Choosing tire width in relation to your body weight?

[TheDL]

Your new topic, go!

 

[daveornee]

Your new topic, go!

Makes sense to me... and you should also consider surfaces you ride on and amount of shock absorbtion you want/need.

 

[TheDL]

Your new topic, go!

Here's what inspired this topic; taken from the "opinoins on fitting" portion of rivendellbicycles.com.

" The more you weigh or carry, and the rougher the roads you ride, the fatter your tire should be. Also, tires have a huge effect on how your bike rides and what sort of surfaces you can comfortably and practically ride on. In this regard, nothing else even comes close to tires. A good general guide is:

700x25 or smaller: For riders under 185 pounds, and smooth roads. Drawbacks: A tire this skinny has to be ridden at higher pressure (harder) in order to protect the rim from bumps and the inner tube from pinch flats. Because the tire is smaller, it tends to be lighter, which is good for acceleration and climbing, and reducing rolling resistance. But the differences here are minimal, and you give up a lot in comfort and versatility. If you don’t race, there’s no reason to ride skinny tires—unless your bike won’t accept anything else, which is often the case with today’s poorly designed bikes.

700x28: For riders up to 220 pounds on smooth roads, and riders up to 190 lbs. on rough surfaces with the odd pothole. In other words, it’s a good, all-purpose size for normal-person, real world riding. Even featherweight riders are better off on this size. The slight increase in weight and rolling resistance is made up for manifold by the greater volume of air, which allows the tire to be ridden at lower pressure, for more comfort on any surface.

700x32 to 700x35: For loaded touring, for heavyweight riders (over 220lbs) on even rough roads; and for sub-200 pounders on any surface up to and including most relatively rock-free dirt roads and trails. Granted, this is still a lot smaller than a mountain bike tire, but a skilled rider using good judgment can reasonably ride most fire trails on a tire of this size. There is less traction and less shock-absorption than in a Big & Puffy mountain bike tire, but for many riders, the ultimate thrill is riding road bikes off-road, and these are the tires to do that on. Most modern road bikes won’t accept tires this big, though. (Ours do.)

700x38: This is the skinniest of the non-huge tires—any fatter, and the tire crosses the line between “road tire” and “other.” A great size for loaded touring, commuting, and riding road bikes on fire trails. Most bikes that can accommodate a tire this big have cantilever (or at least not side pull) brakes. (Our road bikes that have standard-reach side pulls can swallow a 700x37, though.)

Fatter than 700x38: Rough road touring and off-road use. Of course, tires of this size also make fine commuting tires, offering an extra measure of durability and flat resistance. A good choice when you don’t mind the extra weight—and many times you shouldn’t!"

 

[dhk]

Here's what inspired this topic; taken from the "opinoins on fitting" portion of rivendellbicycles.com.

" The more you weigh or carry, and the rougher the roads you ride, the fatter your tire should be. Also, tires have a huge effect on how your bike rides and what sort of surfaces you can comfortably and practically ride on. In this regard, nothing else even comes close to tires. A good general guide is:

700x25 or smaller: For riders under 185 pounds, and smooth roads. Drawbacks: A tire this skinny has to be ridden at higher pressure (harder) in order to protect the rim from bumps and the inner tube from pinch flats. Because the tire is smaller, it tends to be lighter, which is good for acceleration and climbing, and reducing rolling resistance. But the differences here are minimal, and you give up a lot in comfort and versatility. If you don’t race, there’s no reason to ride skinny tires—unless your bike won’t accept anything else, which is often the case with today’s poorly designed bikes.

700x28: For riders up to 220 pounds on smooth roads, and riders up to 190 lbs. on rough surfaces with the odd pothole. In other words, it’s a good, all-purpose size for normal-person, real world riding. Even featherweight riders are better off on this size. The slight increase in weight and rolling resistance is made up for manifold by the greater volume of air, which allows the tire to be ridden at lower pressure, for more comfort on any surface.

700x32 to 700x35: For loaded touring, for heavyweight riders (over 220lbs) on even rough roads; and for sub-200 pounders on any surface up to and including most relatively rock-free dirt roads and trails. Granted, this is still a lot smaller than a mountain bike tire, but a skilled rider using good judgment can reasonably ride most fire trails on a tire of this size. There is less traction and less shock-absorption than in a Big & Puffy mountain bike tire, but for many riders, the ultimate thrill is riding road bikes off-road, and these are the tires to do that on. Most modern road bikes won’t accept tires this big, though. (Ours do.)

700x38: This is the skinniest of the non-huge tires—any fatter, and the tire crosses the line between “road tire” and “other.” A great size for loaded touring, commuting, and riding road bikes on fire trails. Most bikes that can accommodate a tire this big have cantilever (or at least not side pull) brakes. (Our road bikes that have standard-reach side pulls can swallow a 700x37, though.)

Fatter than 700x38: Rough road touring and off-road use. Of course, tires of this size also make fine commuting tires, offering an extra measure of durability and flat resistance. A good choice when you don’t mind the extra weight—and many times you shouldn’t!"

Remember Rivendall is coming at this tire size issue from their prospective. I certainly wouldn't label all bikes that don't accept larger than 25 mm tires as "poorly designed". Believe they might be just a bit self-serving in their recommendations.

Unless you weigh over maybe 220 lbs, I'd say 23 mm tires are fine. Heavier guys will need more pressure, up to max on the sidewall. I'm 170 lbs, and use 23's at 100 psi. Have ridden over lots of potholes and RR tracks and never had a problem with them.

 

[tafi]

Remember Rivendall is coming at this tire size issue from their prospective. I certainly wouldn't label all bikes that don't accept larger than 25 mm tires as "poorly designed". Believe they might be just a bit self-serving in their recommendations.

Unless you weigh over maybe 220 lbs, I'd say 23 mm tires are fine. Heavier guys will need more pressure, up to max on the sidewall. I'm 170 lbs, and use 23's at 100 psi. Have ridden over lots of potholes and RR tracks and never had a problem with them.

23 mm is generally cnsidered the fastest type of tyre takng rolling resistance into consideration. Tyres smaller than 22mm need plenty of pressure and are thus harder and unless the course is smooth as a baby's bum provide a rougher "dead" feeling ride.
Of course the characteristics also depend a lot on how thick or stiff the sidewalls of the tyre are and, to a lesser extent, the length and thickness of spokes used.