notoriously hard to get on, the newer ones aren't as bad. I mounted a 23 on Zipp super nine without tools.

The 23's are close to 25 on an 18.5 internal rim. I'd say the 25's will grow accordingly.

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Last edited by: Ex-cyclist: Apr 18, 19 8:07

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Sean H] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 8:08

Post #35 of 79 Views: 5023

Sean H wrote:

That’s what I thought 🤦🏼‍♂️

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 10:35

Post #36 of 79 Views: 4979

Thanks!

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 10:56

Post #37 of 79 Views: 4962

Ex-cyclist wrote:

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.

Not sure what you're asking. I've tested the Corsa, Corsa Speed, and also 2.0 versions of both, all with latex. I feel like it's a pain to setup tubeless each time for testing and in the past I haven't found much difference between the two. I'll actually have another chance to test that theory out, though, because I just setup up the 5000TL tubeless so I can retest and see if I get any difference between that and the latex test.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 10:58

Post #38 of 79 Views: 4959

Ex-cyclist wrote:

e roller drum got dirty and I didn't notice at first) so would have to redo it to get it exactly right, but I'm confident in saying it costs another 5-7watts above the 5000TL (at 40kph for two tires and at 85kg).

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.[/quote]
You mean "TL?" The Contis are supposed to be TL.

Just making sure you were referring to the GP5000TL vs. the CS TLR.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [trail] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 11:02

Post #39 of 79 Views: 4956

trail wrote:

Ex-cyclist wrote:

e roller drum got dirty and I didn't notice at first) so would have to redo it to get it exactly right, but I'm confident in saying it costs another 5-7watts above the 5000TL (at 40kph for two tires and at 85kg).

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.

You mean "TL?" The Contis are supposed to be TL.

Just making sure you were referring to the GP5000TL vs. the CS TLR.[/quote]If that's what he's asking, the tests above of the 5000TL were with latex. I've now mounted it tubeless (for use in a race Saturday) so I can quickly retest it. But I don't expect to find any difference.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 11:43

Post #40 of 79 Views: 4919

I can't tell if I'm getting confused because (i) I'm just old and generally confused, (ii) we have some challenged use of the quote function in this thread or (iii) we have inconsistent terminology, but to solve (iii), I propose the following nomenclature:

Vittoria tires being discussed:
Corsa G1.0 Clincher
Corsa G1.0 TLR
Corsa G2.0 Clincher
Corsa G2.0 TLR

CS G1.0 TLR
CS G2.0 TLR

Continental tires being discussed:
GP5000 Clincher
GP5000 TL

Notes: "CS" means Corsa Speed and for the tubeless variants, Vittoria is "TLR" and Continental is "TL"

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Last edited by: refthimos: Apr 18, 19 11:44

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 12:11

Post #41 of 79 Views: 4910

Bummer about the regular Corsa. I was looking at it for my wife to replace the GP4000s tires she's been using for her 650C wheels, given that Conti is not making the GP5000 in that size. From Bicyclerollingresistance it's about the same Crr as the GP4000 but was hoping for some improvement.

Sure wish Conti hadn't dropped the 650C size!

For my own riding, I've got a couple of GP5000s and going to pick up a new Corsa speed and test and decide if the slight penalty of the Conti is worth the presumably better puncture resistance. I've had decent luck with the Speeds but did have to bail on a TT when I had a flat right before it. I'll probably pick up a regular Corsa 650C and compare it with the one new GP4000 we still have and decide if it's an adequate replacement or we need to stock up on the 4000 while we still can.

I'm confident enough in my own testing to tell which tire is faster but not enough to put any numbers out there.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [trail] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 14:19

Post #42 of 79 Views: 4857

trail wrote:

Ex-cyclist wrote:

e roller drum got dirty and I didn't notice at first) so would have to redo it to get it exactly right, but I'm confident in saying it costs another 5-7watts above the 5000TL (at 40kph for two tires and at 85kg).

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.

You mean "TL?" The Contis are supposed to be TL.

Just making sure you were referring to the GP5000TL vs. the CS TLR.[/quote]
Corsa 2.0 TLR, not the Speeds

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 14:20

Post #43 of 79 Views: 4856

lanierb wrote:

Ex-cyclist wrote:

Did you test the TLR or just the regular with latex? If it is the regular one, that would likely confirm what I got with the TLR's given the thickness of the casing. My testing says the TLR's are dogs.

Not sure what you're asking. I've tested the Corsa, Corsa Speed, and also 2.0 versions of both, all with latex. I feel like it's a pain to setup tubeless each time for testing and in the past I haven't found much difference between the two. I'll actually have another chance to test that theory out, though, because I just setup up the 5000TL tubeless so I can retest and see if I get any difference between that and the latex test.

You answered my question. I was referring to the Corsa 2.0 TLR. The Corsa 2.0 and Corsa 2.0 TLR have different construction.

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 16:15

Post #44 of 79 Views: 4798

I'm confused. Do the regular (non-TLR, non-Speed) Corsas suck or just the TLR's?

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [gary p] [ In reply to ]

Apr 18, 19 16:23

Post #45 of 79 Views: 4787

gary p wrote:

I'm confused. Do the regular (non-TLR, non-Speed) Corsas suck or just the TLR's?

I don't think anyone has said that the TLRs suck or are anything other than very fast tires.

I think what is being said is that the Corsa G1.0 Clincher rolls about the same as the Corsa G2.0 Clincher, and neither are particularly fast. Instead, the are both a good deal slower than (i) the CS G1.0 TLR and CS G2.0 TLR (which roll roughly the same, no improvement from G1.0 to G2.0 but still the fastest tire currently available) and (ii) the GP5000 Clincher and GP5000 TL (not quite as fast as the CS G1.0/G2.0 TLRs but much more robust).

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Last edited by: refthimos: Apr 18, 19 16:29

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 25, 19 17:12

Post #46 of 79 Views: 4531

lanierb wrote:

I've now mounted it tubeless (for use in a race Saturday) so I can quickly retest it. But I don't expect to find any difference.

Did you end up testing it tubeless? I've got some tubeless ready wheels and trying to decide if I should get the TL's to run tubeless or just the normals with latex.

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [realbdeal] [ In reply to ]

Apr 25, 19 17:51

Post #47 of 79 Views: 4511

realbdeal wrote:

lanierb wrote:

I've now mounted it tubeless (for use in a race Saturday) so I can quickly retest it. But I don't expect to find any difference.

Did you end up testing it tubeless? I've got some tubeless ready wheels and trying to decide if I should get the TL's to run tubeless or just the normals with latex.

Yes I did. Keep in mind that I think tubeless CRR depends a bit on mounting - amount of sealant, whether or not the rims or rim tape leak and cause it to harden, etc. That said, in my setup the CRR of the TLs tubeless was very slightly higher (0.2w) than the TLs with latex -- and recall that the TLs with latex were about 3w higher than the non-TLs with latex as above.

My opinion: for races on good roads (not gravel) I would go non-TL/latex. For gravel/dirt/bad roads I would go TL/tubeless.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 26, 19 2:23

Post #48 of 79 Views: 4377

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [MTM] [ In reply to ]

Apr 26, 19 4:08

Post #49 of 79 Views: 4335

interesting... I can't read French, is that 6w per tire or per pair of tires?

MTM wrote:

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

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.”

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]

Apr 26, 19 5:30

Post #50 of 79 Views: 4252

My French is only spotty, but from what he has written he is talking about a pair of tires. Per his testing he is saying that a pair of CS 2.0 is 5 watts faster than the CS 1.0 and 11 watts faster than a pair of GP5000TL. All tires were set up tubeless.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [MTM] [ In reply to ]

Apr 26, 19 8:13

Post #51 of 79 Views: 4770

MTM wrote:

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

Yeah I saw that. I don't put much faith in those tests for a whole bunch of reasons, but I guess it's intriguing that he found a difference. Maybe the European version is different from the US one? I'll bet not though. I'm very confident in my tests. From a quick reading I think his results for the 1.0 are too high relative to the 5000TL, so I'll bet he screwed that one up.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]

Apr 26, 19 9:32

Post #52 of 79 Views: 4726

ericMPro wrote:

interesting... I can't read French, is that 6w per tire or per pair of tires?

MTM wrote:

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

No. His 'real world' estimate is 2.55 watts per tire at 43 km/hr (Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 25 mm vs. Continental 5000 TL 25 mm both inflated to 6 bar / 87 psi with 20 ml of sealant per tire. Corsa Speed TLR 1.0 25 mm was 1.24 watts better than the 5000 in his real world estimate. These watts are specific to rolling resistance obviously. Then he goes on to say that one can only guess as to the aerodynamic differences, but the Corsa Speed 2.0 is very similar to the 1.0 and the Continental tires have traditionally been more aero.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Apr 29, 19 1:28

Post #53 of 79 Views: 4497

lanierb wrote:

MTM wrote:

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

Yeah I saw that. I don't put much faith in those tests for a whole bunch of reasons, but I guess it's intriguing that he found a difference. Maybe the European version is different from the US one? I'll bet not though. I'm very confident in my tests. From a quick reading I think his results for the 1.0 are too high relative to the 5000TL, so I'll bet he screwed that one up.

I'm also wondering whether there's a difference between the US and Europe version - the US one was out a full month earlier than in Europe, which makes me a little suspicious.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [MTM] [ In reply to ]

Apr 29, 19 2:33

Post #54 of 79 Views: 4480

MTM wrote:

lanierb wrote:

MTM wrote:

Did you see that the French guy found the new version to be faster?

http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...corsa-speed-tlr-2-0/

Yeah I saw that. I don't put much faith in those tests for a whole bunch of reasons, but I guess it's intriguing that he found a difference. Maybe the European version is different from the US one? I'll bet not though. I'm very confident in my tests. From a quick reading I think his results for the 1.0 are too high relative to the 5000TL, so I'll bet he screwed that one up.

I'm also wondering whether there's a difference between the US and Europe version - the US one was out a full month earlier than in Europe, which makes me a little suspicious.

This can be due to logistics:

- Faster shipping from Thailand to the US, than to Europe? (Likely)
- Better vessel availability?
- US shipments prioritized due to lower stock levels in the US?
- Faster warehouse management in the US?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [refthimos] [ In reply to ]

May 29, 19 10:30

Post #55 of 79 Views: 3936

refthimos wrote:

What about the rest of the Graphene 2.0 lineup, how much faster is it than the originals?

BRR tested the new Corsa G+ 2.0, and it turned out to be slower than the original Graphene 1.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...oria-corsa-graphene2

From the test results, I can infer that the Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is probably slightly slower than the original version also.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

May 29, 19 15:04

Post #56 of 79 Views: 3832

RichardL wrote:

refthimos wrote:

What about the rest of the Graphene 2.0 lineup, how much faster is it than the originals?

BRR tested the new Corsa G+ 2.0, and it turned out to be slower than the original Graphene 1.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...oria-corsa-graphene2

From the test results, I can infer that the Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is probably slightly slower than the original version also.

I'm confused. The Corsa G+ 2.0 is the same tyre just a 2.0 badge in line with their marketing that they have now added graphene to more that the Corsa and Corsa speed models. If anything it highlights the inaccuracies in the testing maybe? Tell me if I am wrong?

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]

May 29, 19 17:10

Post #57 of 79 Views: 3782

Shambolic wrote:

If anything it highlights the inaccuracies in the testing maybe? Tell me if I am wrong?

You are wrong.

* Corsa G+ Graphene 1.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...-corsa-graphene-2016
* Corsa G+ Graphene 2.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...oria-corsa-graphene2

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

May 29, 19 17:19

Post #58 of 79 Views: 3766

RichardL wrote:

From the test results, I can infer that the Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is probably slightly slower than the original version also.

How can you infer that? There have been..er inferences..from Josh@Silca and some others that some pro teams tried running tubeless CS TLR in the classics specifically because they measured at ridiculously low rolling resistance.

Last edited by: trail: May 29, 19 17:20

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

May 29, 19 18:32

Post #59 of 79 Views: 3721

RichardL wrote:

Shambolic wrote:

If anything it highlights the inaccuracies in the testing maybe? Tell me if I am wrong?

You are wrong.

* Corsa G+ Graphene 1.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...-corsa-graphene-2016
* Corsa G+ Graphene 2.0: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...oria-corsa-graphene2

So quoting Vittoria how is this a different tyre at all?

While not used in every Vittoria tire, Graphene 2.0 is already found in current road options such as the Corsa and Corsa Speed.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [trail] [ In reply to ]

May 30, 19 7:15

Post #60 of 79 Views: 3555

trail wrote:

RichardL wrote:

From the test results, I can infer that the Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is probably slightly slower than the original version also.

How can you infer that? There have been..er inferences..from Josh@Silca and some others that some pro teams tried running tubeless CS TLR in the classics specifically because they measured at ridiculously low rolling resistance.

We are talking v2.0 versus v1.0 here. Don't get me wrong, the CS TLR 2.0 is still a very fast tire with ridiculously low rolling resistance. However, it does not offer any rolling resistance improvement over the original CS TLR 1.0, at least according to my own roller testing this morning. Keep in mind that Vittoria claimed a 40% improvement in rolling resistance, which in theory should show up on my SRM power meter during the tests.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

May 30, 19 9:55

Post #61 of 79 Views: 3501

RichardL wrote:

We are talking v2.0 versus v1.0 here. Don't get me wrong, the CS TLR 2.0 is still a very fast tire with ridiculously low rolling resistance. However, it does not offer any rolling resistance improvement over the original CS TLR 1.0, at least according to my own roller testing this morning. Keep in mind that Vittoria claimed a 40% improvement in rolling resistance, which in theory should show up on my SRM power meter during the tests.

Responding (again) just to confirm this. I also tested both the 1.0 and 2.0 Corsa Speed and found no difference. Literally the difference was around 0.1 watts, which would be the same as norrmal variation from one tire sample to the next. There is no difference for the Corsa Speed.

I also tested the Corsa (not speed) 1.0 and 2.0 and found the 2.0s to be faster, though not 40% faster, so I'm betting that's what Vittoria is referring to in their marketing. The Corsa is kind of a dog, even the 2.0, so that's not very exciting.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

May 30, 19 16:21

Post #62 of 79 Views: 3439

lanierb wrote:

I also tested the Corsa (not speed) 1.0 and 2.0 and found the 2.0s to be faster, though not 40% faster, so I'm betting that's what Vittoria is referring to in their marketing. The Corsa is kind of a dog, even the 2.0, so that's not very exciting.

Linked above, BRR got a worse Crr for the 2.0.

Seems to be a bit of randomness...

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

Jun 4, 19 4:55

Post #63 of 79 Views: 3244

For me Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is 10 % faster than 1.0, we will see with Brr result ! ;-)

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 4, 19 11:41

Post #64 of 79 Views: 3130

Where did you buy the 2.0 and when?

There is some speculation that early 2.0s which were sold in the US were slow. But it's probably just randomness.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Jun 4, 19 22:51

Post #65 of 79 Views: 3043

From France, April ( 04/10)

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 6:01

Post #66 of 79 Views: 2911

Your results have been confirmed by BRR ;-)

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...toria-corsa-speed-g2

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [pyf] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 6:04

Post #67 of 79 Views: 2906

eh eh 10 % faster! as my result , YES ! :-)

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 11:17

Post #68 of 79 Views: 2832

Hmm, I must have gotten the early slow US version because all three of mine are heavier than 227 grams and did not roll any faster than the original TLR 1.0 :( Might need to order the newer version from Europe.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 11:37

Post #69 of 79 Views: 2813

RichardL wrote:

Hmm, I must have gotten the early slow US version because all three of mine are heavier than 227 grams and did not roll any faster than the original TLR 1.0 :( Might need to order the newer version from Europe.

Yeah something funky is going on because my 2.0s were identical to the 1.0s as well. (difference was 0.15 watts)

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 14:27

Post #70 of 79 Views: 2759

cyclesetforme wrote:

For me Corsa Speed TLR 2.0 is 10 % faster than 1.0, we will see with Brr result ! ;-)

Hang on a second. BRR f'd up and got ahead of themselves. They are mistakenly comparing the 25mm 2.0 to the 23mm 1.0, at the same tire pressure. The 25mm 1.0 is also about 10% faster than the 23mm at the same tire pressure, so the headline is wrong. The 2.0 is still about the same as the 1.0.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 14:38

Post #71 of 79 Views: 2753

Great catch. I think you should add your observation to the comment section of the test result page: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...toria-corsa-speed-g2

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 15:27

Post #72 of 79 Views: 2732

cyclesetforme wrote:

eh eh 10 % faster! as my result , YES ! :-)

NO !
Seems as always stated it's the same graphene in the Corsa 1.0 and 2.0 so you need to check you your machine calibration if you're getting a difference... Only the other models got the 'graphene 2' or lets call it Corsa model graphene.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Jun 7, 19 22:09

Post #73 of 79 Views: 2685

read my test about CS TLR 1.0 25 vs 23 mm, Crr is the same as Continental 5000 23 vs 25 mm. SO for me CS TLR 2.0 is really 10 % faster ! http://www.cyclesetforme.fr/...rsa-speed-tlr-25-mm/

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 0:27

Post #74 of 79 Views: 2646

For you maybe. It's a shame it nets a the same result for other testers and the rest of us in the real world :(

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [cyclesetforme] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 7:49

Post #75 of 79 Views: 2585

Nice, is there a tab on your webpage to covert to English? Looks like you have all kinds of good stuff!

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 7:59

Post #76 of 79 Views: 1629

RichardL wrote:

Great catch. I think you should add your observation to the comment section of the test result page: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...toria-corsa-speed-g2

Someone commented on that issue, and this was the reply:

JarnoBierman wrote:

23 vs 25 should be good for .2 - .3 watts @ 120 psi and ~ .5 - .7 watts @ 60 psi. I'll dive into the differences in the casing and coatings later when I have time to finish the text.

So according to him it narrows the gap, but is not "identical."

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [trail] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 12:09

Post #77 of 79 Views: 1576

He really needs to compare apples to apples by doing a test on the original CS TLR in 25mm width.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 14:53

Post #78 of 79 Views: 1540

RichardL wrote:

He really needs to compare apples to apples by doing a test on the original CS TLR in 25mm width.

I totally agree. Anything else is speculation. Also I just have to wonder what technology he uses that can accurately measure 0.2 watts difference out of 7 watts? And that's not even counting the fact that you can get that much difference with even a few degrees of temperature difference in the tire, or from different samples of the same tire, or even remounting the tire differently. I feel like he needs to put more weight on the tire so the rolling resistance is more like 50 watts (what I do) and the differences are more apparent.

Re: Graphene 2.0 Rolling Resistance Data [RichardL] [ In reply to ]

Jun 8, 19 15:13

Post #79 of 79 Views: 1529

RichardL wrote:

He really needs to compare apples to apples by doing a test on the original CS TLR in 25mm width.

I agree. I can understand switching to 25 as the new standard for testing given it's probably the most common width these days, but given this is about the very fastest tire (in Crr) a direct comparison should be made.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.