Loading…
I don't know if anyone has seen this but I found it pretty interesting before it went to a partial paywall. I may just pony up the cash to see all the info as I know it cost money do what they are doing..anywho...
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/cx-gravel-reviews
I realize a lot of the "watt" numbers are theoretical but the testing method is consistent so all the numbers should be relevant to an equal test between tires... I just don't know how it stacks up to real world use.
Volsung wrote:I'd be more likely to pay for that site if they did apples to apples comparisons. There's no standard in tire sizes so he'll measure the 33mm version of one, the 35 in another, 43 in a third, and it's just really hard to compare because they all also come in a 40mm that wasn't tested.
Zx10freak wrote:
While I love this type of test and the insight it gives me, one thing that stands out is that testing a tire for an afternoon is a lot different than living with it. Hats of to Guitar Ted for his reviews where he spends a fair amount of time with the tires.
My counterpoint:
According to Tour magazine (and my butt) most all good gravel tires use about 25watts/tire in rolling resistance. Most of them are pretty similar. Its good to know if you are getting a draggy tire for aggressive off road use, but other than that – I don’t feel much of a difference in speed in good tires (at 25mph, and that is kind of extreme).
The Maxis Rambler tests have me confused, and don’t match my experience.
In 2019 they said: “… the tread pattern in the centre of the tire is tightly spaced. Our first impressions were confirmed in the lab, with the MAXXIS Rambler scoring well in the rolling resistance test.”
“The tire’s damping properties are mediocre… it wasn’t particularly comfortable.”
In 2020, they say “it’s quickly clear that the Rambler isn’t a tire for anyone who’s in a hurry or wants to commute to work quickly with their gravel bike. The rolling resistance is relatively high…” “…our rolling resistance test verified this feeling.”
"…In contrast, its good damping makes a positive impression."
Excuse me, but is this the same tire??? In 2019 it was fast but not comfortable, and in 2020 it is slow but comfortable? Are we blaming the tan sidewall for the differences?
My experience: Very fast and capable tire. I love it for CX racing, as it has good traction, good volume, great acceleration, and is lighter than most 33mm CX tires. Same on gravel. And yes, I literally do use it to "commute to work quickly with my gravel bike".
Over time: The center lugs are tightly spaced and give a pretty smooth ride, but after a couple hundred miles the rear gets nicely rounded giving a very smooth ride. The tire did tend to get pinholes in the tread more and more as it aged, but other than the tell tail wet spots, it did not cause any issues. One of my tires started blistering after 2 years, and at that point I retired it from tubeless duty. Tire will not hold air without sealant.
Schwalbe G-One. This tire, in its discontinued original version, was one of my favorite all round tires. Its not great in slippery mud or single track antics, but it is great on gravel, pavement, and snow (of all things). It rides and handles great. No complaints over the years, although the new carcass construction seems to have changed the tires personality significantly (for the worst). Tire will hold air without sealant.
Conti TerraSpeed. There are some huge long term issues that aren’t found in this test. Realistically, there is not much difference between this and the G-One as far as riding on the bike goes (although the write up between the two is different). What doesn’t show up in the test is familiar with anyone who has seen the thread here. Over time it wears much, much faster than the tires above, and gets a lot of small punctures that get sealed by sealant. And yes, it is maybe 5 watts “faster” than the average here, but that isn’t something you’ll really notice. Its pretty subtle, even at a race pace. Tire will hold air without sealant.
Lammark wrote:Interesting that they didn’t like the damping of the Schwalbe tires. I had the G-One Allarounds for a while and they had a nice ride, but not nearly enough grip.
chas wrote:
Could be they tested the new mode. Bicycle rolling resistance tested the new one, and it was rather horrible, when the original model in most reviews (and my experience) was one of the best gravel tires out there. There was a significant change to the casing on that tire.
chas wrote:
Could be they tested the new mode. Bicycle rolling resistance tested the new one, and it was rather horrible, when the original model in most reviews (and my experience) was one of the best gravel tires out there. There was a significant change to the casing on that tire.
Lammark wrote:
Aha. I didn’t know they’d changed it so much. Good to know.
The emphasis on traction, side lugs and rolling resistance are all a big deal for me. For context, I'm an all over and anything or adventure rider - not doing racing or in the Stravasshole beating the clock and others spectrum of what is "gravel".
With SO many new riders of this style and MTB I also see quite a few just don't know to use the sides of their tires. My fellow trail stewards and I see crash artifacts and crashes on trails.
When you take off with a combo of pavement and dirt where it's not just unpaved roads and pathways a super versatile tire like MSO or the fast MTB racer types really makes a difference. I appreciate the tests highlighting that type of product and the overall characteristics of a tire.
Sign in to reply — or claim your old account if you posted here before.