2 ms·

Lots of the wattage gains in tests are often only noticeable when the speed approaches 40km/h. Wonder about the effect at pro levels, if 32mm is viable there.

Lots of the wattage gains in tests are often only noticeable when the speed approaches 40km/h. Wonder about the effect at pro levels, if 32mm is viable there. My longest is 300km with 35km/h avg (185 miles, ~22mph) running 25mm. No problems with comfort. Never tested other wheels on this bike. But I do have a gravel in same price range with wider tires. That I can follow easily in a group, but alone my speed is slower for the same wattage. Might be the more upright position though.

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
This is a misconception, I think, although your experience seems like enough that I'm surprised you'd make it. The "big" changes that happen as you approach and go beyond 40km/h are due to (aerodynamic) drag coefficient, which has very, very little to do with the width of your tires. The changes that Heine is talking about are not related to drag coefficient at all. Worth noting that Heine himself is a legendary ultra-cyclist. He holds the record on the Cannonball (Seattle to Spokane on I-90, 300 miles) in the self-supported category. He would routinely other riders (e.g. me) even though he had to pull off the interstate to restock on fluids and food.
- matsemann 5y ago
  > This is a misconception, I think My comment was more general, as in that lots of truths and myths about bicycling stems from people talking about different speeds. So stuff like "x doesn't matter" some amateurs say, but that x actually starts to matter when the speed increases. Or the opposite, lots of marketing about how product y saves z watts making us amateurs buy it, but then that test was on a already perfect setup at high speeds we're never gonna reach. But given most data is pointing to wider being better (or, not less effective but more comfortable) I'm wondering why pros aren't running wider.

2 ms·

Lots of the wattage gains in tests are often only noticeable when the speed approaches 40km/h. Wonder about the effect at pro levels, if 32mm is viable there.

by matsemann 5y ago

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
This is a misconception, I think, although your experience seems like enough that I'm surprised you'd make it. The "big" changes that happen as you approach and go beyond 40km/h are due to (aerodynamic) drag coefficient, which has very, very little to do with the width of your tires. The changes that Heine is talking about are not related to drag coefficient at all. Worth noting that Heine himself is a legendary ultra-cyclist. He holds the record on the Cannonball (Seattle to Spokane on I-90, 300 miles) in the self-supported category. He would routinely other riders (e.g. me) even though he had to pull off the interstate to restock on fluids and food.
- matsemann 5y ago
  > This is a misconception, I think My comment was more general, as in that lots of truths and myths about bicycling stems from people talking about different speeds. So stuff like "x doesn't matter" some amateurs say, but that x actually starts to matter when the speed increases. Or the opposite, lots of marketing about how product y saves z watts making us amateurs buy it, but then that test was on a already perfect setup at high speeds we're never gonna reach. But given most data is pointing to wider being better (or, not less effective but more comfortable) I'm wondering why pros aren't running wider.