is it the end of 23mm tyres???

[Mick F]

Dunno.
I reckon that DF frames vary in their compliance.
I really don't know, I just have an idea about it.

What made the Vitus Duralinox compliant and flexible, and even more compliant and flexible than my Mercian 531c?
In repetition ................ I really don't know, I just have an idea about it.

[Brucey]

Two wheels on the bike,rear wheel is affected by the rear triangle and possibly a miniscule amount of the front quadrilatral ie there's no vertical complience..
Front wheel is affect by the fork including the steerer and flex in the headtube,that's my understanding.

EDITED for better explanation

by calculation about 1/3 of the fork tip movement is bending in the top tube and down tube in the frame on some steel-framed bikes... that is certainly not 'a miniscule amount' of vertical compliance.

At the rear it is no accident that roadies who do big miles tend to use a saddle which is

- set well back
- has flexible rails
- has a flexible hull

all these things allow for a degree of comfort where -with poor choices of these parts- little might exist otherwise.

It is difficult to compare bikes unless they are ridden back to back. Time changes both recollection and actual experience. Having not sold many of the bikes I've owned/used, I have plenty of scope for making direct comparisons that are not flawed by the passing of time. FWIW one of the most comfortable bikes I own has 753 frameset and a very light wheelset. It is utterly delightful to ride; at least as comfortable as most other bikes (with heavier, stiffer framesets) that have ~10mm fatter tyres.

cheers

[reohn2]

Two wheels on the bike,rear wheel is affected by the rear triangle and possibly a miniscule amount of the front quadrilatral ie there's no vertical complience..
Front wheel is affect by the fork including the steerer and flex in the headtube,that's my understanding.

EDITED for better explanation

by calculation about 1/3 of the fork tip movement is bending in the top tube and down tube in the frame on some steel-framed bikes... that is certainly not 'a miniscule amount' of vertical compliance.

How much is that in mm?
I'm thinking not many.

At the rear it is no accident that roadies who do big miles tend to use a saddle which is

- set well back
- has flexible rails
- has a flexible hull

all these things allow for a degree of comfort where -with poor choices of these parts- little might exist otherwise.

All of which isn't the frame as I posted up thread.

It is difficult to compare bikes unless they are ridden back to back. Time changes both recollection and actual experience. Having not sold many of the bikes I've owned/used, I have plenty of scope for making direct comparisons that are not flawed by the passing of time. FWIW one of the most comfortable bikes I own has 753 frameset and a very light wheelset. It is utterly delightful to ride; at least as comfortable as most other bikes (with heavier, stiffer framesets) that have ~10mm fatter tyres.

cheers

That may very well be the case,but I'd bet it's limited to a narrow spectrum of use ie; tarmac on fine days.

[100%JR]

That's your prerogative,all I can say is that you're missing out on a good tyre.

I've just had a quick look at Hypers and they all appear to be slick?I'm more than happy with the Conti's on my road bike but would need something with a bit more tread on the CX.I'm not Touring on it but use it so need something that offers at least some grip off road.It came fitted with Schwalbe Tryago 32mm which were OK off road but horrible on Tarmac.

[reohn2]

That's your prerogative,all I can say is that you're missing out on a good tyre.

I've just had a quick look at Hypers and they all appear to be slick?I'm more than happy with the Conti's on my road bike but would need something with a bit more tread on the CX.I'm not Touring on it but use it so need something that offers at least some grip off road.It came fitted with Schwalbe Tryago 32mm which were OK off road but horrible on Tarmac.

I don't have any problem with Hypers offroad other than on muddy single track,grass or wet leaves,but can understand that most people need the assurance of tread and or side knobs.

[100%JR]

That's your prerogative,all I can say is that you're missing out on a good tyre.

I've just had a quick look at Hypers and they all appear to be slick?I'm more than happy with the Conti's on my road bike but would need something with a bit more tread on the CX.I'm not Touring on it but use it so need something that offers at least some grip off road.It came fitted with Schwalbe Tryago 32mm which were OK off road but horrible on Tarmac.

I don't have any problem with Hypers offroad other than on muddy single track,grass or wet leaves,but can understand that most people need the assurance of tread and or side knobs.

I come from a background of MTBing going back to the 80's.I've done it all,XC,DH,Trail etc.When I go off-road now I tend to ride the same stuff on the CX as I did on the MTB barring the Extreme DH/Jumps etc.The only difference now is I'll tie the off-road into a loop of mainly Tarmac rather than driving to do a MTB loop so I need a tyre that is OK for both.I could get away with slicks if riding the Trans Pennine Trail with my son but not on the Trails in the Hills of the Peak District or at a Trail Centre MTB loop!

[PH]

No to the original question - there's still plenty of bikes being sold that will only accept 23mm tyres so the market will dictate that the tyres remain available, though possibly slightly less common.
It's great that people have found bikes and tyres that suite them and their riding, there's no right and wrong to it, though it's beyond my understanding why bikes that don't offer better choice are still popular. Mick F is obviously very happy with his Mercian, but I can't see any disadvantage, other than fashion, if it'd been made to accept wider tyres, it wouldn't have stopped him using the 23s, just offered choice. Obviously it still appeals to many and is still a popular option on current Mercians.
I'm 95kg and like to ride the lanes that are sadly deteriorating, I have a couple of 28s in use, I doubt I'll ride anything narrower than 32 once they're worn out. The availability of better quality wider tyres has somewhat closed the gap, I don't know when or why this happened, but at some point the manufacturers seemed to stop thinking "fast" wasn't a consideration on anything over 28mm. The stiffness of frames that's a common Brucey theme suites me fine, I find none oversized steel frames to flexible for my taste.
I recently rode a section of Audax with a rider waxing lyrical about his new bike (Which looked like it had 23mm tyres), we parted where I followed the advised route and he took the A road as it wasn't as rough... His choice, though I think I got the best of the scenery and was at the next cafe first. In fairness I ought to point out he finished well before me, though I don't think that had much to do with tyres.

[Brucey]

....It's great that people have found bikes and tyres that suite them and their riding, there's no right and wrong to it, though it's beyond my understanding why bikes that don't offer better choice are still popular. Mick F is obviously very happy with his Mercian, but I can't see any disadvantage, other than fashion, if it'd been made to accept wider tyres, it wouldn't have stopped him using the 23s, just offered choice. Obviously it still appeals to many and is still a popular option on current Mercians....
.

the reason is that if you want 'a proper Mercian' and you want mudguards, you will likely end up being stuck with 23mm tyres and clearances to suit. The reason is that to many folk 'a proper Mercian' will have campag equipment and they don't make brakes that are deep enough for anything else (any more....).

On several occasions I have tried to persuade folk to do the sensible thing, and order their shiny new Mercian with bigger clearances and (say) BR-650 calipers (which are arguably better brakes than most of those with 'campagnolo' written on them, which contain parts from all over the place, including ones from Tektro....). Telling them that they are better brakes anyway, you can remove the 'shimano' decal if you like, and you can fit different tyres and have mudguard clearances that won't try to kill you... it is all wasted breath; the lure of 'the C word' is too strong, particularly in those that buy Mercians, it seems.....

Nobody ever said it all had to make sense, did they.....?....

cheers

[Mick F]

Nobody ever said it all had to make sense, did they.....?....

Spot on.

I have a Mercian.
It's light and comfortable.
It's fast and it's nice to look at ................ or at least some of us think so.
It's Campag equipped .............. or most of it is.
It was made for me in 1986 when I was (only) 34 years old.
It's still a wonderful bike to ride IMHO even though much of the components etc have been updated and renewed.

Trigger's Broom perhaps?
The original frame and fork is the original frame and fork, and long may they last.

[peetee]

There was a time when I aspired to have every campag bit i could possibly fit to my bikes. I still have older generation parts on some of my steeds but the new stuff is a no-no for me cos it's just plain hideous!

[reohn2]

Missed this:-

You're riding a drag of a tyre,and if it dont drag it's bladdy uncomfortable.
Have you tried Hypers?
I've been riding the 37mm actual size for a few years at low pressures (45f/65 with an all up weigh load of 95kg)for a good few years offroad and on crapmac for some years and find them great,they don't like flints or thorns though.

Hypers are Vittoria yes?
Not a fan of Vittoria tyres I'm afraid.
I was told when i fitted the 25mm Contis to "run them lower than 23mm" i was advised 70-85psi.I tried this and they were too draggy so i upped it to 100psi and they still felt draggy.Totally different feel to their 23mm counterparts.

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.
What I've found over a number of years looking for the ideal tyre(for me)was inititially that the bigger the tyre the less air needed in it,then I found the more supple the tyre the more air needed for a given size.
I also found that what may feel slow(draggy)turned out to be the lower PSI eliminating high frequency vibration(HFV),HFV gives the impression of speed,once ironed out can,especially on crapmac such as chip n seal,feel slow but it's only a feeling.

These are my own finding over a few different tyre sizes and types and playing around with tyre pressures,I can't claim any scientific evidence other than my own experiments,but my findings have been borne out by others and particularly tyre tests where lower pressures don't lose much in speed and over inflated tyres gain nothing but lose grip and traction whilst making an uncomfortable ride into the bargain.

[Mick F]

I firmly believe many people are riding tyres over inflated.

For the record ..........

23mm Vitoria Rubino Pro on Mercian are 85psi front and 120psi rear.

Tyres on Moulton at the moment are 28mm Conti GP front at 80psi and 28mm Schwalbe Durano at 100psi at the rear.

[Samuel D]

The ensemble of information available suggests that 23 mm is still the best choice for speed when a few conditions apply:

• high speeds because the rider is strong or they’re in a group
• lightweight rider
• good roads
• tyre of low rolling resistance construction
• springy bicycle
• classic rim without aerodynamic optimisation
• front wheel.

As fewer of these conditions apply, 23 mm tyres become slower than 25 mm or wider tyres.

It’s practically impossible to be certain about the exact thresholds, but, for example, there’s little doubt that 23 mm tyres are slower than 25 mm or wider ones if you cruise at 20 km/h, weigh 90 kg, and choose tyres with decent puncture resistance.

On balance, I think the market trend toward wider tyres is beneficial for most cyclists. You could say it’s a sensible correction of the narrow obsession from the late ’80s to early 2000s.

But I also believe that 23 mm tyres are still good for some of my own riding. And I think they will be available for a long time, because:

1. they’re clearly beneficial in some cases, for example, time trials by strong lightweight riders
2. even when they’re not, some people will buy them anyway
3. some bicycles require them for clearance (although very few new ones do, if you look closely. Things have improved in the last five years)
4. even 20 mm tyres are still widely available from the likes of Continental and Panaracer. Those will disappear before 23 mm tyres.

[100%JR]

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.

[Brucey]

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