Supple 650b tires between 55 and 60 mm. Any suggestions?

25 replies · 1,729 views

sweetspot
33 posts
#1Oct 2, 2019, 11:50 AM
It seems that 50 mm is the limit for manufacturers of 650b tires but I want something bigger yet in the same time I don't want a stiff MTB tire. Can you suggest me some wide and supple 650b tires?
0
Slim
300 posts
#2Oct 2, 2019, 1:13 PM
Many MTb tires actually have pretty supple casings, Schwalbe’s lightskin is one example. Much thinner than most of my gravel tires.
Furious Fred one there. G1 speed in skinwall doesn’t have their snakeskin casing either. That said, snakeskin tires roll almost as well as liteskin, and are way tougher and better tubeless.
0
ccand51997
265 posts
#3Oct 2, 2019, 2:24 PM
I would second the Schwalbe tires. The 2.1 Thunder Burt that I bought to put on my son's bike is a really thin, smooth riding tire. I found a cheap, non-snakeskin version that has held up pretty well and some preliminary testing indicates that even on flat road riding, it may be faster or equal to the WTB Horizon tire I have been using for mostly road riding. The TB has three rows of small center knobs and then some larger side knobs. On the dirt it is all the tire I need.
I also use a Conti Race King Protection as a rear tire and is also a pretty fast tire in 2.2in. And it wears forever. It measures about three or four mm bigger than the TB. Right around 57mm compared to 54mm.
0
chas
1,305 posts
#4Oct 2, 2019, 4:00 PM
Took my Thunder burts (54mm) out last night for a fast and hard dirt ride (with a pack). 25psi - so, so smooth compared to 40mm tires. They feel so slow and heavy compared to my Furious Freds (50mm) - but the FF is not available in 650b. I wish they were. Not sure about the G-One availability in fat 650b guise. Schwalbe makes some good tires though.

WTB has a good reputation with supple 650b tires. I have't ridden them though.
0
owly
328 posts
#5Oct 3, 2019, 1:35 AMedited
chas wrote:...the FF is not available in 650b. I wish they were.

https://r2-bike.com/MAXXIS-Tire-MaxxLite-275-x-20-One70-Silkworm

Stupid light. I run one on the rear at the moment with a liteskin Thunder Burt front.

More supple than the 48mm Compass extralight. Obviously limited uses as it has less grip than a TB.
1
chas
1,305 posts
#6Oct 3, 2019, 11:26 AM
wow, interesting. TB is overkill for most of my gravel (unless its a really rough course). Can that Maxxis be run tubeless?
0
ccand51997
265 posts
#7Oct 3, 2019, 12:16 PM
They feel so slow and heavy compared to my Furious Freds (50mm) - but the FF is not available in 650b. I wish they were. Not sure about the G-One availability in fat 650b guise. Schwalbe makes some good tires though.

I have thought about trying the Freds as a rear tire because they have a bit more side traction than the G-One Speed (which I have used extensively as a gravel/mtb tire; as long as you know it slides on everything, it worked out fine for me and was surprisingly tough in snakeskin). Are the Freds that much better than TB's? I just tested my TBs against my WTB Horizon and it was a wash on flat roads and climbing. That surprised me because it is a smooth tire(compared to light tread on the TB), but then I measured the rubber and there is like 3mm in the center. I'm guessing it will last forever at 25 psi, but all that rubber is not fast.

The G-One Speed comes in 1.5, 2.0 and 2.35 in 27.5/650b.
0
smoothmoose
210 posts
#8Oct 3, 2019, 12:26 PM
Lots. Just look for the lightest casing options for the MTB tires. Here are some options:
- Bontrager XR0 or XR1
- Specialized Fast Traks
- Schwalbe Thunder Burts
- Continential Speed King / Race King

Many of these in the light/thin casing are in the 450-550g range for 2.0-2.2" wide - which the same as most "gravel specific" tires in the 650x45-47mm range. My 2.2 Fast Traks are plenty supple.
0
smoothmoose
210 posts
#9Oct 3, 2019, 12:29 PMedited
owly wrote:

https://r2-bike.com/MAXXIS-Tire-MaxxLite-275-x-20-One70-Silkworm

Stupid light. I run one on the rear at the moment with a liteskin Thunder Burt front.

More supple than the 48mm Compass extralight. Obviously limited uses as it has less grip than a TB.

Doesn't the MaxxLite require tubes and thus higher pressure? Goes against being supple, but yes it's stupid light.
0
chas
1,305 posts
#10Oct 3, 2019, 4:36 PM
ccand51997 wrote:
I have thought about trying the Freds as a rear tire because they have a bit more side traction than the G-One Speed (which I have used extensively as a gravel/mtb tire; as long as you know it slides on everything, it worked out fine for me and was surprisingly tough in snakeskin). Are the Freds that much better than TB's? I just tested my TBs against my WTB Horizon and it was a wash on flat roads and climbing. That surprised me because it is a smooth tire(compared to light tread on the TB), but then I measured the rubber and there is like 3mm in the center. I'm guessing it will last forever at 25 psi, but all that rubber is not fast.

The G-One Speed comes in 1.5, 2.0 and 2.35 in 27.5/650b.

I have a 60mm G-One speed. Fast, but scary in wet offroad conditions. I never noticed a wet trail on a dry day until I had these. flotation on a wide tire sux in mud!

I use the FF for fast dryish days. I like the volume (50mm), the speed, the light weight, the ability to track reasonably in less than ideal conditions (unlike the slicks above). However - it is a lightweight tire - weights about as much as a 33mm CX tire. For me, it works well on the front, but on the rear I'm guessing it will wear fast and be puncture prone.

The TB "feels" a lot slower. Rolling resistance is 22watt, so it isn't much off of some slicks i have, but it doesn't feel it. Its fast on dirt, but on pavement, it corners slow (deeper lugs) makes a little noise (and that isn't fast), and is much heavier (making it accelerate slow). It accelerates and climbs slower (size/weight). So that all adds up. Mostly it feels different, like I'm on a mountain bike. The 50mm FF feels like a fast 40mm road/gravel tire (and is lighter than almost all 40mm tires). But yeah, the TB has plenty of cornering grip for a gravel tire (and makes single track on a gravel bike fun!). I think of the FF as a gravel version of the G-One Speed that tracks and corners better in dirt/gravel/mud.

G-One all around (40mm in my case) works great in anything but sticky mud. Do amazing in the winter - even in snow. That would be a good rear tire if you did't want a slick.
0
owly
328 posts
#11Oct 3, 2019, 5:28 PMedited
chas wrote:wow, interesting. TB is overkill for most of my gravel (unless its a really rough course). Can that Maxxis be run tubeless?

Its not labelled as tubeless, but its how I run it.

It rolls a bit faster than the TB.

At high speed on loose over hard pack I can feel it skipping around quite a bit which is mainly why I run it in the rear.

I really wish someone made a FF weight in a 650b 2.2".
1
sweetspot
33 posts
#12Oct 4, 2019, 12:23 PMedited
ccand51997 wrote:I would second the Schwalbe tires. The 2.1 Thunder Burt that I bought to put on my son's bike is a really thin, smooth riding tire. I found a cheap, non-snakeskin version that has held up pretty well and some preliminary testing indicates that even on flat road riding, it may be faster or equal to the WTB Horizon tire I have been using for mostly road riding. The TB has three rows of small center knobs and then some larger side knobs. On the dirt it is all the tire I need.
I also use a Conti Race King Protection as a rear tire and is also a pretty fast tire in 2.2in. And it wears forever. It measures about three or four mm bigger than the TB. Right around 57mm compared to 54mm.

I have bought thunder burt 2.25 and put in the front of my bike. To be honest I am not blown away both in terms of suppleness and rolling resistance. I needed to go below 20 psi to really feel the difference in terms of comfort between this tire and Panaracer gravelking SK 650bx50 which I ride before. So my quest for wide and supple tire continues. Maybe i will try Continental now...
0
chas
1,305 posts
#13Oct 4, 2019, 2:25 PM
I find it cush, but that may be because I'm used to smaller tires - and riding a bigger tire at 25psi is going to feel cushier than a 40mm at 35psi. Still, all of my Schwalbe tires seem cush to me. Certainly better than the Conti tires I have been using. I'll say Conti's new 32mm GP5000 is surprisingly cush though.

Yeah, the TB doesn't feel fast. Given its rolling resistance numbers - it ain't slow (well, just about anything would be faster than my kenda slant6 tires on pavement). Sounds like you want some Rene Herse tires - as supple low rolling resistance is there raison d'etre.
0
ccand51997
265 posts
#14Oct 5, 2019, 2:00 PM
chas wrote:
Yeah, the TB doesn't feel fast. Given its rolling resistance numbers - it ain't slow

I generally caution people to avoid making speed judgements based off of feel. I recently tested my tires on a steep climb and was curious what extreme changes in pressure would do. I tried them at 50ish, my normal pressure of 22-25, and around 8psi. The last felt bouncy, slow and squirrelly in turns. And yet, I rode exactly the same time/distance for alll three pressures. That goes against the linear results of the drum testing, but I've done it several times and came to the same results. the 50psi felt hard and fast, the 25 normal, and the 8 slow but the results were all the same.
I'm not really directing this to you, but riders (on this site even) obsess over the weight and feel of tires and wheel weight, because the "rotational weight" myth just won't die.
My next project is to test the GP5000 I rode in France this summer against my gravel tires. When I did that previously with gravel tires vs. a GP4000sii, it was only marginally faster (like 2 seconds over 5 minutes climbing when compared to a RK Protection and a G-One Speed) and that might not have been real becauuse the GP had a latex tube and the others butyl.
1
chas
1,305 posts
#15Oct 7, 2019, 11:28 AM
Yup, I agree. Real world is what counts, and is harder to quantify. And on dirt, the limitations of the TBs don’t make much difference.
On hardpack or pavement, TBs are heavier, spin up slower, corner slower, and are a little draggy and audible compared to the Furious Fred. One of the best ways is real world testing with a pack of riders my similar strength/speed level. The weight difference is close to 1lb rotational weight – not hard to feel.
For the GP5000, I had kinda poo-pooed the resistance results. But then I replaced a worn set of 4-seansons (32mm) with 32mm GP5000s Tubless. Commuting, I felt the wind was at my back a little more. In group rides, I moved from the rear of the pack to sprinting off the front. I on strava I started getting KOMs and PRs on routes I do a lot.
I went back, read the “test” results and realized the new tires have half the resistance of my old Conti’s. ON my commute, I cruse maybe 1-2mph faster. Time wise its trivial on a 45min commute as I’m not at speed much of the time. But, it makes a difference racing or hard training rides.
On the other hand, I find weight doesn’t make much difference on a solo ride (or relaxed group ride) in the 150-200 watt range. I’d rather be on a comfortable bike. If I’m putting out 1000+ watts (or even sustaining 250-300 watts) – yeah it makes a difference.
1
clarksonxc
358 posts
#16Oct 9, 2019, 12:34 PM
ccand51997 wrote:
I'm not really directing this to you, but riders (on this site even) obsess over the weight and feel of tires and wheel weight, because the "rotational weight" myth just won't die.

what is the "rotational weight" myth?
0
ccand51997
265 posts
#17Oct 10, 2019, 12:28 AM
The idea that rotating weight matters more than any other weight. Wheel companies—other than deep, aero wheel companies like Zipp—are constantly touting their lightweight wheels and many riders obsess over a few extra grams in their tires. (I read a post recently where a guy complained about the extra weight of the tubeless version of the GP5000.) The myth is that weight at the rim/tire matters more. While I don’t doubt that people can feel the difference, it does not really affect performance.
http://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Why_Wheel_Aerodynamics_Can_Outweigh_Wheel_Weight_and_Inertia_2106.html
It was written from the standpoint of aero vs. weight, but the premise shows that wheel weight does not really matter much. Bike companies don't really want you to believe it, though. Heavier wheels might take a bit more energy to get rolling, but other that the 'feel', you lose nothing because that inertia pushed you down the trail after the light wheels have lost their momentum.
People don't want to believe it as you can see in the comments. The guy who wrote is an engineer and very tech-savvy cyclist who races.
0
chas
1,305 posts
#18Oct 10, 2019, 8:59 AMedited
I don't think it is that simple. First of all, riding gravel is a lot different than riding a crit in many ways. Not to mention that Aero wheels are out the door when on 60mm tires. But if you are talking about lowering your stem height - go for it. That's the biggest thing you can do, and its free.

Doing a solo gravel ride, I'm sheltered from trees, and going speeds where Aero is trivial. Certainly every time I accelerate - weight makes a difference. That is big when I'm commuting as there is a lot of stop and go.

Putting my 1.1kg tires on 1.7kg rims accelerates (and climbs) a lot different from putting 0.6kg tires on my 1.4kg rims. Whether that impacts the type of riding you are doing is up to you. Personally, the weight makes a bigger difference in my endurance than in my actual speed on a long gravel ride.

But if I'm doing a time trial at the velodrome - aero is everything. Big heavy Aero disk wheels are the way to go - hands down. But no one is using those wheels for any racing with a lot of sprinting and attacks. Certainly Aero is Huge at 30mph (as in your article) - but starting to get trivial at the speeds most of us ride gravel at. Just get in the drops going downhill, lol.
2
clarksonxc
358 posts
#19Oct 11, 2019, 4:40 PM
Man I have such a tough time taking a cycling related article from 2011 that seriously.... literally everything has changed since then. But I won't argue with you. At least you're arguing the aerodynamic gains vs. rotational weight gains, and not something totally wacky. I got into it with another guy advocating heavier wheels earlier this year after he said "Once rolling, that weight adds flywheel effect to REDUCE “micro accelerations”, which the equation is once again dominated by the rest of the mass being accelerated."
0
ccand51997
265 posts
#20Oct 17, 2019, 1:26 PM
Well, the guy was not wrong. If microaccelerations actually mattered, and they don't, then heavier wheels would reduce them, but the bigger point is that even in a huge acceleration, the mass of the wheel/tire did not make more than a tiny difference, mostly because it is a tiny fraction of the total mass you might have to accelerate. For me, at about 165 geared up with a 28 pound all-road bike, I come in at 183 pounds. Increasing or decreasing my wheels by a full pound only changes by total mass by less than half a percent. That is why it is not really significant.
I was curious once and loaded up 10 extra pounds on my bike and did my regular course with the same start/finish point. The result--no distinguishable difference in time. Now, if you are talking about a day with 7,000 feet of climbing, it would matter--somewhat. I think the calculator for that puts it at about 4 min 40 seconds. If that ride was 60 miles long and took you 5 hours you would be a little slower, and that does not even account for the speed you would gain back coming down the hills, which admittedly, won't be huge. And that is for ten pounds. A one pound difference in your wheels would be 1/10 of that or about 28 seconds over a five hour ride.
Just picking a faster rolling tire will make a much bigger difference.
I spent some time using one of the online calculators and basically, a pound extra requires one more watt when climbing. At higher outputs, I think it went up to 1.5 watts. On a rolling course that does not end at the top of a mountain, it dwindles down close to zero.
0

Related threads

Chiru VagusBikes · 0 replies · Feb 22, 2020
Myths In CyclingGravel Tires · 82 replies · Mar 20, 2021
performance vs. puncture protectionGravel Tires · 21 replies · Jan 1, 2021
700C > 650B wheels conversion on Gravel bike with "miserly" tire clearanceGravel Wheels (Wheels, Rims, Hubs, Etc) · 0 replies · Feb 13, 2019
Full coverage fendersComponents - Discussion and Reviews · 7 replies · Apr 7, 2020

Related threads

Chiru VagusBikes · 0 replies · Feb 22, 2020

Myths In CyclingGravel Tires · 82 replies · Mar 20, 2021

performance vs. puncture protectionGravel Tires · 21 replies · Jan 1, 2021

700C > 650B wheels conversion on Gravel bike with "miserly" tire clearanceGravel Wheels (Wheels, Rims, Hubs, Etc) · 0 replies · Feb 13, 2019

Full coverage fendersComponents - Discussion and Reviews · 7 replies · Apr 7, 2020