Durable race tyres
GGBiker
Posts: 450
Ok so it sounds a bit contradictory but I'm now totally pissed off with having races ruined by a puncture on my continental gp 4000s tyres and same with conti attack/force combo. The fact is road surfaces are utterly censored with rough/ broken potholed /patched/metal worked/ gravelly surfaces just ripping tyres to bits, they are covered in slashes and eventually something penetrates and it's game over.
On the other hand I have ridden several thousand miles on conti 4 seasons, they feel ok and zero punctures.
Is there any significant difference in terms of speed for x watts of power between "racing" and "reliable " tyres?
Obviously getting to ride the race is preferable to puncturing after 50m like I've experienced recently, on another occasion I punctured about 30 secs before the start.
Another option I'm looking at is the Vredestein fortezza tricomp tyre which is going cheap on Ribble, any experience of these for durability/puncture resistance/speed?
On the other hand I have ridden several thousand miles on conti 4 seasons, they feel ok and zero punctures.
Is there any significant difference in terms of speed for x watts of power between "racing" and "reliable " tyres?
Obviously getting to ride the race is preferable to puncturing after 50m like I've experienced recently, on another occasion I punctured about 30 secs before the start.
Another option I'm looking at is the Vredestein fortezza tricomp tyre which is going cheap on Ribble, any experience of these for durability/puncture resistance/speed?
0
Posts
My all-round tyre of choice is the Vittoria Rubino Pro folder in 25c - as quick, in my experience, as the GP4k but so much more puncture resistant. The only drawback some people quote (and I've never noticed this in 3 years) is wet weather grip. There's a Tech version with grippier compound but I've never bothered with this. They certainly aren't slow like many "puncture resistant" tyres.
@MRS - fwiw, have you tried these? To me, they feel similar to the Rubinos but much grippier. I suspect they last about the same mileage too though I can't be sure.
The roads I use are all a fair mix but suffice to say like all of us they can be terrible, the narrow lanes in the middle of N. Wales especially (road dirt, pot holes and hedge trimmings)
Crudder
CX
Toy
However I've not raced yet this year so can't comment there but I'm considering giving the new GP4000S II a try.
Canyon Ult CF SL- Spin Koppenberg-Ultegra group
I blew two Fortezza tyres in the one race once..
Sorry to muddy the waters - but I can't speak highly enough of my GP4000s.
specialized S- works turbo 24mm 220TPI tyres are very very fast rolling and offer good puncture protection, and excellent grip. Vittoria corsa evo SC’s are also really good rollers with great grip, though under intense braking they are less effective than 4000s’s.
Both also have much better feel or feedback than the conti’s.
Another thing I’ve noticed is GP4000s’s do not last long with Centreline punctures. They cannot cope with thorns at all. Other than that they do roll extremely well but don’t feedback as well as the 2 listed above.
I might give them a go, RF, but I've never felt the need to swap from the Rubinos.
I'm sure puncture protection experience varies according to what sort of protection you need. Also, there's a fair number of fair weather riders that don't take their nice bike out in foul weather - 80% of GP4k punctures I've had have been in the wet.
That's fair enough. Part of me thinks "Try 'em, you might like 'em" and the rest of me thinks if it isn't broken, don't fix it!
That's exactly it. Though it's exactly why I have a pair of GP4k tyres in my black back of tyres in the garage
The funny thing is, I keep trying the GP4ks because so many people like them but, after a week and a couple of punctures, I'm kicking myself and putting the Rubinos back on :roll:
Besides, Rubinos are hard to beat on cost too. I run a set of Michelin Pro 4 too and, TBH, I can't really tell the difference though, unlike with the GP4ks, I've not run them enough on similar rides to say that there's no discernible difference.
Their puncture ability is tbh hard to judge, be honest guys who can day whether a puncture you had on 4000s wouldn't of punctured of another tyre,? Saying its lasted longer than 4000s is most likely luck.
What I do know is 4000s are good at, good grip, good wet weather cornering.
I think focusing on positives is best way to judge tyres.
I say this but going to try some Victoria corsa cx soon as hear very good things about them.
http://www.justgiving.com/broxbourne-runners
I disagree - riding a 30-mile commute on nice roads and on one type of tyre you get 0-1 punctures per year in several years and you ride another tyre for only a few weeks on exactly the same roads and you get 4-5 individual punctures isn't, I'd suggest, down to luck. Same goes for my group ride experiences. When the only guy puncturing is the one guy in a group running GP4ks it's stretching luck to an extreme.
good luck though. Also from a mathematical point of view meanrespider your assesment is incorrect. You puncture rate is a snapshot and while the risk of a puncture is say 0.01% per mile traveled (just picked that out of thin air) then that does not stop you getting 4-5 punctures in say 100 miles. Random bad luck like that does happen.
You can throw a coin and get a run of 20 heads that would seem like good fortune (if you were gambling on heads that is) but if you had to throw the coin 1000 times before hand and got 490 head and 510 tails then this run of good luck does not change the overall chance of getting a head. Snapshots are not good ways of accessing puncture resistance of tyre or anything else for that matter.
We always remember that bad luck never the good and the bad luck sticks in our mind colouring our judgement. The Vittoria's may not puncture but that is not the puncture rate being any lower but the dice are rolling in your favour for a time at least.
Actually I'd disagree - you're using discreet probability (actually without any facts either). Puncture rates are infinitely variable. Once we start applying confidence intervals and sequential probability, it's pretty easy to see that, with a pretty high confidence, that the GP4Ks are less reliable than Vittoria Rubino Pros (when used on the roads I ride on). I haven't actually put the data into SAS or Minitab but then I've done enough reliability testing in my career to not need to bother.
But that said, if you are riding a lot of miles and trying different tyres (and, to be fair, giving the different varieties a decent chance) then you can start to get a feel for relative puncture resistance. But, it isn't that straightforward. 1 puncture in 2000 miles (say) is going to require a lot of miles to test. How many punctures do you need to eliminate random luck? More than 5 probably. So maybe a good 20,000 miles per tyre (less if you flat a lot!).
And then there is where you cycle. Hopefully that won't skew things too much but last year, on my commute, I cycled along a road with scrapyards on it. I'm pretty sure that the punctures I picked up along that stretch had something to with sharp bits of metal lying around on the road surface. This year, I haven't been using that road - so I might conclude that the Rubinos I've been using this year are more reliable than the Duranos I was using last year. Even weather can skew things a lot. Ride on one pair of tyres for a couple of weeks where repeated rainstorms flush debris onto the roads and you can quickly pick up a few punctures and blame that on the tyres rather than the weather.
As I swap wheels a bit, I never really remember which tyres got punctured so I haven't a clue which are best in this respect!
I do tend to find though when it comes to issues like this where people are trying to access the probablilty of something happening sample size is quite important. You are a sample of one and that is far from indicative. so as your sample set is skewed against those tyres you have been unlucky enough to puncture on (and if you punctured on those you would have punctured on many that same day) your conclusions become skewed.
The risk of puncturing is in the order of 0.05% per mile or so (maybe a bit more or less depending on the tyre road conditions e.t.c). So the cumulative probably of puncturing after 5000 miles is about 63% which feels right for a race tyre. After 10000 miles the probablilty goes up to 86%. All I saying anecdotal evidence and sampling of a relatively low number of miles will skew conclusions badly, why do you think politicans are the worst kind of decision makers. they are the masters of anecdotal evidence and skewed sampling. Repeat the test on a sample of 100 people running a tyre for 5000 miles under similar conditions and the results maybe valid. Miss any one of those things out and you have opinion.
But let's keep this in perspective. I'm quoting my experiences rather than claiming a definitive statistically unassailable test result (I'm a director of quality in medical devices - I know what statistically unassailable test results look like). I'm confident though that, (again) for the roads I ride, the GP4ks doesn't provide the same degree of puncture protection as the Rubino Pro - the results aren't entirely down to chance: other than the possibility that I've had 2 sets of duff tyres from Conti which, in itself, would probably say something.
Comparing apples and oranges is kind of pointless. My point is all equivalent race tyres will puncture roughly as requently as each other (design constraints dictate this) some may be slightly better than other some worse, some a bit more supple some less but in general all are roughly equivalent. The same goes for the Rubino, Tri Comp Fortezza, Gatorskin and the marathon plus is in a catagory all of it own.
I think these numbers don't make much sense. Firstly, normally you can't do 5,000 miles with a 23 mm tyre, let alone 10,000... I have managed 6,000 with a chunky nailproof Randonneur PRO 32 before the red of the underlying layer showed up... a 23 mm tyre is a lot thinner.
Secondly, if there is such a thing as a % risk of puncturing, it's not a linear relationship with mileage, but rather something approaching an exponential... close to zero when it's new, once the rubber is worn punctures are way more likely, as you point out yourself
ugo I picked that puncture rate as it pretty much means after 2000 miles you have pretty much killed your 23mm race tyre. I have not got much more than that before. I do think though you can with some testing asign an average puncture rate for the average road say in suffolk. I have punctured brand new 4 seasons tyre the day of fitting after 20 miles in fact front and rear holed to the point of being scrap. That has happened more than once so I am not sure about the close to zero risk when tyres are new.
IME punctures are as much down to the rider as they are to roads and tyres. Every club has a few serial punctures... I am sure you know at least one of those guys who has at least a puncture on every single ride, regardless of the tyre. Some tend to avoid dirt and gutters, others ride into it