is it the end of 23mm tyres???

[Mick F]

I happened to have a recent Michelin 23mm tyre in my hands earlier. Writ upon the sidewall was a maximum pressure rating of 8 bar (116psi) and a minimum pressure rating of 6 bar (87 psi). The latter seems too high for light-built folk, and the former seems too low if you are erm, 'somewhat thick-set' shall we say.
Part of the trend to wider tyres is the change in the cycling demographic; there are a lot more people who are above average weight riding bikes these days.
Mass produced 'racing bikes' have weight limits that are almost double the weight of an average professional cyclist, and skinny tyres won't do more than a narrow range of rider weights, not very well, at least....

My 23mm Vittoria Rubino Pro have a pressure range of 100psi to 145psi written on the sides.
As I said, I inflate to 85psi front, and 120psi rear.

Seems fine to me.

[reohn2]

My 23mm Vittoria Rubino Pro have a pressure range of 100psi to 145psi written on the sides.
As I said, I inflate to 85psi front, and 120psi rear.

Seems fine to me.

Seems about right for the front,the rear seems a leettle on the high side to me for an all up weight of 86kg

[reohn2]

I firmly believe many people are riding tyres over inflated.
The draggy effect you feel,is it proven with ride times or power output or just a feeling?

I would never run any road tyre at 45f/65 rear!

That statement is quite sweeping and prejudicial without knowing the tyres involve.

The draggy effect is the way they feel to me.
The statement isn't sweeping nor prejudicial but based on my experience.I can tell straight away if my Road bike tyres have lost a bit of pressure.It just feels wrong.Even on the CX bike the 32mm tyres feel far too low at 60 let alone 45psi.

The pressures I posted were for 40mm(actual 37mm) Hypers,32mm Hypers would be ridden at a guess about 55f/75r with an all up weight(rider,bike and day luggage) of 98kg.I don't know what your all up weight is.

[robc02]

I have a bike that will only accept 23mm (or narrower) tyres. It's a very nice bike - a Principia Rex e SX, carbon fork, high end aluminium frame, kitted out appropriately. I now run the tyres at about 85-90F 100-110R. I weigh 63kg so am one of the lightweights who should be OK with 23mm tyres. Despite this and despite the bike feeling great - stiff, responsive, fast etc. I consistently fail to see any overall speed advantage when compared to my 531 framed Woodrup on high quality 28mm tyres. Any difference that might be there is easily masked by "noise". In fact my fastest rides on my normal routes (25 - 40ish miles) are on the older tech bike, but I wouldn't try to claim any significance from that.

I have never found 23mm tyres to be especially uncomfortable, but clearly they are less comfortable than 28s. Were it not for the restrictions of the frame I couldn't see myself buying any more 23s. However, there must be a lot of people in a similar situation so, like other posters, I don't anticipate a shortage of 23mm tyres for a long time to come.

[Brucey]

might be interesting to run the 23s in the woodrup, even if you can't try the 28s in the other bike....

cheers

[robc02]

might be interesting to run the 23s in the woodrup, even if you can't try the 28s in the other bike....

cheers

A year or two ago I ran 23s in another 531 framed bike and over a 50-odd mile route that I regularly rode found much the same - Principia and 531 almost identical. Subjectively I would have said I might have been a touch faster on the Principia, in fact it was the other way around, but not by a significant amount (about 0.2mph I think).

[Samuel D]

The specific tyre construction makes a great difference to both speed and comfort.

I’ve just fitted a pair of Michelin Pro4 Grip tyres that are unfortunately only available in 23 mm, so that’s their size. These are specialist high-hysteresis tyres (with unbelievable wet traction), and I would swear blind they’re more comfortable than my 25 mm Schwalbe One tyres. They’re eerily good at eliminating road buzz – until you hit any kind of break in the tarmac, of course. That’s where wider tyres at lower pressures really make a difference.

[Spinners]

I'm really enjoying this thread and the different views - even the polarised ones and they might just shape my next frame purchase!

I came into road cycling (from an MTB background) in 1994 and 23mm tyres were de rigueur for club cyclists. Nobody in our club rode on 25mm or 28mm tyres and, as has been said, people raced on 19mm, 21mm and 23mm tyres (or tubs). I had no trouble with 23mm tyres and found the better ones (Michelin - but I can't remember the precise name) more comfortable than todays tyres but must admit that they were more fragile. I rode a 24-hour TT in 2004 and upsized to 24mm Victoria Open Pave tyres (nice but suffered from cuts) and upsized again to 25mm Conti GP4000 tyres to ride a SR series & then PBP in 2007. I was still riding steel framed bikes back then but now mainly ride on 25mm tyres on alloy frames but did have a carbon-framed Boardman for a couple of years. None of them have been 'keepers' (as they say on roadbikereview.com) with a Giant Defy probably being the best of a pretty mediocre bunch.

Anyway, I had my first ride on my 'new' road bike today (I actually bought it almost a full year ago in the sales but just never got around to using it). It has an alloy frame, carbon forks with a tapered headtube and it has 28mm Conti tyres. With the great weather today I was really looking forward to riding it on a social club ride but I found it just as uncomfortable as the other alloy-framed bikes I've had... worse if anything. I'm really disappointed!

So, in conclusion, I'm with MickF on this one and it's back to springy steel for me!

[StephenW]

Jumping back a few pages, I think the point about volume maybe got a bit confused.

The volume of the tyre, in itself, is not important. It is merely a by-product of the width.

I found a little thought-experiment helpful:

Suppose you had a 23 mm tyre, and you had a metal air reservoir attached to the hub, with a volume of say one pint. The air reservoir is connect to the inner tube by a pipe, which allows air to flow freely in both directions. This setup would have a narrow width, and a high volume. It would ride almost exactly the same as a 23 mm tyre without the reservoir, it would just need topping up less often!

Surely the most important effect of width is actually on the height of the air pocket? A taller air-pocket means longer "suspension travel", which of course means that the "spring" can be made softer without the risk of bottoming out (snakebite).

[Brucey]

....I had no trouble with 23mm tyres and found the better ones (Michelin - but I can't remember the precise name) more comfortable than todays tyres but must admit that they were more fragile....

Those tyres would have been Michelin Hi-Lites. They were comfy but fragile like you say. They also used to swell up gradually; 23mm tyres often ended up over 24mm in width after a while. I think that they were not as fast-rolling as some other tyres either, in that my TT efforts on them were slower than on some other tyres.

So, in conclusion, I'm with MickF on this one and it's back to springy steel for me!

It is certainly my favoured choice. I have quite a soft spot for Ti frames too, but that usually means a carbon fork and that is just as much of a lottery as buying a carbon frame, stiffness-wise. In theory you can make a structure from CF that is strong enough for the very strongest/heaviest rider without being too stiff, but the reality is that they don't often manage it.

cheers

[StephenW]

one of the most comfortable bikes I own has 753 frameset and a very light wheelset.

Do you think that the light wheels are important in keeping the unsprung weight down, so that the "frame suspension" can do its job?

People argue back and forth about whether lightweight wheels are worthwhile, basing all their arguments on rotational inertia. But perhaps the real benefit of light wheels is nothing to do with rotational inertia, but rather about keeping the unsprung weight down, so the bike can float over rough surfaces and thus go faster?

[Bmblbzzz]

I happened to have a recent Michelin 23mm tyre in my hands earlier. Writ upon the sidewall was a maximum pressure rating of 8 bar (116psi) and a minimum pressure rating of 6 bar (87 psi). The latter seems too high for light-built folk, and the former seems too low if you are erm, 'somewhat thick-set' shall we say.

Part of the trend to wider tyres is the change in the cycling demographic; there are a lot more people who are above average weight riding bikes these days.

Mass produced 'racing bikes' have weight limits that are almost double the weight of an average professional cyclist, and skinny tyres won't do more than a narrow range of rider weights, not very well, at least....

cheers

Could be, if you consider club, sports and leisure cyclists, what with cycling being popular among the middle-aged (or plain old) folk. But it might also be a different demographic factor; not that the average weight of "a cyclist" has increased relative to the overall population, but that the average weight of the whole population has increased (and more in certain countries, of which Britain is one, than in the global average, so exaggerating the effect as seen here).

[multitool]

Not so sure about the theory of changing cycling demographic resulting in trend for wider tyres. There have been fat cyclists for ever. This is not a recent phenomenon.

Secondly, the lightest of cyclists, the pro riders, are predominantly riding tyres wider than 23mm, and have been doing so for several years. Wider tyres were the norm on cobbled stages and classics but they are now used for all racing, except TT. Last time I checked at least 20 World Tour teams were using 25mm tyres (or 26mm if on Spchzld).

There have been plenty of independent tests demonstrating that wider tyres are faster, when paired with wide rims.

Will this actually matter to most enthusiast riders, even if they convince themselves that it does? Possibly not, but they won't complain about the added comfort.

[FakeConcern]

End of 23mm tyres? I don't know.

I have to say that this discussion is particularly interesting to me having just bought a new bike and taken the bike shops advice to have 28mm tyres fitted.
I’ve had it two weeks now and don’t like them!
A bit of background; 4 years ago I bought a Bianchi 1885 which has an aluminium frame with carbon forks & seat stays, running on 23mm Vittoria Rubino Pro tyres. It was the most comfortable bike I’d ever ridden up till that point (previous bikes included Holdsworth & Roberts steel 531c frames).
Anyway the new bike (picked up 2 weeks and about 300 miles ago) is an endurance orientated full carbon Bianchi Infinito. I tried it out on Fulcrum wheels with 25mm Vittoria tyres, but upgraded to Zonda wheels with 28mm Pirelli tyres when I bought it. After a couple of days I realised that I was taking two 23mm spare inner tubes with me so bought a larger tube. Promptly had a puncture the same day! Bought two more spares and that made me notice how big and heavy they are compared to the 23mm tubes. This also ties in with how they feel on the road to me, that is they run well on the flat and down hill, but when the road goes up, the bike seems to grind to a halt. I also dislike the bouncy feeling I get over some undulations and sometimes in time with my pedalling cadence.
However contrary to how they feel, every ride has been quicker than with the old bike on the same routes with 23mm tyres even up hill!
I haven’t yet got as far as weighing the tyres or tubes to compare with the old ones or tried old wheels and tyres on the new bike. What I can say is new bike feels smoother and faster most of the time, but feels slow up hill, even if it isn’t!
To conclude, I wish I’d had the new bike fitted with 25mm Vittoria tyres despite the evidence telling me the current set up is working well!

[Brucey]

one of the most comfortable bikes I own has 753 frameset and a very light wheelset.

Do you think that the light wheels are important in keeping the unsprung weight down, so that the "frame suspension" can do its job?

People argue back and forth about whether lightweight wheels are worthwhile, basing all their arguments on rotational inertia. But perhaps the real benefit of light wheels is nothing to do with rotational inertia, but rather about keeping the unsprung weight down, so the bike can float over rough surfaces and thus go faster?

I think this can be significant.

cheers