Tour’s ridiculous tyre test and their questionable findings.

[maxxevv]

Continental posted the article in English here: http://www.conti-online.com/generator/w ... 00s_en.pdf

Not that it is going to change anyone's mind...

Based on my experiences with the Conti 4 season, GP4000s and the Michelin P2R and Ultremo tyres, its a lot of rubbish there!

Firstly, Conti's in my experience are amongst the most difficult to mount fresh out of the box. Even when 'broken-in' its still difficult to mount with tools. Those guys mentioned without tools ? Wow.. probably world class finger wrestlers they have there!

Next, Michelins are a little tight new, but once broken in, they are most often then not mountable without tools. Definitely easier than Conti tyres! And Ultremo's have a fairly loose loose bead and will mount easily without tools indeed.

Next is the measurement of width. The measured the Conti's on par with Michelins and wider than the Ultremo ? In my use and observation of these tyres, the Conti's are obviously narrower than the other 2. The Ultremo's being about on par with the Michelin, probably 1.5-2.5mm wider than the Conti's at full pressure.

As for rolling resistance, its not quite a clear where or how they got the results but straight out of the box, the Michelin's simply roll better. With a little breaking in, the gap between and the GP4000s narrows somewhat, with the P2R's still a little bit better. The Ultremo's feel a little crappy new, but once broken in, roll just as good as the GP4000S.

The details there are not coherant with what I've experienced with tyres I can get on the store front.

[KB]

Based on my experiences with the Conti 4 season, GP4000s and the Michelin P2R and Ultremo tyres, its a lot of rubbish there!

Firstly, Conti's in my experience are amongst the most difficult to mount fresh out of the box. Even when 'broken-in' its still difficult to mount with tools. Those guys mentioned without tools ? Wow.. probably world class finger wrestlers they have there!

100% agree. It's one of the reasons I only use tubular tyres. Particularly one experience with a puncture on a Vittoria tyre on a cold wet day. I just couldn't get the tyre off the rim and had to call the bitter half to come and get me, whereas with tubs I've peeled them off and put the spare on.

[wasfast]

100% agree. It's one of the reasons I only use tubular tyres. Particularly one experience with a puncture on a Vittoria tyre on a cold wet day. I just couldn't get the tyre off the rim and had to call the bitter half to come and get me, whereas with tubs I've peeled them off and put the spare on.

My wife would be bitter too.

[Danton]

100% agree. It's one of the reasons I only use tubular tyres. Particularly one experience with a puncture on a Vittoria tyre on a cold wet day. I just couldn't get the tyre off the rim and had to call the bitter half to come and get me, whereas with tubs I've peeled them off and put the spare on.

But that depends. Use Conti tubs too, they don't stretch much and can be just as bad as the clinchers to mount!

[KB]

I only use Veloflex tubulars. Clinchers don't cut it for me. I also think tubulars ride better, although I know plenty will disagree and produce stats!!!

[GrahamB]

I only use Veloflex tubulars. Clinchers don't cut it for me. I also think tubulars ride better, although I know plenty will disagree and produce stats!!!

http://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistic ... 0393310728

[zebragonzo]

Personally, I found GP4000S tyres ludicrously easy to mount on my Ambrosio rims. I was a little concerned in fact that they might come off, but 3000miles later they're still on!

Conversely successfully mounting tubs felt like a far greater achievement than setting a new PB when using them!

[Coolhand]

Yeah, the Tour test's and methods have long been a joke, as was their pro German product bias. There test are like Mythbusters, without the hot chick, and even less science. Stick to BTR if you accurate science. Stick to Tour for bike porn pictures.

[Miller]

Have just read the english language version of the test, it's interesting. To say that Conti beats Michelin or whatever clearly invites religious argument on this forum but the test result that jumped out at me as being absolutely true is the non-existent puncture resistance of the Vittoria EVO CX. This is the tyre I was running last summer and it was so puncture-prone it was embarrassing. I began to be apprehensive about riding with the club because I knew I'd get a flat and hold everyone up. I really wanted to like that tyre but the hassle factor was immense.

[fdegrove]

Hi,

Not so IME.
I've worn several EVO CXs untill the threads were starting to show, ran them deliberately through miles of landfill and they still refused to die.
Maybe I was lucky, maybe not.

I currently run a set of Veloflex Carbon tubulars that I only repaired once, they've been running the better part of 8.000km and the only thing showing the mileage is the logo.
Go figure.
OTOH I have a set of Conti Competition (you know, Black Chili Compound, Vectran dipers, whatever) that I ran since late Spring last year untill early Spring this year.
Both died on me within a day in April this year. The rear tyre is already showing some squaring and the profile is fading.

I'm sure many of us can dish up stories about tyres that should have punctured but didn't and vice versa.
The only thing I can conclude from it is that puncture resistance tests don't relate all that well to field experience.

As far as clinchers go, I think quite a few blow because of roughness on the rim tape, pinched inner tubes or some fine sand between the rim and the inner tube or similar scenarios.
Tubulars are much better protected due to their construction and that's definitely an asset when you need to put on a spare on the side of the road.
I also start to notice a pattern between factory fresh handmade natural rubber tubulars that blow early on and ones that have been stored for a couple of months and appear to be much less puncture prone.
Tyre pressure also seems to be a key player, the higher you run it the faster you'll flat.

All in all little that shows a direct relationship between claimed puncture resistance and actual experience as far as I'm concerned. YMMV.

Ciao,

[Miller]

Hi,
As far as clinchers go, I think quite a few blow because of roughness on the rim tape, pinched inner tubes or some fine sand between the rim and the inner tube or similar scenarios.

In general I agree but not in this instance. Berkshire in the UK has a ready supply of flints on every road you want to cycle on. Flints are, well, tiny pieces of flintstone. They're very effective at puncturing tyre carcasses so I think Tour magazine's test could be a good model of how tyres get flatted round here. The Vittorias certainly offered only token resistance.

[Amadeus]

I agree with Fdegrove about storing the tubulars or so called "open Tubulars" for a while. The puncture resistance is much better after a few months (we all know that self esteemed tyre professor Jobst Brandt does not agree here).

@Fdegrove; to answer your earlier question. "What is the difference between Clincher and open tubular"?

An open Tubular is a not sewn up tubular of at least 200tpi and up to 330tpi (Veloflex, Challenge Criterium, Deda Tre are 300TPI Vittoria is 290TPI exact like their tubulars). Open tubular tyres are made by brands/producers of tubular tyres. Basically open tubulars are build up exact the same way as tubulars and therefore realise almost the same riding qualities. As you know very well higher TPI makes a better Rolling and suppler tyre (less RR).

The difference in Clincher and open tubular is mainly their TPI and the compound used in between the threads of the fabric).

The best clinchers available are up to 127 TPI in one layer of fabric (like Schwalbe Ultremo/Michelin Pro3Race). Continental leis about this, due to marketing purpose. Actually Continental says that their 110 TPI Conti 4000s clincher is 330TPI. But Continental counts all three layers of fabric instead of one!.

P.S.
NOTE:
The last ten years clinchers of lower TPI are trying to close the gap to Tubular and open Tubular. Actually they are getting closer. Even with a lower TPI ride quality is getting better in “clincher country”. This is due to a lot of research that is done for instance in the use of "compound" that keeps the threads in de fabric together. Due to a more flexible "compound" in between the threads the clinchers are getting better and better.

But Tubulars and open Tubulars are still providing the best riding quality.
On the contrary clinchers provide the best puncture resistance.
High TPI makes a tyre more prone to puncturing but suppler.
Lower TPI makes a tyre more resistant to puncture but harsher.

P.S.
One of the guys in this thread said he experienced that Vittoria at 290tpi gave him a harsher ride then a Continental at 110tpi that made me smile because that really is not possible. I have on both and riding quality of the Vittoria is far better but it is comparing two different worlds.

[rruff]

Yeah, the Tour test's and methods have long been a joke, as was their pro German product bias.

A few years back they used Continental's testing machine to determine that all of the Conti tires sucked for Crr. This was independently verified. Last year when the Black Chilis came out, they in fact did measure much better (also verified).

I've found the 4000s to be quite easy to mount, but there could be some variation in different batches. They are quite durable also, and seem well made. Handling is great and the ride is decent.

I don't see any indication that Tour is or has been biased.

[Zak]

Yeah, the Tour test's and methods have long been a joke, as was their pro German product bias.

A few years back they used Continental's testing machine to determine that all of the Conti tires sucked for Crr. This was independently verified. Last year when the Black Chilis came out, they in fact did measure much better (also verified).

I've found the 4000s to be quite easy to mount, but there could be some variation in different batches. They are quite durable also, and seem well made. Handling is great and the ride is decent.

I don't see any indication that Tour is or has been biased.

+1

But there is a bias in the equipment they choose to test towards German brands. But that isn't so strange.

And you can rightly critize them for not putting enough emphasis on riding the equipment although I find that they have improved somewhat in that respect.

[theremery]

Amadeus, re the vittorias and contis and harshness, the Vitorias are definately harsher. I swapped between the 2 sets (raced the Vittorias and trained on the 4000s tyres), and the vittorias are noticeably harsher at the same pressure. I didn't always get round to swapping them over so rode both sets at 110+100 (rr fr) for training and 120 110 for racing, and compared them very directly, one after the other within the same weeks. I don't understand the crr data tho, because (subjectively) I always felt the Vittorias were slightly quicker. I don't have a bias either way as I use cheap and cheerful alternatives at the moment (150-160g IRC paperlites) that I'm quite happy with. I have kept a set of new corsa evo CX vittorias for racetyres but would recommend 4000s to most people as they are a little grippier (especially in the wet).