MTB slick tire comparison--difference in speed

"AcctHitman" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

My Performance Fast City tires are getting near replacement, but I'm
considering the Ritchey Tom Slick tires.

Here's the details:

Performance Fast City (26 x 1.25) (90 psi max)
Ritchey Tom Slick (26 x 1.0) (100 psi max)

Would the Tom Slick tires be noticeably faster since they are narrower
and have a higher psi rating? Or is the difference too small to
really matter?

Too many other variables (TPI, rubber compound, tread thickness), and it's
probably a really, really small difference.
But skinnier does not always mean faster.

Buy a set of each and let us know what you find out...🙂

Pete

On 20 Sep 2004 20:33:44 -0700, [email hidden] (AcctHitman)

Quoted message said:

Would the Tom Slick tires be noticeably faster since they are narrower
and have a higher psi rating?

I like Tom Slicks but they aren't any faster unless they can crawl to
someone else's bike and climb on.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

In article <[email hidden]>,

Pete' ptr@ThievingBastardsWorkAt_usaf.com said:

"AcctHitman" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

My Performance Fast City tires are getting near replacement, but I'm
considering the Ritchey Tom Slick tires.

Here's the details:

Performance Fast City (26 x 1.25) (90 psi max)
Ritchey Tom Slick (26 x 1.0) (100 psi max)

Would the Tom Slick tires be noticeably faster since they are narrower
and have a higher psi rating? Or is the difference too small to
really matter?

Too many other variables (TPI, rubber compound, tread thickness), and it's
probably a really, really small difference.
But skinnier does not always mean faster.

As I understand it, the skinny is that the only advantage skinnier tires
have is aerodynamic. The rolling resistance difference between these two
tires is going to be imperceptible, though possibly measurable. We're
not talking slicks versus knobbies.

If it was me, I would buy the cheaper tire. The bad news is that once
you make the transition to slick tires, there isn't a lot you can do
beyond that to make a commuter bike much faster. Going to a road frame
might help, because the drop-bar positions are notably more aerodynamic,
or you could go full-geek and add tri-bars to your MTB (which isn't
completely crazy: highly aero position for when you need it, and very
nice flat-bar riding when you're in heavy traffic).

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ryan Cousineau said:

If it was me, I would buy the cheaper tire. The bad news is that once
you make the transition to slick tires, there isn't a lot you can do
beyond that to make a commuter bike much faster. Going to a road frame
might help, because the drop-bar positions are notably more aerodynamic,

The main consideration I look for in MTB slicks is not
simple speed, but how confident they let me feel in
cornering on rain-slickened streets, and riding over
wet RR tracks. So far in my experience, and in those
criteria, Tioga City Slickers win out overall. But they
feel a little more 'sticky' and slower than the Ritchey Toms.

Quoted message said:

or you could go full-geek and add tri-bars to your MTB (which isn't
completely crazy: highly aero position for when you need it, and very
nice flat-bar riding when you're in heavy traffic).

I've seriously considered turning my riser bar upside down.
Then I shined the idea on.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

"Ryan Cousineau" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

As I understand it, the skinny is that the only advantage skinnier tires
have is aerodynamic. The rolling resistance difference between these two
tires is going to be imperceptible, though possibly measurable. We're
not talking slicks versus knobbies.

Some of the tests done in the recumbent world have shown a slight advantage
to a wider tire, given the same construction and pressure.

2 versions of the same tire, the wider may well have less rolling
resistance.

Finding two such tires limits your choices.

Quoted message said:

If it was me, I would buy the cheaper tire. The bad news is that once
you make the transition to slick tires, there isn't a lot you can do
beyond that to make a commuter bike much faster. Going to a road frame
might help, because the drop-bar positions are notably more aerodynamic,
or you could go full-geek and add tri-bars to your MTB (which isn't
completely crazy: highly aero position for when you need it, and very
nice flat-bar riding when you're in heavy traffic).

If you're going to do all that, get another bike...🙂

Pete

Quoted message said:

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

Tom Keats said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ryan Cousineau said:

If it was me, I would buy the cheaper tire. The bad news is that once
you make the transition to slick tires, there isn't a lot you can do
beyond that to make a commuter bike much faster. Going to a road frame
might help, because the drop-bar positions are notably more aerodynamic,

The main consideration I look for in MTB slicks is not simple speed, but
how confident they let me feel in cornering on rain-slickened streets,
and riding over wet RR tracks. So far in my experience, and in those
criteria, Tioga City Slickers win out overall. But they feel a little
more 'sticky' and slower than the Ritchey Toms.

My favourite so far are Specialized FatBoys, which are completely slick. I
got mine at the Bike Doctor a few years ago, but I don't think they carry
them any more. Since they don't have any "rain sipes" or other tread they
should in theory have slightly better traction while cornering on wet (and
dry) paved roads.

I doubt the brand of tire will make a significant difference on wet RR
tracks.

--
Benjamin Lewis

"Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips
over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
--Matt Groening

In article <[email hidden]>,

Benjamin Lewis said:

I doubt the brand of tire will make a significant difference on wet RR
tracks.

I think tires with a more elliptical than circular cross-section,
with the flatter spot on the bottom, fare better on wet RR tracks,
while rounder, more circular cross-sectioned, garden hose-like
tires might corner better.

But that's just conjecture on my part.

I've had to cross the RR tracks at Nanton & Arbutus twice a day for
the last two weeks, on my Cheng Shin slicks. Nary a slip or slide.
But those unused tracks are rusty & textured.

I'll tell ya this much -- I'm starting to hate having to crawl up that
hump on Nanton from Arbutus to Angus with a sackful of hammers and
crowbars, etc. in the milk crate.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

Tom Keats said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Benjamin Lewis said:

I doubt the brand of tire will make a significant difference on wet RR
tracks.

I think tires with a more elliptical than circular cross-section,
with the flatter spot on the bottom, fare better on wet RR tracks,
while rounder, more circular cross-sectioned, garden hose-like
tires might corner better.

For a given tire air pressure and downwards force, the area of the contact
patch doesn't vary. Furthermore, unless we're talking about tires with
uneven thickness, the cross section *is* circular.

Quoted message said:

But that's just conjecture on my part.

I've had to cross the RR tracks at Nanton & Arbutus twice a day for
the last two weeks, on my Cheng Shin slicks. Nary a slip or slide.
But those unused tracks are rusty & textured.

I don't see any reason for slipping, as long as you cross in a straight
line not too parallel to the tracks. The only time I can recall slipping
on rainy tracks were some I encountered which crossed the road at an
extreme angle, and for which I neglected to steer across more
perpendicularly. Otherwise, as long as you aren't doing anything "weird",
there are no lateral forces that would cause you to slip (when crossing at
an angle, the track puts a sudden lateral force on the front wheel).

Quoted message said:

I'll tell ya this much -- I'm starting to hate having to crawl up that
hump on Nanton from Arbutus to Angus with a sackful of hammers and
crowbars, etc. in the milk crate.

I'm not sure I want to know what you're up to 🙂

--
Benjamin Lewis

"Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips
over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
--Matt Groening

Tom Keats said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Benjamin Lewis said:

I doubt the brand of tire will make a significant difference on wet RR
tracks.

I think tires with a more elliptical than circular cross-section,
with the flatter spot on the bottom, fare better on wet RR tracks,
while rounder, more circular cross-sectioned, garden hose-like
tires might corner better.

But that's just conjecture on my part.

I've had to cross the RR tracks at Nanton & Arbutus twice a day for
the last two weeks, on my Cheng Shin slicks. Nary a slip or slide.
But those unused tracks are rusty & textured.

I'll tell ya this much -- I'm starting to hate having to crawl up that
hump on Nanton from Arbutus to Angus with a sackful of hammers and
crowbars, etc. in the milk crate.

cheers,
Tom

Wet railroad tracks are one thing that will make me get off and walk.
Bill Baka

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

In article <[email hidden]>,

Benjamin Lewis said:

I don't see any reason for slipping, as long as you cross in a straight
line not too parallel to the tracks. The only time I can recall slipping
on rainy tracks were some I encountered which crossed the road at an
extreme angle, and for which I neglected to steer across more
perpendicularly. Otherwise, as long as you aren't doing anything "weird",
there are no lateral forces that would cause you to slip (when crossing at
an angle, the track puts a sudden lateral force on the front wheel).

I've heard a couple of motorcyclists mention wiping out on tracks that
were just diagonal enough so that both tires were simultaneously on
both of the (wet) rails. That's just /their/ explanations of why they
wiped out; I don't know if it really happens that way.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'll tell ya this much -- I'm starting to hate having to crawl up that
hump on Nanton from Arbutus to Angus with a sackful of hammers and
crowbars, etc. in the milk crate.

I'm not sure I want to know what you're up to 🙂

It's nothing scary. I just accidentally got pressed into service
as a labourer by a local construction firm. But I'm enjoying the
work, partly because I get to ride to all the sites.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca