Re: fat is faster

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 2/12/2025 2:39 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gXXmail.com> wrote:

On 2/11/2025 9:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/11/2025 8:11 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/9/2025 5:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/9/2025 3:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Sat Feb 8 22:29:16 2025 Roger Merriman  wrote:

That Dylan Johnson has been doing some limited testing to find the
fastest
Gravel tyres, which is larger than most folks would think.
 
though does as he notes depend on you and your riding, my Gravel
riding is
often mixed use, and I like it?s adaptability, which would be
compromised
with much larger tyres ie be more draggy on the tarmac.
 
Though if you?re just riding on the trails then a 2.1/50mm tyre is
almost
certainly a better choice, I personally like being able to ride
tarmac/mud/roots etc which the all road/Gravel bike I have does
fine, it
gives a bit to mates with newer bikes with wider clearances but it?s
certainly not enough to tempt me to a new bike!
 
And if it?s really narly can just use the MTB which just flattens
stuff!
 
<https://youtu.be/iq9ydwkRt0Q?si=eX_6lRdPWtLwjh4k>

 
 
 
 
On my gravel bike I had 38 mm tires. Going fatter would have gained
nothing unless the terrain changed from gravel to wild MTB.

 
As noted, we all have our political preferences and our own analyses
of agreed facts. Such is life.

 
I'll note, as usual, that some things actually are measurable.
 
 

 
For whatever criteria you deem significant.

 
Of course. For tires, it's commonly (but not always) rolling resistance
in the real world on a specific type of surface. Traction might be another.
 

That’s a roadie perspective, my MTB tyres are slow rolling, on roads be
that tarmac or even fire roads they are pigs to pedal each one is 1KG plus,
have soft tacky compounds and so on, but once in the terrain they are
designed for they shine, Magic Mary (Front) is total grip monster,
particularly in wet loamy conditions. Hans Dampf is bit quicker rolling and
more middle of the road in terms of wet or hard pack terrain, hence it’s a
common pairing with the Mary up front.
 
 

Sometimes it can be tricky to specify the criteria or design the tests,
but some things are certainly measurable. And I tend to trust measured
data more than mere opinions.
 

Certainly with MTB tyres can be feel or predictability, the Maxxis Minion
DHF has a gap between the shoulders and the main tread the grip levels are
huge, but you have to commit ie bank the bike on to the shoulders and trust
that it will grip, it’s one of the reasons for their newer DH/Burly trail
tyre the Assegai which has like most tyres transition nobs and the DHF
doesn’t though it’s absolute grip is very high no evidence that the Assegai
has greater grip but it’s much more accessible.
 
Ie feel of tyre absolutely does matter in those situations, I certainly
noticed the Mary squarer profile on tarmac the MTB feels even more out of
its element than it did with Hans front and rear.

Right. Criteria vary. But once one's criteria are specified, a well
constructed test can yield data that's far more reliable than one's
seat-of-the-pants impressions.
 
 
 

Grip test are notoriously difficult, you can test a bike times down a trail
but it’s not wildly useful certainly for MTB tyres grip and feel so seat of
your pants impressions do matter.

For road for most part tarmac is grippy and even tyres with poor grip will
be fine mostly unless it’s very wet and even then unlikely to be
catastrophic more feel though yes can be measured to a degree with tests
certainly more so than off road.

That’s why tyres tend to be tested might have weights stated and any
features but the rest is feel etc, also why you can tell if a review is
simply reproducing marketing guff.

But you don’t get grip testing figures, though bicycle rolling resistance
does have some which I’d suggest are highly suspect!

Roger Merriman