Fast, dependable, good value 700x30 tyres

[Bonefishblues]

The randeneer Pro is a totally different tyre to the non pro. They come up a lot smaller than the hyper, the 32c is far small than the 32c hyper. I have both.

Yes you're right

[reohn2]

The randeneer Pro is a totally different tyre to the non pro.

The standard wire bead Randoneur is a pretty course 60tpi,compared to the Pro's 120tpi supple carcass.

They come up a lot smaller than the hyper, the 32c is far small than the 32c hyper. I have both.

Do you mean the standard Randoneur or the Pro?
I have the standard 559x40 on a tandem which comes up at 40mm,but have no experience of the 32 variety.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,

The randeneer Pro is a totally different tyre to the non pro. They come up a lot smaller than the hyper, the 32c is far small than the 32c hyper. I have both.

Any specs on rolling resistance for the pro?

[NetworkMan]

Tests comparing non-Pro with Hyper and others but the Pro is not mentioned. R2 is correct 20.5 watts for Hyper, 35.3 for the Rando. Load is 50 kg. Probably done on a drum.
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/fiet ... hwalbe.pdf

[reohn2]

Tests comparing non-Pro with Hyper and others but the Pro is not mentioned. R2 is correct 20.5 watts for Hyper, 35.3 for the Rando. Load is 50 kg. Probably done on a drum.
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/fiet ... hwalbe.pdf

Looking at those figures the only thing that get's even close to Hypers is Grand Bois and that is a 32mm(actual size)tyre compared with the 36mm(actual size)Hyper* .
I reckon Hypers are as good as GB's,I did ask Jan Heine to test Hyper's for a comparison to GB's but got no reply to my enquiries.

*it should be noted that the Hyper in those tests is a Vittoria Randoneur Hyper which is the same tyre as the Voyager Hyper,Vittoria changed the name to Voyager about three or four years ago,I assume so as not to confuse with Randoneur Pro's which,as I posted up thread,shares the same carcass but with a thicker tread.

[iandriver]

The randeneer Pro is a totally different tyre to the non pro.

The standard wire bead Randoneur is a pretty course 60tpi,compared to the Pro's 120tpi supple carcass.

They come up a lot smaller than the hyper, the 32c is far small than the 32c hyper. I have both.

Do you mean the standard Randoneur or the Pro?
I have the standard 559x40 on a tandem which comes up at 40mm,but have no experience of the 32 variety.

I have a Kinesis 4s which takes most 32c tyres. The hypers did not fit and are now on my CX bike. The 32c randeneer pros I have fit this bike no problems. They came in at 29-30 mm. The hypers came in full sized. The hyper seems to be one of those rare tyres that is actually the size it's supposed too be!

[Brucey]

IIRC there was a marathon almotion tyre which was very slightly faster than the Hyper.

However in their wisdom, Schwalbe almost immediately replaced it with a tubeless version, which is slower....

ho hum....

cheers

[NetworkMan]

I reckon Hypers are as good as GB's,I did ask Jan Heine to test Hyper's for a comparison to GB's but got no reply to my enquiries.

IIRC Jan Heine is Compass bicycle parts isn't he? Don't Compass supply the GB?

[PH]

The testing and review that Hyper fans so often refer to concludes

I rate the Voyager Hyper 5/5 because it sits at the top of the touring bike category for now and rolling resistance is still the most important factor here. I must add that the Schwalbe Marathon Supreme (read review) is probably the better all-round tire when you look at the big picture and consider other things like the amount of rubber to wear down and puncture resistance. If you want the absolute lowest rolling resistance, the Voyager Hyper is the tire to get.

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... hyper-2016

That's pretty much my conclusion having used both, I'll choose tyres based on the whole range of criteria and how it applies to me. PX would have to be giving them away before I'd have a Hyper over a Supreme.
I know the title of the tread is about good value, but I enjoy riding my bike and anything that contributes to that I'll usually consider good value.

[Brucey]

how about a marathon supreme at the rear and a hyper at the front?

cheers

[PH]

how about a marathon supreme at the rear and a hyper at the front?
cheers

I'd consider that, except to get best value I tend to only put a new tyre on the front and move the part worn one to the back.

[RickH]

The going rate for the biggest supremes seems north of £40 each. I've recently paid £16 each for 38mm Hypers at PX.

Are Supremes more-than-double-the-cost better?

[PH]

The going rate for the biggest supremes seems north of £40 each. I've recently paid £16 each for 38mm Hypers at PX.

Are Supremes more-than-double-the-cost better?

Short answer - they are to me

Long answer - I prefer 32mm, though I've also used some 35s. I've never paid more than £30. The tread depth of the Supreme is twice that of the Hyper (According to the above link) How that equates to miles per £ I don't know, but it's not as simple as looking at the purchase price.
But really my opinion is that these sort of touring tyres are generally pretty cheap. Even if I were to spend £80 on tyres and then get several thousand miles of feeling I was getting the best out of the bike, I'd consider I'd had good value. If you were to spend half as much and feel the same, great. But I wouldn't buy a tyre I was less happy with to save a few pennies.

[reohn2]

I reckon Hypers are as good as GB's,I did ask Jan Heine to test Hyper's for a comparison to GB's but got no reply to my enquiries.

IIRC Jan Heine is Compass bicycle parts isn't he? Don't Compass supply the GB?

I was aware of that when I asked him the question

[reohn2]

The testing and review that Hyper fans so often refer to concludes

I rate the Voyager Hyper 5/5 because it sits at the top of the touring bike category for now and rolling resistance is still the most important factor here. I must add that the Schwalbe Marathon Supreme (read review) is probably the better all-round tire when you look at the big picture and consider other things like the amount of rubber to wear down and puncture resistance. If you want the absolute lowest rolling resistance, the Voyager Hyper is the tire to get.

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... hyper-2016

That's pretty much my conclusion having used both, I'll choose tyres based on the whole range of criteria and how it applies to me. PX would have to be giving them away before I'd have a Hyper over a Supreme.
I know the title of the tread is about good value, but I enjoy riding my bike and anything that contributes to that I'll usually consider good value.

How does the Supreme score over the Hyper?
IRC of this parish has toured on both and I think says there's little in them.
I've no personal experience of Supremes but Hypers last,are fast,comfy and IME don't puncuture easily,though people in flint infested parts say they experience more punctures than I do.

EDIT:- I was on my phone when I posted above so didn't read the test in full,that said I'm still happy with Hypers and wouldn't pay the £30 for folding Supremes.
It seems going off the test,Supremes are more like a Randoneur Pro given the tread thickness,whether the Pro performs like the Supreme would need a head to head test.
The Supreme also seems very similar to the Marathon Slick of old that I mentioned up thread and if so they are a good fast and hard wearing tyre.

The Almotion tyre Brucey mentions seems a good tyre though are now discontinued.One has to ask why?

TBH other than 406(20inch)x50mm Big Apples on the Circe tandem and my Tern folder,mainly due to a lack of choice and as low mileage machines for tootling about,I stopped using Schwalbe tyres some time ago due to their poor quality control.Sometimes the same model tyres ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous with wirebeads failing and sidewall cracking,though I can't say that for Supremes as I've never used them but it does apply to other tyres in their range.