Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

renehersecycles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 419 posts

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#341

Post by sam_lowry_ »

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #143
jiscariot wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My only complaint about the gravel trend is that at the entry (and mid) level they are often using pretty crappy disc brakes when rim brakes would have been a better choice in 90% of cases. When they are hydraulic, they are a dream to use, but with a cable you really lose the brake feel.

Ha! I only figured it out after buying Kona Rove NRB, which is not even an entry-level bike, but it turned out to have disk brakes and extremely fragile paintwork. It served me well, but I am still somewhat cautious when descending since then.

Mechanical disk brakes, I mean.

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#342

Post by Xylakant »

jacquesm wrote: post #325
Xylakant wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should also keep in mind that the articles are slightly dated, so technical improvements may have changed the equation. For example in the comments thread for the disc brake article, people mention that they cannot find disc rotors with sufficient size for tandems. With the rise of cargo and electric bikes, disc brakes with pretty massive stopping power have come to market. Mine can safely stop the bike, me, plus…

On tandems the problem hasn't been stopping power for years (every since we had hydraulic brakes this has been a solved problem). The bigger issue on a tandem is that when you're going downhill you will end up overheating your brake, whatever kind of system you are using. There is just too much kinetic energy to get rid of as heat for your normal brake system to be able to deal with.

The kinetic energy depends on weight and speed. Cargo bikes easily come into that range, especially the fast 45km/h electric ones. Energy dissipation depends on the size of the rotor and sizes have been increasing substantially. When I bought mine, the standard disk size was 160mm, I opted for the upgrade to 180mm. The current generation of Riese-Müller Load uses dedicated cargo bike brakes with thicker rotors (2.3mm instead of 1.8) and a 223mm diameter on the rear wheel, 160mm on the front. Those brakes have substantially more staying power before they fade.

Edit: Generally, developments for cargo bikes seem to help tandems and tandem developments benefit cargo bikes. There's now an option to use the tandem version of the Rohloff internal geared hub for RM cargo bikes. That's a serious upgrade to all previous internal hubs, especially since you can combine it with a belt drive. It's a tiny bit expensive, though...

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#343

Post by JNRowe »

pverghese wrote: post #336
JNRowe wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinarello bikes, Shimano groupsets, Fizik saddles, Kask helmets, Castelli kit, Oakley glasses, and all the other things you see surrounding the fat guy at the coffee shop on a Sunday morning ;)

None of them are the products of Ineos.

All of them, and many more than I managed to think of, are also sponsors of the team¹.

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ineos_Grenadiers#Sponsorship_a...

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#344

Post by reubenmorais »

TheAlchemist wrote: post #113
brianwawok wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does your gravel bike have road slicks? Is your geometry the same, i.e. your reach and drop is the same?

No. Fair point indeed - the tires are not the only difference. I suspect they are one of the biggest though (based on subjective feeling - for what it’s worth).

It's almost physically impossible for the tires to be a bigger difference than geometry (and thus your position), specially at faster speeds as you mentioned, because aerodynamics quickly dominate the overall resistance you're fighting to keep your speed.

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#345

Post by mymythisisthis »

stinos wrote: post #299
Swizec wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my neck of Europe those bikes reached peak popularity in the 90's and early 00's. We called them "city mountain bikes". Their distinguishing feature was that a "mountain bike" comes with gears (normal bikes don't), which was very popular. The city edition came with fenders, luggage racks, a nice bell, stand, etc. Big fat tyres, comfy geometry. The tires usually had a slick strip in the middle and grooves on the si…

These aren't the types of bikes meant by the one you're replying to, I think: these are basically mountain bikes with modifications for day to day road use. The other are gravel bikes (which is what I assume means the ones used in cyclocross i.e. a sturdier version of a road bike) modified for day to day road use. But yes these citybikes were very popular in Europe.

Touring bike is my favourite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touring_bicycle#/media/File:Lo...

Very similar to cycle cross (a wide range of gears) https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Fo...

The hybrid has straight handlebars https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/AE...

Mountain bikes, gravel bikes, are slow. Gearing is for climbing a mountain. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/No...

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#346

Post by ehnto »

blakblakarak wrote: post #327
ehnto wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely still available. That segment of the industry has exploded. Another great manufacturer for touring/adventure bikes is Bombtrack. Many touring/adventure bikes will double as way better commuter than a road bike I feel. They are set up for comfort, long hours in the saddle, and usually have with luggage mounts.

My 15 year old Surly Crosscheck is probably my most ridden bike - it was one of the 'first' gravel bikes (they've been making them for 20 years) before they really became a thing. The cantilever brakes are rubbish but that just makes it more fun.

I have a bike with cantilevers too, I admire their robustness but yep, definitely not the quickest way to stop in a hurry.

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#347

Post by minikomi »

blakblakarak wrote: post #327
ehnto wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely still available. That segment of the industry has exploded. Another great manufacturer for touring/adventure bikes is Bombtrack. Many touring/adventure bikes will double as way better commuter than a road bike I feel. They are set up for comfort, long hours in the saddle, and usually have with luggage mounts.

My 15 year old Surly Crosscheck is probably my most ridden bike - it was one of the 'first' gravel bikes (they've been making them for 20 years) before they really became a thing. The cantilever brakes are rubbish but that just makes it more fun.

If you haven't, and have the budget to do so, try a set of Paul Components mini motos. Fantastic brakes.

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#348

Post by londons_explore »

asdff wrote: post #224
londons_explore wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real test for a city is how many hypodermic needles and smashed bottles can you ride over before being stranded by a puncture in a not-so-nice area of town at night...

This is why I ride gatorskins

Hypodermic needles go straight through gatorskins.

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#349

Post by mymythisisthis »

sliken wrote: post #295
darkwater wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a city rider to commute, pads alignment was a real PITA and the main reason that made me switch to disc brakes. I was always feeling braked and spending more effort than really needed because one pad was touching the rim. With disc brakes that feeling disappeared and never came back, although you still need to do some maintenance from time to time.

Heh, yes, less maintenance, but also less finicky. Brake pads on rim brakes are a nightmare. They follow a 3-d arc as they approach the rim, which is itself a very complicated 3d surface. Ideally the front edge of the brake pad hits slightly before the rear edge, to avoid squeal... but not too much or it will engage too softly. Even minor wear changes the engagement point. Cables need maintenance, they wear, get kink…

What about cable over fluid disc brakes for a commute bicycle?

Re: Myths in cycling: wider tires are slower

#350

Post by alanfranz »

japanuspus wrote: post #102

A great source of data on bike tires is [0], which has been doing systematic tests on a dedicated test rig for many years and appears to be independent of any tire manufacturer. After finding this site a few years back, I bought a high-pressure floor pump and Schwalbe Marathon tires for all the commuter bicycles in the family. Haven't seen a flat tire since, even though we have four bikes on the road almost every day…

I love Marathon Supreme tires. They're lighter but I haven't seen a puncture on them; on the other side I experienced breaks in their sides (probably because of clipping a sidewalk or other object) twice.

I usually ride 32mm or 35mm. You can reach a decent pressure and still ride comfortably.

Post reply on HN