Bikeradar Tyre Test

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
spud
Posts: 654
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:52 am

by spud

A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.[/quote]

Bike radar tested a 23mm Vittoria, everyone else was 24+. Makes a difference.

Marin
Posts: 2819
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 am
Location: Vienna Austria

by Marin

jlok wrote:Is it being pushed by the industry or tubeless tires really roll better?


Not if you run latex instead of heavy butyl tubes.

by Weenie


User avatar
Orlok
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2017 12:36 pm
Location: Almere - Nederland

by Orlok

It's amazing the results of those tires tests because since several years now I monitor the results of my rides by database (Android app) and they show me that a 25mm tire is not faster then a 23mm tire, better; they are slower.!! Also they show me that a Schwalbe Pro One tubeless tire is slower then a Schwalbe Ultremo tubeless, Schwalbe One tubeless and a Hutchinson Fusion 3 tubeless tire!! I didn't change the bike, always the same pressure and most of all always the same of différents rounds of roads, only the weather change. So . . . . ?
Once comes a time that you'll have a tailwind :D
Pinarello F10 - Ultegra 6800 - Carbonspeed C38 - Tubeless

thumper88
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

Pokerface07 wrote:
mpulsiv wrote:More data using to make your head spin using same test methodology http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com ... ke-reviews



A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.



Indeed, that was my first thought. It also contradicts some of the data developed on Blather about Bikes... data that mostly seems to gybe with the bicyclerollingresistance data. And their stuff generally corresponds to testing done by a particularly savvy and meticulous engineer I ride with sometimes... so I have three and in the case of some tires that have been tested multiple times, four or five data points that seem to disagree with this article.
Its almost like quibbling, but just enough watts we're talking about that it's real. I mean, 4 or 5 watts between top tire choices is significant. You don't get much more than that off an aero frame alone. and it's like, I dunno, in realm of half the gain from deep wheels. Plus, its essentially free because you have to buy tires.
As to his caveat about not using latex for testing because most cyclists don't... that mostly is logical. But its also true most cyclists don't give a crap about 5 or 10 watts of loss and those who do are a lot more likely to be running latex.

jfranci3
Posts: 253
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 5:21 pm

by jfranci3

Pokerface07 wrote:
mpulsiv wrote:More data using to make your head spin using same test methodology http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com ... ke-reviews



A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.

Looks like there is a weight, speed, tube, and non-spherical rough drum difference. Seems like the BR test would generate more heat and have less influence from the tube.

wingguy
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Pokerface07 wrote:A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.

Yes, but as noted on the BR text, Vittoria sent 23c tyres to the test where everything else was 25c. That's a significant disadvantage when the margins are so tight.

Hexsense
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

wingguy wrote:
Pokerface07 wrote:A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.

Yes, but as noted on the BR text, Vittoria sent 23c tyres to the test where everything else was 25c. That's a significant disadvantage when the margins are so tight.

Vittoria's 25c are not as wide as Continental 25c and Schwalbe Pro One 25c. It is the only one that could maintain 105% rule where rim are 5% wider than the tire on my set-up. So if i stick with Vittoria i can use 25c but i would want 23c on Conti and Schwalbe. That is a big plus in my combo.

On the other hand, 23c Continental is almost as wide but much much lighter than Vittoria 25c...

nemeseri
Posts: 685
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:40 pm

by nemeseri

I think this test just supports my earlier assumption: the difference between high-end tires is small. So small, that even in the laboratory, with highly controlled tests they might give slightly different results. I believe that the different measured width of the tires have a relatively big influence on the contact patch. Also taking the load, rim width and pavement surface differences, it's impossible to define a clear winner.

I think the "bottom line" part in the article is spot on. Just buy your choice of high-end tire. If you focus on Crr instead of aero, just buy the 25s. If you are racing a flat tt, go with the appropriate size for your rim in the front (follow the 105% rule).

Probably 5 psi off from you ideal pressure would make a bigger difference than changing to a different tire. And good luck with calculating your ideal pressure for a given road surface. Especially if you are running latex tubes. ;)

Lieblingsleguan
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:47 pm

by Lieblingsleguan

Hexsense wrote:
wingguy wrote:
Pokerface07 wrote:A lot of data on bicyclerollingresistance.com contradicts the testing in the BikeRadar test. Just at a glance, the Vittoria Corsa came out as one of the slowest tyres in the BR test, but BRR.com has it as one of the fastest.

Yes, but as noted on the BR text, Vittoria sent 23c tyres to the test where everything else was 25c. That's a significant disadvantage when the margins are so tight.

Vittoria's 25c are not as wide as Continental 25c and Schwalbe Pro One 25c. It is the only one that could maintain 105% rule where rim are 5% wider than the tire on my set-up. So if i stick with Vittoria i can use 25c but i would want 23c on Conti and Schwalbe. That is a big plus in my combo.

On the other hand, 23c Continental is almost as wide but much much lighter than Vittoria 25c...

The new Vittoria Corsa G+ tires are wider than the Contis. My 23mm Corsa G+ measures exactly 25mm on a 15C rim, 23mm 4000sII is 24,2mm on the same wheel.

TheKaiser
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

Some of the variation between Bike Radar's data from Wheel Energy, Al Morrisons roller based data at bikeblather.blogspot.com, and Jarno's at www.bicyclerollingresistance.com may simply come down to the test protocol. They are all good at maintaining consistency of test conditions within their own environment, but they differ from each other, most significantly in the drum diameter of their fixture.

Al is using training rollers. I don't recall the exact diameter of his, but it probably somewhere around 10cm. Jarno is using a 77cm drum, so the difference there is huge, and that is even more true with Wheel Energy, as they use around a 122cm drum if I recall correctly. There isn't any reason to believe that tire casing hysteresis losses all increase/decrease in a totally linear fashion with more/less deflection, so a smaller roller that distorts the tire more may provide different results than a larger roller.

Also, Al's rollers are smooth, whereas Jarno's drum has a diamond plate texture. Wheel Energy has the capability of offering multiple surface drums, and as you saw in the Bike Radar article, they got different rankings between their smooth and diamond plate drums, even within the same test facility.

I haven't taken the time to do so, but it would be interesting to see if the Bike Radar rough drum data tracks Jarno's more than their smooth drum data, as that would suggest that the surface texture of the drum was a deciding factor. You could do the same with Al Morrisons smooth roller data, and get an idea of if the drum diameter altered the relative rankings substantially. An easy model to look at would the the GP4000S2 both because it is common, and because it jumped around quite a bit in the rankings at Wheel Energy based on the drum surface.

In addition, there will be some tire to tire variation, as every weight weenie who has weighed a batch of "identical" model tires will know. Generally speaking, the less rubber in the tire, the faster it will roll, all else being equal. Tires can have a +/- weight margin of 10% or so and a lot of that will come from the rubber thickness, so if Bike Radar happened to get one of the thinnest lightest examples of tire A, and one of the thickest heaviest examples of tire B, and Jarno got the opposite mix, then that could explain some of the difference in rankings.

Hexsense
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am

by Hexsense

Lieblingsleguan wrote:The new Vittoria Corsa G+ tires are wider than the Contis. My 23mm Corsa G+ measures exactly 25mm on a 15C rim, 23mm 4000sII is 24,2mm on the same wheel.

i'm talking about 25c size specifically.

i have both Corsa G+ 23c and 25c on my wheel right now.
25c Corsa are only 1 to 1.5 mm wider than the 23c but a bit taller.

while 25c Conti are much larger than 23c, quite noticably.

flafonta
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 8:25 pm

by flafonta

TheKaiser wrote:In addition, there will be some tire to tire variation, as every weight weenie who has weighed a batch of "identical" model tires will know. Generally speaking, the less rubber in the tire, the faster it will roll, all else being equal. Tires can have a +/- weight margin of 10% or so and a lot of that will come from the rubber thickness, so if Bike Radar happened to get one of the thinnest lightest examples of tire A, and one of the thickest heaviest examples of tire B, and Jarno got the opposite mix, then that could explain some of the difference in rankings.

Yup! I always wonder why they don't use at least 3 different tire samples for each and use the average but should also publish the deviation.

Sam
Posts: 321
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:07 pm
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

by Sam

The industry is most certainly pushing for it if you ask me, as with disc brakes. Guess the tubeless weight just a little bit more, demand a specific/compatible rim and have some actual benefits in terms of rolling resistance.

niklasp
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:36 pm

by niklasp

Gp 4k s2 25mm measures 27 (one is 27 and the other like 26,9mm) on rims with 17mm internal width. This was after two weeks inflated but never used ouside.

by Weenie


User avatar
kgt
Posts: 6807
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

an equation of tire brand, width, weight, testing protocol and marketing is impossible to solve. I agree with nemeseri, just ride whatever you like. There are many good tires in the market.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post