"Adventure" bike tire size help

[Ron]

Anyone with experience riding Colorado "gravel" roads and double track? Our roads are really hard pack mag chloride grade 5 type stone and not much in the way of loose gravel although some areas do have loose finer stone/gravel. I am wondering if there's really much need to go wider than 38? I am considering a Moots Routt or Routt 45 (great deals on demos right now) . The advantage to the Routt is that it has a shorter CS and just a bit more road bike oriented and a lot of our gravel roads require riding on paved roads to access. the advantage to the 45 is that it will accomodate a wider (really taller) tire but it has longer CS's. BTW- you can run a 40+ tire on the front of the Routt


http://moots.com/bike/routt/

 

[newfydog]

Routt 45 all the way. You can always run a skinnier tire on the 45, but can't use a fatter one on the other.

Don't overlook the fact that wider tires actually have lower rolling resistance. From road racing to mtb, the trend is towards wider tires. I run a Continental Cyclocross Speed 42c tire on my "gravel" bike (a Motobecane titanium cyclocross bike). I like those tires so much more than the skinnier tires I've used that fitting them would be a requirement for any bike I took off pavement.
I rode across Colorado on the Great Divide MTB route, and remarked how the cyclocross bike and those tires would have been perfect.

 

[Ron]

THANKS @newfydog The shop owner is really suggesting the Routt and running 38's. I am torn since most here do run 32-38's for the majority of hard roads. For that kind of riding, and not the more rugged MTB-like trails, would that make sense? I don't foresee using the bike on MTB trails. the Routt vs Routt 45 is lighter 2.5 cm shorter CS and a little less stack too.

here's the product video (its from 2015 and now accommodates 38's).

<iframe width="963" height="642" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WondRY_2nEg" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

and a good example of the majority of riding

http://moots.com/studio-velo-gravel-camp-steamboat/

 

[newfydog]

He might be pushing the Routt because he doesn't want to get stuck with them. I have dropped road riders with the 42c tires pumped up hard. I took the same tires around the course used for the national cyclo championships and made it up some hills a fair number of riders walked. I just can't see much advantage in a bike that won't fit a wider tire. I use short chainstays for riding criteriums, not for cruising gravel roads. Looking at your Moots links, I see a need for mud clearance, not rear triangle stiffness.

If I were looking for something like that, I'd buy a less of a boutique bike and some extra sets of wheels----say 25, 35 and 45 tire sets. Buy this bike and you can get that, plus your season pass at Steamboat for the next few years.

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products...roadbikes/centurypro-ti-discbrake-road-ta.htm

 

[Ron]

hes not pushing them, that's still the top seller here. Appreciate the info though!

 

[Ken_R]

Anyone with experience riding Colorado "gravel" roads and double track? Our roads are really hard pack mag chloride grade 5 type stone and not much in the way of loose gravel although some areas do have loose finer stone/gravel. I am wondering if there's really much need to go wider than 38? I am considering a Moots Routt or Routt 45 (great deals on demos right now) . The advantage to the Routt is that it has a shorter CS and just a bit more road bike oriented and a lot of our gravel roads require riding on paved roads to access. the advantage to the 45 is that it will accomodate a wider (really taller) tire but it has longer CS's. BTW- you can run a 40+ tire on the front of the Routt


http://moots.com/bike/routt/

I love Gravel Riding. Check out my instagram to see my Bike setup and typical riding terrain. HERE

I use 700x37c WTB tubeless tires. 45c's might be a better choice for REALLY rocky terrain and sharp rocks and maybe deep gravel. But for combination paved and gravel + easy singletrack the 37's cant be beat. Also I REALLY suggest a 1x setup. MUCH less drivetrain noise and little to no chain slap/slop + great reliability.

 

[Slim]

As people mentioned above you can always put a narrower tire in a bike with more clear acne, not vice versa. You never know what the future holds.
For anything other than smooth hardpack, more tire width is better.

@Ron, you say that the skinnier bike has shorter chainstays and lower stack.
Is that an advantage though? If your front is long enough to keep weight over the rear, a longer chain stay lengthens the wheelbase, aiding stability on loose surfaces.
Do you need the lower stack height? Can you not achineve the same fit with are lower stem?

@Ken_R, nice looking bike!

I disagree about the drivetrain. I have 1x now, never had any problems with 2x either. Key is to use a MTB rear derailleur with a clutch, to prevent chainslap, and a chain-watcher.
2x gives you wider range, smaller gaps and can often be had for a similar weight.

 

[newfydog]

for combination paved and gravel + easy singletrack the 37's cant be beat. .

They certainly CAN be beat.

Here a 40 c tire was measured for rolling resistance against a slew of 37s. It beat all of them, at all air pressures;

 

[Ken_R]

They certainly CAN be beat.

Here a 40 c tire was measured for rolling resistance against a slew of 37s. It beat all of them, at all air pressures;

View attachment 36121

On what surface did they perform the test? Tire designs vary wildly even in that class of tire. The fatter tires get quite slow on pavement and smooth surfaces off road. Specially the more knobby designs. The WTB Riddler 37c's that I got (and run tubeless) work well in both pavement and dirt/gravel, specially if its dry. 40's are ok, not much difference, 45's start to get more into the off road only category. It is awesome that there are so many choices nowadays.

The 1X drivetrain is just simpler, easier to clean and looks better IMHO. Overall I love it. Yes, a MTB rear derr. is a must regardless. I really do not miss having to deal with a front derr.

 

[newfydog]

On what surface did they perform the test? Tire designs vary wildly even in that class of tire. The fatter tires get quite slow on pavement and smooth surfaces off road.

That test was run on a smooth steel drum. Fatter tires actually don't run slower on pavement. I saw a test of road tires and the only 28 c tire tested beat all the 23-25 c. Years ago the tri-geeks were running 17c tires, thinking they would be faster (they were always good at seeking out misery). Now you see time trial bikes with 25 c tires.

If you sprint hard out of the saddle fat tires have a bit of mush. I don't do much of that on a gravel bike, so I enjoy the fast smooth ride of a 42c tire.

 

[Ken_R]

That test was run on a smooth steel drum. Fatter tires actually don't run slower on pavement. I saw a test of road tires and the only 28 c tire tested beat all the 23-25 c. Years ago the tri-geeks were running 17c tires, thinking they would be faster (they were always good at seeking out misery). Now you see time trial bikes with 25 c tires.

If you sprint hard out of the saddle fat tires have a bit of mush. I don't do much of that on a gravel bike, so I enjoy the fast smooth ride of a 42c tire.

Ok, il test a few in the spring using my power meter.

 

[newfydog]

Yeah, try some, you might be surprised. Of course, you can only try them if your bike has the clearance.....back to the original question....

 

[Ron]

on my road bike I run a 30 up front and a 28 out back (due to space) the 30's actually measure closer to 32. They are fast and smooth at 90psi.

 

[Tom K.]

Routt 45 all the way. You can always run a skinnier tire on the 45, but can't use a fatter one on the other.

Pretty hard to argue with that.

Also I REALLY suggest a 1x setup. MUCH less drivetrain noise and little to no chain slap/slop + great reliability.

Although I've converted fully to 1X on my mtbs, I have to disagree with that approach on a gravel bike. My current "gravel bike" is my hard tail mtb with 1X and no matter how I gear it, I'm shy on gears at one end of the range or the other. Plus, the 1-2 jump drives me a little bit crazy on the road. Major Caveat: If you don't care about top speed, disregard, and simply gear for the climbs!

 

[scott43]

Although I've converted fully to 1X on my mtbs, I have to disagree with that approach on a gravel bike. My current "gravel bike" is my hard tail mtb with 1X and no matter how I gear it, I'm shy on gears at one end of the range or the other. Plus, the 1-2 jump drives me a little bit crazy on the road. Major Caveat: If you don't care about top speed, disregard, and simply gear for the climbs!

Absolutely.

 

[scott43]

I'd run the widest tire you can that doesn't sink or plow. I'm switching my road bike from 25's to 28's or 30's this summer..might just be from old-age though...

 

[newfydog]

I see the 1X and 2X shifting as a solution to a problem that never existed. We have several bikes with xt/xtr 3X10. Perfect shifting, every shift, in snow, mud, everywhere. Great selection, long running chainrings and actually not much weight difference.

We started in the Pleistocene with 28x28 as the lowest gear. Every time we got as lower gear, I found a use for it. For extended offroad tours carrying gear, I use the 22x36 a lot. Then we lost a gear going to bigger wheels, and another one going 1X. I wouldn't spend money fixing something that isn't broke. 1X 2X 3X, they are all very good My latest bike is 1X. I suppose it is a bit more tolerant of really stupid sloppy shifting, but the selection is poor.

I go out on the trails and every bike out there is now 1X. The pressures of fashion have sent a lot of good bikes to the garage, and fattened the Shimano stockholders. Retrogrouch rave over.

 

[Ken_R]

Unless you guys are fast racers 1x is really enough and more low maintenance but to each their own, great to have choices. I have averaged up to over 18mph on 2-3 hr gravel rides that include some singletrack and honestly have not wished for more gearing. Most of the time I am at 15-16mph average for 2-3 hr rides and the gearing is fine (42t, 11-42 with 700x37c tires). If I were racing and in top shape I might put in a 44t in front or even a 46t for flatter courses. But for overall riding the 42t is fine even with road segments thrown in and specially useful for the climbs around here in the front range.

For road riding the 28c tires are great, if you can fit 30c's by all means. I also really enjoy the tubeless setup so if you can run one do so as well.

Its also best to have a good match between rim width/design and the tire width you intend to use. Wide tires on narrow rims are just odd and not great performing.

Again, my recommendations are for where I live. I live right next to the foothills in Colorado just 5 miles from the canyons so there are a LOT of climbs nearby.

 

[Tom K.]

Most of the time I am at 15-16mph average for 2-3 hr rides and the gearing is fine (42t, 11-42 with 700x37c tires).

Again, my recommendations are for where I live. I live right next to the foothills in Colorado just 5 miles from the canyons so there are a LOT of climbs nearby.

So true about location. Our gravel roads include crazy steep sections. Like 34 x 50 at 60 cadence steep stuff. And damned if every truly great loop we have doesn't include at least one of those segments.

So I end up under-geared on normal roads with a 34 x 10 high gear, which I don't care so much about these days, being a (mostly) retired racer.

 

[Ron]

I'd run the widest tire you can that doesn't sink or plow. I'm switching my road bike from 25's to 28's or 30's this summer..might just be from old-age though...

im running Bonti A3 Aerolus 3 wheels with Schwalbe One's: 28 in the rear because that's as much as I can fit which seat up at 30 and a 30cc up front which seats at ~32. I run them at 85F 90R psi and love this setup for fast rolling and smoothness on our chip and seal. Tires are just part of the holy trinity of Rims, hubs & tires.