[Closed] Gravel bike tyres - how wide should they be?

TL:DR

42

Oops! third last picture should be this

[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7819/46378324205_c3aa5fa2af_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7819/46378324205_c3aa5fa2af_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

scotroutes

TL:DR

42

I had to google that and found this definition and similar

"The average IQ of people typing TLDR in Internet forums is about 64"

But seeing as you gave the ultimate answer 42 from the Hitchhiker's Guide, you must be a few points above that.

It does raise the point, is there any way to adjust picture sizes and to have them beside each other, so a post like mine doesn't end up as a long scroll?

all depends on how fast you want to hit things and if they are tubeless or not.

mixed terrain (mud, rocks, roots and fire road "gravel") set up tubeless around 30psi front 35psi rear then nothing under 40mm

if it's just a touring bike, lots of tarmac with the odd excursion on forest paths or towpath then 30-35mm but then that's not my idea of gravel, see above for the sort of stuff i like to ride on mine

so hard to pin down as everyone has their own opinion on what gravel means. for example those doing the dirty reiver/kanza etc will try to go as fast as possible so sacrifice comfort over speed and probably run a much narrower tyre. those just trying to survive those events will run bigger in an effort to reach the end without being battered.

Looks ace 🙂

(I also now want to put silly bars and a 3 speed hub on my pompino)

simondbarnes

I also now want to put silly bars and a 3 speed hub on my pompino

Then you may also want to add the triple sprung saddle... 🙂

Looks a lovely ride, though if I was doing it I reckon I’d enjoy it more on a mountain bike.

Then you may also want to add the triple sprung saddle… 🙂

I'm not quite old enough for that yet 🙂

iainc

Looks a lovely ride, though if I was doing it I reckon I’d enjoy it more on a mountain bike.

Ah, that's the point, but it would be a boring ride on an mtb because there was nothing technical about it, so no need for all the other technology on an mtb - although the surfaces really needed mtb size tyres..

I think British gravel bikes need to have the clearance for wide tyres to make them suitable for the variety of surfaces and conditions we get here*.

After all, you can fit skinny tyres into a wide clearance frame, but not the other way around. We're in a similar situation to where early mtbs were designed more for dry California than boggy Britain.

A good option is choice of wide 650B tyres or skinnier 700c which some of the more progressive manufacturers are now doing.

.

.

*Maybe that's a Scottish perspective because we have almost unrestricted access.

Epicyclo, I am also ‘here’, so know what you mean. I have taken my Croix de Fer on a lot of rides and wished I’d taken my HT mind you 😀. That said, it only has 35c tyres on it..

Nothing there I'd call 'gravel' but it's pretty much identical to the kind of terrain/surfaces I'm used to travelling on the old M-Trax hybrid conversion, very much the same config as yr pictured bike.

I had teo sets of tyres for different uses, both by Schwalbe

Marathon Racer 35c (Tarmac and light gravel, summer farm tracks)
Landcruiser 45c (for what you are riding, in luding surfaced transfer/minor roads)

I'd keep the Landcruisers on most of the year, surprisingly capable in rough and goopy stuff, yet not too shabby on tarmac. Of course that was 26er and had full SK guards to take 1.75mm tyres. No reason to think that 40c Landcruisers wouldnt perform well.

Now I use Nano 2.1s on the monstercross. Much better all around, and lighter to boot. 40c Nanos IME may be a good all-round choice for that kind of stuff?

For most of the OPs ride, my current tyres (WTB Resolute 700x42) would have been pretty much ok. For the logging-machinery-ruined sections, proper MTB tyres.

As a general rule, and having experimented in the 700x32-47 range, my gravel tyre sweet spot is a fast rolling but slightly knobbly 40-45c tyre, which is capable enough on most of the off road I want to do, whilst still rolling well enough on tarmac.

Haven't tried 650b, but the kind of think once you start getting into the realms of 2" wide rubber, you might as well take your MTB (and if doing that sort of ride locally, I'd take my Inbred SS Rigid)

So there we have what can happen on a typical gravel ride in the Highlands.

When you consider I picked the route for its easiness you can see why I think gravel bikes need 2.35″ tyres. 🙂

It's not a gravel ride.

When you consider I picked the route for its easiness you can see why I think gravel bikes need 2.35″ tyres

Or just ride an MTB. I feel as if you are thinking of MTBs as 150mm of full suspension long slack rad-ness. but that's just one kind of MTB. On a ride like that I'd have my rigid 29er, with its 2.35 tyres, but it's still an MTB. I call it my adventure bike, but it's still an MTB. In fact it's perfect for that kind of ride. In as much as anything is. I must admit I'd have chalked that ride down to experience and not repeated it!

^ yeah, looks like classic old school xc terrain. Some good, some a bit sloggy, all part of a good unplanned day. Rigid 29er would be ideal for me there. Gravel/ATB duality.

molgrips

It’s not a gravel ride.

I suppose the big question is how do you define gravel?

If it's only applied to smooth graded surfaces, is there any point to owning a special purpose bike for such as a decent road bike will do?

I agree an rigid mtb would have been better for the bits shown on the pics, but the important bit of the mtb would have been the tyres, most of the rest is a hindrance when there's long bits of road to cover as well.

I was originally looking for a ride that would replicate the conditions the vintage bikes would have got ridden on, back when most minor roads were unsurfaced.

Although the pics aren't gravel, most of the ride was on forestry and estate tracks but even those would have been no pleasure at all on skinny tyres and the downhills were sketchy enough with 40mm.

What bike is the solution for forestry and estate roads if not a gravel bike?

Sometimes they degenerate into stuff like I have shown for a few miles. Bigger tyres make the difference between riding it and a few miles of hike a bike, and usually it's too far to simply turn back.

Here's a few pics of what I call gravel on part of a 90 mile loop I like to do, about half of that being road work.

(It will be familiar to quite a few on here as part of the HT550).

40mm tyres, road no problem, but climbs on loose gravel mean wheelspin.

[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/934/41851681550_1f812cd4d9_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/934/41851681550_1f812cd4d9_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

It's much more comfortable on fatter tyres (here 2.35" Big Apples) and more secure on the descents for braking etc, and the BAs are just the job for cruising on cut up tarmac.

[url= https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3816/19542997988_52000c33ea_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3816/19542997988_52000c33ea_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

And best of all on very fat tyres (slick), you can ignore the surfaces within reason, and ok for distance on the road, but not as easy as with the BAs.

[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7396/8731654806_fe6d0d9333_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7396/8731654806_fe6d0d9333_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

I have also ridden it on assorted mtbs, but the 40+ miles on the road component with knobbly tyres are a drag.

If I was buying a bike for the job instead of lashing something together from my attic, it would be something like the Whyte Glencoe. They seem to agree on the need for big tyres for our conditions.

If someone has ridden it on one, I'd be interested in their opinion.
(Or maybe Whyte can lend me one if they want a review 🙂 )

I suppose the big question is how do you define gravel?

If it’s only applied to smooth graded surfaces, is there any point to owning a special purpose bike for such as a decent road bike will do?

From what I understand, gravel riding is basically what we would call fire roads. It comes from the US, presumably out West, where there are lots of non-tarmac public roads that are like our fire roads, they can go on for 20-30 miles without a junction. They get surfaced and graded periodically. So 35-38c tyres will be fine. They are not like the tracks in upland Britain.

You say a 'decent' road bike will do, but really 25-28c tyres aren't enough which is what most normal road bikes have. So you need a road bike with clearance for fatter tyres. Which is what a gravel bike is. Seems straightforward to me.

a decent road bike

That's pretty much why I like the current crop of what are sold as gravel bikes and the bikes sold as cross bikes before that. Entertaining on the tarmac but not limited to it. For me (and I think, based on what I've seen, quite a lot here) that makes a road bike that can go off road, rather than a mountain bike that can go on road.

I'll add, if you're interested to see where I'm coming from, my 'road' bike is a bowman foots Cray- sold as a cross bike, still slacker than most of the newer gravel bikes and I swap between a knard and a nano that come up about 44mm and a set of 35mm slicks. Goes like the clappers on most things and if it's getting rough enough that I really wanted bigger tyres there's a good chance I'd like all the other trappings that I get with my Solaris- suss forks, dropper etc. I could run much faster tyres on the Solaris but then it wouldn't be as good for all of the muddy singletrack round here as I'd spend the entire time going sideways into the bushes

Quite where that line is will be different for everyone, the nice thing about this gravel craze is that it's opened up a lot of options for good tyres in the intermediate category that previously got largely stuck with heavy touring tyres

Down by me we don't have many trails that are well surfaced enough for a gravel bike, hence the rigid 29er. But that's just my local terrain. Horses for courses. Gravel bikes aren't replacing anything, they are just giving us more choices.

I bet the original RSF members would've chosen rigid 29ers with fat tyres if they'd had them.

swanny853

...and if it’s getting rough enough that I really wanted bigger tyres there’s a good chance I’d like all the other trappings that I get with my Solaris- suss forks...

That makes sense, but when you're already out on your gravel bike, it's not an option. It's ok for planned rides in known conditions or maintained circuits.

I look at gravel bikes as a tool for exploring and covering distance, so it's likely that there will be surfaces where narrow tyres make for hard going. You just need a drop of rain on some tracks for the ground to get soft, or loose gravel,  and the skinny tyres sink in.

That's ok for maybe a mile or a short term effort like a cross race, but if you want to ride all day it's awful hard work that can be avoided if you have fatter tyres.

I've done long distances on skinny tyres offroad. Many years ago (before mtb) I did a week touring outback tracks in Oz on a bike with 32mm tubs - which enabled me to run lower pressures. In places where conditions were soft, the tyres sank in and there were long hike a bike sections. Yet I have ridden the same sort of stuff with 2"+ tyres subsequently.

molgrips

I bet the original RSF members would’ve chosen rigid 29ers with fat tyres if they’d had them.

As it happens, I've been a member for a long time, and before that I used to ride with members when I was a lad in the late 1950s and 60s.

I think I can safely say from experience that original RSF members would ride anything from a 16" Moulton to a rod brake roadster to a lugged lightweight fixed wheel. It was never about the bike to the RSF, and all about the ride.

But nowadays, we're softies, and this RSF member wants his comforts and the ride to be no harder than it need be.

My gravel bike is a rigid 29er with fat tyres, so you're spot on, but there's too many compromises, luggage, mudguards, cockpit, etc. There was no other option when I built it.

What I'd like in a gravel bike is something with the profile and geometry of an easy handling audax or touring bike, but with clearance for 2"+ tyres.

Maybe when I have finished my cull of excess bikes, I'll have an excuse to buy something like the Whyte, but as usual, it will need to be singlespeed or hub gear capable.

At the moment I have adapted a 29er hardtail purely to get the tyre sizes, but there are a lot of compromises to do so.

Interested to what these are. I don't feel compromised on my Salsa.

Sorry, edited original before I saw your next post, but answered your question.

EDIT: and now I'm editing this. 🙂

Your Salsa is a very competent bike, and so is my converted TD-1, but one killer for me is the sloping top tube.

I find a horizontal TT much more comfortable for extended hike a bike, so it's something I would specify in a bike that would be likely to see plenty HaB. I'd probably want the tube profile flattened as well.

Interesting.

I've never been able to get comfortable with the bike over my shoulder in the traditional style. The TT always rests on a bone in my shoulder and hurts like hells bells. So I put it flat across my back and put my hand either under or over the top tube and hold it there. I'm usually wearing a Camelbak which helps. Back in the day if I was wearing a rucksack for 'bikepacking' I'd rest it across the top of my rucksack and I'd barely have to hold it. This made me wonder if some kind of strap arrangement for this would help.

I think I can safely say from experience that original RSF members would ride anything from a 16″ Moulton to a rod brake roadster to a lugged lightweight fixed wheel. It was never about the bike to the RSF, and all about the ride.

See, this sounds like bragging. Of course it's about the bike - you're riding one, it matters. You don't have to obsess over pointless details, but your bike has to function. A bike has to have some benefits to the activity otherwise you might as well leave it behind and just go for a walk. Of course, lots of people get worked up over stuff that doesn't matter, and argue over what's 'better'. But thinking about your bike doesn't have to be that. You yourself have discussed the pros and cons of bikes (even in this very thread), which is perfectly reasonable, it just goes to show that the bike matters even when it doesn't.

I'm reflecting the attitudes that the old timers I rode with had, basically any bike, anywhere, any time.

It's fun to do that, but my own opinion is that the bike matters very much, and the RSF missed a golden opportunity to put pressure on the British bike industry when it was at its zenith.

Otherwise I wouldn't have put so much time and effort in trying to get it right.

epicyclo,

From what you describe, have you looked at something like a Velo Orange Polyvalant?

Interesting list of bikes here

What I’d like in a gravel bike is something with the profile and geometry of an easy handling audax or touring bike, but with clearance for 2″+ tyres.

Peregrine?

Wouldn't recommend one round strathpuffer though!

That makes sense, but when you’re already out on your gravel bike, it’s not an option. It’s ok for planned rides in known conditions or maintained circuits.

This strikes me as a strange argument. There are plenty of rides where I hit points and think 'hmm, the big full suspension bike would have been great here' but that doesn't mean I ride it everywhere just in case.

Any bike is going to be a compromise for just about any ride and pretty much by definition will be out of it's depth somewhere, it's just the compromise that suits you and not generalising it to everyone.

Again, if you want my perspective- I've run the mountain bike rigid and on fast tyres as an explorer and it was great for the 'riding around' off road parts, but it didn't feel like it made it 'better enough' on the smooth bits or the tarmac to compensate for the compromise on the rougher stuff. If I lived somewhere different the point at which I hit that compromise might be different.

2.25 is the sweet spot I've settled on for now. Currently a Singular Swift with Jones bars.
Schwalbe RR on the front, and another on the rear with the knobbles cut off to make a semislick. I'd have bought something less knobbly, but the RR was in the shed already.

It's made for a bike that is barely compromised on the road, but is still actually enjoyable to bomb down roughish fireroad descents on.

I did sixtyish miles of Tour de Ben last week with a mate on a proper gravel bike. He's got it up for sale now with plans to resurrect an old steel MTB into his gravel bike.
His hands and shoulders were killing him by the end of the day, due mainly to the deathgrip on the hoods on every descent, controlling speed to avoid getting into trouble on his weedy tyres.

A good option is choice of wide 650B tyres or skinnier 700c which some of the more progressive manufacturers are now doing.

These two options are not as different from each other as you may think. Take a look at this, its a two part article but the conclusion isnt online yet

https://www.ukgravelbike.club/2019/03/03/the-versatility-conundrum-one-mans-battle-with-wheels-formats-and-tubeless-tyres/

His hands and shoulders were killing him by the end of the day, due mainly to the deathgrip on the hoods on every descent, controlling speed to avoid getting into trouble on his weedy tyres.

A few years before MTBs hit the UK (and before buying my first ATB) I had cut my grownup/distance cycling teeth on a 1980s road bike. This was ridden everywhere and I took scenic shortcuts where available ie canal towpaths, farm tracks, woodland trails. FFWD and though I had enjoyed what MTB had to offer I still missed the touring bike, and in some ways a (rigid) ATB. So I experimented with a few rigid MTBs trying to touralise-ificate them with old fashioned touring/comfort high-sweep bars, hybrid 1.75 tyres and full guards, kickstand, racks etc. I had some success, but then entirely by luck/coffee stop I chanced upon a Genesis Vagabond demo in a bike shop.

2016 enter the monstercross. Had never heard of one. It ticked most of my my road-touring/ATB boxes. Rode it and loved it. Made it mine.

First thing I did was ride on the hoods. Everywhere. Second thing I did (on the hoods) was stack off-road during a descent (in the FOD). Time to lay off the hoods, at least on downhill sections.

Going back to the 1980s I remembered my old Carlton roadie had secondary/auxiliary/crosstop brake levers. They had let me ride in the woods without cricking my neck to see over everything.

So surely it makes sense on a monstertour (I may have just invented that hateful word) drop-bar setup to run wide and shallow drops with cross-top levers?

Sweet-spot I've found for variable wet/dry/on/off-road conditions are the WTB Nano 2.1s

OTOH and in the dry (on past 26er incarnations) like the OP I favoured 2.35 Big Apples. They were heavy old things though. Would be interested in trying something similar for the Vagabond in 29er flavour if anyone has any suggestions?

swanny853

This strikes me as a strange argument. There are plenty of rides where I hit points and think ‘hmm, the big full suspension bike would have been great here’ but that doesn’t mean I ride it everywhere just in case

You have misinterpreted what I was saying, so I probably didn't word it very well.

Rather than repeat myself, I think bedmaker's post just after yours probably sums up nicely the difference having bigger tyres make on a decent length of ride on the actual conditions we have on our gravel roads.

And really it's not much to ask - a bit more clearance to allow for wider tyres on gravel bikes. Those who want skinny tyres can have them, and those that want wider can have them too. Everybody's happy then.

Malvern Rider

...First thing I did was ride on the hoods. Everywhere. Second thing I did on the goods was stack off-road during a descent (in the FOD). Time to lay off the hoods, at least on downhill sections...

Should always be in the drops for descents. You've got the brakes handy, and although it's counter-intuitive you're less likely to OTB.

On the hoods your CoG is high, in the drops it is low (although slightly forward), but the leverage force is less.  The guys who are fit and flexible enough to use really low bars benefit even more from this.

Make a wee model with cut out cardboard, and measure the change of the CoG lever length in the different positions and you'll see what I mean, or at least work out what suits you.

.

BTW Monstertour - who can argue with that? Well done. I might stop creating dissent by calling my bike a gravel bike and use that instead. 🙂

Will this do it?

http://www.bikepacking.com/news/bearclaw-beaux-jaxon-gravel-plus/

(29x2.6" tyres in a 405mm axle-to-crown fork!)

More seriously, I see what the OP means. I do a lot of riding in the Dales, and often mix in easy off road stuff with long road sections. I prefer being on my rigid 29er offroad, but I sometimes get a train out of Leeds and cycle home and would rather not be dragging it along 40-50 miles of tarmac.

The MTB geometry isn't really needed for a lot of the offroad bits, just the clearance for fast rolling 2.2-2.3" tyres.

I made a klaxxon noise at that^

Looks ace.

Shame it doesn't seem to have provision for hub-gears/SS?

I run 29 2.6 and 29 3.00 on my gravel adventure bike.

legometeorology

Will this do it?

Looks enticing. 🙂

I'd want mudguards with tyres that size - they have the ability to redistribute sizeable amounts of the track on you.

All it needs is the ability to SS it or fit a hub gear.

So once you have relatively bigish tyres, what's the benefit of drop bars? Hand position and aero ability?

Wondering if you could get that from jones loops or something similar instead?

if you look at a lot of the folks ultra-distance eventing, then jones loops or various drop bar shapes are pretty much the main choices, to be honest I do love a loop bar, but find drops just that bit better for keeping on the cadence with a singlespeed. Ultimately its down to what works for you comfort and performance wise.

benp1

So once you have relatively bigish tyres, what’s the benefit of drop bars?...

Headwinds. 🙂

A long haul on the road sitting up into a headwind is a right pain.

They are also good descending on unkempt track because you're in the hooks and can still have a loose grip. On a rigid bike, your wrists will thank you for that.

But really any bar that gets you a comfortable position. It's not a religion.

So once you have relatively bigish tyres, what’s the benefit of drop bars? Hand position and aero ability?

What they said. And, it functions well as my middle-aged belly-fat monitoring device. The pencil test. Right now I can pinch and retain a mostly-full pencil-case. Or a cartridge pad. Working my way down to a couple of marker pens. Looking forward to a 4b.

BTW Monstertour – who can argue with that? Well done. I might stop creating dissent by calling my bike a gravel bike and use that instead. 🙂

Monstertour you say???

Ye olde original Kona Sutra. Maybe proven to be well ahead of its time with clearance for big tyres and slidey dropouts for your fixed/hub gears.

scotroutes

Ye olde original Kona Sutra. Maybe proven to be well ahead of its time with clearance for big tyres and slidey dropouts for your fixed/hub gears.

Konas do lend themselves nicely to that purpose. 🙂

[url= https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2560/5706510702_f57a197a96_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2560/5706510702_f57a197a96_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

[url= https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2084/5705945159_c6bfc0f785_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2084/5705945159_c6bfc0f785_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

Must pull it back out of the attic.

If you were actually riding on gravel rather than the terrain in your pictures then I find 23c are okay as I am not bothered by comfort as don't ride far. Better in the summer on dry gravel though as when it is wet the 23c sink in a bit too much so are slower than a wider tyre s for the fastest I would probably go 28c if it fitted in my frame.

kerley

If you were actually riding on gravel rather than the terrain in your pictures then I find 23c are okay as I am not bothered by comfort as don’t ride far...

If you live in the Highlands, you can get all sorts of surfaces on any ride of a decent length.

On the bit in the last pic your 23c tyres would have been just as good because it was into HaB or RSF territory anyway, but it would have been unpleasant getting there.

There was a track shown on the OS map, but it was overgrown. The lead up had got progressively rougher and softer and eventually unrideable.

The total loop is about 68km around Ben Wyvis, about 4km on road, and ascent just under 2,000 metres. At the time that pic was taken there was a big HaB to that loch, but last time I went round the track had been renewed and was good gravel.

However there's still about 2km of HaB in the loop depending on how wet the moor is. It's a reasonably rigorous ride at my age but younger riders should enjoy it.

If anyone wants to do it, I have a GPX. I've not published it because there's some crossing of trackless moor and a bit of Rough Stuff and I don't want to be responsible for the unprepared getting into trouble. But if anyone here wants it, just ask.

I must be such a no skills bad handling southern wuss as I’m looking at getting a drop bar bike with room for 2.1 knobblies, just because my current “adventure/gravel/cross/endurance” bike only takes 33mm knobblies.
My body is in pieces after an off road ride on that.