Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance???
Quote | Reply
Hey Tom, I read your comments a while back on the Compass Jon Bon Pass test on bicyclerollingresistance.com intimating that you were working on a testing protocol for the grave/adventure tire category. Any updates? I was also surprised that the Jon Bon Pass tested so poorly in that test and that you found it to be as slow as the knobby Steilacoom in your own testing!!!

Needless to say, given the inherent trade-offs one must make with regard to the optimal balance of rolling efficiency, weight, traction, sidewall protection, etc...for the specific mix of all-road terrain, I imagine I am not the only one yearning to demystify the rolling resistance of this genre of tires to aid in tire selection.

Currently, I'm running the Maxxis Rambler 120TPI 40mm as most of my rides mix a fair amount of pavement and gravel here in Boulder, but I would love to know how much, if any, rolling resistance I'm sacrificing on the pavement by running a mild small-knob tread such as the Rambler or the Gravelking SK as opposed to the smooth file tread of a Compass, Scwhalbe G-One, or Panaracer Slick.

Hit us with the science Tom!!!
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Send him some tires and I am sure he will be happy to accommodate you. I think I read he has a gravel bike and is starting to do some of that type of riding, but like anyone not getting paid for this, most of his work is self-funded.
I would love to see some tests of actual tires, but I have done some of my own powermeter testing and found some of the tires hold up pretty well. I compared a Conti 4000S II (latex at 70 PSI) with a Schwalbe G-One Allround (45ish psi tubeless) and could not tease out any difference. Later on I tried the G-One at 50 psi and then 30 psi and again could not tease out any difference. I am sure there is a difference, but when you look over at bicyclerollingrestance.com and see his results for the Big One tire, 25 to 55 psi only resulted in 4 watts difference for that tire.
Heck, I would test tires if someone sent them to me. My own testing over the years does not have the same kind of exactness as ‘lab’ testing, but if you do self-testing enough, you can do it well enough to make good equipment choices.

Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I was on G-One (30c) @ 60psi this past weekend on my new gravel bike... I felt atleast 2mph slower on the flats outputting the same power.. depressing.


compared to my road bike on turbo cottons
Last edited by: spntrxi: Aug 26, 18 21:03
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm curious to know what you mean by, "It felt 2mph slower at the same power." If you use one of the models for speed and wattage, 2 mph difference at lower speeds (15-17mph) is about 30 watts. At higher speeds (19-21 mph) the 2mph difference is 45 watts. That seems unlikely given the difference between the turbo cotton and a very slowest of the road tires is only about 10 watts. If you were really riding the same wattage and found that great of a difference, then wind or something else was likely at work, especially since the G-One tires have tested very fast. As I mentioned above, my Allround model was as fast as a GP4000 SII. If you have the Speed model, I expect it will be nearly as fast as the Cotton and certainly faster than my Conti GP4000.
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [cdw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I only have 1 ride in on my Gravel bike... but I'll just grab a 5 mile segment from strava.. Granted the bikes are different but nearly the same (except for the gravel bike being 2lbs heavier, but same powermeter) This 5 mile segment is flat and just riding.. not pushing because it's a MUP on the way to Mt Diablo.

TurboCotton : Avgspd 15.9 Pwr 157
G-one :Avgspd 14.1 Pwr 167

Far from scientific I know... but hey I can feel the Crr :)

Here's another 3mi segment.

TC Avg 18.4mph Pwr 170
G-One 17.0 Pwr 198

I mean there are a ton of other factors I'm sure... but no doubt in my mind the 30c are slower by a good margin and yes they are the "speed" model. I'm selling my #1 road bike and this one will have to do until I buy a new fangled "aero" bike... fast group rides are going to be harder unless I swap the TC back on.

all in all the whole ride took about the same time... but I avg 24w more :) It will make me stronger
Last edited by: spntrxi: Aug 27, 18 9:19
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think anyone doubts that there is a difference between those two tires. It is the magnitude that sounds off. A small change in wind direction would more than overcome the difference between tires.
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I love the Rambler. It feels fast on every surface. I like that it is a very light tire too.
Compass tires seem fast but very fragile.
The G-One is decent, but not great, IMO.

I asked a similar question before here and Tom answered: "Challenge Gravel Grinder Pro 36C w/latex tubes"
As much as I loathe to go back to tubed tires, he is probably right.
Tubeless have stiffer sidewalls which increase rolling resistance.

FWIW, I ride Vittoria Terreno Dry 40C. They roll reasonably well, but are heavy. My 33C Clement MXP's, while a full on CX tire I swear are faster and provide better handling on all roads but pavement.
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spntrxi wrote:
I only have 1 ride in on my Gravel bike... but I'll just grab a 5 mile segment from strava.. Granted the bikes are different but nearly the same (except for the gravel bike being 2lbs heavier, but same powermeter) This 5 mile segment is flat and just riding.. not pushing because it's a MUP on the way to Mt Diablo.

TurboCotton : Avgspd 15.9 Pwr 157
G-one :Avgspd 14.1 Pwr 167

Far from scientific I know... but hey I can feel the Crr :)

Here's another 3mi segment.

TC Avg 18.4mph Pwr 170
G-One 17.0 Pwr 198

I mean there are a ton of other factors I'm sure... but no doubt in my mind the 30c are slower by a good margin and yes they are the "speed" model. I'm selling my #1 road bike and this one will have to do until I buy a new fangled "aero" bike... fast group rides are going to be harder unless I swap the TC back on.

all in all the whole ride took about the same time... but I avg 24w more :) It will make me stronger

I could be way off here, but are you running too low of a PSI?

I run 80 in a 30 and can't really tell that much of a difference between that and a 25 at 100 PSI. The lower PSI I run, the slower it feels. I weigh about 185ish for reference.

jake

Get outside!
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [jakers] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe.. I was at about 60psi...
Same weight as you
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chrisgrigsby wrote:
Hey Tom, I read your comments a while back on the Compass Jon Bon Pass test on bicyclerollingresistance.com intimating that you were working on a testing protocol for the grave/adventure tire category. Any updates? I was also surprised that the Jon Bon Pass tested so poorly in that test and that you found it to be as slow as the knobby Steilacoom in your own testing!!!

Needless to say, given the inherent trade-offs one must make with regard to the optimal balance of rolling efficiency, weight, traction, sidewall protection, etc...for the specific mix of all-road terrain, I imagine I am not the only one yearning to demystify the rolling resistance of this genre of tires to aid in tire selection.

Currently, I'm running the Maxxis Rambler 120TPI 40mm as most of my rides mix a fair amount of pavement and gravel here in Boulder, but I would love to know how much, if any, rolling resistance I'm sacrificing on the pavement by running a mild small-knob tread such as the Rambler or the Gravelking SK as opposed to the smooth file tread of a Compass, Scwhalbe G-One, or Panaracer Slick.

Hit us with the science Tom!!!


I thought I heard someone calling (cursing?) my name ;-)

Yes...I've dabbled a bit in trying to get a handle on "gravel tire" performance...and like the bikes themselves, there's usually quite a bit of trade-offs to be considered when trying to make a tire choice.

In other words, short of running actual Turbo Cottons on the bike...you're going to have a hard time matching the pavement performance of a TC (that said, the newer 28mm wide TCs work quite well in "light gravel" conditions...so there's that :-)

OK...so, here are some basic "truths" I've been able to come up with. Most of these are in the "well, duh" category of common sense, but some might be a bit more surprising. In no particular order:

- As with any tire, casing thickness and rubber compound matter in regards to both efficiency (low Crr) AND "comfort". To paraphrase Jan Heine, "Supple tires rule." All other things being equal, high thread count casings and low-loss rubber compounds will lead to a more efficient and more "comfortable" tires.

- The trade-off for high TPI tires is the casing is thinner, and thus easier to puncture or cut. To combat this, designers start adding in puncture belts and sidewall protection materials, both of which lead to lower efficiency (higher Crr) and stiffer tire casings. IMHO, especially with models that can be set up tubeless, sometimes the designers go a bit overboard in doing so, and thus basically "undo" any advantages of higher TPI casings. A case in point: The Challenge Gravel Grinder tires are available in both a "Pro" model that has a 260tpi cotton casing with a glued on tread (i.e. "open tubular" type construction), and in a "Race" model that is a vulcanized 120tpi nylon casing. All things being equal, the "Pro" should have lower Crr than the "Race"...EXCEPT, they put a double layer of puncture protection in the "Pro" model, while the "Race" has a single layer. The result of this is that they roll basically identically. Another case in point: the Vittoria Terreno Dry has a very nice 120tpi nylon casing and uses their fast rolling Graphene compounds...but they use a relatively stiff sidewall protection material, and they don't roll as well as they should. In fact, I found them not to roll as well as the Gravel Grinder models, which arguably have a less "high tech" tread compound.

- Once you start adding tread texture beyond a file tread (i.e. going to a diamond-tread center and/or small knobs), you start slowing down the pavement performance by quite a bit. All of that additional rubber flexes on hard surfaces and causes energy losses.

- In researching off-pavement Crr measurements, the data I've seen shows it's pretty clear that once on the dirt, it's the compression of the surface that starts driving the rolling resistance. Measurements with MTBs shows that the lower the pressures that can be run, the lower the Crr for a particular setup. This means that for fast performance off-pavement, you want to run the widest tires you can fit at the lowest pressures that will protect your equipment from damage.

- In choosing a potential tire for mixed-surface use, one of the main considerations is smooth (file tread, e.g. Compass models, Challenge Strada Bianca, or WTB Horizon) vs. texture/knobbies (e.g. G-One, Gravel King SK, Gravel Grinder, etc.) For me, that calculus comes down to the percentages of pavement vs. off-pavement, how rough the off-pavement sections are, and how wide of a tire can be fit in the bike.
  • If the course is something like BWR, with LOTS of pavement miles and with relatively "benign" off road sections (double-track and somewhat smooth single-track), I'm going to go for as wide of a smooth (file tread) tire I can fit. I'm talking 36mm wide (measured) or greater. Some may be tempted to go narrower with a smooth tire thinking they'll be "faster" on the road, but IME that isn't necessarily the case. The wider tires, if they're "supple", won't be any slower on the pavement, and will handily outperform narrower smooth tires off-pavement (mostly due to the lower pressure). Choosing a narrower tire with some "texture" may make you slightly faster off-pavement, but is going to be a huge hindrance on the pavement, which obviously isn't a good idea for a course that's so pavement heavy. Besides, IME it takes quite a bit of texture/knobs on a narrow tire to outperform off-pavement a wide, file-tread tire run at significantly lower pressures.
  • For courses with either a higher percentage of off-pavement, or with more technical off-pavement sections (such as MTB-style single-track), then using a tire with texture/knobs makes sense. But again, the wider the better, because that allows for lower pressures, and lower pressures are faster off-pavement.

Anyway...that's a (not so) quick-and-dirty synopsis of where I stand on this subject right now...I hope that wasn't too much to digest.

P.S. I should have a box waiting for me at home today with some of the new Challenge Gravel Grinder TLR (tubeless ready) tires in it. For that model they eliminated the puncture belt entirely (but added some sidewall rubber). I'll probably be testing those out this coming long weekend...I guess we'll see if the elimination of the belt overcomes the Crr hit of the sidewall rubber...<fingers crossed>



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Aug 27, 18 16:48
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom! Thanks for sharing your experience thus far with various tires in this exploding genre...much appreciated! Can you elaborate more on why the 35mm Jon Bon Pass seems to test so poorly since it seems to have all the attributes of a fast rolling tire? Seems strange based on everything you have stated that a 700x35mm ultra-supple tire with zero puncture protection was on par with a knobby cyclocross tire from the same manufacturer?

I'm running the Maxxis Rambler 40 on my new Enve G23 wheels and have been pretty impressed with their on-road performance...perhaps because they are a 120TPI tire with no sidewall protection belt and only weigh 380g? Then again, they could be slow as molasses compared to a fast road tire, which would be great to know at some point!

Interesting that you found the tire pressure to be the primary determinant in off-road performance. My 3T Exploro came stock with 650b wheels and 1.9" tires (WTB Byway and GravelKing SK) and, while super fun off-road, it was very sluggish on the road. Now I'm curious how they would fare with a file-tread Compass.
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Awesome reply, thanks Tom.

I'm running 47mm WTB Byways on 650B rims. Love the setup for comfort and rough stuff, but was wondering how much I'm giving up against a Challenge Strada Bianca Pro 36mm on a 700c rim. I've got a race coming up that's about 60/40 tarmac/gravel. The Byways have a nice smooth middle line, which seems to roll relatively well on the road.

As an aside, the new Zipp 303 discs are impossible to setup tubeless.

Alex
Last edited by: alexZA: Aug 27, 18 20:42
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chrisgrigsby wrote:
Tom! Thanks for sharing your experience thus far with various tires in this exploding genre...much appreciated! Can you elaborate more on why the 35mm Jon Bon Pass seems to test so poorly since it seems to have all the attributes of a fast rolling tire? Seems strange based on everything you have stated that a 700x35mm ultra-supple tire with zero puncture protection was on par with a knobby cyclocross tire from the same manufacturer?

Well...to be clear, the BJP I tested was a standard casing, while the Stielacoom tires was a "extra light" (EL) model...but anyways, yeah that BJP seemed to "underperform" as compared to what I had measured for nominally the same tire construction (Snoqualmie Pass) but at in a larger size. Compass isn't very transparent in any changes they make to the tires as they source them from batch-to-batch (from Panasonic), so it's hard to say why that particular tire tested relatively poorly. I think it just points to the fact that one really doesn't know how well a tire performs unless one has a way to test the actual tires.

chrisgrigsby wrote:
I'm running the Maxxis Rambler 40 on my new Enve G23 wheels and have been pretty impressed with their on-road performance...perhaps because they are a 120TPI tire with no sidewall protection belt and only weigh 380g? Then again, they could be slow as molasses compared to a fast road tire, which would be great to know at some point!

Like I said above, there's only one way to know for sure ;-)


chrisgrigsby wrote:
Interesting that you found the tire pressure to be the primary determinant in off-road performance. My 3T Exploro came stock with 650b wheels and 1.9" tires (WTB Byway and GravelKing SK) and, while super fun off-road, it was very sluggish on the road. Now I'm curious how they would fare with a file-tread Compass.

That's not something I've measured myself (yet), but is instead something I learned from some fairly extensive MTB tests that have been published. But, when you think about it, it makes sense. The lower the pressure, the more "suspension" you'll be getting from the tires AND the more "flotation" over the soft surfaces (i.e. you'll be compressing the dirt less while rolling). But, as you point out, the flip-side is the lower pressures might be slower on pavement...which again points to the widest tire possible being the best compromise since it allows the lower pressures with good pavement performance.



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HI Tom, first off let me say how much I appreciate your tire work. Kudos. While I whole heartedly agree with your synopsis here, in terms of rolling resistance, I think for gravel riding or racing here in the Flint Hills of Kansas, sidewall protection comes at a premium. With the sharp, large gravel we have here, lighter tires tend to become troublesome due to the lack of sidewall protection. While you mentioned the Vittorias having a higher rolling resistance due to the thicker sidewalls, they are actually very popular here along with the gravel kings mostly in the 38-40c variety. Choosing a gravel tire definitely varies from course to course. Cheers, Steve
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [SteveDDS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SteveDDS wrote:
HI Tom, first off let me say how much I appreciate your tire work. Kudos. While I whole heartedly agree with your synopsis here, in terms of rolling resistance, I think for gravel riding or racing here in the Flint Hills of Kansas, sidewall protection comes at a premium. With the sharp, large gravel we have here, lighter tires tend to become troublesome due to the lack of sidewall protection. While you mentioned the Vittorias having a higher rolling resistance due to the thicker sidewalls, they are actually very popular here along with the gravel kings mostly in the 38-40c variety. Choosing a gravel tire definitely varies from course to course. Cheers, Steve

Understood.

Here's an interesting story. A riding buddy of mine did DK this year. When he returned, I asked him about the infamous Flint Hills rocks...he actually said that he thought some of the relatively unmaintained forest roads and trails we commonly ride here (SoCal, Santa Barbara area) had sharper, and more, rocks than anything he saw on course in Kansas. These are routes I've ridden often with tires like the Challenge Gravel Grinder Pro (thin 260tpi casing w/no extraneous sidewall protection) without issue, so that's partly why I'm of the opinion that making a set of tires 5-10W slower by incorporating sidewall guards might not be the best design tradeoff.



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
chrisgrigsby wrote:
Hey Tom, I read your comments a while back on the Compass Jon Bon Pass test on bicyclerollingresistance.com intimating that you were working on a testing protocol for the grave/adventure tire category. Any updates? I was also surprised that the Jon Bon Pass tested so poorly in that test and that you found it to be as slow as the knobby Steilacoom in your own testing!!!

Needless to say, given the inherent trade-offs one must make with regard to the optimal balance of rolling efficiency, weight, traction, sidewall protection, etc...for the specific mix of all-road terrain, I imagine I am not the only one yearning to demystify the rolling resistance of this genre of tires to aid in tire selection.

Currently, I'm running the Maxxis Rambler 120TPI 40mm as most of my rides mix a fair amount of pavement and gravel here in Boulder, but I would love to know how much, if any, rolling resistance I'm sacrificing on the pavement by running a mild small-knob tread such as the Rambler or the Gravelking SK as opposed to the smooth file tread of a Compass, Scwhalbe G-One, or Panaracer Slick.

Hit us with the science Tom!!!


I thought I heard someone calling (cursing?) my name ;-)

Yes...I've dabbled a bit in trying to get a handle on "gravel tire" performance...and like the bikes themselves, there's usually quite a bit of trade-offs to be considered when trying to make a tire choice.

In other words, short of running actual Turbo Cottons on the bike...you're going to have a hard time matching the pavement performance of a TC (that said, the newer 28mm wide TCs work quite well in "light gravel" conditions...so there's that :-)

OK...so, here are some basic "truths" I've been able to come up with. Most of these are in the "well, duh" category of common sense, but some might be a bit more surprising. In no particular order:

- As with any tire, casing thickness and rubber compound matter in regards to both efficiency (low Crr) AND "comfort". To paraphrase Jan Heine, "Supple tires rule." All other things being equal, high thread count casings and low-loss rubber compounds will lead to a more efficient and more "comfortable" tires.

- The trade-off for high TPI tires is the casing is thinner, and thus easier to puncture or cut. To combat this, designers start adding in puncture belts and sidewall protection materials, both of which lead to lower efficiency (higher Crr) and stiffer tire casings. IMHO, especially with models that can be set up tubeless, sometimes the designers go a bit overboard in doing so, and thus basically "undo" any advantages of higher TPI casings. A case in point: The Challenge Gravel Grinder tires are available in both a "Pro" model that has a 260tpi cotton casing with a glued on tread (i.e. "open tubular" type construction), and in a "Race" model that is a vulcanized 120tpi nylon casing. All things being equal, the "Pro" should have lower Crr than the "Race"...EXCEPT, they put a double layer of puncture protection in the "Pro" model, while the "Race" has a single layer. The result of this is that they roll basically identically. Another case in point: the Vittoria Terreno Dry has a very nice 120tpi nylon casing and uses their fast rolling Graphene compounds...but they use a relatively stiff sidewall protection material, and they don't roll as well as they should. In fact, I found them not to roll as well as the Gravel Grinder models, which arguably have a less "high tech" tread compound.

- Once you start adding tread texture beyond a file tread (i.e. going to a diamond-tread center and/or small knobs), you start slowing down the pavement performance by quite a bit. All of that additional rubber flexes on hard surfaces and causes energy losses.

- In researching off-pavement Crr measurements, the data I've seen shows it's pretty clear that once on the dirt, it's the compression of the surface that starts driving the rolling resistance. Measurements with MTBs shows that the lower the pressures that can be run, the lower the Crr for a particular setup. This means that for fast performance off-pavement, you want to run the widest tires you can fit at the lowest pressures that will protect your equipment from damage.

- In choosing a potential tire for mixed-surface use, one of the main considerations is smooth (file tread, e.g. Compass models, Challenge Strada Bianca, or WTB Horizon) vs. texture/knobbies (e.g. G-One, Gravel King SK, Gravel Grinder, etc.) For me, that calculus comes down to the percentages of pavement vs. off-pavement, how rough the off-pavement sections are, and how wide of a tire can be fit in the bike.
  • If the course is something like BWR, with LOTS of pavement miles and with relatively "benign" off road sections (double-track and somewhat smooth single-track), I'm going to go for as wide of a smooth (file tread) tire I can fit. I'm talking 36mm wide (measured) or greater. Some may be tempted to go narrower with a smooth tire thinking they'll be "faster" on the road, but IME that isn't necessarily the case. The wider tires, if they're "supple", won't be any slower on the pavement, and will handily outperform narrower smooth tires off-pavement (mostly due to the lower pressure). Choosing a narrower tire with some "texture" may make you slightly faster off-pavement, but is going to be a huge hindrance on the pavement, which obviously isn't a good idea for a course that's so pavement heavy. Besides, IME it takes quite a bit of texture/knobs on a narrow tire to outperform off-pavement a wide, file-tread tire run at significantly lower pressures.
  • For courses with either a higher percentage of off-pavement, or with more technical off-pavement sections (such as MTB-style single-track), then using a tire with texture/knobs makes sense. But again, the wider the better, because that allows for lower pressures, and lower pressures are faster off-pavement.

Anyway...that's a (not so) quick-and-dirty synopsis of where I stand on this subject right now...I hope that wasn't too much to digest.

P.S. I should have a box waiting for me at home today with some of the new Challenge Gravel Grinder TLR (tubeless ready) tires in it. For that model they eliminated the puncture belt entirely (but added some sidewall rubber). I'll probably be testing those out this coming long weekend...I guess we'll see if the elimination of the belt overcomes the Crr hit of the sidewall rubber...<fingers crossed>

Will be VERY interested in hearing how those tires work.

I also run the Gravel Grinders w latex tubes, and they are awesome all-around tires.

Switched to GP4KS II’s for my vaca last week, and they are very fast on the road (duh!) but become very “interesting” as the off-road riding gets more technical.

I’d love to go tubeless w the GG’s if possible.


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Murphy'sLaw wrote:


Will be VERY interested in hearing how those tires work.

I also run the Gravel Grinders w latex tubes, and they are awesome all-around tires.

Switched to GP4KS II’s for my vaca last week, and they are very fast on the road (duh!) but become very “interesting” as the off-road riding gets more technical.

I’d love to go tubeless w the GG’s if possible.


The box came...by my "hand feel", the sidewalls don't appear to have much, if any, additional rubber on them...yesssss...

My hope is that these end up being the "Goldilocks" tire of the textured/treaded realm (i.e. a treaded tire that rolls on pavement as fast as other "smooth/file" offerings").

Of course, that would also bode well for the TLR version of the file tread Strada Bianca, especially in a 650B x 46 offering that has been touted. I may just need to finally put together a 650B wheelset so I can fit a tire that wide in my Fuji :-)



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Aug 28, 18 10:17
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom,

Is the new Challenge Gravel Grinder TLR also 700x36mm?

I've been using my Compass switch back hills 650x48mm for the majority of my riding lately and would love to try a Strada Bianca 650B x 46 with some tread. Most of the terrain I enjoy requires 40mm+ tires, so I'm sold on the large volume 650 format.

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do you have a Goldilocks, tubeless file tread wide tire? Or are you sticking with low pressure latex?
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bonesbrigade wrote:
Tom,

Is the new Challenge Gravel Grinder TLR also 700x36mm?

I've been using my Compass switch back hills 650x48mm for the majority of my riding lately and would love to try a Strada Bianca 650B x 46 with some tread. Most of the terrain I enjoy requires 40mm+ tires, so I'm sold on the large volume 650 format.

The Gravel Grinder TLRs come in a 700x33, 38, and 42 listed sizes, just like the previous "Race" models.

I actually found the Race 700x38 to be a bit under the listed size. Directly comparing a flattened tire bead-to-bead with the 700x38 TLR model, it looks like they widened up the casing by a few millimeters on the TLR, so it should measure more true-to-size.



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks good to know! I'll keep an eye out for the 700x42mm versions.

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [torrey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
torrey wrote:
Do you have a Goldilocks, tubeless file tread wide tire? Or are you sticking with low pressure latex?

The Compass Snoqualmie Pass 700x44 rolls fairly well (and is tubeless capable)...but not as well as the 700x36C Challenge Strada Bianca Pro w/latex tube (~2-3W slower per pair at 30kph) despite the latter's double layer puncture belt...which is why I have high hopes for the TLR version of the Strada Bianca (no puncture belts) being even faster.



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [chrisgrigsby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just read every post in this thread and I'm really surprised that there's no mention of the WTB Resolute. Over the course of 5 or 6 years of riding the gravel roads all around my rural home (which take on various characters as all gravel roads do based on when and how they're resurfaced, what the hunting traffic does to them, etc.) the only tire mentioned in the thread here that I haven't ridden is the Challenge Strade ... or whatever that tire was called. I have a couple of trash bags loaded with cast-off tires from Compass and Schwalbe and Challenge and other WTBs (including Horizon and By-Way).

Like most people, my gravel rides involve a lot of pavement to connect gravel sectors. One tire has stood head and shoulders above all others I've tried, both in terms of performance on the pavement and performance on "my" gravel (which can vary from hard-packed sand that seems faster than pavement, to crap that'll break the axles on my vintage Toyota FJ40). It's the WTB Resolute. I have three gravel bikes. The setups vary, but some are 700c and some are 650b. The Resolute comes in both sizes and is exceptional in both.

As with most of my posts, this is purely anecdotal 'cuz I'm too old to care what power I'm putting out. I have a road I'm used to riding on my Open UP with my Resolutes at 20 mph or better, depending on wind. This morning I was trying out the same road on a new Open UPPER I just bought yesterday. It came equipped with Clement MSO tubeless 36 mm tires. The new bike was superb until I hit this familiar, 20 mph stretch of gravel. I couldn't handle it at above 17 mph and I had to back off to 15 mph in order not to freak out. It blew my mind how poorly the bike handled. But I've had these same tires before on the same bike on which I now cruise that section regularly at 20 mph. When I had those tires mounted on that bike, it was the same story. They were pretty much terrifying.

With gravel, your mileage may vary. Your gravel will certainly vary. Mine varies from one season to the next and one DOT maintenance cycle or hunting season to the next. My WTB Resolutes are consistently the best tires I've ridden ... both on the gravel and on the chip seal pavement that connects the gravel sectors.

I'd be very interested to see how they measure up to Tom's testing.

Stay aero my friends.
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [bobby11] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The WTB resolute looks interesting, but I don't think the 700x42 would fit in my Fuji frame when mounted on my current wheels (both sets are 21mm internal width). It looks like they plump up to over 43mm on a 19.5mm internal width rim in one of the reviews I found.

Of course, the 650Bx42 should fit just fine...one more reason for that 650B wheelset for me ;-)

Looking at it superficially, it most likely won't be super-fast rolling on pavement. That's just the nature of the larger knobs. I bet it works quite well in a wide range of off-pavement conditions though! Although, at that point I might be tempted to look at some dedicated MTB tires that appear similar...

edit: BTW, do you want to send that trash bag of tires you mention my way :-)



http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Aug 28, 18 14:28
Quote Reply
Re: Paging Tom A...Gravel Tire Rolling Resistance??? [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How about the WTB Riddler 37c? I'm on G-One 35's at the moment but need more teeth in socal sandy corners without losing speed.
Quote Reply

Prev Next