Gravel tire rolling resistance tested

[req110]

I can share my experience with

Continental Terra Speed 700x40c.

1280km, 60% gravel, 35% paved, 5% mtb terrain, this is how they look like now. They are soaking a bit on the thread on some places. Overall i think good tires, but for gravel bike specific purpose, it's better to purchase something stronger, so i am considering something like Vittoria Terreno Mix or Pirelli Cinturato Mixed Terrain Classic.

[FlatlandClimber]

Wow, those centre knobs look pretty worn!
Give the Pathfinder Pro 42c a try. Much stronger than Conti.

[tanhalt]

Wow, those centre knobs look pretty worn!
Give the Pathfinder Pro 42c a try. Much stronger than Conti.

Somewhat slower as well...

[FlatlandClimber]

Yes, it is slower on tarmac.
However, it is very capable, grips into deep mud and cleans itself very quickly.

[req110]

Hmmm. So what we have now as options for tires which are second fastest, but more potent in gravel, with higher life than Terra Speed:

1) pathfinder pro
2) pirelli cinturato hard gravel or mixed terrain?
3) vittoria terreno mix?

Thank you

[eins4eins]

Tufo Thundero

I tried Terra Speed, Terreno dry, Cinturato hard and several GOne versions. The Tufo combines the best attributes of them all.
Its very fast on hardpack/asphalt, super supple, decent grip on difficult surfaces, fairly light, good puncture resistance and all that for a fair price.
I've known Tufo from tubular times and their tubs felt like garden hoses, so i was really surprised that they came out with such a good gravel tire.

[CampagYOLO]

Hmmm. So what we have now as options for tires which are second fastest, but more potent in gravel, with higher life than Terra Speed:

1) pathfinder pro
2) pirelli cinturato hard gravel or mixed terrain?
3) vittoria terreno mix?

Thank you

I've just started using the Michelin Power Gravel in 40mm. Can't comment on long term life but I'm pleased with them so far.

[nickf]

I have a few races on the Graelking SS 38c. I'm impressed. Even in the loose chunky gravel, they have held up well and the file tread was not a problem. We had dry roads at all of the events. Not sure how they would do on a wet surface. The Terra Speed might have an advantage there, they have some real tread blocks. So far no cuts or punctures with the SS. That's me just blasting the descents on some really nasty chunky granite gravel. Most of our races are around 60% road and 40% gravel around here.

[req110]

I've had gravelking ss 38
- poor puncture protection
- bad grip even when compared to terra speed
- pain to install as they are too loose on rim, so you have the pump them with inner tube and remove it carefully while keeping one bead in (only panaracers does that)

I am not going to purchase panaracers ever, as i had also model SK, not impressed as well.

[warthog101]

Tufo Thundero

I tried Terra Speed, Terreno dry, Cinturato hard and several GOne versions. The Tufo combines the best attributes of them all.
Its very fast on hardpack/asphalt, super supple, decent grip on difficult surfaces, fairly light, good puncture resistance and all that for a fair price.
I've known Tufo from tubular times and their tubs felt like garden hoses, so i was really surprised that they came out with such a good gravel tire.

Just put a Speedero on the rear of my Revolt.
Great supple and fast rolling tyre.
Very happy with it.
A Thundero would be great on the front.
Got a pair of 38c Gravelking SKs coming so one of them will go on there in the meantime.
A Thundero may have to be ordered and the Gravelkings may end up on the back after the Speedero is worn.

[jacobeh]

I've had gravelking ss 38
- poor puncture protection
- bad grip even when compared to terra speed
- pain to install as they are too loose on rim, so you have the pump them with inner tube and remove it carefully while keeping one bead in (only panaracers does that)

I am not going to purchase panaracers ever, as i had also model SK, not impressed as well.

My exact experience as well and I know installation also comes down to the rim, but the GK are by far the worst tires I've had to try and mount tubeless, whereas the Terra Speed was the easiest to mount with just a standard floor pump.

Currently rocking the Pathfinder Pros in 42mm and haven't looked back since - for supple road feel the Terra Speeds is superiour but their wear would require me to replace the rear tire about 3 times per year and they don't have the same puncture protection as the Pathfinders (1 puncture in 5318km so far on the Pathfinders)

[warthog101]

Bugger it, got the Thundero for the front.


Speedero on the rear


Work well on the hard packed stuff I am riding.

[FlatlandClimber]

I have done some more "research" and it kinda has me doubt all the tire rolling resistance results...
From the BRR Panaracer Gravelking 3 Way test, I am just now learning that their testing of the GravelKing TLC 40mm was conducted using a butyl tube.
The original result is 20.8W at low pressure, and the new test shows 20.8W with a tube and 17.6W for the same tire and width, but set to tubeless.
I looked up some of the older tests of Gravel and CX tires, and there they specified, that they were set up with a 160g Conti butyl tube.
I understand I am probably the last person to realize this, but are all tests of Gravel tires with a tube?
If so, I'd argue it is completely possible that the results are really difficult to compare between tires, when most tires are separated by 1 to 4 watts.

Then I looked up the Michelin Power Gravel, as I found it very interesting with its low rolling resistance and relatively aggressive thread.

I found a test by German outlet "Rennrad-News", they tested 16 tires on a metal drum and found the Michelin Gravel, Conti TerraSpeed and Specialized PF to be very fast, all in line with BRR.
However, nothing is close to the speed of the Schwalbe G One R - by far the fastest rolling tire they tested...
Which BRR says rolls terribly slow (28W vs 21W on the Terra Speed per tire).
Don't really know how that is possible, considering the tests are conducted in a similar fashion. On difference I can see:
"Rennrad-News" only tests the tires set up tubelessly.

The next test I read on the Michelin Gravel, they were the slowest tire in the test, beaten by several tires much slower according to BRR.

Idk what all this means, but makes things a little questionable for me...

[tanhalt]

I have done some more "research" and it kinda has me doubt all the tire rolling resistance results...
From the BRR Panaracer Gravelking 3 Way test, I am just now learning that their testing of the GravelKing TLC 40mm was conducted using a butyl tube.
The original result is 20.8W at low pressure, and the new test shows 20.8W with a tube and 17.6W for the same tire and width, but set to tubeless.
I looked up some of the older tests of Gravel and CX tires, and there they specified, that they were set up with a 160g Conti butyl tube.
I understand I am probably the last person to realize this, but are all tests of Gravel tires with a tube?
If so, I'd argue it is completely possible that the results are really difficult to compare between tires, when most tires are separated by 1 to 4 watts.

Then I looked up the Michelin Power Gravel, as I found it very interesting with its low rolling resistance and relatively aggressive thread.

I found a test by German outlet "Rennrad-News", they tested 16 tires on a metal drum and found the Michelin Gravel, Conti TerraSpeed and Specialized PF to be very fast, all in line with BRR.
However, nothing is close to the speed of the Schwalbe G One R - by far the fastest rolling tire they tested...
Which BRR says rolls terribly slow (28W vs 21W on the Terra Speed per tire).
Don't really know how that is possible, considering the tests are conducted in a similar fashion. On difference I can see:
"Rennrad-News" only tests the tires set up tubelessly.

The next test I read on the Michelin Gravel, they were the slowest tire in the test, beaten by several tires much slower according to BRR.

Idk what all this means, but makes things a little questionable for me...

Don't discount the fact that some tire manufacturers make unannounced changes to their tires. I've seen plenty of examples of this affecting roller Crr measurements over the years.

This is why the best way to determine this for yourself, and for the tires you have on hand, is to at least do relative testing yourself...and small diameter rollers are great for this since the differences are "amplified", so it's easy to tease them out

[FlatlandClimber]

Might be, but several of these tests were conducted within a short period of time. I guess there are bigger factors playing a role here.