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.

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.

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?

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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

Seems to be a bit of randomness...

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

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.

From France, April ( 04/10)

Your results have been confirmed by BRR ;-)

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

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

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)

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.

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

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.

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/

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 :(

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