Best handling road tire that gets reasonable mileage?

[Garyg]

"Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 22 May 2003 09:30:56 -0700, "GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> wrote:
>
> >I've tried other tires (Conti's, Panaracer, Specialized, Forte), but they never inspired the
> >confidence I have in the Axial Pros. They're supple, accelerate quickly, and stick in the corners
> >like glue.
>
> Which of the tires that you used didn't stick to the ground? What happened?
>

Mostly those other tires just felt a bit heavier (the Conti's and Specialized), or wore out fast
(Panaracer, Forte). The Conti's (2000's), and Specialized (Armadillo's) seemed to be designed more
for high mileage...they didn't seem to have the same amount of "tackiness" as the Axial Pro's.
Pushing them hard in a corner causes them to sometimes "skip" or "chatter" a bit.

I certainly don't claim to be an expert, and I haven't ridden enough tires one right after the other
to be able to do proper side-by-side comparisons. I just know that the Axial Pro's inspire my
confidence. I've gone into corners too hot, where I had to push the bike over farther than I
anticipated. I've also had the occasional emergency maneuver (potholes, critters, etc.), and they've
never let me down.

Last year while on the Bicycle Tour of Colorado (www.bicycletourcolo.com), I descended into Ouray
from Red Mtn. Pass. That's a legendary descent even in good conditions, featuring steep
switchbacks, and 300 ft dropoffs. When I did it, it was raining and hailing (we found out later
that we were 20 minutes ahead of a big mudslide that completely closed the road). The Axial Pros
stayed rubber side down.

Perhaps my faith in them is "all in my mind"...but, I'm OK with that.

GG

 

[Garyg]

"Peter Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > As a rule of thumb, "you get what you paid for". There might very well
be
> > acceptable $9.95 tires out there, but I'm not willing to risk a crash to save a few bucks (at my
> > age, recovery from injury takes too damned
long!).
> > I love going downhill fast...my friends call me "Il Falcone", because
none
> > of them can catch me on a descent. At the speeds I descend, falling is
not
> > an option, and so tires are a mission-critical item for me.
>
> You make it sound like the rest of us save money on tires just to blow it
on
> medical expenses.

Not at all, and no disrepect meant. If you use your brakes on downhills, most any decent tire will
do. I rarely brake.

Perhaps my faith in the Axial Pro's is all in my mind...whatever, they give me confidence, which
counts for a lot. Sure, they cost more, but I've been on them for a couple of years now, and really
like them a lot, and the money is not an issue for me.

>
> > I've tried other tires (Conti's, Panaracer, Specialized, Forte), but
they
> > never inspired the confidence I have in the Axial Pros. They're supple, accelerate quickly, and
> > stick in the corners like glue.
>
> "Supple", the magazine writer's favorite adjective!

Per dictionary.com: "Yielding or changing readily; compliant or adaptable". They seem to not beat me
up on rough roads, nor bounce me out of the saddle when I hit a pothole.

>
> How do you measure acceleration (of tires)?

It's a "feel" thing. The Conti's and Specialized felt a bit heavier, and don't feel as fast when
accelerating.

>
> As for "sticking like glue", as Jobst loves to point out, nobody really
pushes
> the limit in corners because the learning curve is so painful, so nobody
ever
> really finds the limits of their tires. How do you distinguish better cornering ability without
> breaking tires loose? How do you do that without crashing? A tire traction expert would either
> have a very good lab or be covered head to toe in road rash.
>

Ummm...I've broken my rear tire loose many times. Of course, I try to avoid it, but if you've done
much mountain biking, it's not that big a deal. As for how I "distinguish better cornering
ability"...the fact that none of my riding buddies can keep up with me on a downhill, and that I've
not gone down to the pavement in the last 7,000 miles is good enough for me.

As for Jobst's comments...I tend to agree. I try not to get too close to the limits of my tire's
traction, for the reasons given. However, Jobst also claims that countersteer is not appropriate for
descending, and I strongly disagree with that. Countersteer helps a lot, both in terms of carrying
speed through corners, and more importantly, the ability to respond quickly to emergencies
(potholes, rear wheel sliding, etc.).

YMMV.

GG

 

[Dougc]

Sam Huffman <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> writes:
>
> > "one of the six billion" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Micheln Axial Pro Race 25mm from [email protected]. He'll send 3 of them to you for less than
> > > $100 shipped. They are great on fast twisty bumpy decents and they are durable.
> > >
> >
> > Ditto that. I love going downhill fast, and the Michelins inspire a lot of confidence. They
> > really stick to the road in turns, even in the wet. You can push the bike over far enough to be
> > scary, and they won't let you down.
> >
> > I've logged nearly 1900 miles on the Axial Pro's (last year's tire), and have not yet tried the
> > Pro Race model, but I've heard lots of good buzz on this year's tire. Last year's model seems
> > reasonably durable, although somewhat susceptible to cuts. I've just received a couple of the
> > new Pro Race tires (from Performance...are you listening Michael?), and can't wait to try them
> > out soon.
>
> The Michelin Carbon appears to offer similar quality but with lower cost and longer life (and a
> little more weight) than the pro race; does anyone have experience with this tire?
>
> Thanks, Sam

I have been using the Michelin Axial Carbons for over a year and I find them quite durable. I don't
know that they are as "sticky" as the Pro Race tires, but better grip comes at the expense of
durability. I got 4500 miles out of one tire, 3000 on the front and 1500 after rotating it to the
back. I finally scrapped it, but only because it seemed to be pretty worn down. Living in southern
New Jersey, I don't ride too many scary descents, so my tire criteria are a bit different.

 

[Fred Roses]

"Peter Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:
> If you didn't like the Panaracers, you'd probably not like the Avocet or Rol-y Pol-y, which I
> think are made by IRC, the other big Japanese tire exporter. I think IRC and Panaracer make
> excellent tires, even in the economic price ranges. I think the Avocets, and especially the R-P's
> suffer from excessive markup. The Continentals are a nice racing tire, but $50 a pop for just
> riding around is a little steep, I doubt very much they're any safer, light weight tires make
> compromises.

Actually Rivendell says the R/P's are made by Panaracer. I think they represent a pretty good value
and I'm sure the price is not determined by greedy markup but rather by Rivendell's limited
purchasing power. By the way, I have about 5,000 miles on a pair, which are now smooth (no little
boxes of light tread anymore) but otherwise look as good as new. They're pretty quiet and they have
always felt very secure and predictable from the cobblestones of the Czech Republic to the
sheep-dung-and-rain-slick roads of Ireland. They've never flatted either!

 

[Jay Beattie]

"GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Thu, 22 May 2003 09:30:56 -0700, "GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> wrote:
> >
> > >I've tried other tires (Conti's, Panaracer, Specialized, Forte),
but they
> > >never inspired the confidence I have in the Axial Pros. They're
supple,
> > >accelerate quickly, and stick in the corners like glue.
> >
> > Which of the tires that you used didn't stick to the ground? What happened?
> >
>
> Mostly those other tires just felt a bit heavier (the Conti's and Specialized), or wore out fast
> (Panaracer, Forte). The Conti's
(2000's),
> and Specialized (Armadillo's) seemed to be designed more for high mileage...they didn't seem to
> have the same amount of "tackiness" as
the
> Axial Pro's. Pushing them hard in a corner causes them to sometimes
"skip"
> or "chatter" a bit.
>
> I certainly don't claim to be an expert, and I haven't ridden enough
tires
> one right after the other to be able to do proper side-by-side
comparisons.
> I just know that the Axial Pro's inspire my confidence. I've gone
into
> corners too hot, where I had to push the bike over farther than I anticipated. I've also had the
> occasional emergency maneuver
(potholes,
> critters, etc.), and they've never let me down.
>
> Last year while on the Bicycle Tour of Colorado
(www.bicycletourcolo.com), I
> descended into Ouray from Red Mtn. Pass. That's a legendary descent
even in
> good conditions, featuring steep switchbacks, and 300 ft dropoffs.
When I
> did it, it was raining and hailing (we found out later that we were 20 minutes ahead of a big
> mudslide that completely closed the road). The
Axial
> Pros stayed rubber side down.

I ride in the rain most of the fall, winter and spring and have compared a number of current
production tires. The fat 25 mm Axial Pros did not have as much traction as the 25 mm Avocet Carbon
12s, and neither of them had the traction of my NOS $17 23mm SuperCompHDs. The 23 mm Vittoria Rubino
Pros are about at the level of the Avocets. This is based on very non-scientific test of rear wheel
slip-out on a 12% climb on my commute home. I prefer not to do slip out testing while descending in
the rain because of the morbidity rate. My favorite tire for traction in the rain is still the
SuperComp HD. Too bad they had to dump that cheap model for a $40-a-pop supposed wonder tire. The
only truly dangerous tires I have owned were the Umma Gummas and a first generation colored tire
made by Michelin which I think had a clay-based pigment and no traction-giving filler like silicum
or carbon (bad father's day gift). Man, those were banana peels in the rain. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Jobst Brandt]

Gary G? writes:

> I've tried other tires (Conti's, Panaracer, Specialized, Forte), but they never inspired the
> confidence I have in the Axial Pros. They're supple, accelerate quickly, and stick in the corners
> like glue.

Oh wow! That's as good a compendium of undefined bicycle jargon as I have heard in a while.

To what do you attribute "accelerate quickly" and how do you feel that tires "stick in the corners"?
How do you feel whether a tire is "supple" when it is inflated to 100psi or so?

The way you say that, one might assume you drift around turns with the bicycle leaning at lower than
45 degrees and pedaling under full power. Oh what an imagination.

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Jobst Brandt]

Gary G? writes:

> Mostly those other tires just felt a bit heavier (the Conti's and Specialized), or wore out fast
> (Panaracer, Forte). The Conti's (2000's), and Specialized (Armadillo's) seemed to be designed more
> for high mileage...they didn't seem to have the same amount of "tackiness" as the Axial Pro's.
> Pushing them hard in a corner causes them to sometimes "skip" or "chatter" a bit.

Heavier! Oh oh, a new tire dynamics term. Apparently it's not the weight of the tire, because we can
measure that, but rather some characteristic having the same units as weight. Please explain how
this "heavier" is measured or felt. I take it this is not rolling resistance, because we cab also
measure that easily.

> I certainly don't claim to be an expert, and I haven't ridden enough tires one right after the
> other to be able to do proper side-by-side comparisons.

Oh come on. That's not a valid dodge, excusing the repetition of advertising claims as personal
evaluations. The "I'm no expert... but let me explain all about tire dynamics" ruse doesn't come
across well to the conscious reader.

> I just know that the Axial Pro's inspire my confidence. I've gone into corners too hot, where I
> had to push the bike over farther than I anticipated. I've also had the occasional emergency
> maneuver (potholes, critters, etc.), and they've never let me down.

Vaaaaaague stuff. How do you quantify emergency maneuvers in contrast to cornering traction,
something that can be measures in lean angle?

> Last year while on the Bicycle Tour of Colorado (www.bicycletourcolo.com), I descended into Ouray
> (sic) from Red Mtn. Pass. That's a legendary descent even in good conditions, featuring steep
> switchbacks, and 300 ft dropoffs. When I did it, it was raining and hailing (we found out later
> that we were 20 minutes ahead of a big mudslide that completely closed the road). The Axial Pros
> stayed rubber side down.

A true tale of derring-do. Can tire manufacturers quote you on that?

> Perhaps my faith in them is "all in my mind"...but, I'm OK with that.

That's called "faith in advertising".

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Peter Cole]

"Fred Roses" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Actually Rivendell says the R/P's are made by Panaracer. I think they represent a pretty good
> value and I'm sure the price is not determined by greedy markup but rather by Rivendell's limited
> purchasing power.

You imply that the price is high, and yet say they are a good value. I just think they're too
expensive for what they are. They're just nice Japanese tires marketed as froufrou boutique tires.

 

[Peter Cole]

"GaryG" <gary_g@charter_NOSPAMX_.net> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Perhaps my faith in the Axial Pro's is all in my mind...whatever, they give me confidence, which
> counts for a lot. Sure, they cost more, but I've been on them for a couple of years now, and
> really like them a lot, and the money is not an issue for me.

I've ridden $50 tires and $10 tires, can't say that I noticed a lot of difference, not $40 worth
in any case.

> Per dictionary.com: "Yielding or changing readily; compliant or adaptable". They seem to not beat
> me up on rough roads, nor bounce me out of the saddle when I hit a pothole.

This doesn't make sense. I don't know how a tire can bounce you out of the saddle.

> It's a "feel" thing. The Conti's and Specialized felt a bit heavier, and don't feel as fast when
> accelerating.

Weight is weight, tire or anywhere else. Tire weight is a miniscule contribution overall.
Accelerations are tiny in bicycling. 40-60 g between the expensive & cheap tires isn't really worth
much except to an extreme weight weenie.

> Ummm...I've broken my rear tire loose many times. Of course, I try to avoid it, but if you've done
> much mountain biking, it's not that big a deal.

Sure, I have too, always from a patch of bad traction or bad braking technique, never intentionally.
These aren't frequent enough occurances for me to tell anything useful about tires.

> As for how I "distinguish better cornering ability"...the fact that none of my riding buddies can
> keep up with me on a downhill, and that I've not gone down to the pavement in the last 7,000
> miles is good enough for me.

I often corner faster than the other riders in my group, I'm not sure whether that's a matter of
skill or risk tolerance. I doubt it's my tires.

> As for Jobst's comments...I tend to agree. I try not to get too close to the limits of my tire's
> traction, for the reasons given.

I don't think anyone does, hence my skepticism when people claim one tire corners better than
another at high speed, If you don't ride to the limit, you can't know where the limit is.

> However, Jobst also claims that countersteer is not appropriate for descending, and I strongly
> disagree with that.

I don't think this has anything to do with tires, so I won't comment.

 

[Suzy Jackson]

This has probably already been brought up in this thread, but I really like Michelin Axial Carbons.
I use them (in the 700x23c size) both for racing (mostly crits) and training, and find that they
wear pretty well, but are still relatively light and supple. They don't come in forty seven flavours
like many tyres do these days, but that's ok by me. They're also about five quid cheaper (17 quid at
Deeside) than the Michelin Pro Race and other "race" tyres, so when they do wear out or cut it's not
quite as painful. Oh, and they're French. That counts for a lot, in my book.

Regards,

Suzy

--
---
Suzy Jackson [email protected] http://www.suzyj.net

 

[Jobst Brandt]

Peter Cole writes:

> I don't think anyone does, hence my skepticism when people claim one tire corners better than
> another at high speed, If you don't ride to the limit, you can't know where the limit is.

>> However, Jobst also claims that countersteer is not appropriate for descending, and I strongly
>> disagree with that.

> I don't think this has anything to do with tires, so I won't comment.

I think Mr. G(whiz) can't read. The reference to countersteer is exactly the opposite from his
claim. See:

http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/9.15.html

Where among other cornering and braking considerations, countersteer is discussed:

# Countersteer

# Countersteer is a popular subject for people who belatedly discover or rediscover how to balance.
# What is not apparent, is that two wheeled vehicles can be controlled ONLY by countersteer, there
# is no other way. Unlike a car, a bicycle cannot be diverted from a straight path by steering the
# wheel to one side. The bicycle must first be leaned in that direction by steering it ever so
# slightly the other way. This is the means by which a broomstick is balanced on the palm of the
# hand or a bicycle on the road. The point of support is moved beneath the mass, in line with the
# combined forces of gravity and cornering, and it requires steering, counter and otherwise. It is
# so obvious that runners never mention it, although football, basketball, and ice hockey players
# conspicuously do it.

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Garyg]

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Gary G? writes:
>
> > Mostly those other tires just felt a bit heavier (the Conti's and Specialized), or wore out fast
> > (Panaracer, Forte). The Conti's (2000's), and Specialized (Armadillo's) seemed to be designed
> > more for high mileage...they didn't seem to have the same amount of "tackiness" as the Axial
> > Pro's. Pushing them hard in a corner causes them to sometimes "skip" or "chatter" a bit.
>
> Heavier! Oh oh, a new tire dynamics term. Apparently it's not the weight of the tire, because we
> can measure that, but rather some characteristic having the same units as weight. Please explain
> how this "heavier" is measured or felt. I take it this is not rolling resistance, because we cab
> also measure that easily.

Ummmm...actually, I think it is due to the lesser weight of the Axial Pro's compared to those
others. Are you implying that what I feel when I ride is of no value when choosing a tire?

>
> > I certainly don't claim to be an expert, and I haven't ridden enough tires one right after the
> > other to be able to do proper side-by-side comparisons.
>
> Oh come on. That's not a valid dodge, excusing the repetition of advertising claims as personal
> evaluations. The "I'm no expert... but let me explain all about tire dynamics" ruse doesn't come
> across well to the conscious reader.

I didn't repeat anyone's advertising claims. The OP was asking for recommendations for tires on
which to "bomb the switchbacks" near SLC. I've had very good experience doing that on the Axial
Pros, and was simply attempting to relay my enthusiasm for these tires (as have other posters).

I'm not sure why I'm getting my head bitten off here...is it because I haven't conducted
double-blind studies with g-force meters? Or, is it because I recommended a more expensive tire? Or,
is it because the tires are made in (gasp!) France? For what it's worth, I value empirical evidence
over anecdote, but as far as I know if any such studies have been conducted, they're closely guarded
trade secrets.

>
> > I just know that the Axial Pro's inspire my confidence. I've gone into corners too hot, where I
> > had to push the bike over farther than I anticipated. I've also had the occasional emergency
> > maneuver (potholes, critters, etc.), and they've never let me down.
>
> Vaaaaaague stuff. How do you quantify emergency maneuvers in contrast to cornering traction,
> something that can be measures in lean angle?

Examples of emergency manuevers: 1) coming around a corner fast and seeing gravel in your path and
having to quickly change directions to avoid it. 2) same thing but with a pothole, 3) same thing but
with a dog, 4) same thing but with a car pulling out of a driveway, 5) too fast in an off-camber
turn and the rear starts to go, 6) emergency stops due to car pulling out of driveway. Can other
tires handle these same scenarios? Sure...but, the OP was asking for recommendations, and I've
experienced all of these on the AP's without going down.

>
> > Last year while on the Bicycle Tour of Colorado (www.bicycletourcolo.com), I descended into
> > Ouray (sic) from Red Mtn. Pass. That's a legendary descent even in good conditions, featuring
> > steep switchbacks, and 300 ft dropoffs. When I did it, it was raining and hailing (we found out
> > later that we were 20 minutes ahead of a big mudslide that completely closed the road). The
> > Axial Pros stayed rubber side down.
>
> A true tale of derring-do. Can tire manufacturers quote you on that?

Sure!...it was an epic downhill.

>
> > Perhaps my faith in them is "all in my mind"...but, I'm OK with that.
>
> That's called "faith in advertising".

Whatever...are you saying that the fact that those tires inspire confidence in my riding is
of no value?

> Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Garyg]

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Peter Cole writes:
>
> > I don't think anyone does, hence my skepticism when people claim one tire corners better than
> > another at high speed, If you don't ride to the limit, you can't know where the limit is.
>
> >> However, Jobst also claims that countersteer is not appropriate for descending, and I strongly
> >> disagree with that.
>
> > I don't think this has anything to do with tires, so I won't comment.
>
> I think Mr. G(whiz) can't read. The reference to countersteer is exactly the opposite from his
> claim. See:

I'll let the name calling go, Jobst (having a bad day?).

And, I'll admit I did misread the Countersteer section of that page. I meant to refer to the "Lean
the Bicycle, the Rider, or Both" section...in which you seem to imply (it's not entirely clear) that
you recommend leaning both (i.e., rider's upper body stays in the same plane as the bike frame). I
vary technique, depending on the circumstances, but generally lean the bike more than my body.

>
> http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/9.15.html
>
> Where among other cornering and braking considerations, countersteer is discussed:
>
> # Countersteer
>
> # Countersteer is a popular subject for people who belatedly discover or rediscover how to
> # balance. What is not apparent, is that two wheeled vehicles can be controlled ONLY by
> # countersteer, there is no other way. Unlike a car, a bicycle cannot be diverted from a straight
> # path by steering the wheel to one side. The bicycle must first be leaned in that direction by
> # steering it ever so slightly the other way. This is the means by which a broomstick is balanced
> # on the palm of the hand or a bicycle on the road. The point of support is moved beneath the
> # mass, in line with the combined forces of gravity and cornering, and it requires steering,
> # counter and otherwise. It is so obvious that runners never mention it, although football,
> # basketball, and ice hockey players conspicuously do it.
>
> Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Garyg]

BTW...perhaps we can get back to the OP's question about a good handling road tire that he can "bomb
the switchbacks" with, and gets "reasonable mileage".

Besides exhibiting your curmudgeonly bona fides, do have any recommendations for the OP? Preferably
a tire that's still in production?

GG

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Peter Cole writes:
>
> > I don't think anyone does, hence my skepticism when people claim one tire corners better than
> > another at high speed, If you don't ride to the limit, you can't know where the limit is.
>
> >> However, Jobst also claims that countersteer is not appropriate for descending, and I strongly
> >> disagree with that.
>
> > I don't think this has anything to do with tires, so I won't comment.
>
> I think Mr. G(whiz) can't read. The reference to countersteer is exactly the opposite from his
> claim. See:
>
> http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/9.15.html
>
> Where among other cornering and braking considerations, countersteer is discussed:
>
> # Countersteer
>
> # Countersteer is a popular subject for people who belatedly discover or rediscover how to
> # balance. What is not apparent, is that two wheeled vehicles can be controlled ONLY by
> # countersteer, there is no other way. Unlike a car, a bicycle cannot be diverted from a straight
> # path by steering the wheel to one side. The bicycle must first be leaned in that direction by
> # steering it ever so slightly the other way. This is the means by which a broomstick is balanced
> # on the palm of the hand or a bicycle on the road. The point of support is moved beneath the
> # mass, in line with the combined forces of gravity and cornering, and it requires steering,
> # counter and otherwise. It is so obvious that runners never mention it, although football,
> # basketball, and ice hockey players conspicuously do it.
>
> Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Hawke]

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Gary G? writes:
>
> > I've tried other tires (Conti's, Panaracer, Specialized, Forte), but they never inspired the
> > confidence I have in the Axial Pros. They're supple, accelerate quickly, and stick in the
> > corners like glue.
>
> Oh wow! That's as good a compendium of undefined bicycle jargon as I have heard in a while.
>
> To what do you attribute "accelerate quickly" and how do you feel that tires "stick in the
> corners"? How do you feel whether a tire is "supple" when it is inflated to 100psi or so?
>
> The way you say that, one might assume you drift around turns with the bicycle leaning at lower
> than 45 degrees and pedaling under full power. Oh what an imagination.
>
> Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

Jobst please be careful. He may accuse you of being "mean-spirited" and kill file you!

OH the pain! <G>

Hawke

 

[Hawke]

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Gary G? writes:
>
> > Mostly those other tires just felt a bit heavier (the Conti's and Specialized), or wore out fast
> > (Panaracer, Forte). The Conti's (2000's), and Specialized (Armadillo's) seemed to be designed
> > more for high mileage...they didn't seem to have the same amount of "tackiness" as the Axial
> > Pro's. Pushing them hard in a corner causes them to sometimes "skip" or "chatter" a bit.
>
> Heavier! Oh oh, a new tire dynamics term. Apparently it's not the weight of the tire, because we
> can measure that, but rather some characteristic having the same units as weight. Please explain
> how this "heavier" is measured or felt. I take it this is not rolling resistance, because we cab
> also measure that easily.
>
> > I certainly don't claim to be an expert, and I haven't ridden enough tires one right after the
> > other to be able to do proper side-by-side comparisons.
>
> Oh come on. That's not a valid dodge, excusing the repetition of advertising claims as personal
> evaluations. The "I'm no expert... but let me explain all about tire dynamics" ruse doesn't come
> across well to the conscious reader.
>
> > I just know that the Axial Pro's inspire my confidence. I've gone into corners too hot, where I
> > had to push the bike over farther than I anticipated. I've also had the occasional emergency
> > maneuver (potholes, critters, etc.), and they've never let me down.
>
> Vaaaaaague stuff. How do you quantify emergency maneuvers in contrast to cornering traction,
> something that can be measures in lean angle?
>
> > Last year while on the Bicycle Tour of Colorado (www.bicycletourcolo.com), I descended into
> > Ouray (sic) from Red Mtn. Pass. That's a legendary descent even in good conditions, featuring
> > steep switchbacks, and 300 ft dropoffs. When I did it, it was raining and hailing (we found out
> > later that we were 20 minutes ahead of a big mudslide that completely closed the road). The
> > Axial Pros stayed rubber side down.
>
> A true tale of derring-do. Can tire manufacturers quote you on that?
>
> > Perhaps my faith in them is "all in my mind"...but, I'm OK with that.
>
> That's called "faith in advertising".

I would have to question the "tackiness" or stickiness of any tire, I would think that road dust,
dirt, etc., would accumulate on the tire and render that a non-issue.

Of course I could be wrong but I once stayed at a Motel 6!

Hawke
>
> Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[Hawke]

"Suzy Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This has probably already been brought up in this thread, but I really
like
> Michelin Axial Carbons. I use them (in the 700x23c size) both for racing (mostly crits) and
> training, and find that they wear pretty well, but are still relatively light and supple. They
> don't come in forty seven
flavours
> like many tyres do these days, but that's ok by me. They're also about
five
> quid cheaper (17 quid at Deeside) than the Michelin Pro Race and other "race" tyres, so when they
> do wear out or cut it's not quite as painful. Oh, and they're French. That counts for a lot, in
> my book.
>
> Regards,
>
> Suzy

Jeez I use those tires also! Wow what a coincidence, we have something in common.

I like French tires, fries, girls too.

Hawke

 

[Douglas Landau]

"Peter Cole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> As for "sticking like glue", as Jobst loves to point out, nobody really pushes the limit in
> corners because the learning curve is so painful, so nobody ever really finds the limits of their
> tires. How do you distinguish better cornering ability without breaking tires loose? How do you do
> that without crashing?

Easy. Just get up some speed, coast, start to turn left, lock up the rear brake, and lean left, and
let the rear come around to the right, leaving a bananna shaped skidmark on the ground.

Yours and Jobst's logic starts out good but is incomplete. You can obtain small samples of relevant
data without crashing:

- you can lock up the wheels without turning and not crash
- you can break loose in wet or other traction-robbing conditions like dirt/sandy road surface
and not crash
- you can experience loss and regain of traction due to chatter, etc

Of course, none of these would teach nearly as much as low-siding it in a turn on clean dry
pavement, but they can provide enough data to let you learn which tire is stickier.

Doug

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Thu, 22 May 2003 18:42:37 +0000, Peter Cole wrote:

> I don't think I've ever bought Avocets that cheap. The cheapest I see now is around $25. You can
> get very nice Panaracer/IRC tires for about half that. My tires rarely wear out at the tread, not
> even the Avocets or Continentals.

I don't think the Panaracer has the same rubber as the Avocet, so they may indeed last longer.

BTW, where else do your tires wear out?

--

David L. Johnson

__o | To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or _`\(,_ | that we are to
stand by the president right or wrong, is not (_)/ (_) | only unpatriotic and servile, but is
morally treasonable to the American public. --Theodore Roosevelt

 

[Bfd]

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 22 May 2003 18:42:37 +0000, Peter Cole wrote:
>
> > I don't think I've ever bought Avocets that cheap. The cheapest I see
now is
> > around $25. You can get very nice Panaracer/IRC tires for about half
that. My
> > tires rarely wear out at the tread, not even the Avocets or
Continentals.
>
> I don't think the Panaracer has the same rubber as the Avocet, so they may indeed last longer.
>
Its my understand that Avocet tires were made by IRC; Panaracer tires are made by National Tire Co.
As I understand it, both IRC and National Tire Co. are in Japan. However, it should be noted that
the Avocet tires, starting I believe with the new Carbon 12 models, are now made in Korea!....