Heard from a guy at a local shop today that he runs a 650 x20 on his front and a 650 x23 on his rear.
It makes sense for handling - but do many people do this? Since I’m in a very aggressive/aero position - will my handling improve/suffer b/c of this? Does it throw off balance at all?
Wider rear sounds really logical but I do remember reading somewhere on the net (Cobb possibly?) that a wider front/narrow rear 23/20 is more aero on a bicycle. Don’t ask me why, I’m just the messenger. Don’t understand this as I used to race automobiles/go-carts and we always ran wider rears than fronts.Somehow bicycles must be different?
Also something about matching certain tires to certain rims makes a big diff and not all manufacturers specs are exactly the same.
John was commenting on a special case. It was a TT bike with a rear wheel “shadow” in the downtume. The problem was that the 23mm rear was too wide for the cutout.
When set up for my usual TT position, by Front to rear weight balance still results in more weight on the back than front. I’m not as far forward as many people can get. Also, whenever I have to run over something in the road that is dangerous, I unweight the front somewhat. These two things make me lean toward 23 rear, 20 front. Except on training setups, where I tend to run 23/23 or 23/25.
20 = lowest aero drag - most important for the front wheel. (And a good fork dampens the vibrations / road shock transferred from a high psi 20 mm tyre)
23 = lowest rolling resistance - most important for the rear wheel which is partly sheltered from aero drag.
20 = lowest aero drag - most important for the front wheel.
Do you have the data to back this up? I’ve heard that the most aero wheel depends on the rim that it’s being used on. The transition area from tire to rim is critical, and I believe that the Zipp’s, for example, are optimized to be used with 23’s.