You weren’t dreaming that Tufo is slower. Oh and the Schwalbe, same tire, collaborates the results. I do love my Vittorias, but they just don’t hold up like Michelins. I’ve found this test to be what I’ve experienced, but have no clue how the rolling resistance figures correlate to real time. I believe the Michelins were also at the top of another tire test. Again, this is from the German Magazine “Tour”. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Tire Crr
Deda Tre Giro d’Italia 0.0038
Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX 0.0039
Michelin Pro 2 Race 0.0042
Vittoria Diamante Pro Rain 0.0044
Michelin Megamium 2 0.0047
Pariba Revolution 0.0048
Veloflex Carbon (Tubular) 0.0049
Michelin Carbon 0.0050
Gommitalia Route du Nord (Tubular) 0.0050
Panaracer Stradius Pro 0.0051
Schwalbe Stelvio Plus 0.0052
Gommitalia Platinum (Tubular) 0.0053
Vittoria Corsa Evo CX (Tubular) 0.0054
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Front 0.0056
Continental GP Force (rear specific) 0.0057
Hutchinson Fusion 0.0057
Schwalbe Stelvio Evolution Rear 0.0057
Vittoria Corsa Evo KS (Tubular) 0.0057
Continental Ultra GatorSkin 0.0058
Ritchey Pro Race Slick WCS 0.0058
Schwalbe Stelvio 0.0059
Continental Competition (Tubular) 0.0059
Veloflex Roubaix (Tubular) 0.0059
Continental Podium (Tubular) 0.0060
Specialized S-Works Mondo 0.0061
Continental GP 3000 0.0067
Hutchinson Top Speed 0.0069
Schwalbe Stelvio (Tubular) 0.0069
Continental GP Attack (front specific) 0.0073
Tufo Elite Jet (Tubular) 0.0073
Schwalbe Montello 300 (Tubular) 0.0075
Tufo Hi-Composite Carbon (Tubular) 0.0077
Does the number which shows that clinchers have lower RR than tubulars take the tube into account too? It seems they should take the tube into account too, because the clincher is no good w/out a tube. Did they also run tests on which tubes have the lowest RR?
They did some with and without, I don’t know for sure. Glue vs tape as well, who knows, but again my seat of the pants already agrees, and many here agree with the tufo thing. I really like the Tufo’s for never going flat though.
Does the number which shows that clinchers have lower RR than tubulars take the tube into account too? It seems they should take the tube into account too, because the clincher is no good w/out a tube. Did they also run tests on which tubes have the lowest RR?
Of course all clinchers had tubes! You can’t put one on a wheel and pump it up without a tube. The magazine said they used the same tube on each clincher. Tubulars, of course, come with their own tubes.
I have the Conti Attack/Force combo, and they certainly “feel” fast. but they rank way down the bottom of the list. and the Michelin training tire ranked near the top of the list?
All those folks that go on and on about clinchers not being race wheels should check these results out.
Many are some of the same people I listened to when I bought Tufos… I hated them from the first ride, a waste of $$$ and time.
While this test did not compare the performance of clincher tubes, I’d rate Vittoria latex tubes as worst, riding at 0 psi gives you really high rolling resistance. The couple times I’ve used them (I bought two at the same time) they failed very quickly. (OTOH I love Vittoria Corsa Evo clinchers.) I seriously doubt that tubes make that much difference as long as you’re using decent ones, but some tests would be interesting.
I’d love to see the the results of testing to evaluate various tubular gluing techniques, I bet it’d be an eye-opener. I bet you’d find that the Crr of the same tire comes up a bit different each time they’re glued on, and substantially different depending on gluing technique. Not to mention how good a job that worker in Thailand did on that particular tire. Also love to see a comparison of the so called tri gluing technique, with not that much glue and a couple of inches unglued, that’d be interesting, LOL.
“…but have no clue how the rolling resistance figures correlate to real time.”
According to analyticcycling.com, the difference between the lowest Crr tire (.0038) and the tire I use (Vittoria Corsa Evo CX - tubular) would amount to 7 minutes over the IM distance (based on 225 watts, 1% grade, and the std. AC defaults for the remaining parameters)
Joel, I think it was on an indoor velodrome (if I recall). As far as the gluing, absolutely this makes a huge difference! If you use a schlack (sp), you will lower the amount of deflection a bit and thus improve RR. But then you might end up like Norman if you do flat.
Was anything said in the article regarding inflation pressure? I have one of the high-scoring sets of Vittoria tires on my road bike and another of the high-scoring sets on my TT bike training wheels. Boths sets of tires are rated to 145 psi … quite high for clinchers. Yet they ride very nice and smooth.
I wonder what the difference is that these clinchers seem to handle such high pressure so gracefully, while others seem rock hard if you go 5 psi beyond the recommended 115 or 120 psi.
Wow…it’s amazing how my little compilation list has jetted around the 'net.
The list is a compilation of 2 separate tests (one all tubular and one all clincher) done by Tour magazine over the last year or so. All tests were done with identical loadings and air pressures and were performed on a Crr test drum fixture at the Continental tire factory. Kind of surprising considering how poorly the Conti tires performed. The other feature tested was puncture resistance, and for that, the list is basically inverted. If you want to know more details, it helps to be able to translate German.
Did they also run tests on which tubes have the lowest RR?
Last I checked, the tubes in my clinchers dont have contact with the ground, therefore I don’t see the value in running rolling resistance tests for the tubes
