It is still all about Thunderburts.
/thread
5 Likes
I found a combo I’ve loved this season for the more aggressive “gravel” I ride in the mountains, which includes a decent amount of baby head rocks on double track and single track, as well as dirt and asphalt roads.
Shwalbe G One RX Pro (45mm) in the front and G One R Pro (45mm) in the rear.
The new compound on these is pretty game changing IMHO. It combines somewhat aggressive treads with harder compounds which allows them to roll really fast but have good grip when it gets loose and rowdy.
I’ve felt no weird sketchy cornering attributes when ripping down super steep road descents either.
I also really enjoyed the new Specialized Tracer TLR as a rear tire. Fast rolling and good grip. Very versatile tire. Definitely inflates small. 45mm Measures 43mm on a Roval Terra CLX II (25mm internal rim) wheel. Could be a good option for people with a borderline rear tire clearance or for days when you’re expecting mud if you ride where places where that happens.
3 Likes
Here’s a vote for TB’s.
1 Like
If you’re running a converted vintage MTB as a gravel bike and need 26" tires, the Gravel Kings in 26x2.1 are really fast compared to the other XC-ish tires I’ve tried. You can also get two of them for about the price of one from Rene Herse, if you shop around.
I know nobody else cares about this, I just wanted to participate in the new forum 
20 Likes
I just switched to the new Schwalbe G-One Pros, too. GX 45 on the front and GS 45 on the rear. On loose surfaces, the GS breaks loose under braking pretty easily, but that was expected, and it’s manageable. I really like the front end traction of the GX. I’ve run mixed tread combinations a few times - Pirelli H/M and Tufo Thundero/Swampero, previously. It really works well for my local terrain. The Tufos have been my favorite, but my first impressions of the Schwalbes is pretty favorable.
Most recently, I was running the new Maxxis Reaver HYPR-X 45s. I liked the way they handled pretty well, but a big gash in not very rough terrain left me concerned about their durability, and I used it as an excuse to ditch them to try the Schwalbes.
2 Likes
All about the Thunderburts for me.
2 Likes
Look, yes they’re expensive. But there really is no contest. René Herse all day, every day.
Everyone else is thrashing about, constantly changing tread designs in the desperate hope of gaining a marketing edge (or shoulder) over the competition.
They rely on this churn to have something new to talk about. It’s baked into the model folks. That’s all they got.
I’m sure the people working on new tread designs and casings and whatnot are lovely folk who believe passionately in what they’re doing.
The problem is, without independent testing, it’s all just hot air and emperor’s new clothes. René Herse are working with a university to set up an independent testing standard for tyres that will actually reflect real-world use cases, not just a steel drum. RH’s roll down methodology is a great start.
In the same way Silca and others are establishing drivetrain lube testing protocols with Purdue Uni (until that happens ZeroFrictionCycling is the best we got).
I’m totally aware of the irony/hypocrisy of mirroring the religious fervour of other gravel tyre brand adherents in saying RH are the best. But I’m basing my view on a decade of use, feedback from customers and friends, and the near-endless string of wins or FKT’s set by top athletes riding RH. I haven’t done an analysis, but the fact RH tyres win so many races with basically zero marketing or sponsorship budget speaks volumes. The riders who use RH have choices that aren’t tied to huge sponsorship money. But choosing RH absolutely is tied to their personal income from racing and media.
Anyway, ramble ramble blether this tyre that tyre best better etc 
3 Likes
I’d be maybe be on board with that if there wasn’t independent testing, but there’s plenty of independent testing. You’ve just got to be sensible enough to consider other contributing factors to the ‘best’ tyre (puncture protection, grip, weight etc) and be able to apply your rationale to the realities of a race environment… ala… when does your tyre ‘need’ to be fast?
Personally risk is a very key ingredient for my tyre selection, and TBs have ended far too many races for me. I’m very interested in the new Schwalbe’s which seem to be holding up pretty well, but I’ll keep monitoring. My Thundero HDs have proven bulletproof and seem pretty fast, but I’m always open to find something better.
1 Like
That’s what I like about RH. There’s only one tread pattern. That’s it. And a slick.
Then, you’re choosing diameter, width, and casing.
So it’s very easy to find the right tyre for your needs.
Whereas all other mfrs are a hot mess. If you find a tread you like, it’s almost certain it’s not carried in all sizes or widths. You only get the one casing choice, etc.
And they’ll change it next season - because marketing. They need something new to talk about.
It’s a machine.
The idea that there is one tread pattern that is sufficient for all areas, outside of a slick, is at odds with reality.
And I don’t know that there is a lot of room to criticize other companies’ naming strategies when RH insists on a different name for the same tire, just in a different size. They would be much better if they just picked a name for the knob tire and the slick tire and called it good.
9 Likes
This is great to hear. I fully agree that all other anecdotal statements of personal use just aren’t adequate to evaluate tire differences.
1 Like
John Karrasch is doing real world testing on a variety of surfaces. If this stuff interests you, he’s worth following…
https://www.instagram.com/p/DL--EF1Rjw2/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
13 Likes
In addition, John’s work is using an established, accepted protocol that is repeatable and measurable.
If RH is using rolldown tests for the starting point of their testing, they need to rethink their approach. It is not a reliable method for testing tires.
10 Likes
I’m often at odds with not only one tread pattern for all conditions, but even the same tread pattern on both wheels. The front and rear have different demands. Sometimes a matching setup works pretty well, but I’ve found my favorite tire setup is a fast-rolling rear tire and a front tire with more grip for cornering and braking confidence in the conditions I frequently encounter in my local area - Tufo Thundero/Swampero, Pirelli H/M, and (currently) Schwalbe RS/RX.
2 Likes
I’m not convinced RH are much less of a hot mess than other manufacturers.
Firstly, they’ve released the Corkscrew Climb semi-slick now (how long ago was it that they said semi slicks were pointless, and that their knobblies were just as fast?)
And then there are their TPU-tube-only-tubeless-only tyres, into which you must insert their TPU tubes, but only on tubeless rims, but then you can add their TPU sealant, in case you want to have all the faff and mess of a tubeless tyre whilst still having to deal with tubes too.
4 Likes
I have 29 27.5 and 26 inch wheels (not all on the same bike). Conti Race Kings are great because they’re available in all those diameters, and tubeless.
I really want to like Rene Herse, but my problem with them isn’t the naming scheme. Or how most of their tires aren’t really tubeless compatible.
It’s that they insist that tire compound doesn’t impact rolling resistance, only casing does. According to BRR and I think @John_Karrasch ‘s testing, tire compound has a big impact on rolling resistance, maybe even more than any other factor. My RH tires are slower than many of my other tires - like my Terra Speeds, Race Kings, Thunder Burts. As in, same power, same route, different bike, 1-2mph slower. Consistently. I love that Jan has pushed the wider is better thinking and I even have a copy of The All Road Bicycle. But the tires (in any casing besides extralight) are just slow.
6 Likes
The criticism of semi-slicks as implemented by everyone else is 100% valid - I hated reviewing them as the transition when cornering hard on asphalt always scared the bejesus out of me.
The RH take removes that because they’ve patented a design that is elevated knobs all over - just bound together. So a totally different beast to a slick with higher knobs sticking out the side, that then give a pronounced shoulder that squirms as you transition in a corner. 700C X 44 Corkscrew Climb TC Semi-Slick – Rene Herse Cycles
The TPU-only approach for one tyre, where they left out the liner, is because people asked for it. Some folks hate the faff of tubeless (mess and evaporation), want a super-supple narrow tyre, and maybe want the insurance of sealant that doesn’t dry out. The reason they say use tubeless rims is because the bead is so tight you need a decent centre well to make them fit. That’s not a bad thing. It’s one super-niche use case - which has its tradeoffs. I like that Jan looks at these asks from the broad church that is cycling, gets it right with a new product (probably patenting something along the way), and then moves on.
This is why we need a universally accepted methodology for testing rolling resistance in the real world. I don’t doubt you find them slower - otherwise why would you come here and post. But are all things equal in your comparison? You said ‘different bike’? Are confounding factors allowed for? Are you comparing tyres of the same puncture resistance? Weight? Size? Grip?
Roll on a way to trust test results.
Do you not trust chung method testing?
3 Likes
I care…especially since I’m running the same on my converted 26”. And I agree.