2020 Schwalbe Pro One

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.

Moderator: robbosmans

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 7629
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

As I’ve mentioned before, the ETRTO tire standard has been finalized. It now just needs to be ratified. The manufacturers have not been on the same page regarding the rim specification, so that might be delayed by a year or two.

Hex
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:30 am

by Hex

yinzerniner wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:50 pm
Dan Gerous wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 3:28 pm
That's one part of the new ETRTO standard, having labeled sizes be closer to match real world sizes on more modern rim widths as before it was all over the place, people in the know knew which tires were bigger or how to find the info but for many, it lead to suprrises, pleasant or not. Continental GP5000 also use the newer sizing so you don't buy a 25 if you really wanted a 28 like before...
For road tubeless the new standard is a 19mm inner diameter rim, so going up or down with ID will incur a reduction or increase in tire width and height.
The tire sizings have also been updated to measure accurately on 19mm internal road rims.
https://bikerumor.com/2019/08/23/new-sc ... less-tire/

However, with my initial impressions using the 2020 Pro One TLE the 28mm gets smaller at a higher rate on narrower ID rims than gets larger on wider ID rims. At 80 psi on a Giant SLR1 17mm ID the 28mm Pro One TLE measures ~26.9mm wide and 24.2mm tall, while on a Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 19.5mm ID it's ~28.1mm wide and 24.7mm tall, and on a Reynolds ATRx 23mm ID it's ~29.2mm wide and 25mm tall.

Will re-check later tonight as they're on the Bontrager right now.
I would take an issue with the new width.

I was thinking of picking up 30c OG Pro Ones with the outlook that they'd be around 33-35mm wide on 22mm ID rim.

If the 30c will be close to a 31-32mm, then I may just go Conti5k and their 32c...

All that in search of more cushin' for the pushin' unless the new Pro Ones are "all that much more supplesseeenesss" ...

by Weenie


User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

TobinHatesYou wrote:As I’ve mentioned before, the ETRTO tire standard has been finalized. It now just needs to be ratified. The manufacturers have not been on the same page regarding the rim specification, so that might be delayed by a year or two.
Its hardly “final” if it hasn’t been “ratified” by the manufacturers making the stuff.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

yinzerniner
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 8:54 pm

by yinzerniner

Hex wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:51 pm
I would take an issue with the new width.

I was thinking of picking up 30c OG Pro Ones with the outlook that they'd be around 33-35mm wide on 22mm ID rim.

If the 30c will be close to a 31-32mm, then I may just go Conti5k and their 32c...

All that in search of more cushin' for the pushin' unless the new Pro Ones are "all that much more supplesseeenesss" ...
If you're looking for comfort the Schwalbe in 30mm will probably feel better than the Conti in 32mm. Just from my butt feel with the same pressure the Schwalbe in 28mm is much more comfy than the Conti in 28mm. So if you looking at Schwalbe 30mm with ~3-5 higher psi vs Conti 32mm with ~3-5 lower psi the Schwable would probably still be comfier. As for wear, rolling resistance, puncture protection, grip .... remains to be seen although I think the Conti would probably best the Schwalbe in all categories.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 7629
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Calnago wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 11:08 pm

Its hardly “final” if it hasn’t been “ratified” by the manufacturers making the stuff.

They agreed to adopt UST so quite a few tires already adhere to the standard. The new Pro Ones do. The Hutchinson made tires for various brands also comply. The fact that it’s final means the big names all agreed to play ball. The same can’t be said for the rim side of things.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

So, if there’s no agreed to standard on the rim side of things, then whatever “standard” that may or may not be being adhered to on the tire side of things makes the whole “standard”, in a word, useless.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 7629
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Calnago wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:14 am
So, if there’s no agreed to standard on the rim side of things, then whatever “standard” that may or may not be being adhered to on the tire side of things makes the whole “standard”, in a word, useless.

I was only pointing out that the ETRTO standards are not “dead” in the water as lugan claims. In fact, one of the standards is about to be made official and the other is being worked on. Anyway, progression is not useless. The rim standard is perhaps more crucial since tires are consumable, but it’s still nice knowing which tires are standard. Without having tried the new Pro Ones, I already know they will work just fine with my existing rims...because UST tires do.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Fine, let them continue to work on a standard, but when all parties involved haven’t even agreed on what that standard should be, let alone implemented one, “Dead” is a much more apt description of its status than “Final” is. A “finalized standard” is just that... final, and a standard because everyone adheres to, or should be if they are party to it. Neither of those conditions are even close to being a reality at this point. Right now it seems closer to a free for all.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

spdntrxi
Posts: 4272
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 6:11 pm

by spdntrxi

bringing shooting the messenger to a new level guys and gals?
2019 BMC TM01 Road UCI config 7.36kg

Hex
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:30 am

by Hex

yinzerniner wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:05 am

If you're looking for comfort the Schwalbe in 30mm will probably feel better than the Conti in 32mm. Just from my butt feel with the same pressure the Schwalbe in 28mm is much more comfy than the Conti in 28mm. So if you looking at Schwalbe 30mm with ~3-5 higher psi vs Conti 32mm with ~3-5 lower psi the Schwable would probably still be comfier. As for wear, rolling resistance, puncture protection, grip .... remains to be seen although I think the Conti would probably best the Schwalbe in all categories.
I'm nearly certain of 3 things in the P1 vs 5K contest:

5K will be the faster tire
5K will last some significant margin more (maybe 15-20% more mileage)
P1 may still have the better grip in the dry

I suspect that Conti may relax their tight fit to be friendlier with more rims (anyone tried to marry a 5K with fulcrum?) Since this seems to be the biggest drawback of the tire

My experience with the OG P1 is that puncture resistance is "as expected for a race tire"

I don't know yet how the new P1 or 5K stack up on that front yet, but I wouldn't be expecting a great deal of difference

kevinw
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:49 pm

by kevinw

Hex wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:03 am
I'm nearly certain of 3 things in the P1 vs 5K contest:

5K will be the faster tire
5K will last some significant margin more (maybe 15-20% more mileage)
P1 may still have the better grip in the dry

I suspect that Conti may relax their tight fit to be friendlier with more rims (anyone tried to marry a 5K with fulcrum?)
The 5Ks are fast
My 5Ks didnt last 1K (althought tread wear was minimal)
I had no issues with grip on the 5Ks - but havent tried P1

I had my 5Ks fitted to campy WTOs so should be the same 2wayfit as fulcrum. As I have said - initial install was hard as hell but removal and re-fit was easy after tyres stretched.

Worryingly my fusion perfomance tyres - which should be UST compatible - seemed a little loose if anything.

Imaking20
Posts: 2394
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

That's some very specific assumptions for two pieces of equipment you haven't used.

I had some stereotypes in mind about Schwalbe based on previous experiences. Basically that they'd roll fine (not great) and provide mediocre grip and comfort. Right now, I'm more inclined to say all their marketing spiel is legit - at least in terms of ride traits. I don't even really care how it performs when BRR tests it in a few years - they do not feel slow at all.

refthimos
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 6:02 pm

by refthimos

How is it that Enve still hasn't tested these to tell us if they are on the approved list for the 4.5 ARs with hookless rims?
EVO1 | 5.37kg
EVO3 | 6.51kg
SystemSix | 8.01kg
P5 | 9070 Di2 | SISL2 SRM | Enve 7.8/FFWD Falcon | Roval 321
T1 | P2Max Type S | Rolf Prima FX58/Zipp Super 9 Disc

Imaking20
Posts: 2394
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

Because they were announced like a month ago?

by Weenie


Ettore
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 8:44 am

by Ettore

refthimos wrote:
Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:07 am
How is it that Enve still hasn't tested these to tell us if they are on the approved list for the 4.5 ARs with hookless rims?
Ask ENVE if one can run a Vittoria Corsa Tubeless on their wheels. Nope, they don't support it.

I find that company strange.

Post Reply