In BRRs testing of the 44s it’s within a watt or two at lower pressures. Makes the HDs seem like a great option.
I’ve just gone up from 40s to 48s to see how they compare.
2 Likes
I’ve ridden the Thunderos and RX pro’s for around +1000 miles each, plus a few races, and I wouldn’t go back to the Thundero’s - for me the grip was noticeably lacking, particularly on loose finer gravel.
Looking at the thread the centre blocks are too closely spaced to provide much grip, and the side knobs don’t do much either. Both myself and a friend have had the front slide out on them. Very aware others have had good success with this tyre though, so your experience may differ.
1 Like
There is no good place in Australia to get tyres; if you want a good selection and price, Germany is it.
Can anyone recommend a 650b tyre that rolls and corners okay on tarmac, but isn’t totally worthless on hard dirt? (Not RH!)
TB’s are available in a 650b!
1 Like
I’ve used the Thundero in 40, 44, and 48. With the 40 and 44, I preferred it paired with a Swampero on the front for confident front end traction. For me, this combo was really good, and still a favorite. I ran the Thundero 48s at both end, and it was useable, but required being a little more cautious in loose conditions. My issue was with how that large a tire affected my bike’s handing and caused a toe-overlap issue. The Schwalbe RX is definitely going to be better for traction compared with the Thundero. Currently, I’m running RX paired with an RS on the rear. I’m liking it a lot so far.
I am running Gravelking slicks in 650b x 48mm, primarily tarmac with a dash of firm dirt. They do great on hard-packed gravel if you run lower pressures, absolutely useless if there is any mud though. I’m based in Melbourne so running into the same issue you are, so hard to find decent tyres for a decent price.
I hear you being in Sydney and running 650b; I just had to relent and order in a couple of TB’s 27.5 x 2.1 from R2 bike in germany (slipped in some Wera tools and converted the ecosystem to Clik valves at the same time). I run the 2.1 TB on the rear and a 2.25 Racing Ralph on the front and it’s a good setup for adventurous offroad but can handle the tarmac to get there
1 Like
@adamralph I can put a good word in for the Caracal’s durability - I’ve been using the Race version in 40mm, ended up commuting on them quite a bit and so far so good. I usually err towards a slightly meatier casing for commuting due to broken glass (joys of commuting past a football stadium…). I also like that the centre strip is a little raised - I don’t often go for semi-slicks because the centre is always very thin and wears out before the side knobs have hit the ground. The caracal seems to have a good few mm extra thickness in that central belt, without being as thick as something like a GravelKing SS or Pathfinder. Only thing I don’t like is the squeaky noise the side knobs make when cornering on tarmac - I’ve never had an issue with cornering grip, but the noise is off-putting.
2 Likes
Have just logged on to this community thing. I have ridden mainly Rene Herse tyres of all types since the Compass days, as they were a step up from the then benchmark, the Grand Bois Hetre Extra Leger. Also Teravail Honco and Coronado because of the same principles at play - light ‘n floppy sidewalls, and it don’t rain much here. Disappointing to see the, I dunno, what’s the word, shitcanning of an enterprise that has been at it longer than most, and the loose use of the word sactimonious. Jan has views. Most have been spot on. I am happy to share my near 20 year old Bicycle Quarterly magazines with essays about how wider tyres are faster, the importance of hysterisis, and the joy that can be had riding away from the road on bikes built for the purpose. In the meantime, there is indeed no best.
1 Like
We’ve all made up already. Rene Herse fans are welcome here. But it’s also time to move on….
1 Like
But I just got here. In any case, people need learnin.
Best place for tyres is Off Course in Brunswick. They have all the tyres you will ever need Stephen. RH Fleecer Ridge, RH Bon John Pass, RH Babyshoe Pass, the selection is endless.
I’m quite surprised at the lack of mentions for Vittoria gravel tyres.
Maybe they don’t test well but I’ve been very happy with terreno dry’s (40mm max in my old orbea Terra) at the gralloch x2, traka, battle on the beach & gritfest. No punctures and decent speed/grip. Have gone for t50’s in 50mm on my new vault when it arrives, anyone got experience of those?
Tried Panaracer gravel kings (older version) when sponsored by them but they were neither quick, grippy or puncture proof
Big fan of Vittoria cx tyres too (mix & wet) for anything up to proper slop and they do uci legal widths, going off topic now…
I found them, 1. super slow. 2. easy to mount tubeless, 3. very robust in super rough gravel. Mine were 43x700. Oldest versions.
I found the Vittoria Tirreno Dries to be just great for my hack CX racing. And had a surprisingly good grip for a near file tread. This crowd has a bias towards measured rolling resistance, though, and they just don’t stand out there. (Nothing wrong with that bias, I have it too).
1 Like
What testing protocol was used to get those results? At 18MPH/29KPH there is flat out no way any decent tyre is sucking up that many watts just to roll. No way.
MTB Tire Test: Schwalbe G-One Speed Pro Says the G-One Speed Pro is 11.4W at that speed/25psi. How does the above chart show 32W? Someone’s wrong.
Anyway, assessing a tyre’s real-world performance on a steel drum is a single metric that misses so many other factors.
Has anyone created a table of tyres used by top-10 finishers across major races, day and epic? Assuming the people doing those events are pro, they will be riding lots, testing everything, exchanging notes and then using the tyre with the best mixes of benefits/compromises to get themselves a podium and a paycheck. I doubt very much in gravel racing there’s manufacturers paying so much that a racer would choose a clearly inferior tyre just for the cash.
So instead of relying on steel drums and labs that can never replicate the real world, why not use the collective wisdom of the pro community to inform choice?
At the top end of the sport where riders are vying for podiums, they have to be going with the best sponsor, since that’s their livelihood.
2 Likes
Surely they need to win (or have a strong chance) in order to sign up any sponsors? Unless the cheque is huge (which I’m informed it isn’t) they must go with what gives them the best chance of winning. That has to be a hygiene factor - chance of winning - followed by cheque size. It’s a well-known thing (in the past anyway) for road pros to black out non-sponsor logos - but if you’re that good, and you feel a non-sponsor tyre will get you the win, you do it. Maybe this would make a good Geek Warning @Dave_Rome- The finance and nuance of equipment sponsorship?
I think you’re right - the checks for landing on the podium or winning aren’t huge, compared to the sponsor checks, so it makes more sense to run sponsor-appropriate tires.
unless I misunderstood you and you meant that the podium checks are larger than sponsorship payments, in which case I’d disagree.
Once again, this is incorrect. The Chung Method is an established and accepted protocol that has been adapted for testing tires.
That would be utterly meaningless in terms of establishing what tires are fastest. The perfect example is Keegan, who has ridden some of the slowest tires (Maxxis Reavers) to numerous gravel wins, including Unbound. Pros get paid to run their sponsors tires, not what is fastest. There are some unsponsored pros, like Dylan Johnson, who can ride what they want and test extensively, but the guys who are winning races are, for the most part, sponsored.
The Chung Method IS real world testing. Data > Opinions.
3 Likes