Vittoria Launch this month
Moderator: robbosmans
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
- Posts: 893
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm
Let us know how the mounting itself goes. The ease (or lack thereof) with mounting is, to me, one of the paramount factors when differentiating between tubeless tires.
For quite some time the gp4k was far from being a reference. It builts its reputation on rolling resistance, low RR coming from a ridiculously stiff tire. Can’t imagine that people could get over this aspect or are so Insensitive that i would question any feedback given on any equipment.ducman wrote:Finaly a tire that comes close to a GP4000/5000? It has taken 'them' long enough to be true....
They will fit differently each type of rim since dimensions are not standardised. As far I I know, only Mavic has a consistent std that cover both tire and rim dimensions, even huntchison tires (making Mavics tires) do not yet respect dimensions and bed stiffness set by the std.aeroisnteverything wrote:Let us know how the mounting itself goes. The ease (or lack thereof) with mounting is, to me, one of the paramount factors when differentiating between tubeless tires.
Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:18 pm
If Graphene 2.0 claims are true, trucking companies would be highly interested given the possible fuel cost savings at the fleet level.
-
- Posts: 893
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm
Performance-wise, this should be a good tyre. I put the Corsa Speed entirely aside here, as that one is pure TT/Racing item. But the original Corsa G+ clincher was fairly close to Conti GP 4kSII. If you just made that tubeless, without any changes to the compound, you're getting fairly close to Hutchison Galactic's level of performance, as going tubeless usually subtracts a couple of watts. If the compound is improved even by 5%, I'd be happy to try that on. The non-tubeless options will continue to find their audience too, particularly if the performance improves by say 10%.
This TLR tyre is going to live or die by the more practical issues though. Are they easy to mount? How good is tyre life? Do they cut up too easily? What about feel/grip? Stuff like that. Ignoring all the marketing malarkey, there is a non-trivial chance that a Corsa G+ TLR could become the new all-around best tyre on the combination of those factors and its performance. But let's see, shall we?
Problem is, Vittoria makes 2 tons of graphene for tyres a year for tyres that contain some grams of it and they can sell at 20€ (ex Vittoria) for 300 of tyre in average.bremerradkurier wrote:If Graphene 2.0 claims are true, trucking companies would be highly interested given the possible fuel cost savings at the fleet level.
A truck tyre comes at roughly 450€ in average at market price, and weights in at nearly 100 kg. Of which 3 or 4 (maths form the top of my head) should be graphene.
Even accounting for the extra that could be charged for the improved efficiency such a truck tyre would be a difficult market case.
-
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:18 pm
Commercial truck tires seem to have very long service lives to amortize the extra costs, assuming the rolling resistance gains are real.XCProMD wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 6:13 pmProblem is, Vittoria makes 2 tons of graphene for tyres a year for tyres that contain some grams of it and they can sell at 20€ (ex Vittoria) for 300 of tyre in average.bremerradkurier wrote:If Graphene 2.0 claims are true, trucking companies would be highly interested given the possible fuel cost savings at the fleet level.
A truck tyre comes at roughly 450€ in average at market price, and weights in at nearly 100 kg. Of which 3 or 4 (maths form the top of my head) should be graphene.
Even accounting for the extra that could be charged for the improved efficiency such a truck tyre would be a difficult market case.
https://www.thetruckersreport.com/truck ... st.905255/
Is rolling resistance a real concern for big motor vehicle?
I thought their speed is far too high that aerodynamic drag almost totally overwhelm any effect of rolling resistance difference.
Even if we reduce rolling resistance down to 0, total energy consumption doesn't go down much, isn't it?
I thought their speed is far too high that aerodynamic drag almost totally overwhelm any effect of rolling resistance difference.
Even if we reduce rolling resistance down to 0, total energy consumption doesn't go down much, isn't it?
-
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm
XCProMD wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 6:13 pmProblem is, Vittoria makes 2 tons of graphene for tyres a year for tyres that contain some grams of it and they can sell at 20€ (ex Vittoria) for 300 of tyre in average.bremerradkurier wrote:If Graphene 2.0 claims are true, trucking companies would be highly interested given the possible fuel cost savings at the fleet level.
A truck tyre comes at roughly 450€ in average at market price, and weights in at nearly 100 kg. Of which 3 or 4 (maths form the top of my head) should be graphene.
Even accounting for the extra that could be charged for the improved efficiency such a truck tyre would be a difficult market case.
As Hexsense mentions, rolling resistance is the least of a truck’s problems. Aerodynamic drag is the low-hanging fruit, which is why you see more road hugging skirts, more fairings on the back of trailers and wheel covers these days.
-
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 4:18 pm
https://nacfe.org/technology/low-rollin ... nce-duals/Hexsense wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:57 pmIs rolling resistance a real concern for big motor vehicle?
I thought their speed is far too high that aerodynamic drag almost totally overwhelm any effect of rolling resistance difference.
Even if we reduce rolling resistance down to 0, total energy consumption doesn't go down much, isn't it?
Low rolling resistance (LRR) dual tires will save significant amounts of fuel when compared to tires that are not designed for low rolling resistance. Some of the costs to operate low rolling resistance tires may be higher than those of non-LRR tires, but those costs are recovered over the life of the truck.
Cost per mile of tires has traditionally been defined in terms of initial purchase and tread life. However, the cost of fuel the tire consumes because of rolling resistance is five times greater than the initial purchase price of the tire. Rolling resistance makes up 30-33% of the total fuel cost of a Class 8 truck or about $0.21 per mile. The typical purchase price of the tire is about $0.04 per mile.
The Confidence Rating indicates a high confidence in low rolling resistance dual tires to save on fuel costs signifying a good case for adoption.
-
- Posts: 12457
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm
And how much added benefit would graphene add vs cost to existing low-rolling resistance tires?
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com