My take on the various tyre options. I always run these tyres with latex tubes inside so that it’s easy to swap them before races depending on the requirements.
Veloflex Record - more robust than you think, similar aero to Corsa Speeds, but the fastest thing. Doesn’t matter that they’re less aero than the GP5000 TTs, they’re always marginally faster overall especially in the 25s which have very low Crr. Used to have poor wet grip but that’s been improved.
Vittoria Corsa Speed - marginally behind Veloflex Record in terms of Crr but otherwise identical, with better wet grip. I would choose these over GP5000 TTs unless the road surface is really terrible.
GP5000 TT - a mega tyre which you can train on if you want, the aero/Crr combo makes it the best all rounder by far, but not the out and out fastest option which is VF Record.
Michelin Power TT - I quite like these, not bad for training, wet grip is great, I’d put them in between Corsa Speeds and GP5000 TTs. Splitting hairs though.
GP5000 clincher - I use these exclusively for training. You can race on them if you want and they’re a little bit quicker than the S TR/old TL, but I’d just race and ride on 5000 TTs.
Schwalbe Pro One TT - not a bad option, I have found them a bit more puncture prone than others so stopped using them.
Great info thank you for this
So the above holds no matter what rim they are on?
Meaning outside width of the rim compared to the outside width of the tire?
Schwalbe Pro One TT - not a bad option, I have found them a bit more puncture prone than others so stopped using them.
My experience as well - particularly the sidewall. Also oddly they seem bleed air through the sidewalls quite a bit. Not in a way that would materially affect most rides, but they go completely flat after 2-3 days, which is not typical. With sealant.
So the above holds no matter what rim they are on?
Meaning outside width of the rim compared to the outside width of the tire?
No problem - regarding width I think people end up simplifying things far too much regarding rim width/tyre width. Just looking at brake track width or maximum rim width and using one or either of those to guide your tyre choice is incorrect. Rim depth & the location of maximum rim width, play a large factor in wheel/tyre aero and you should always speak to the wheel manufacturer to find out what the best tyre aero combo is for the specific wheel you’re on about.
Given that the tyres above all come in different widths you should be able to select the best one for your specific wheel though. Some come up smaller than others which you should bear in mind too. Bit of a minefield I know!
Schwalbe Pro One TT - not a bad option, I have found them a bit more puncture prone than others so stopped using them.
My experience as well - particularly the sidewall. Also oddly they seem bleed air through the sidewalls quite a bit. Not in a way that would materially affect most rides, but they go completely flat after 2-3 days, which is not typical. With sealant.
I would add that they’re also terribly difficult to seat on some wheels, usually you need to use the washing up liquid trick to get the bead to slip into place. Also a small issue with Corsa Speeds but not as bad (and only really with the 23mm Corsa Speeds, the 25s are much looser). Michelin Power TTs tend to make an almighty CRACK when they seat which is mildly terrifying.
This is my setup for sprint, Olympic, and 70.3. GP5k TT on the front, Corsa Speed on the back.
Would you run this same set-up for a full distance race? Also, why put two different tires on the front and back? I don’t know much about all this, so forgive me if that is a dumb question.
I’m trying to decide what tires to run for IMWI. I’m a light rider and rarely get a flat, but the roads in Wisconsin are pretty miserable so grip and puncture resistance are at least on my mind. I currently have a Pirelli P-Zero Velo TT on the front and GP 5000 on the back, not sure if it is the TL or STR. Both are 25s and I run them with latex tubes. These were the brands the LBS recommended when I first acquired the wheels, which are Hed Jet Plus 6 and a Hed Disc.
I’m thinking of going with a set of either the GP 5000 TT TR or the Vitoria Corsa Speed G2.0. It seems like I can’t go wrong with either one. I’d appreciate any advice anyone can offer.
Porous side walls seem to be a feature of some schwalbe tires. I had a set of racing ralphs that bubbled for a week. Some OG pro ones were okay, but a mother trucker to mount. I haven’t had sidewalls weep on initial install in a while between Vitoria, Pirelli and Continental tires now.
The 5000 tt is tested here 4w per pair faster than the 5000 clincher.
That’s probably why you prefer the tt over the clincher in racing.
OK sofar.
The linked test tested the tt with sealant. You write you always run latex (no sealant).
The linked test remarks the following:
“There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
My question is now is that credible? Or just an allegation?
If it is true I also would consider to move from regular 5000 to 5000 tt (I would run them with latex on older clincher rims).
But I would not like to spend more money if the 4W is not really achieved by the TTs …
The 5000 tt is tested here 4w per pair faster than the 5000 clincher.
That’s probably why you prefer the tt over the clincher in racing.
OK sofar.
The linked test tested the tt with sealant. You write you always run latex (no sealant).
The linked test remarks the following:
“There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
My question is now is that credible? Or just an allegation?
If it is true I also would consider to move from regular 5000 to 5000 tt (I would run them with latex on older clincher rims).
But I would not like to spend more money if the 4W is not really achieved by the TTs …
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean. There isn’t a difference between setting up a tubeless tyre with a latex tube and latex sealant (as long as you don’t put too much sealant in, see here: https://aero-coach.co.uk/tubeless-sealant-and-rolling-resistance), so the GP5000 TT with a latex tube is faster than the GP5000 clincher with a latex tube.
The 5000 tt is tested here 4w per pair faster than the 5000 clincher.
That’s probably why you prefer the tt over the clincher in racing.
OK sofar.
The linked test tested the tt with sealant. You write you always run latex (no sealant).
The linked test remarks the following:
“There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
My question is now is that credible? Or just an allegation?
If it is true I also would consider to move from regular 5000 to 5000 tt (I would run them with latex on older clincher rims).
But I would not like to spend more money if the 4W is not really achieved by the TTs …
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean. There isn’t a difference between setting up a tubeless tyre with a latex tube and latex sealant (as long as you don’t put too much sealant in, see here: https://aero-coach.co.uk/tubeless-sealant-and-rolling-resistance), so the GP5000 TT with a latex tube is faster than the GP5000 clincher with a latex tube.
Thanks that’s just what I wanted to know. It’s just that I have not found any testresults explicitly showing the same tyre with a latex tube and sealant having the same rr. I did not study heavily though in the protocol, I only peeked.
The 5000 tt is tested here 4w per pair faster than the 5000 clincher.
That’s probably why you prefer the tt over the clincher in racing.
OK sofar.
The linked test tested the tt with sealant. You write you always run latex (no sealant).
The linked test remarks the following:
“There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
My question is now is that credible? Or just an allegation?
If it is true I also would consider to move from regular 5000 to 5000 tt (I would run them with latex on older clincher rims).
But I would not like to spend more money if the 4W is not really achieved by the TTs …
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean. There isn’t a difference between setting up a tubeless tyre with a latex tube and latex sealant (as long as you don’t put too much sealant in, see here: https://aero-coach.co.uk/tubeless-sealant-and-rolling-resistance), so the GP5000 TT with a latex tube is faster than the GP5000 clincher with a latex tube.
Thanks that’s just what I wanted to know. It’s just that I have not found any testresults explicitly showing the same tyre with a latex tube and sealant having the same rr. I did not study heavily though in the protocol, I only peeked.
Essentially these three tests show that 30ml sealant is equivalent to a latex tube, and you may pay a price at substantially more sealant.
The 5000 tt is tested here 4w per pair faster than the 5000 clincher.
That’s probably why you prefer the tt over the clincher in racing.
OK sofar.
The linked test tested the tt with sealant. You write you always run latex (no sealant).
The linked test remarks the following:
“There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
My question is now is that credible? Or just an allegation?
If it is true I also would consider to move from regular 5000 to 5000 tt (I would run them with latex on older clincher rims).
But I would not like to spend more money if the 4W is not really achieved by the TTs …
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean. There isn’t a difference between setting up a tubeless tyre with a latex tube and latex sealant (as long as you don’t put too much sealant in, see here: https://aero-coach.co.uk/tubeless-sealant-and-rolling-resistance), so the GP5000 TT with a latex tube is faster than the GP5000 clincher with a latex tube.
Thanks that’s just what I wanted to know. It’s just that I have not found any testresults explicitly showing the same tyre with a latex tube and sealant having the same rr. I did not study heavily though in the protocol, I only peeked.
Essentially these three tests show that 30ml sealant is equivalent to a latex tube, and you may pay a price at substantially more sealant.
Essentially these three tests show that 30ml sealant is equivalent to a latex tube, and you may pay a price at substantially more sealant.
Except in weight, given a Vittoria latex tube weighs 85g (25/28), and 30ml of sealant + stem typically weighs around half that. Muc-Off stem is 14g and 30ml of Stan’s is about 25g, so ~40g. Not a huge weight weenie, but something approaching triple-digit grams starts to become a factor to think about.
Essentially these three tests show that 30ml sealant is equivalent to a latex tube, and you may pay a price at substantially more sealant.
Except in weight, given a Vittoria latex tube weighs 85g (25/28), and 30ml of sealant + stem typically weighs around half that. Muc-Off stem is 14g and 30ml of Stan’s is about 25g, so ~40g. Not a huge weight weenie, but something approaching triple-digit grams starts to become a factor to think about.
Not a weight weenie either, it’s worth remembering weight near the tire counts double. Rotational and forward motion.
Essentially these three tests show that 30ml sealant is equivalent to a latex tube, and you may pay a price at substantially more sealant.
Except in weight, given a Vittoria latex tube weighs 85g (25/28), and 30ml of sealant + stem typically weighs around half that. Muc-Off stem is 14g and 30ml of Stan’s is about 25g, so ~40g. Not a huge weight weenie, but something approaching triple-digit grams starts to become a factor to think about.
Not a weight weenie either, it’s worth remembering weight near the tire counts double. Rotational and forward motion.
Obviously you’ll gain a little bit of weight, but sub 100g (I’d be surprised if Stan’s is lighter than water at equal volume)
Not really sure why I left tubulars. Never EVER got a flat on one. Maybe its all the shiny marketing stuff
that sucked me in to unreliable road tubeless. Big scary mystery to go into garage or bike on car rack after work to see if
I can ride as planned . Ive had more mystery flats with tubeless than earned flats on tubes. Now training on DT Swiss alloy rims
with Pirelli race 4S 28mm tires/tubes and i ve had one flat in 3800 miles this year. Pirelli 4S and Michelin power cups are
quite easy to mount and fix a flat with 1 lever and a little recycled shammy butter on the last 12inches of rim. Easy Like
the the good old days of GP 4000. Michelin TT tube tire is also easy to mount and really rolls fast but is a bit tender for training.
If you have clean roads and a good budget it maybe the year around answer.
Pirelli 4S 28 mm seems about the size of a 25mm 10 years ago and fits my frame nicely .
Not a weight weenie either, it’s worth remembering weight near the tire counts double. Rotational and forward motion.
So… have you (ahem) actually done the math on this?
Haha very nice. There’s not actually a ton of math with it. The extreme edge of the tire needs to be rotating at the same speed as the the road passing by lest it slip. Angular and linear are identical in terms of kinetic energy under these circumstances. Mathematically Ekinetic=0.5mv^2 or Erotational=0.5Iw^2, both of which come out in joules, and when you consider a point mass at a fixed radius the equation can be substituted for that mass at that tangential velocity and give the same answer. We could do a proof but I’m on mobile.
This only kind of matters in things like technical criteriums where acceleration out of corners is a substantial and repeated effort which is lost in repeated braking zones.
I am using the Corsa speed for 2 years now. Never punctured and do 2500 miles with a set of tires. Very fast tires
Are Vit corsas easy to mount ? I find Michelin power TT and power cup easy to mount but GP5000 is just brutal to mount on my 2014 zip and head alloy wheels.
You might want to look at the actual rates of acceleration that occur in the systems under consideration. They’re… Not very significant. Small enough that on a bicycle, mass is, essentially, just mass.
