Those Panaracer tyres................worth it ?

JimmyK

I was in a LBS last week and I happened to ask the sales guy about lowest rolling resistance tyres. He took me over to where a range of tyres that could be folded up and put in a bag, they had no fixed shape to them like a normal tyre usually does........something to do with the bead or something not being fixed and rigid.

In his words, he said they were the dogs balls and could be inflated to 140PSI , the cost was £24.99 per tyre :shock: the range was Panaracer extreme .

Whats the lowdown then, anybody used them and can give some opinions, £24.99 is a tad expensive for a tyre in my opinion.

Jimmy

andrewgturnbull

Hi there.

The better tyres are usually folding tyres like the Panracer ones in the shop. They might take 140psi, but I'd stick to 110psi or less if I were you.

If you think £24.99 is too expensive, then I'd recommend Michelin Pro Race 2 which go for about £17 now that there's a version 3 out. The Pro Race 2 consistently score highly in rolling resistance tests - better than the Panracers.

Cheers, Andy

ps Good tyres, properly inflated do make a huge difference to the performance of your bike. That £17 a tyre is the cheepest upgrade you'll ever make.

JimmyK

andrewgturnbull wrote:

Hi there.

The better tyres are usually folding tyres like the Panracer ones in the shop. They might take 140psi, but I'd stick to 110psi or less if I were you.

If you think £24.99 is too expensive, then I'd recommend Michelin Pro Race 2 which go for about £17 now that there's a version 3 out. The Pro Race 2 consistently score highly in rolling resistance tests - better than the Panracers.

Cheers, Andy

ps Good tyres, properly inflated do make a huge difference to the performance of your bike. That £17 a tyre is the cheepest upgrade you'll ever make.

110 PSI is what I inflate my bontragers to , you reckon 140 PSI in a Panaracer carries a risk of blow out ?

Jimmy

andrewgturnbull

Hi there.

No, not a risk of blowout. If you're riding on marble-smooth roads then 140psi would give a fast and smooth ride. On most roads though it would just bounce you around, which would be uncomfortable, a bit ropey in the corners and possibly slower.

Cheers, Andy

aracer

As usual LBS sales assistant doesn't have much of a clue. Those Panaracers aren't particularly fast rolling tyres. Certainly being foldable (all really good tyres tend to be) or being able to take 140psi doesn't really say anything about how fast rolling they are. As Andy suggests, Michelin PR2s are a good choice - other fast rolling alternatives being Conti GP4000S and Schwalbe Ultremo (though like the new Michelin PR3 they're likely to be more expensive, and the Schwalbes at least are a little fragile).

andrewgturnbull

Hi there.

To be fair, the assistant was probably trying to sell you the fastest tyres he had in his shop - it's not in his interests to recommend something else...

Cheers, Andy

Steve I

It's very easy to claim a tyre is fast rolling. Fast rolling just needs a narrow profile, slick tread, and high tyre pressure. Anything more than that is just splitting hairs and marketing bollox. The tiny smidgen of extra performance you might get from a different rubber compound will surely only really matter to the most competitive of road racers.

aracer

You'd be surprised how much difference there is, Steve. Looking at http://fairwheelbikes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=46944 there is for instance 20W difference between the GP 4 Seasons and the GP4000S at 22mph, which is certainly what I'd call significant. Having also found the test which didn't rate the Panaracer very well at http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum ... hp?t=35989 - if you extrapolate from the tyres either side of it in that test to the other one, it's clear that it has a good 10W more resistance than a GP4000S or a PR2. Apologies for suggesting the Ultremo was good though - looking at both those tests, it's clearly little better than the Panaracer.

pedylan

aracer wrote:

........ and Schwalbe Ultremo (though like the new Michelin PR3 they're likely to be more expensive, and the Schwalbes at least are a little fragile).

Interesting Ultremo comment. I've done around 1500km on mine and they are full of nicks from glass and stones. Some are quite substantial but none have penetrated the casing to cause a puncture. Nevertheless I am surprised as I've done twice the distance on my Vittoria Rubina - for which no extravagent claims get made - and they are virtually clear.

I'm going for Conti 4000 before my first Sportive. The Tour Mag Sept 07 review is definitive I think. http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/conticycle ... ghters.pdf

aracer

pedylan wrote:

The Tour Mag Sept 07 review is definitive I think.

Were it not out of date, being before the PR3 was released it might be! Not that I've seen any proper figures on the PR3 yet, but early indications are it's at least as quick as a GP4000S.

Cajun

I've been adicted to the Panaracers for years and find that (for me) not only are they the best riding tyre, but absolute best confidence tyre when it comes to not slipping on dry or wet surfaces. You can do a search and find them much cheaper on the internet; the current version is the Extreme EVO II, which I've been able to find in the US for about $30US.
http://www.panaracer.com/eng/indexen.html

acorn_user

Assuming the data is reliable, the Panaracer tyres were what 3% lower than the Pro2light or GP4000 supersonic. That's not a lot.

My race tyres are Challenge Criterium clinchers atm. I like them a lot. I had some Pro2Races before that, but seemed to get a lot of you know whats. Nice ride though.

aracer

3% is a huge amount in the context of that test. By comparing the results from that to the other test, you can see it corresponds to a far greater difference than that in the actual rolling resistance of the tyres - potentially 15W more at 22mph, which is also a huge amount.

Cajun

Keep in mind, that even though tyres may be rated for 140psi, you 'should' adhere to your Wheel Mfgrs. maximum psi rating... I'm running American Classic Velocity rims and they're rated for 125psi. I've never experienced it, but have heard of wheels disintergrating due to excess psi applications.

andy advanced

i got a pair of these extreme evo 2 tyres a few weeks ago and im loving them, super fast super comfy, im running 110psi and all is well they did feel too sticky at first but now im 100% happy.

DavidBelcher

pedylan wrote:

Nevertheless I am surprised as I've done twice the distance on my Vittoria Rubina - for which no extravagent claims get made - and they are virtually clear.

I'm going for Conti 4000 before my first Sportive. The Tour Mag Sept 07 review is definitive I think. http://www.conti-tyres.co.uk/conticycle ... ghters.pdf

I've just switched to Vittoria Rubino Pros and am very impressed so far after just a couple of rides - only a mid-range tyre but excellent value and competent on the speed, puncture resistance and comfort fronts [1]. I was on Conti GP4000Ss before, but was disappointed by the fact that, like the GP3000s I had before that, the carcass seems very susceptible to splitting at points where a pinch-puncture has occurred; never had that problem with all the pairs of Vredestein Tri-Comps I used in the past, leaving me a bit disillusioned with the top-end offerings from Continental.

David

[1] But can't really gauge durability yet - I'll see how they are at the end of the summer.

pedylan

I seem to remember the Vittorio Rubinos getting panned on here a while ago specifically for wet road holding.

I put mine on my Bianchi last May (before the summer deluge) and they've done a couple of sportives and all my autumn and winter riding with no slides, no carcase damage and no punctures (tempting fate). The Ultremos have done 1500km since Jan on my new bike and are looking a bit sorry for themselves.

I'd be happy to buy another set of Vittorios for any season use for my Bianchi but will go Pro race 3 or Conti for the Etape. (and probably fall off!)

aarw

andrewgturnbull wrote:

Hi there.
That £17 a tyre is the cheepest upgrade you'll ever make.

hmm, one of the better value for sure, but not the cheapest

upgrading tyres and tubes can make a huge difference to your bike. I've advised mates to try latex tubes, but no-one actually believes they make a difference..... their loss.

aracer

aarw wrote:

I've advised mates to try latex tubes, but no-one actually believes they make a difference..... their loss.

I believe they make a difference - just can't be bothered with having to pump the tyres every day (or having to pump from flat if I don't use the bike for a week).

DavidBelcher

aracer wrote:

aarw wrote:

I've advised mates to try latex tubes, but no-one actually believes they make a difference..... their loss.

I believe they make a difference - just can't be bothered with having to pump the tyres every day (or having to pump from flat if I don't use the bike for a week).

Latex tubes have always had a reputation for being leaky, though I understand that some are now available with a thin coating of butyl rubber inside the tube to lessen the effect.

David

andrewgturnbull

aracer wrote:

aarw wrote:

I've advised mates to try latex tubes, but no-one actually believes they make a difference..... their loss.

I believe they make a difference - just can't be bothered with having to pump the tyres every day (or having to pump from flat if I don't use the bike for a week).

My tubs have latex tubes (conti records), and it's a real pain! Especially the disk which needs three hands to pump up...

Cheers, Andy