I just ordered a new pair of tires and when they arrived I realized that they're 700x20 instead of 700x23. Instead of returning them, I thought I'd give the narrower tires a try. I was a little concerned about rim width, but a trip over to sheldonbrown.com resolved that concern for me; my rims should work just fine.
I know I'll have to adjust my cyclo-computer to the new size. I also expect they'll give me a harsher ride, but my ride's comfy enough. Is there anything else I should know? Any difference in cornering? Will I notice any difference with a slightly smaller outer circumference?
I just ordered a new pair of tires and when they arrived I realized that they're 700x20 instead of 700x23. Instead of returning them, I thought I'd give the narrower tires a try. I was a little concerned about rim width, but a trip over to sheldonbrown.com resolved that concern for me; my rims should work just fine.
I know I'll have to adjust my cyclo-computer to the new size. I also expect they'll give me a harsher ride, but my ride's comfy enough.
Is
Quoted message said:
there anything else I should know? Any difference in cornering?
Will
Quoted message said:
I notice any difference with a slightly smaller outer circumference?
Just curious.
-JR
The 20s may need a slightly higher pressure. You don't mention what pressure you run in your 23s. They will also be more prone to pinchflats so potholes will become even more hazardous.
I just ordered a new pair of tires and when they arrived I realized that they're 700x20 instead of 700x23. Instead of returning them, I thought I'd give the narrower tires a try. I was a little concerned about rim width, but a trip over to sheldonbrown.com resolved that concern for me; my rims should work just fine.
I know I'll have to adjust my cyclo-computer to the new size. I also expect they'll give me a harsher ride, but my ride's comfy enough. Is there anything else I should know? Any difference in cornering? Will I notice any difference with a slightly smaller outer circumference?
For a given weight of bike & rider, you'll have to run higher pressure. That will cause a harsher ride and poorer traction due to the smaller contact patch. Unless you're a lightweight, I would suggest you send 'em back and get at least 23s (if not 25s). Almost everyone I know who switched to wider tires preferred them.
Almost everyone I know who switched to wider tires preferred them.
Quoted message said:
Do many folks who are not racing actually run 20's? Even on high end bikes they seem pretty rare to me.
I don't think many racers use them. As I recall, back in the early '70s the narrowest clinchers were 27" x 1-1/4" (about 32mm). As manufacturers came out with lighter and narrower clincher tires, there was a real improvement in performance. So the thinking was that if 25mm tires were good, 23mm must be better, and 20mm best of all. But as with most things, there's a point of diminishing returns.
"Arthur Harris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
gds said:
Art Harris said:
Almost everyone I know who switched to wider tires preferred them.
Quoted message said:
Do many folks who are not racing actually run 20's? Even on high end bikes they seem pretty rare to me.
I don't think many racers use them. As I recall, back in the early '70s the narrowest clinchers were 27" x 1-1/4" (about 32mm). As manufacturers came out with lighter and narrower clincher tires, there was a real improvement in performance. So the thinking was that if 25mm tires were good, 23mm must be better, and 20mm best of all. But as with most things, there's a point of diminishing returns.
I agree, at one point it really got weird when several mfrs came out with 17 and 18mm wide tires. Some people thought you could be "faster" by putting an 18mm in front, 20mm in back. Talk about bouncing around.....
"Arthur Harris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
gds said:
Art Harris wrote: > Almost everyone I know who switched to wider > tires preferred them.
Quoted message said:
Do many folks who are not racing actually run 20's? Even on high
end
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
bikes they seem pretty rare to me.
I don't think many racers use them. As I recall, back in the early
'70s
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
the narrowest clinchers were 27" x 1-1/4" (about 32mm). As
manufacturers
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
came out with lighter and narrower clincher tires, there was a real
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
improvement in performance. So the thinking was that if 25mm tires
were
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
good, 23mm must be better, and 20mm best of all. But as with most
things,
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
there's a point of diminishing returns.
I agree, at one point it really got weird when several mfrs came out
with 17
Quoted message said:
and 18mm wide tires. Some people thought you could be "faster" by
putting an
Quoted message said:
18mm in front, 20mm in back. Talk about bouncing around.....
Since I haven't used tubulars for a long time could someone remind me of their approx. width? My vague recollection is that they were quite a bit narrower than the 23mm clinchers to which I switched.
Since I haven't used tubulars for a long time could someone remind me of their approx. width? My vague recollection is that they were quite a bit narrower than the 23mm clinchers to which I switched.
As I recall, the Clement Criteriums were around 23mm. The Paris-Roubaix and del Mondo were even wider.
Since I haven't used tubulars for a long time could someone remind me of their approx. width? My vague recollection is that they were quite a bit narrower than the 23mm clinchers to which I switched.
Most seem to be in the 20-23mm range, but Campionato del Mondos are about 26mm.
