Tire weight and speed performance

Discussion in 'Recumbent bicycles' started by Bandjhughes, Mar 10, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bandjhughes

    Bandjhughes Guest

    I've signed up for a century next month. I haven't competed in a bike race nor ridden a century in
    almost 2 decades, and have no thoughts of being near the front. However I do have my own personal
    goal and I'm wondering if it is worth changing tubes in my V-Rex. Where I live the roads are full
    of goat-head thorns (not to mention broken glass), so I ride with tire liners, thorn resistant
    (thick and heavy) tubes, plus green slime. Does anyone have a guess on how much this excess weight
    in the tires affects average speed? I figure, as a minimum, I'll take out the tire liners to save
    some weight.

    Brian
     
    Tags:


  2. Hi, Brian, I use Airfree Tires and they don't seem to affect my average speed.

    Extra weight affects your acceleration, not speed.

    You'd be a lot better to use a tire/tube setup that will allow you to enjoy your ride and complete
    it successfully without having to sit around fixing flats.

    Lewis.

    http://home.earthlink.net/~limeylew/index.html

    .........................

    [email protected] (bandjhughes) wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > I've signed up for a century next month. I haven't competed in a bike race nor ridden a century in
    > almost 2 decades, and have no thoughts of being near the front. However I do have my own personal
    > goal and I'm wondering if it is worth changing tubes in my V-Rex. Where I live the roads are full
    > of goat-head thorns (not to mention broken glass), so I ride with tire liners, thorn resistant
    > (thick and heavy) tubes, plus green slime. Does anyone have a guess on how much this excess weight
    > in the tires affects average speed? I figure, as a minimum, I'll take out the tire liners to save
    > some weight.
    >
    > Brian
     
  3. Von

    Von Guest

    [email protected] (bandjhughes) wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > I've signed up for a century next month. I haven't competed in a bike race nor ridden a century in
    > almost 2 decades, and have no thoughts of being near the front. However I do have my own personal
    > goal and I'm wondering if it is worth changing tubes in my V-Rex. Where I live the roads are full
    > of goat-head thorns (not to mention broken glass), so I ride with tire liners, thorn resistant
    > (thick and heavy) tubes, plus green slime. Does anyone have a guess on how much this excess weight
    > in the tires affects average speed? I figure, as a minimum, I'll take out the tire liners to save
    > some weight.
    >
    > Brian

    How much time would you lose fixing 2 or 3 flats? Say lighter weight tubes sans liners saves you 10
    seconds a mi.; 1,000 seconds or around 17 min.. I would rather be a bit slower than work on
    flats,plus a century ride is not a race.Enjoy the ride and forget about speed.First century in 20
    years,If I were you I'd pace myself for my first few long rides. How do you like the V-REX? Von(It's
    not what you ride,but that you ride)
     
  4. Rcpinto

    Rcpinto Guest

    >Where I live the roads are full of goat-head thorns (not to mention broken glass), so I ride with
    >tire liners, thorn resistant (thick and heavy) tubes, plus green slime. Does anyone have a guess on
    >how much this excess weight in the tires affects average speed? I figure, as a minimum, I'll take
    >out the tire liners to save some weight.
    >
    >Brian
    >

    Hi Brian

    In this case, the weight is a very distant second factor to the rolling resistance increase
    in your tires. Depending on your average speed, and the rolling resistance increase from
    the heavier tubes, liners, slime etc....I would not be surprised to see speed losses of as
    much as 25%.

    However, as others have pointed out, 0 MPH with a flat is the slowest. It sounds like you have
    some really tough conditions.

    Rich Pinto
    Bacchetta Bicycles
     
  5. La

    La Guest

    Rich, Really. 25%. Sounds kinda off the cuff to me. Really, Rich. Lon HepCat

    > In this case, the weight is a very distant second factor to the rolling resistance increase
    > in your tires. Depending on your average speed, and the rolling resistance increase from the
    > heavier tubes, liners, slime etc....I would not be surprised to see speed losses of as much
    > as 25%.
    >
    > However, as others have pointed out, 0 MPH with a flat is the slowest. It sounds like you have
    > some really tough conditions.
    >
    > Rich Pinto
    > Bacchetta Bicycles
    >
     
  6. Al Kubeluis

    Al Kubeluis Guest

    Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and slime has shown slower speeds
    of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about 12%.
    --
    ~~~al.kubeluis..md.usa.earth.sun.milkyway.virgo.universe..corsa~~~

    "LA" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Rich, Really. 25%. Sounds kinda off the cuff to me. Really, Rich. Lon HepCat
    >
    >
    > > In this case, the weight is a very distant second factor to the
    rolling
    > > resistance increase in your tires. Depending on your average speed, and
    the
    > > rolling resistance increase from the heavier tubes, liners, slime
    etc....I
    > > would not be surprised to see speed losses of as much as 25%.
    > >
    > > However, as others have pointed out, 0 MPH with a flat is the
    slowest. It
    > > sounds like you have some really tough conditions.
    > >
    > > Rich Pinto
    > > Bacchetta Bicycles
    > >
    > >
    > >
     
  7. Dave Miller

    Dave Miller Guest

    On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:09:34 -0500, "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and slime has shown slower speeds
    >of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about 12%.

    Al, What do you classify as "performance" & "nonperformance" tires? I've used Vreds and Comets on my
    VRex and it's time to replace again.

    Thanks
     
  8. Al Kubeluis

    Al Kubeluis Guest

    Hi Dave, My experience has been that wider, heavier, treadier, lower psi tires are slower than less
    wide, lighter, slicker, higher psi tires. Where I became first really aware of big effect of tires
    on speed was on my Rocket. Because I was getting flats on Comets, I went to a tire whose name
    escapes me now. But is was an off-road 2'' wide beefy 60 psi tire. Then I went to various better
    road performance tires for Rocket, V2 and Corsa, as Primo Racers, Kenda Koncept, Hutchison Carbon
    Comp Tech+. Flats have not been a problem on performance tires now that I watch road better. (Okay,
    I've just jinxed myself as a lot of luck is involved.) I really like Hutchison above. It is a light
    folding tire and I carry a spare one.
    --
    ~~~al.kubeluis..md.usa.earth.sun.milkyway.virgo.universe..corsa~~~

    <Dave Miller> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:09:34 -0500, "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and
    slime
    > >has shown slower speeds of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about
    12%.
    >
    >
    > Al, What do you classify as "performance" & "nonperformance" tires? I've used Vreds and Comets on
    > my VRex and it's time to replace again.
    >
    > Thanks
     
  9. David, I ride with Al quite often. Well I did till the weather got so lousy. When Al first started
    benting he went for durability vs. speed. I always went for speed. Al paid the price. I believe that
    he is refering to his use of Airfree tires, HookWorms and Ashpalts etc. Also some IRC Metro tires of
    various widths. He currently uses Hutchenson PRO lite tires as I do. I also run Verdenstein
    Fortezzas. For the 406 rim I like the Comp Pool. I have also used the 406/559 Schwalbe Stevelo less
    durable but fassst. Please take all tire recommendations with a grain of salt. Why? Because IMO
    conditions dictate tire choice. My riding is normally on very well maintained roads with no potholes
    and advoidable hazards. I can use a light, less durable tire/tube combo. Incidently, The last tire
    problem I had was last year, my Hutchenson Top Lite 559 came apart. My fault It had over 4K on it.
    Prior to that it was a Stevelo 559 on my V-REX a piece of glass the size of a glazier point. Asking
    a product to perform in a enviornment that its not suited to and expecting not to have problems is
    well...IMO unreasonable. You tires should suit the conditions and use. Having two sets of
    wheels/tires is oftem my recommended way to go. Many of my DF and bent customers that commute and
    compete do this. Beefy wheels with 25/28 kevlar belted tire during the week and Zipps/Rolfs with
    20/23 mm tires on the fast rides with the hammerheads. Your choices of performance tires are also
    wheel size reliant. Some sized have lots of choices some don't.

    Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and Sports,
    Inc 1-800-586-6645 <Dave Miller> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:09:34 -0500, "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and
    slime
    > >has shown slower speeds of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about
    12%.
    >
    >
    > Al, What do you classify as "performance" & "nonperformance" tires? I've used Vreds and Comets on
    > my VRex and it's time to replace again.
    >
    > Thanks
     
  10. Al Kubeluis

    Al Kubeluis Guest

    Jude, "Al paid the price. I believe that he is referring to his use of Airfree tires, HookWorms and
    Ashpalts etc. Also some IRC Metro tires of various widths." You're right. I blotted these clunkers
    out of my mind. But you're also right that best tire depends on road conditions. On bad roads,
    especially roads with thorns mentioned by some Texas riders, Airfrees would be my choice.
    --
    ~~~al.kubeluis..md.usa.earth.sun.milkyway.virgo.universe..corsa~~~

    "Jude T. McGloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > David, I ride with Al quite often. Well I did till the weather got so lousy. When Al first started
    > benting he went for durability vs. speed. I always went for speed. Al paid the price. I believe
    > that he is refering to his use of Airfree tires, HookWorms and Ashpalts etc. Also some IRC Metro
    > tires of various widths. He currently uses Hutchenson PRO lite tires as I do. I also run
    > Verdenstein Fortezzas. For the 406 rim I like the Comp Pool. I have also used the 406/559 Schwalbe
    > Stevelo less durable but fassst. Please take all tire recommendations with a grain of salt. Why?
    > Because IMO conditions dictate tire choice. My riding is normally on very well maintained roads
    > with no potholes and advoidable hazards. I can use a light, less durable tire/tube combo.
    > Incidently, The last tire problem I
    had
    > was last year, my Hutchenson Top Lite 559 came apart. My fault It had over 4K on it. Prior to that
    > it was a Stevelo 559 on my V-REX a piece of glass the size of a glazier point. Asking a product to
    > perform in a enviornment that its not suited to and expecting not to have problems is well...IMO
    > unreasonable. You tires should suit the conditions and use. Having two sets of wheels/tires is
    oftem
    > my recommended way to go. Many of my DF and bent customers that commute
    and
    > compete do this. Beefy wheels with 25/28 kevlar belted tire during the
    week
    > and Zipps/Rolfs with 20/23 mm tires on the fast rides with the
    hammerheads.
    > Your choices of performance tires are also wheel size reliant. Some sized have lots of
    > choices some don't.
    >
    > Jude....///Bacchetta AERO St. Michaels and Tilghman Island.. Maryland Wheel Doctor Cycle and
    > Sports, Inc 1-800-586-6645 <Dave Miller> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:09:34 -0500, "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and
    > slime
    > > >has shown slower speeds of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about
    > 12%.
    > >
    > >
    > > Al, What do you classify as "performance" & "nonperformance" tires? I've used Vreds and Comets
    > > on my VRex and it's time to replace again.
    > >
    > > Thanks
     
  11. La

    La Guest

    Rich, I am truly amazed by these figures! The correlation of increased rolling resistance and mph
    speed loss seems a bit hazy. If a 25% increase of MPH were possible by trading my Marathons with
    polyurethane liners for the original Primos, then why didn't I feel the difference when I made the
    change to the Marathons? I certainly didn't loose 25% in MPH. I appreciate the reference and that
    you so earnestly responded to my post. But, again, really?

    Lon

    RCPINTO wrote:

    > >Rich, Really. 25%. Sounds kinda off the cuff to me. Really, Rich. Lon HepCat
    > >
    >
    > Lon
    >
    > Yes, it was a bit off the cuff and from memory, but I've since looked some figures up for you.
    >
    > As I mentioned, it all depends on your speed. If you are traveling faster, far less of the
    > total drag % is rolling resistance. Here is an example that will give you an idea of the
    > potential speed losses from increased rolling resistance at high speed (25MPH baseline)
    >
    > http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hadland/rolrec10a.pdf
    >
    >
    > Note the losses from the slowest tire to the fastest in the last column,
    > 182/1440sec, or 12.6%, even at this high speed...and neglecting the large increase in frontal area
    > and aero drag of the different tires tested.
    >
    > If you drop the speed to the 15 or 16MPH averages that many report here, 25% speed losses
    > after adding a tire liner, heavier tube, and Slime are not at all unrealistic. Instead of RR
    > being 10 or 15% of the total power required at 25MPH in the example above, it can easily rise
    > to 30-40% of the total power required, depending on rider speed and the rolling resistance of
    > the tires.
    >
    > A figure I found in "HiTech Cycling" by Burke has a "polyurethane liner" increasing the
    > rolling resistance of a given tire 235% (.0023 to .0054), add to that the thicker tube and
    > Slime, and speeds more in keeping with the average recumbent rider out there, and 25% speed
    > losses are very possible.
    >
    > Rich Pinto
    > Bacchetta Bicycles
     
  12. Tiresavers may work against goatheads - they brush off the thorn before it can work its way through
    the tread.

    "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > Hi Dave, My experience has been that wider, heavier, treadier, lower psi tires are slower than
    > less wide, lighter, slicker, higher psi tires. Where I became first really aware of big effect of
    > tires on speed was on my Rocket. Because I was getting flats on Comets, I went to a tire whose
    > name escapes me now. But is was an off-road 2'' wide beefy 60 psi tire. Then I went to various
    > better road performance tires for Rocket, V2 and Corsa, as Primo Racers, Kenda Koncept, Hutchison
    > Carbon Comp Tech+. Flats have not been a problem on performance tires now that I watch road
    > better. (Okay, I've just jinxed myself as a lot of luck is involved.) I really like Hutchison
    > above. It is a light folding tire and I carry a spare one.
    > --
    > ~~~al.kubeluis..md.usa.earth.sun.milkyway.virgo.universe..corsa~~~
    >
    > <Dave Miller> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:09:34 -0500, "Al Kubeluis" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Lon, My experience with non-performance tires even without liners and
    > slime
    > > >has shown slower speeds of about 2 mph in 16-17 mph range. That's about
    > 12%.
    > >
    > >
    > > Al, What do you classify as "performance" & "nonperformance" tires? I've used Vreds and Comets
    > > on my VRex and it's time to replace again.
    > >
    > > Thanks
     
  13. R2D2

    R2D2 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've gone directly from Primo Comets to Continental Grand Prix's, from Primo Comets to Kenda Kwests to G. P's, from Grand Prix's to Michelin Axial Pros, from many other tires to many other tires.

    If you want a great mix of speed, handling, and durability, then the Conti's are front and center. Like I've posted before, I've never flatted a Conti in the past 15,000 miles! I ride pavement, granite and limestone trails, and deer paths. I know I'm bucking the odds, but it's the honest truth. They aren't balloon tire comfy, but I gladly trade that for the speed, grip, and durability.

    As far as stability goes, my Bacchetta Giro handles so well that the Grand Prix's don't give me any problems off-road, unless I get into sand (I wouldn't ride them on bark though).

    It is really something to slap a pair of these on and take your next ride. It's like being freed from a ball and chain. You have to try it. I increased my average cruising speed by 1 1/2 to 2 MPH going from Primo Comets to the G.P.

    But that's just my personal opinion on tires (hey, you asked for it :) )

    R2
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...