You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Thanks to Milfordvets recommendation I have just replaced the 29 x 2.1 tyres on the Vagabond with Thunder Burts. First commute last week following epic deluge and they coped just fine in the chiltern slop. On road quieter than the Clements they replaced. I thought they might have been slower but I think this was the effects of a massive xmas do hangover. Finally went up tubeless POP.
Run them on my bike packer.... fair much better than I could ever have hoped off road and fast on road... love 'em.
How durable are they?
Thunderburts & durable don't go in the same sentence.
I mean in terms of tread wear on tarmac. I don't cut sidewalls.
That's what I meant too.
They'll be a full on slick within a week
I’ve ridden 500+ miles on Thunder Burts and they’re still absolutely fine. Except in slimey mud obvs
+1 perfect for mix of road and towpath/mild bridleway.
My rigid bike has 2.3 Ralphs on it currently, but now I have a spare set of wheels I think I'll put on smaller quicker tyres for "gravel" usage.
If you love your TB's, wait till you try Mezcals.
Mezcals will be slower.
Tests show the Mezcals have higher rolling resistance and are heavier. So they will be slower to spin up and take more energy to keep there.
They are 100g heavier than TB's at the same size. I'd consider 100g on rim weight very siginificant when buying them. On tyres it's even further from the axis of rotation.
There's no point going narrower than 2.1's. Its the sweet spot. If you look at the weights a narrower 'gravel' tyre at sub 1.5 inches its no lighter and sometimes heavier than TB.
700/ 29er sizes...
Thunder Burt 2.1 Liteskin 435g
Thunder Burt 2.1 Snakeskin TLR 515g
WTB Riddler TCS 37/ 1.45 465g
WTB Riddler TCS 44/ 1.7 560g
Maxxis Rambler 40/ 1.6 434g
Mezcals 2.1 TNT 680g
The sweet spot is a TB at 2.1 on a 23/25 450g Stans Arch mk3/ Wtb Kom 25 inner rim. Narrower rims and tyres barely weigh less and offer less comfort and probably have more rolling resistance if we believe the science offroad.
Which is why...we need to ditch the road chainsets and swap small chainring, small sprocket mtb drivetrains in. With a 32 oval x 10 sprocket you can spin to 26mph with a 2.1 at a 100 cadence. That was about 5 seconds of my 2hr New Forest ride last week before tucking, down the biggest gravel steep downhill in the New Forest. If you extend a gravel bikes chainstays from 435 to 450 mm you have room for even a 2.4, like on my Swift and Fargo for max bike flexibility
You can have sufficient gearing, wider tyres, lower resistance, more comfort and no more weight. Most gravel bike designers are too hung up with road bike legacy choices of narrow tyres, high head angles and uncomfortable low stack heights still.
On my rigid weenie 29er I run a 2.1 TB on the rear and a 2.25 WTB Nine Line on the front. Both tubeless naturally.
A TB on the front is a tad sketchy on muddier ground, so a nine line is better as it has more bite/knobs yet still rolls well.
This is my optimal setup. I've tried other fronts with even more bite/knobs (e.g. Maxxis Aspen) but they weren't as grippy/predictable on road, particularly at full lean. The Nine Lines have closely spaced knobs which run all the way to the edge, so full-lean edge grip is still good and they don't flex/deform like 'MTB' type designs.
I've even got a couple of downhill road KOMs with this tyre setup... so it has some grip.