On 6/20/2025 4:34 PM, cyclintom wrote:
If you scan the rolling resistance chart all of the lowest
rolling resistance is on 25 mm tires. What that implies is
that the drum is entirely out of sync with the real world
since wider tires with lower pressures are both faster and
less likely to puncture. It is time fore the rolling
resistance people to redesign their setups to have more
connection to reality. My speed after two weeks off of the
bike with 32 mm tires is half a mph faster than riding a
lot on 28's
I'm going to shock people by agreeing with you on one point.
I do think the current test rigs for rolling resistance need
serious improvement. I've mentioned that before.
On 6/20/2025 6:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/20/2025 4:34 PM, cyclintom wrote:
If you scan the rolling resistance chart all of the lowest
rolling resistance is on 25 mm tires. What that implies is
that the drum is entirely out of sync with the real world
since wider tires with lower pressures are both faster and
less likely to puncture. It is time fore the rolling
resistance people to redesign their setups to have more
connection to reality. My speed after two weeks off of the
bike with 32 mm tires is half a mph faster than riding a
lot on 28's
I'm going to shock people by agreeing with you on one point.
I do think the current test rigs for rolling resistance need
serious improvement. I've mentioned that before.
+1
A long time complaint here on RBT beginning with Mr Brandt
long ago. Steel drum tests can be very accurately measured
but what they measure leaves a void between that and our
actual world.
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 6/20/2025 6:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Particularly the small drums and smooth drums that bicyclerollingresistance.com uses hence its data doesn’t correlate that well to MTB tyres in particular.
On 6/20/2025 4:34 PM, cyclintom wrote:
If you scan the rolling resistance chart all of the lowest
rolling resistance is on 25 mm tires. What that implies is
that the drum is entirely out of sync with the real world
since wider tires with lower pressures are both faster and
less likely to puncture. It is time fore the rolling
resistance people to redesign their setups to have more
connection to reality. My speed after two weeks off of the
bike with 32 mm tires is half a mph faster than riding a
lot on 28's
I'm going to shock people by agreeing with you on one point.
I do think the current test rigs for rolling resistance need
serious improvement. I've mentioned that before.
+1
A long time complaint here on RBT beginning with Mr Brandt
long ago. Steel drum tests can be very accurately measured
but what they measure leaves a void between that and our
actual world.
Silverstone has a much bigger drum with all sorts of surfaces, that folks like Dylan Johnson have used to test tyres (MTB) which has correlated with his real world testing so is bit more faith in that drum and set up, but
even so that it’s a hugely simplified model of the world must be accounted for plus is one’s goal just speed?
Certainly off road even if one wants to ride fast, a fast rolling tyre isn’t always your friend, the Thunderburts which are light with out much tread are popular as fast tyres be that Gravel or XC but they are very much terrain specific!
Even in mid summer descending on the steep grassy slope off the top of the mountain to my folks place, with those you’d be running wide on the turns in any other season you’d not make the turn!
Roger Merriman
On 6/21/2025 3:08 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 6/20/2025 6:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Particularly the small drums and smooth drums that
On 6/20/2025 4:34 PM, cyclintom wrote:
If you scan the rolling resistance chart all of the lowest
rolling resistance is on 25 mm tires. What that implies is
that the drum is entirely out of sync with the real world
since wider tires with lower pressures are both faster and
less likely to puncture. It is time fore the rolling
resistance people to redesign their setups to have more
connection to reality. My speed after two weeks off of the
bike with 32 mm tires is half a mph faster than riding a
lot on 28's
I'm going to shock people by agreeing with you on one point.
I do think the current test rigs for rolling resistance need
serious improvement. I've mentioned that before.
+1
A long time complaint here on RBT beginning with Mr Brandt
long ago. Steel drum tests can be very accurately measured
but what they measure leaves a void between that and our
actual world.
bicyclerollingresistance.com uses hence its data doesn’t correlate that
well to MTB tyres in particular.
Silverstone has a much bigger drum with all sorts of surfaces, that folks
like Dylan Johnson have used to test tyres (MTB) which has correlated with >> his real world testing so is bit more faith in that drum and set up, but
even so that it’s a hugely simplified model of the world must be accounted >> for plus is one’s goal just speed?
Certainly off road even if one wants to ride fast, a fast rolling tyre
isn’t always your friend, the Thunderburts which are light with out much >> tread are popular as fast tyres be that Gravel or XC but they are very much >> terrain specific!
Even in mid summer descending on the steep grassy slope off the top of the >> mountain to my folks place, with those you’d be running wide on the turns >> in any other season you’d not make the turn!
Roger Merriman
I remember saying I got a lot miles on my tires compared to what others
were getting and Mike Jacoubosky say it was because I did not climb. He
said that climbing will wear tires out more. Mike is a Trek store owner
in Redwood California and I respect is opinions but generally would
disagree with this. I can see that going up long grades you go slower turnover and possible some more tire wear but nothing like seemed to
imply. His implication was climbing is hard on tires.
On 6/21/2025 3:08 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 6/20/2025 6:04 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Particularly the small drums and smooth drums that bicyclerollingresistance.com uses hence its data doesn?t correlate that well to MTB tyres in particular.
On 6/20/2025 4:34 PM, cyclintom wrote:
If you scan the rolling resistance chart all of the lowest
rolling resistance is on 25 mm tires. What that implies is
that the drum is entirely out of sync with the real world
since wider tires with lower pressures are both faster and
less likely to puncture. It is time fore the rolling
resistance people to redesign their setups to have more
connection to reality. My speed after two weeks off of the
bike with 32 mm tires is half a mph faster than riding a
lot on 28's
I'm going to shock people by agreeing with you on one point.
I do think the current test rigs for rolling resistance need
serious improvement. I've mentioned that before.
+1
A long time complaint here on RBT beginning with Mr Brandt
long ago. Steel drum tests can be very accurately measured
but what they measure leaves a void between that and our
actual world.
Silverstone has a much bigger drum with all sorts of surfaces, that folks like Dylan Johnson have used to test tyres (MTB) which has correlated with his real world testing so is bit more faith in that drum and set up, but even so that it?s a hugely simplified model of the world must be accounted for plus is one?s goal just speed?
Certainly off road even if one wants to ride fast, a fast rolling tyre isn?t always your friend, the Thunderburts which are light with out much tread are popular as fast tyres be that Gravel or XC but they are very much terrain specific!
Even in mid summer descending on the steep grassy slope off the top of the mountain to my folks place, with those you?d be running wide on the turns in any other season you?d not make the turn!
Roger Merriman
I remember saying I got a lot miles on my tires compared to what others
were getting and Mike Jacoubosky say it was because I did not climb. He
said that climbing will wear tires out more. Mike is a Trek store owner
in Redwood California and I respect is opinions but generally would
disagree with this. I can see that going up long grades you go slower turnover and possible some more tire wear but nothing like seemed to
imply. His implication was climbing is hard on tires.
On 6/21/2025 11:29 AM, Mark J cleary wrote:
I remember saying I got a lot miles on my tires compared to what others were getting and Mike Jacoubosky say it was because I did not climb. He said that climbing will wear tires out more. Mike is a Trek store owner
in Redwood California and I respect is opinions but generally would disagree with this. I can see that going up long grades you go slower turnover and possible some more tire wear but nothing like seemed to
imply. His implication was climbing is hard on tires.
I think he's right. The harder the (rear) tire has to push back against
the ground, for example when climbing, the faster it will wear. Here's why.
When the tire is pushing back against the ground the rubber flexes. The
bit of rubber doing the pushing at any one instant is flexed towards the front of the bike. (You can simulate this by taking a rubber eraser in contact with your desk and pushing to the right. The bottom of the
eraser is deflected to your left.)
At the instant that rubber loses contact with the surface, it flexes
back or straightens out. As it does so, it scrapes a bit and a
microscopic bit of rubber is abraded off. The harder you're pushing, the greater the effect.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 12:15:19 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,875 |
| Posted today: | 1 |