Buying tires

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 29 Nov 2006 18:20:38
From: OughtFour
Subject: Buying tires

On impulse I bought a cheapo tire in my last Nashbar order. I'm glad I did
because I needed it unexpectedly. Now I'm wondering, though, how to shop
more intelligently.

I ride an old steel bike with 27" wheels, which narrows things down to begin
with. Even so there are a bewildering array of options--kevlar vs. wire
beads, water-shedding treads, kevlar belts, etc.

The newer tire is noisier than the one it replaced, and if noise corelates
to friction that can't be good. Or can it?

The tire it replaced was an IRC HP 90, which had a raised ridge about 1/4 of
an inch wide in the middle of the tread. Is this useful? Should I just stick
with that?

The IRC is a heavy tire (about half a kg). Usually I don't care about weight
(if I did I'd get a lighter bike), but tires spin and affect gyroscopic and
centrifugal forces so perhaps it's worth paying attention to. Does it
matter?

I ride medium and longer recreational rides, not in the city but on roads of
varying conditions.

I'd be grateful for explanations and advice that will help me make the right
choices. What do I need to know?

Thanks!

Date: 30 Nov 2006 17:24:30
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Rex Kerr wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > If you shop MO/internet carefully, you can find Panaracer Pasela 27x1
> > 1/8 for as little as $10. A very nice tire, wire bead. They also have a
> > kevlar-belted "Tourguard" model if frequent flats are a problem. Try a
> > pair sometime, I think you'll like 'em - and it's a pretty cheap
> > experiment.
>
> I've got those on my commuting bike... about 1000 miles on them, first
> flat in about 300 miles, and lately about one per week on the rear
> (which is showing more wear). I think it's time to consider something
> different.

Hmmmm....I've been using "plain vanilla" Paselas in various sizes
(700x28/32/35) on two bikes for several years. One flat (a pinch flat,
Mea Culpa) in ~ 9k miles. Decent tread life, too. If you ride in rough
conditions, you might want to consider Panaracer T-Servs, which were
developed for urban messangers. I believe rec.bicycles.* regular k
Hickey uses these with some success.

Date: 30 Nov 2006 16:39:28
From: Rex Kerr
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> If you shop MO/internet carefully, you can find Panaracer Pasela 27x1
> 1/8 for as little as $10. A very nice tire, wire bead. They also have a
> kevlar-belted "Tourguard" model if frequent flats are a problem. Try a
> pair sometime, I think you'll like 'em - and it's a pretty cheap
> experiment.

I've got those on my commuting bike... about 1000 miles on them, first
flat in about 300 miles, and lately about one per week on the rear
(which is showing more wear). I think it's time to consider something
different.

Date: 30 Nov 2006 17:09:14
From: OughtFour
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Thanks, everyone, for both the general comments and the specific
recomendations. They are exactly what I was hoping to learn.

Some of the things I walk away with:

--Kevlar bead mostly useful for if you want to fold up a tire and carry
it around on a ride, otherwise not.

--Kevlar belt adds some protection at the expense of some speed and
responsiveness.

--Tread mostly harmless but useless.

--Raised ridges are bad, even if quiet.

--I might notice better performance from a lighter tire, but I might
not.

I also discovered that Nashbar lists at least one of the recommended
tires at half the weight as elsewhere. Hmm...

Thanks again everybody!

Date: 30 Nov 2006 23:32:02
From: nash
Subject: Re: Buying tires

I guess the OP has chosen already but here is something new and of interest
http://www.biketiresdirect.com/productdetail.asp?p=WTMRU&tnum=4430495&c=5903892

Does not say in the description but they are tubeless and foldable and at
$33 that is comparable to any foldable tire. They may not be as sluggish as
they use to be is what I suspect also.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 02:29:28
From: oughtfour
Subject: Re: Buying tires

nash wrote:
> I guess the OP has chosen already but here is something new and of interest
> http://www.biketiresdirect.com/productdetail.asp?p=WTMRU&tnum=4430495&c=5903892
>
> Does not say in the description but they are tubeless and foldable and at
> $33 that is comparable to any foldable tire. They may not be as sluggish as
> they use to be is what I suspect also.

Nope, I'm a procrastinator, haven't bought a thing yet. But these are
not for me and my old road bike, whatever their virtues.

Date: 29 Nov 2006 21:55:43
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Buying tires

I guess I made more of a tire endorsement than a real reply so here
goes:

>On impulse I bought a cheapo tire in my last Nashbar order. I'm glad I did
>because I needed it unexpectedly. Now I'm wondering, though, how to shop
>more intelligently.

Hey, grabbing cheap tires on sale at Nashbar is very intelligent!
Nothing wrong with having a few spares hanging in the garage you got
for cheap.

>I ride an old steel bike with 27" wheels, which narrows things down to begin
>with. Even so there are a bewildering array of options--kevlar vs. wire
>beads, water-shedding treads, kevlar belts, etc.

Treads are insignificant except when they're too aggressive for road
tires, and cause "squirm" and thus energy loss through friction. Tread
is mostly decorative on road tires. Plenty of posts to search about
this.

>The newer tire is noisier than the one it replaced, and if noise corelates
>to friction that can't be good. Or can it?

Tire noise usually means excessive squirm and friction for sure.

>The tire it replaced was an IRC HP 90, which had a raised ridge about 1/4 of
>an inch wide in the middle of the tread. Is this useful? Should I just stick
>with that?

Ugh. Raised ridge tires are to be avoided in my opinion. it's just bad
design. They also make cornering a bit wierd feeling.

>The IRC is a heavy tire (about half a kg). Usually I don't care about weight
>(if I did I'd get a lighter bike), but tires spin and affect gyroscopic and
>centrifugal forces so perhaps it's worth paying attention to. Does it
>matter?

Tire weight and sidewall suppleness make a huge impact on feel,
cornering, and efficiency. A few grams here or there matter little to a
recreational cyclist, but a 150g difference is pretty palpable when
accelerating.

>I ride medium and longer recreational rides, not in the city but on roads of
>varying conditions.

>I'd be grateful for explanations and advice that will help me make the right
>choices. What do I need to know?

That there is a lot of tire hype. Get something in a width that's
appropriate. 1 1/8" for basic fairly fast riding, 1 1/4" if you want a
little more comfort on rougher roads.

I'm on the fence about kevlar/aramid belting but tires I've ridden with
it certainly *seem* to get fewer flats.

I still recommend those Vittorias.

Date: 30 Nov 2006 15:22:09
From: nash
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Even with kevlar belted tires I still have to put tuffys in.
Surrey rarely cleans it's streets and not where I am riding anyway. The
bike trail that runs east west is always littered with glass and I end up
cleaning it up myself. Needless to say I do not take the whole route since
I know where the worst part is now.
Kevlar or tuffys is better than nothing.

Date: 29 Nov 2006 20:06:09
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Date: 29 Nov 2006 18:47:25
From: peter
Subject: Re: Buying tires

OughtFour wrote:
> On impulse I bought a cheapo tire in my last Nashbar order. I'm glad I did
> because I needed it unexpectedly. Now I'm wondering, though, how to shop
> more intelligently.
>
> I ride an old steel bike with 27" wheels, which narrows things down to begin
> with. Even so there are a bewildering array of options--kevlar vs. wire
> beads, water-shedding treads, kevlar belts, etc.
>
> The newer tire is noisier than the one it replaced, and if noise corelates
> to friction that can't be good. Or can it?

There's some correlation (big knobby tires are both noisy and have high
rolling resistance), but it's not really a good way to tell. A raised
center ridge is quiet but actually leads to increased rolling
resistance due to squirming of the rubber in that ridge in the contact
patch region and quite a bit of the rolling resistance is due to
hysteresis losses in the sidewall area of the tire which doesn't
contribute to the noise level.
>
> The tire it replaced was an IRC HP 90, which had a raised ridge about 1/4 of
> an inch wide in the middle of the tread. Is this useful?

No, it would be better if it were just a slick tread without any
pattern or raised ridge.

> Should I just stick with that?

Tires wear out fairly frequently so it's worth a bit of experimentation
with different types to see which you like best. I've had good
experience with the Nashbar house-brand Prima tires (made by Cheng
Shin). The sidewalls seem pretty flexible, tread life is decent, and
the tread pattern isn't too pronounced although I'd prefer them to be
slicks. When on sale they cost about $6 and I haven't noticed any real
disadvantage compared to much more expensive models.

> The IRC is a heavy tire (about half a kg). Usually I don't care about weight
> (if I did I'd get a lighter bike), but tires spin and affect gyroscopic and
> centrifugal forces so perhaps it's worth paying attention to. Does it
> matter?

I wouldn't worry about gyroscopic effects which are pretty small
anyway. The added weight usually isn't that critical by itself
(especially if your bike isn't very light and isn't used
competitively), but the extra material that creates the weight can also
increase rolling resistance by making the tire hard to flex and
therefore increasing energy losses as the tire is compressed in the
area of the contact patch. So I'm less concerned with weight due to a
wire bead (which doesn't affect rolling resistance) than with weight
due to thick rubber on the sidewalls (which does increase resistance).
>
> I ride medium and longer recreational rides, not in the city but on roads of
> varying conditions.
>
> I'd be grateful for explanations and advice that will help me make the right
> choices. What do I need to know?

For riding on paved surfaces I'd go for the minimum amount of tread
pattern (optimally using slicks). The tread pattern doesn't do
anything useful on hard surfaces where it doesn't dig in and
hydroplaning isn't of concern at bicycle speeds and tire pressures.
Kevlar beads allow the tire to be folded and make it ginally lighter
but usually cost more. Based on your description it doesn't seem that
they'd usually be worthwhile for you. Kevlar belts provide better
protection against some types of flats in exchange for higher cost,
higher rolling resistance, and slightly greater weight. The tradeoff
would involve how many flats you get that are of a type that could be
prevented by a belt layer and how much you value a bit better
performance vs. the aggravation of getting flats. I'd be more likely
to consider the belts worthwhile for commuting where it's better to
tradeoff a little speed in exchange for having a very low chance of
getting a flat.

Date: 29 Nov 2006 12:48:39
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Date: 29 Nov 2006 12:22:14
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Buying tires

Date: 29 Nov 2006 13:32:53
From: Ernie Willson
Subject: Re: Buying tires