Weight Weenies
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/

Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=97249
Page 5 of 12

Author:  bones [ Mon May 28, 2012 7:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

Tubes lose pressure every day, latex more so than butyl. I pump up every day. I like the same psi all the time.

I used to ride Conti tires a lot, then switched to Michelin for a while. Just tried the new Specializes Turbo pro tires. You guys should give them a try. Really not bad at all and price is cheaper than the other high end clinchers.

Author:  Weenie [ Mon May 28, 2012 7:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?


Author:  shokhead [ Mon May 28, 2012 2:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

drmutley wrote:
Which butyls u use that are close to latex? Would like to try them!

I switched to latex a couple of years ago and won't prob ever go back to butyl, as the positives far outweigh the (1) negative.

Having to put 10 to 20psi into them each day is a small effort when u consider how much better they roll, the added puncture resistant they are, and the fact that they tend to never go immediately flat when u do happen to flat. Nothing worse than the instant butyl flats at high speed, where latex will more often than not just slowly deflate, allowing for safe stopping (ESP on front flats).


Are you sure about all that?

Author:  giant man [ Mon May 28, 2012 4:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

FWIW I would take Mich ProRaces over the Contis every time ....

Author:  shokhead [ Mon May 28, 2012 5:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

giant man wrote:
FWIW I would take Mich ProRaces over the Contis every time ....

Because?

Author:  petromyzon [ Mon May 28, 2012 6:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

Schwalbe are adopting a similar anti-puncture strip to Conti for the new Ultremo ZX, and releasing a Road Tubeless version. Interesting!

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/arti ... nch-34116/

Author:  drmutley [ Mon May 28, 2012 6:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

shokhead wrote:
drmutley wrote:
Which butyls u use that are close to latex? Would like to try them!

I switched to latex a couple of years ago and won't prob ever go back to butyl, as the positives far outweigh the (1) negative.

Having to put 10 to 20psi into them each day is a small effort when u consider how much better they roll, the added puncture resistant they are, and the fact that they tend to never go immediately flat when u do happen to flat. Nothing worse than the instant butyl flats at high speed, where latex will more often than not just slowly deflate, allowing for safe stopping (ESP on front flats).


Are you sure about all that?

Very sure from my couple of years experience on latex

Author:  sawyer [ Mon May 28, 2012 6:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

drmutley wrote:
shokhead wrote:
drmutley wrote:
Which butyls u use that are close to latex? Would like to try them!

I switched to latex a couple of years ago and won't prob ever go back to butyl, as the positives far outweigh the (1) negative.

Having to put 10 to 20psi into them each day is a small effort when u consider how much better they roll, the added puncture resistant they are, and the fact that they tend to never go immediately flat when u do happen to flat. Nothing worse than the instant butyl flats at high speed, where latex will more often than not just slowly deflate, allowing for safe stopping (ESP on front flats).


Are you sure about all that?

Very sure from my couple of years experience on latex


My experience is different, and a fair number of people on this board with decades of experience riding would not choose latex tubes plus clincher tyres for the mountains. Likewise, some manufacturers of clinchers explicitly state not to use latex tubes with their wheels. I wonder why?

Tubs utilise the benefits of latex safely. Latex and clinchers are problematic precisely because they are so elastic.

This has been debated a fair bit on this forum ... if latex and clinchers works for you then fair enough.

Author:  giant man [ Mon May 28, 2012 7:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

shokhead wrote:
giant man wrote:
FWIW I would take Mich ProRaces over the Contis every time ....

Because?

Because they wear and grip better that's why

Author:  shokhead [ Tue May 29, 2012 12:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

giant man wrote:
shokhead wrote:
giant man wrote:
FWIW I would take Mich ProRaces over the Contis every time ....

Because?

Because they wear and grip better that's why


OK!

Author:  teddysaur [ Tue May 29, 2012 2:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

Here's a question. I have seem both flat/smooth and rocky/rough tarmac in different countries. Do you think flat protection depends on the road surface?

Author:  rowdysluggins [ Tue May 29, 2012 2:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

drmutley wrote:
Which butyls u use that are close to latex? Would like to try them!

The best I've tried are Panaracer R'Air. I cleaned out the stock here in the states last year, and contacted the distributor and bought some of the last that they had as well (they were completely out of 60mm stems, which is what I wanted most, but still had a few 48s).
Still, I got enough that I should be good this year. These tubes can go three of four days without losing significant pressure and ride very close to latex. If I can't find them in the future, I might have to give latex another shot (but they better not loose more than 15 psi in 10 hours, or I won't like them).

Author:  shokhead [ Wed May 30, 2012 10:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/tech/gea ... -tyre.html
http://bicyclesportshop.wordpress.com/2 ... rse-tires/


http://www.competitivecyclist.com/revie ... e_295.html
http://roadcyclinguk.com/news/racing-ne ... -4000.html

Author:  BobSantini [ Thu May 31, 2012 12:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

sawyer wrote:

My experience is different, and a fair number of people on this board with decades of experience riding would not choose latex tubes plus clincher tyres for the mountains. Likewise, some manufacturers of clinchers explicitly state not to use latex tubes with their wheels. I wonder why?

.....

I'll assume that's not a rhetorical question and venture an answer. It's because latex tubes are more vulnerable to heat than butyl and in clinchers the tubes lack the all round protection of tubs.

Author:  sawyer [ Thu May 31, 2012 12:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

BobSantini wrote:
sawyer wrote:

My experience is different, and a fair number of people on this board with decades of experience riding would not choose latex tubes plus clincher tyres for the mountains. Likewise, some manufacturers of clinchers explicitly state not to use latex tubes with their wheels. I wonder why?

.....

I'll assume that's not a rhetorical question and venture an answer. It's because latex tubes are more vulnerable to heat than butyl and in clinchers the tubes lack the all round protection of tubs.



It was a rhetorical question but yes.

Author:  KLabs [ Thu May 31, 2012 1:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?

rowdysluggins wrote:
drmutley wrote:
Which butyls u use that are close to latex? Would like to try them!

The best I've tried are Panaracer R'Air. I cleaned out the stock here in the states last year, and contacted the distributor and bought some of the last that they had as well (they were completely out of 60mm stems, which is what I wanted most, but still had a few 48s).
Still, I got enough that I should be good this year. These tubes can go three of four days without losing significant pressure and ride very close to latex. If I can't find them in the future, I might have to give latex another shot (but they better not loose more than 15 psi in 10 hours, or I won't like them).

Yes, the Panaracer R'Air are very good and keep air pressure well. that is what I use with clinchers :-)

Author:  Weenie [ Thu May 31, 2012 1:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Michelin Pro 4's vs Conti 4000S ?


Page 5 of 12 All times are UTC+01:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/