Vittoria Corsa G+ Tubular Review (vs Conti Comp vs Veloflex Arenberg & Carbon)

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
sethjs
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by sethjs

Figured I'd write up a quick review after taking a first ride on them this AM.

For context - I almost exclusively ride tubulars, either on 303s or Bora Ultra 35s. These days mostly on a Baum.

I've ridden Conti Competitions (23 & 25), Veloflex Carbons (23) & Arenbergs (25) on the same setup - same pressures.

This morning was my first ride on the G+s. I was quite impressed. It was raining in San Francisco. Traction was great - no slipping whatsoever. No flats on a 19 mile loop - but obviously too early for that to be meaningful.

Biggest surprise was how comfortable they were. More comfortable than both the Veloflex and Conti tires above. They did an absolutely fantastic job soaking up the road chatter, including the larger hits we get with our rather massive potholes around here.

I should mention I've also ridden Vittoria's older cx tubulars - didn't like their wet weather traction much.

Net: great feeling tire. Good wet weather traction. Easy to mount (especially vs the Contis, which just hurt). Too early to tell on the durability front.

Update: See post below for second ride impressions
Last edited by sethjs on Thu Oct 27, 2016 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.


KCookie
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:40 am
Location: Pom living in Australia

by KCookie

How would you rate the Carbons to the Comps.?
I'm currently on 25mm comps atm and have carbons waiting to go on, but I've only ridden a few hunded Kms on the comps and was wondering if it's worth changing them over before they have worn out, heard a lot of good reviews on the ride quality of the carbons. !!
Cheers

sethjs
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by sethjs

On Comps vs Carbons - first - I've got a different point of view than what I mostly read. So keep in mind, this is largely on 303 Firecrest, laced to White Industry T11s, on a Baum Coretto, I weigh about 72kg, and I ride in and around the San Francisco Bay Area (crap roads).

With that:

Ride Quality:
Comps - I like the ride quality - I don't consider them "dead" like others seem to. They do "mute" the ride a bit - but on our roads that actually comes across as absorbing more road chatter, so it's more comfortable. G+s - I found to also be comfortable, but more supple as well. Carbons - I actually like their ride quality on our road the least. For whatever reason, they transmit more chatter. They are supple - and on smooth pavement they're great - but we have a lot of either a) big bumps or b) rough pavement. Net: Early read is G+ the best, then Conti Comp, then Veloflex.

Durability:
Comps - great! It went flat early in its life in the rain - I couldn't find the puncture. I threw some Stans in. It was fine fro another ~3.5k miles. Still had the dimpled tread when I removed it (it had become reasonably cut up from the amount of glass we have). Rear tires lasted maybe 1.5-2k miles, which is pretty good. I'd say it lost the dimples at about 1.2k miles. I replaced it when it flatted due to a puncture from road debris (not glass). I assumed it was a sign the tread had worn too thin. Veloflex - I'd say the rear lasts more like 1.2k miles - maybe 30% less than the Comp. Its rubber is definitely more fragile. Center tread gone by maybe 900 miles. I generally found them to be good about not puncturing and Stans always worked great in them when I did puncture. Net: a wash.

Wet Traction:
All three have been acceptable. Can't say I wouldn't ride any due to wet weather performance. Right or wrong, my perception is the Contis have a slight edge over the other two - but I have nothing great to back that up (other than the apparent Team Sky switch).

Dry Traction:
All 3 seem totally acceptable.

Mounting:
The Veloflex and G+ are easy, the Conti is torture.

Speed / rolling resistance:
I doubt this is human detectable :)

Net: I'd definitely not ruin a new / lots of life remaining pair of Contis to switch to the Veloflex. They're both good. If they were equally easy to mount, I'd use the Contis over the Veloflex. I've got to get lots more miles on the G+ to know where I rank it overall - durability's a big deal for me. One short ride in I'm really liking the G+. But have I mentioned how painful it is to mount the Contis?

KCookie
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:40 am
Location: Pom living in Australia

by KCookie

Thanks for the review, very detailed and much appreciated.
I'm the same weight as you, roads aren't to bad with debris but do have some areas of ruff Tarmac. I've been playing around with tyre pressure for a while to see how much that helps but they feel harsh. I have my comps on Obies as they were put on for free with the purchase, plus the puncture resistance was very appealing as it was my first time ridding tubulars and was a little worried making the move from clincher.
A few people have commented how hard the Conti's are to mount, but I watched mine being mounted straight out the box no problem at all, weird.
I bought the carbons as I was hoping they would be more supple and provide a more comfortable ride.
I'll confess I only ride in the dry, so the problems associated with the wet won't bother me, so as you say i might as well leave the comps on until they need changing.
Cheers

sethjs
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by sethjs

Ah, on tire pressure with me weighing roughly 72 kg, after a bunch of experimenting I've settled at 88 psi front and rear.

Hexsense
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

sethjs wrote:Ah, on tire pressure with me weighing roughly 72 kg, after a bunch of experimenting I've settled at 88 psi front and rear.

does your weight split 50/50?
normally road rider are closer to 40/60 so 10-15 psi difference are preferable if the tire are at the same size. but i see that you like to use different size of tire. I weight 65kg and using 75-80psi 23c front regularly.
perhaps try to drop down the front to 82/88 for better cornering grip?
Last edited by Hexsense on Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

vlastrada
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:12 am
Location: uphill

by vlastrada

.
Last edited by vlastrada on Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

vlastrada
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:12 am
Location: uphill

by vlastrada

i find the conti comp a good compromise between puncture resistance, durability, traction and still feeling like a tub.
plus i can sometimes train on them when i feel like it, i.e. not purely a race day only tub.

So good thread as interested to hear how the G+ tubs compare and hold up especially wrt punctures.

KCookie wrote: A few people have commented how hard the Conti's are to mount, but I watched mine being mounted straight out the box no problem at all, weird


... it can look deceptively easy when looking at a strong-handed mechanic. But you may be in for a surprise when you do it yourself, unless you have bestial thumbs :)

nemeseri
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:40 pm

by nemeseri

I'm a tubular rookie, so please forgive me if I miss something. Why do you guys prefer the conti comps so much over anything else? They come with butyl inner tubes so they have higher crr than others. Also it's harder to fix a butyl tube with sealants (http://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Thin ... _4155.html). And also extremely hard to mount.

Wormiez
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 12:46 am

by Wormiez

How do they compare to the Arenbergs ?

sawyer
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

nemeseri wrote:I'm a tubular rookie, so please forgive me if I miss something. Why do you guys prefer the conti comps so much over anything else? They come with butyl inner tubes so they have higher crr than others. Also it's harder to fix a butyl tube with sealants (http://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Thin ... _4155.html). And also extremely hard to mount.


As the OP says, his view isn't really representative as most guys on tubs here don't rate the ride quality of Comps all that highly. They have their place though as the grip, puncture resistance, durability and roundness are all very good for a reasonably light and reasonably fast tyre

Not worth the premium over Sprinters IMHO - only fractionally lighter, same crr, and 50-60% more expensive

OTOH if you can source TT specific Pro LTD Comps there are different beast altogether ... fast and more supple
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

natefontaine
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:37 am

by natefontaine

I found the comps to be much more resistant to cuts than sprinters and they last longer for me. plus everyone knows that dimples are more aero. If you do any off road exploring or loose sand on the road, the comps offer much better grip. I think you should run as low of pressure as you feel safe. for some of our roads I go down as low as 50f60r for fast group rides, 65kg. I've also had good luck with orangeseal. I'm interested in the G+ but the cost is a bit steep for me right now. I stick with what I can snipe on eBay for <$50/tub

RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 1702
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Downtown Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

I've done the last 10K miles on Veloflex Carbons and have a pair of Corsa G+ on my RZRs at the moment and Roubaix on my 46s, so I'll weigh in.

Carbons vs Corsa G+ for ride quality:
Indiscernable, but that's a good thing as I find Carbons extremely good. My Carbons at 23mm are more supple than my 27mm Vittoria Evo Pave. Even though the Pave's are wider, unless I'm running stupid low pressure, the Carbons mute small cracks a lot better. I think the Vittoria like high PSI as 110 seems to be good.

Mounting:
Corsa G+ were nearly impossible to prevent a hop near the valve stem. I've never had that problem with Veloflex.

Roubaix:
Roubaix are like bigger Carbons and more rubber. I like them and at 80/85 psi, they handle bigger cracks and bumps more smoothly. They seem mushy though out of the saddle unlike the Carbons. Even at 100 psi they feel that way. I don't know why, they just do.

Continental tires...don't get me started...

P.S., I live in Downtown LA where proper disposal of bottles is to smash them on the bike path.
Strava
Current Stable. The Snob Machine
The Ex's. LS Siena: 6.21kg | Parlee Z5 SLi: 5.9kg | LS Xicon: 5.76kg | C59: 5.7kg | Cervelo R5ca: 5.09kg | Fuji Altamira SE - 6.2kg | Scott Foil - 6.2kg | Evo - 5.18kg | LS Classic - 6.7kg | The Crumpton - 5.9kg

sethjs
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by sethjs

Update on the Corsa G+

Took them on a 30 mile loop today with a fair amount of climbing and *very* steep descents with tight curves. (Hawk Hill front and back, Bunker Rd for those familiar with SF). Have to say - they are very comfortable tires!

Two new observations:

1. Inspected the tires before going and noticed the rear picked up a very large glass shard embedded deep in the tread from the first ride. Didn't flat the tire - but also have never seen such a large glass shard embed on either the Comps nor the Carbons/Arenberg. Of course, that ride was raining hard and so more susceptible to glass - so not sure I fault them.

2. Had a scary experience on the ride today. On about an 18% downhill where you need to brake hard into a curve, I locked up the rear wheel. I was braking with the same force I've used on the Comps and Carbons and neither would have locked up. My weight was same as always in such a situation, leaning rearward. This reminded me of the older Vittorias I tried where I experienced similar lock ups. On the Carbons or Arenbergs, if you lock a wheel, you lose a lot of rubber. Checked afterward, not so on the G+. Not sure I've locked the rear on the Comps.

Net: the G+ seem to have less dry traction, at least when braking in a straight line. I wonder if the compound on the edges is more supple / stickier for turns and the center harder for longevity? Anyone know? Wasn't super confidence inspiring!


mr4fox
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 2:01 pm

by mr4fox

I've been through almost 2 25mm Corsa G+'s on the rear and front almost looks like it might last through a third. so i think a total og 6-8000km total on them so far. can't say I've noticed any lack of traction at all. shortly after mounting them i took a pretty hotly contested strava KOM on a pretty technical descent with lots of hairpins and an average grade of about -10%. have taken a couple more descent koms since. so I've been pretty happy with traction so far and i can't say their rolling resistance (or lack of) is holding me back at all. then again i haven't had to brake hard on a -18% grade.

Havent ridden the conti comps but have a veloflex carbon 23mm(F) and Arendberg(R) on a 60mm carbon wheel set. hard to compare comfort and feel as those wheels are more comfortable and feel different anyway compared to the 38mm carbon wheels the Corsa G+'s are on. nothing negative to say about the handling or traction of the veloflexes though..

I decided to order G+s for both wheel sets for next season because:
1) in 15-20000 on vitoria Corsa CXIII's/G+s Ive worn all the rears down to the threads where as I've punctured Veloflexes twice in maybe 10000kms. Which probably isn't bad but not as "lucky" as the Corsas
2) the rolling resistance data I've seen suggests the Corsas are the fastest tubular except for may the specialized cotton which is hard to get and more expensive in norway and I'm unsure about their puncture resistance.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post