[Nick0]

I just posted these elsewhere in case they’re useful these are seemingly allegedly impartial scientific-ish non subjective studies…

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/best-road-racing-tyres-35215/

http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/conticycle/download_files/TyreTests/Wide_Tyre_Test_TourMagazine_2014_UK.pdf

Topic

[DanTe]

http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/
http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/conticycle/road_tyres/attack%20force/Resistance%20Fighters.pdf

[DanTe]

Have a search of Tour
Have a search of Tour magazine. They’re bound to of done just what you’re asking for. Find the issue and download it for a couple of quid.
They’re good at that very German tech type reviews..

[Flying Scot]

As a former race driver,can I
As a former race driver,can I say that tyres tests are…..largely useless.

It sorts out the utter crap from the acceptable ones, but that’s it, I’ve done the driving on these.

All tyres have a mix of abilities, each ability is higher or lower at a given temperature, or a different static weight. And the ones that measure best, often don’t feel the best, as although they lose grip at a higher load, they do do suddenly.

On any given day, with a given vehicle, at a given static mass, there will be a ‘best’ tyre of course. That will change after 5 degrees.

Bike tyres are a bit different in that you also add puncture resistance and weight, neither of which have much bearing on motor vehicle designs.

The fact is, it’s a very mature technology, how to make a decent tyre is now well known, most are 10% technology, 90% marketing.

One conundrum for me was Michelin, it’s been a long time since they made a crap car tyre, but until recently they made some bloody awful bike tyres (and good ones too)

[gmac101]

This is a bit old – but does
This is a bit old – but does have some info on wet weather handling. I think the test was done by a Dutch or German magazine using the Continental test track

http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/conticycle/road_tyres/attack%20force/Resistance%20Fighters.pdf

[Nick0]

jdryan86@ymail.com

jdryan86@ymail.com wrote:

Nick0
Not sure if I have worked this out correctly but if you are 13 stone that makes you roughly 83kg. I have added 10kg to take into account your bike so takes total weight to 93kg. Based on the article optimal pressure is distributed 40% front 60% back.
Therefore:
40% of 93kg = 37.2
60% of 93kg = 55.8

Based on this front psi would be aprox 90psi and back psi would be pushing 128psi. Again this is my assumption of the calculation and agree I would not run my back tyre as high as 128psi. I have assumed you are on 23mm tyres but you can alter accordingly and above is rough guide.

Cheers

Thank you sir this scientific method seems to equate to what i was doing already, so it must be good !

[olic]

http://flocycling.blogspot.co
http://flocycling.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/flo-cycling-flo-30-wind-tunnel-results.html
http://flocycling.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/flo-cycling-tire-pressure.html

Rolling resistance can be a bit misleading because it doesn’t take into account drag, which as you can see from the above can be quite significant for some tyres, particularly as they get wider on narrower rims.

[jdryan86@ymail.com]

Nick0
Not sure if I have
Nick0
Not sure if I have worked this out correctly but if you are 13 stone that makes you roughly 83kg. I have added 10kg to take into account your bike so takes total weight to 93kg. Based on the article optimal pressure is distributed 40% front 60% back.
Therefore:
40% of 93kg = 37.2
60% of 93kg = 55.8

Based on this front psi would be aprox 90psi and back psi would be pushing 128psi. Again this is my assumption of the calculation and agree I would not run my back tyre as high as 128psi. I have assumed you are on 23mm tyres but you can alter accordingly and above is rough guide.

Cheers

[Nick0]

gmac101 wrote:I thought about

gmac101 wrote:

I thought about warning people that the Bicycle Quarterly graph was load per wheel – But then I thought – people will read the text not just look at the picture surely?

Oh dear.

[Nick0]

drmatthewhardy wrote:Have a
[quote=drmatthewhardy]Have a look at this, too, based on rolling resistance tests:

https://janheine.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/science-and-bicycles-1-tires-and-pressure/%5B/quote%5D

Nice one sir we’re getting a good bit of information here.

[gmac101]

I thought about warning
I thought about warning people that the Bicycle Quarterly graph was load per wheel – But then I thought – people will read the text not just look at the picture surely?

[matthewn5]

Have a look at this, too,
Have a look at this, too, based on rolling resistance tests:

Science and Bicycles 1: Tires and Pressure

[J886atv]

Which file are you looking
Which file are you looking at?

The bikequarterly chart is ‘Wheel load’ – unless I’m wrong doesn’t your bike have 2 wheels?

[Anonymous]

Christ, I’m right at the end
Christ, I’m right at the end of the scale @ 10stone. Guess I’ve got to ride 25’s! Also ex-rugby and like Man of Lard this is the lightest I’ve been since school as well!

[bigshape]

Nick0 wrote:Nice one – I’m 13

Nick0 wrote:

Nice one – I’m 13 stone (all muscle and no choccie biccies of course) though so I’m off the scale!
I reckon that although I’m off the scale the graph suggests I should be riding my tyres at around 140Psi, that’s bone shaking territory and exceeds the recommended pressure rating, D’OH

you’re not off the scale – have a look at the example under the chart.

their example shows a combined bike and rider weight of 100kg (15.7473 stone)

[Man of Lard]

From the Journal of the

From the Journal of the Stating the Bleeding Obvious wrote:

For heavy riders/bikes, narrow tires require very high inflation pressures, and wide tires are a better choice

As someone who comes from a rugby background, I’m at the lightest I’ve been for 20+ years (since I was a teenager) and I’m further off the scale than Nick0…

[Author]

Replies