 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
OK bear with me on this.
I've seen all the stuff online about XC tyres being faster than gravel tyres and by-and-large I can believe it, especially on a lot of the gravel I stray into, and my particular riding style ('lacking finesse').
However I think the premise for this was that XC MTB tyres had lighter weight/ more supply sidewalls than equivalent gravel tyres? This sort of makes sense to me, a 40mm gravel tyre doesn't have the volume to play with so you can imagine the sidewall being designed to be stiffer to avoid bottoming out and excessive flex (the sidewalls on my rear Terreno TNT tyre always look a bit ragged as it is!).
My preference would be to buy a 50mm version of my favourite 40mm gravel tyre, but wondering if I'm better getting an XC specific MTB tyre (the Conti Race King seems to be most popular...) if this is likely to be more supple. Is it just a case of comparing carcass TPI and looking for a higher number?
There is some talk that when gravel tyres go up to ~50mm they keep the tougher sidewalls of the 30-40 versions and just increase the volume so they end up being less supple than a 2" XC tyre that's designed from the ground up.
Certainly some of the 50mm Pirelli's are heavier than a few 2.1" XC tyres but there's rarely an apples for apples comparison as they'll often use different compounds/sidewall reinforcements etc. too.
For what it's worth all of my riding buddies for "gravel" duties (which in Surrey/Hampshire is basically XC mountain biking most of the time) have eventually settled on either 2.0/2.1" Conti Race Kings or 2.1" Vittoria Mezcals on whichever wheel size suits their frame clearance and geo etc.
There is some talk that when gravel tyres go up to ~50mm they keep the tougher sidewalls of the 30-40 versions and just increase the volume so they end up being less supple than a 2" XC tyre that's designed from the ground up.
Exactly what I was wondering! I fancied a 50mm T50 as a sort of slightly more aggressive Terreno Dry (the MTB Terreno 'XC' was just a bit too floaty in corners, I think the transition from slick crown to shoulder tread was just too big). That said, I might prefer the chunkier sidewall if it helps resist punctures...
The 29er has TNT (grey sidewall) Mezcals on it at the moment, might go out and try at the weekend whilst memories of the 40mm Terreno Dry on my gravel bike are still fresh.
I've just gone back from my winter setup of 27.5x2.25 Mezcals to 650x50 Pirelli Cinturato Gravel M's and actually feel like I need less pressure in the Pirelli's to get the same comfort and rolling speed over rougher gravel tracks which should really be the opposite as the volume is much smaller. But being different tyres and even manufacturers it's obviously tricky to make a straight comparison.
They are noticeably lighter to spin up though which was my goal and feel faster, as I changed the wheels & tyres together and saved a good 700g of combined weight so overall happy (I was running the Mezcals on some old Hope Pro4 Enduro wheels!).
I'm using 50mm Gravelkings, they work for me 👍
@jfab - what size rims are you using and how wide are the 50mm Gravel Ms once fitted? I'm just wondering if they might fit on my Topstone, which is currently fitted with some 650x47mm Rutlands.
I've just gone back from my winter setup of 27.5x2.25 Mezcals to 650x50 Pirelli Cinturato Gravel M's and actually feel like I need less pressure in the Pirelli's to get the same comfort and rolling speed over rougher gravel tracks which should really be the opposite as the volume is much smaller. But being different tyres and even manufacturers it's obviously tricky to make a straight comparison.
Is that maybe just the marginal difference in diameter? By my maths 2.25" is equivalent to 57mm? So you've gone more than 10% smaller in tyre size?
I'm using 650 x 50mm goodyear connector on my gravel bike. As they're mtb tyres, they have a larger volume than the equivalent gravel tyre so are way more comfy.
Have previously used schwalbe thunderburts which were good also.Â
I'd personally always take a xc mtb tyre over a gravel of the same size.Â
Â
I don't know about XC tyres being more supple sidewalls than gravel tyres but I see the logic.
I swapped from 700x50 Clement X'Plor gravels to 29x2.2 Conti Race Kings in 'Performance Shieldwall' variety (not the cheap wire bead ones but also not the expensive ProTection ones). The Clement 50mm/2.0 actually measured at 54mm vs 54.8mm for the Conti 2.2 on the same 25mm internal rim, but the volume/height is greater and the more knobbly tread adds width.
If anything I'd say the Conti sidewalls appear to be more robust but it also feels slightly more supple. I'm also riding a few psi less so it's not that clear cut, but the robust appearance of the sidewall is what encouraged me to try slightly less pressure (I ran more pressure in the Clements as they felt quite flimsy).
I imagine the 50mm/2.0" version of the Race King will be a decent tyre also. I'm happy with my 2.2s.
@scotroutes I don't have exact numbers to hand but I do remember that the 50mm rear didn't fit in my Ribble CGR frame as it blew up just over 50mm on some Prime Orra 650B gravel wheels, but frustratingly when I dropped to a 45 in the rear it ended up being about 8-9mm narrower instead of 5mm and clearing with so much room it looked like I should have gone up a size!
Is that maybe just the marginal difference in diameter? By my maths 2.25" is equivalent to 57mm? So you've gone more than 10% smaller in tyre size?
Â
Yes quite likely that has an influence as well!
Â