# Rolling resistance - Schwalbe Marathon Plus



## Rooster1 (3 Dec 2018)

I'm running some 700 / 25c Schwalbe Marathon Plus while I wait for delivery on some slicks, they are on some heavy CX wheels and I just cannot get any speed up!

They are heavy tyres, 595 g a wheel, so over a kilo in tyre, as opposed to most other tyres being about 500g a set.

Aside from the weight they have a tred pattern. 

So would the heavier setup and the tred account for about a -2 to -3 mile per hour defecit on my rides.

I'm certainly getting a good work out, and they are great at going over potholes.


----------



## MikeG (3 Dec 2018)

Yep, they're renowned for it, and there is some testing somewhere which shows the comparison. They're bomb-proof tyres for touring, mainly, rather than for people interested in speed. If you were riding across Africa, they'd probably be one of your top choices. If you are riding a TT, probably not.


----------



## Rooster1 (3 Dec 2018)

[QUOTE 5459025, member: 9609"]2 to 3 mph seems excessive but what is that as a percentage of a normal ride ?[/QUOTE]

I usually amble around at 16.7 - 17.5 mph (with lumpy bits)

With these tyres its usually 15 mph! 

It's liking riding with a handbrake on.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (3 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> I'm running some 700 / 25c Schwalbe Marathon Plus while I wait for delivery on some slicks, they are on some heavy CX wheels and I just cannot get any speed up!
> 
> They are heavy tyres, 595 g a wheel, so over a kilo in tyre, as opposed to most other tyres being about 500g a set.
> 
> ...



That's par for the course. It isn't the weight that's doing the dirty, it is the rubber. You can confirm this for yourself by inflating a standard set of tyres with water and going for a ride You. won't notice the difference, even though the water tyres will weigh more than the marathons. (a 25mm tyre on 700c can take just under 1l of water, thus 1kg).

It is all in the rubber thickness, the tread and the high-hysteresis intermediate layers.


----------



## Racing roadkill (3 Dec 2018)

They are known as ‘Wattsaps’ because they suck so much power out of you to even get them to move. On the plus side, they are very puncture resistant.


----------



## Racing roadkill (3 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> I usually amble around at 16.7 - 17.5 mph (with lumpy bits)
> 
> With these tyres its usually 15 mph!
> 
> It's liking riding with a handbrake on.


It’s not much different with the road focussed Durano+. They are hard work, but again don’t puncture easily.


----------



## Cycleops (3 Dec 2018)

If you want the low down on a variety of tyres check out this site;
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews

Here's the report on the marathon plus;
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews/schwalbe-marathon-plus-2015


----------



## Specialeyes (3 Dec 2018)

I've had a pair of M+ on my commuter bike for 18 months and... [aaargh - I can't bring myself to say it and tempt the P-Fairy!]... suffice to say my time spent at the side of the road with a wheel off has been zero. The calculus is always (time saved by not having P-Fairy Visits) - (time lost in slower rolling on a daily basis) and in reality they probably balance out. Of course, the slower commute is predictably slower whereas an unscheduled stop is, pun intended, a spike  

They're patched up with Superglue in a bunch of nicks but still going strong, which is good as I dread the day where I'll have to refit one at the roadside, as they were buggers to get on the rims in the first place!


----------



## Boon 51 (3 Dec 2018)

Cycleops said:


> If you want the low down on a variety of tyres check out this site;
> https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews
> 
> Here's the report on the marathon plus;
> https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews/schwalbe-marathon-plus-2015




Good info from this site..


----------



## Boon 51 (3 Dec 2018)

A heavy set of CX wheels at least 2.2 Kg + 1.2 Kg for tyres + 150 g for QR's and 200 to 250 gs for inner tubes that a lot of weight to lug about? Have you thought about some lighter wheels perhaps?


----------



## rogerzilla (3 Dec 2018)

I find they roll fine but they are slow to wind up to speed because of the colossal weight.


----------



## MichaelW2 (3 Dec 2018)

With M+ it is not only the weight but the stiffness of the sidewall which adds to rolling resistance. Best use is for pootling around town on a hub gear/chainguard bike by someone who doesn't like to fix their own, or if your route is particularly full of tyre hazards. M+ is a bit too stodgy for most touring, I have used plain Marathon. Specialist touring tyres have the protection and tread but more flexible sidewalls.


----------



## Rooster1 (3 Dec 2018)

Boon 51 said:


> A heavy set of CX wheels at least 2.2 Kg + 1.2 Kg for tyres + 150 g for QR's and 200 to 250 gs for inner tubes that a lot of weight to lug about? Have you thought about some lighter wheels perhaps?



Rear wheel being mended!


----------



## Rooster1 (3 Dec 2018)

Cycleops said:


> If you want the low down on a variety of tyres check out this site;
> https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews
> 
> Here's the report on the marathon plus;
> https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews/schwalbe-marathon-plus-2015



Ahh, this is the site I remember seeing before on rolling resistance tests.

OK, so its about 20% slower which is also my avg speed difference. At least I know I am not slacking.


----------



## GuyBoden (3 Dec 2018)

After a few punctures in winter's; dark, cold, frost and rain. Then you'll know why riders like Marathon+


----------



## DaveReading (3 Dec 2018)

rogerzilla said:


> I find they roll fine but they are slow to wind up to speed because of the colossal weight.



I'm afraid you have Newton's second law of motion to thank for that.


----------



## Rooster1 (3 Dec 2018)

Mmmm, fresh rubber


----------



## Will Spin (3 Dec 2018)

Just wondering how meaningful the rolling resistance test is. OK you may compare one tyre with on other but once out on our rough old roads are really going to notice the difference? May be if the road is dead smooth like the rolling test machine, but otherwise I think the result is meaningless.


----------



## Dave 123 (3 Dec 2018)

It’s the ‘dead’ feeling of the tyre that I didn’t enjoy.

It’s like having a solid pram/shopping trolley tyre on your wheels. Not a lot of bounce!


----------



## Yellow Saddle (3 Dec 2018)

Dogtrousers said:


> OK ... hands up who has taken up YS on this challenge? I've got as far as mentally designing a modified track pump for delivering the water.
> 
> I'm wondering whether to stop at water, there are higher density liquids available. Mercury tyres anyone?
> 
> I'm wondering what effect the incompressibility of water would have on the ride.


Just suck water into a standard hand pump and fill the tyre. The trick is to convince yourself that you can or can't feel it. Therefore, play the trick on an unsuspecting riding buddy and ask if he/she noticed anything.

But, I wasn't rubbishing the claim because of a subjective experiment. I'm rubbishing it based on doing the calculations. I've done them before and posted them on here.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (3 Dec 2018)

Will Spin said:


> Just wondering how meaningful the rolling resistance test is. OK you may compare one tyre with on other but once out on our rough old roads are really going to notice the difference? May be if the road is dead smooth like the rolling test machine, but otherwise I think the result is meaningless.


It is meaningful. Really meaningful. 
You can apply it in your everyday moving about. Push a loaded wheelbarrow over a lawn onto concrete paving. Notice the difference.
Push a loaded supermarket trolley over a smooth hard floor over one of those spaghetti welcome mats and feel the difference.
Push a car standing on a hard surface vs one on a soft surface or with softer tyres.


----------



## MikeG (3 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> Just suck water into a standard hand pump and fill the tyre. The trick is to convince yourself that you can or can't feel it. Therefore, play the trick on an unsuspecting riding buddy and ask if he/she noticed anything.
> 
> But, I wasn't rubbishing the claim because of a subjective experiment. I'm rubbishing it based on doing the calculations. I've done them before and posted them on here.




What would you hope to achieve with this experiment? The water would roll around the tyre internally, with friction therefore being a factor in addition to extra weight. You would therefore be attempting to test two variables (at least) with one "test", which isn't good science.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (3 Dec 2018)

MikeG said:


> What would you hope to achieve with this experiment? The water would roll around the tyre internally, with friction therefore being a factor in addition to extra weight. You would therefore be attempting to test two variables (at least) with one "test", which isn't good science.



It is a subjective test to show that a lot of extra weight in a tyre doesn't not present as people postulate. The fact that there's a bit (yes, just a small bit) of friction from moving water is neither here nor there. The myth goes that "rotating weight at the outer perimeter of the wheel makes the bike very slow to accellerate bla bla bla." It doesn't. You can't even feel it if you add two kilos of "rotating weight" to your wheels.

Try it and report back. The experiment is super easy, harmless and startling. However, don't use this as the basis of a retort. Do the calculation. It is easy: 1/2 mv2 etc.


----------



## ianrauk (3 Dec 2018)

Marathon Plus tyres just suck the life out of you.
But, if you want piece of mind for puncture protection then there's probably none better.


----------



## nickyboy (3 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> Ahh, this is the site I remember seeing before on rolling resistance tests.
> 
> OK, so its about 20% slower which is also my avg speed difference. At least I know I am not slacking.


It's just 20% more rolling resistance...this doesn't mean 20% slower.
Imagine you cycle at 120W (not too difficult). M+ eats 25W of this, leaving 95W effective power. Some other tyre eats 20W, leaving you with 100W effective power
In this example, you will be 5% slower (forgetting wind resistance for now). So if you're 20% slower most of that speed drop off is coming from elsewhere


----------



## MikeG (3 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> .......Try it and report back. The experiment is super easy, harmless and startling. .......



No. I don't accept that it is harmless, and frankly, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to me either way. I was merely interested in the poor design of your suggested experiment.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (3 Dec 2018)

MikeG said:


> No. I don't accept that it is harmless, and frankly, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to me either way. I was merely interested in the poor design of your suggested experiment.


Thanks for the interest.


----------



## DaveReading (3 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> You can't even feel it if you add two kilos of "rotating weight" to your wheels.



Nonsense.


----------



## HobbesOnTour (3 Dec 2018)

Lot's of Schwalbe tires are directional (is that even a term? ).
Check you have them on the right way - it makes a massive difference to speed & comfort!

Just something I read... Not from personal experience, honest!


----------



## Supersuperleeds (3 Dec 2018)

If you think Marathon Plus are hard work you should try Marathon Winters


----------



## Pat "5mph" (3 Dec 2018)

Supersuperleeds said:


> If you think Marathon Plus are hard work you should try Marathon Winters


Or Marathon Ice Spikers


----------



## ianrauk (3 Dec 2018)

HobbesOnTour said:


> Lot's of Schwalbe tires are directional (is that even a term? ).
> Check you have them on the right way - it makes a massive difference to speed & comfort!
> 
> Just something I read... Not from personal experience, honest!


It makes absolute zero difference


----------



## Ajax Bay (3 Dec 2018)

HobbesOnTour said:


> Lot's of Schwalbe tires are directional (is that even a term? ).
> Check you have them on the right way - it makes a massive difference to speed & comfort!
> Just something I read... Not from personal experience, honest!


Naughty, naughty! But you managed to get Ian to 'bite'. Does the Hobbes' 'road' bikes do the "more dynamic" look?
"Why are so many treads direction dependant (sic)?
"In the case of a road tire the rolling direction is mainly important for aesthetic considerations. Tires marked with arrows simply look more dynamic."
https://www.schwalbe.com/en/profil.html


----------



## HobbesOnTour (4 Dec 2018)

ianrauk said:


> It makes absolute zero difference





Ajax Bay said:


> Naughty, naughty! But you managed to get Ian to 'bite'. Does the Hobbes' 'road' bikes do the "more dynamic" look?
> "Why are so many treads direction dependant (sic)?
> "In the case of a road tire the rolling direction is mainly important for aesthetic considerations. Tires marked with arrows simply look more dynamic."
> https://www.schwalbe.com/en/profil.html



I wasn't trolling. The OP asked about Marathon plus tyres. My Marathon plus tyres have a direction on them (in black on the tyre itself, so hardly for aesthetics) and I have learned from bitter experience that it does make a difference if you fit them backwards.
(It also says it on the pages you linked to?)

I use them on 2 old MTBs, one used for touring & one for commuting. My tyres are big, currently running 2 inch ones on the tourer. I know nothing about "road" tyres and care less.

So, OP, check the directional arrows on your tires. It may make a difference.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

HobbesOnTour said:


> I wasn't trolling. The OP asked about Marathon plus tyres. My Marathon plus tyres have a direction on them (in black on the tyre itself, so hardly for aesthetics) and I have learned from bitter experience that it does make a difference if you fit them backwards.
> (It also says it on the pages you linked to?)
> 
> I use them on 2 old MTBs, one used for touring & one for commuting. My tyres are big, currently running 2 inch ones on the tourer. I know nothing about "road" tyres and care less.
> ...



Interesting. Please share this bitter experience with us.


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> Mmmm, fresh rubber



Hope you like fixing punctures at this time of the year with those


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

M+ great protection but lethal in the wet in my experience. However that is probably because I had them pumped to the max so they roll better............


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

MrGrumpy said:


> M+ great protection but lethal in the wet in my experience. However that is probably because I had them pumped to the max so they roll better............



Your assumption of the cause of your slip is invalid. A tyre pumped to the max or left soft, has exactly the same grip on the same surface.


----------



## Rooster1 (4 Dec 2018)

MrGrumpy said:


> Hope you like fixing punctures at this time of the year with those


Are they a bag of crap ? I wanrted some Conti Four Seasons but I dont have the wonga


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> Your assumption of the cause of your slip is invalid. A tyre pumped to the max or left soft, has exactly the same grip on the same surface.



Nope they are definitely squirmy in the wet and so are the Vittoria Voyagers I bought last year, they were even worse. Current Conti 4 Seasons however are much better.


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> Are they a bag of crap ? I wanrted some Conti Four Seasons but I dont have the wonga



They are fine for summer use in my opinion, but not great for puncture resistance. I run Conti 4 seasons they are have been great on the CX winter bike. I run Mich Pro Endurance 4 on the road bike, those are good as well ! Fast rolling and robust.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> Your assumption of the cause of your slip is invalid. A tyre pumped to the max or left soft, has exactly the same grip on the same surface.


Your assertion is correct for contact with flat surfaces. However I think the issue is with bumpy surfaces. With these, a tyre pumped to the max is more inclined to leave contact with the road, at which point your grip is zero


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

MrGrumpy said:


> Nope they are definitely squirmy in the wet and so are the Vittoria Voyagers I bought last year, they were even worse. Current Conti 4 Seasons however are much better.



No. You said they were more slippery when pumped hard. Your comparison should be within one tyre, but over two conditions. Don't introduce another tyre or another phrase. What does squirmy mean?


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

nickyboy said:


> Your assertion is correct for contact with flat surfaces. However I think the issue is with bumpy surfaces. With these, a tyre pumped to the max is more inclined to leave contact with the road, at which point your grip is zero


There was no mention of irregular surfaces crossed at speeds where bounce is introduced. Hence, leave it out. The statement was simple: the tyres were more slippery because they were pumped too hard.


----------



## Rusty Nails (4 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> Your assumption of the cause of your slip is invalid.* A tyre pumped to the max or left soft, has exactly the same grip on the same surface*.



Is this statement based on your experience, or is it a technically proven fact?

My gut reaction (without the scientific knowledge to back it up) is that the rubber on a tyre pumped up high would have a softer feel than a lower pressure one and possibly have a lower rolling resistance. Or is grip nothing to do with rolling resistance? I'm happy to learn from experts.


----------



## Rooster1 (4 Dec 2018)

MrGrumpy said:


> They are fine for summer use in my opinion, but not great for puncture resistance. I run Conti 4 seasons they are have been great on the CX winter bike. I run Mich Pro Endurance 4 on the road bike, those are good as well ! Fast rolling and robust.



Oh well.


----------



## nickyboy (4 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> There was no mention of irregular surfaces crossed at speeds where bounce is introduced. Hence, leave it out. The statement was simple: the tyres were more slippery because they were pumped too hard.


You can't leave it out. Perception may be they are more "squirmy", less "grippy". Reality is that it's down to more bounce caused by higher levels of inflation


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2018)

Rooster1 said:


> I'm running some 700 / 25c Schwalbe Marathon Plus . . .
> So would the heavier setup and the tred account for about a -2 to -3 mile per hour defecit on my rides?
> I usually amble around at 16.7 - 17.5 mph (with lumpy bits)


To answer the OP, I would be surprised if the high rolling resistance and weight of the M+s would make such a difference, though the OP doesn't say what tyres they replaced. The weight of the tyres (adding an extra kg to the rider+bike weight would have a minimal difference (as discussed above). The rolling resistance of an M+ is about 25w, compared to 17w (say for a Conti GP4Seasons). So 16w more (power) expensive (2 tyres).
This bikecalculator site allows calculations of how much power is needed to go at what speed (with lots of variables to be set/altered).
80kg rider/12kg bike ridden at 200w up a 1% gradient (simulates the OP's "with lumpy bits") goes at 16.5mph. If 16 of those wattts are absorbed by increased rolling resistance, the speed goes down to 15.8mph - a reduction of 0.7mph - rather less than 2-3mph (OP).
So my answer is "no". HTH
I used a 28-622 M+ for the second half of an end-to-end (after tyre failure of the useless Giant tyre I had on) and frankly noticed no difference. But the tyre weighed 750g odd, three times the weight of a normal 28-622 road tyre, and it was a b*******d to get on. Never punctured though (Lancaster to JoG/Kirkwall).


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2018)

HobbesOnTour said:


> The OP asked about Marathon plus tyres. My Marathon plus tyres have a direction on them (in black on the tyre itself, so hardly for aesthetics) and I have learned from bitter experience that it does make a difference if you fit them backwards.
> (It also says it on the pages you linked to?)


From the OP we are considering tyres being used on road (deduced from normal and reduced speeds). The Schwalbe quote I offered is directly relevant (direction arrow is for aesthetics). Please quote the passage you suggest "says it [makes a difference if you fit them backwards] on the pages you linked to".


Dogtrousers said:


> We have in the past had long, fruitful and profoundly interesting* threads on the directionality of tyres.


In case chatters can't find the interesting (TM) threads to which @Dogtrousers refers, here's the link (19 pages - so much fun - the highlight of 2017 (not including the Bryan Chapman Memorial ride, Mille Pennines of LEL)):
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/tyres-on-the-wrong-way-for-over-two-years.219604/ (started by @GuyBoden)


ufkacbln said:


> The point of tread is to spray mud up the back of your jacket in a pattern that makes you look like a really hardened off roader
> 
> View attachment 441408


----------



## Rooster1 (4 Dec 2018)

Ill give them Durano's a go. I think I have had just about every brand and type there is.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2018)

Dogtrousers said:


> Durano Plus, by the way.


Even the fast (dead) bunny thinks they're "very draggy" (so unclear why he sticks with them).


Racing roadkill said:


> Personally I ride with a mixture of 700c x 25mm Schwalbe Durano plus on one bike, and 700c x 25mm Tannus Aither tyres on my other road bike. The former are very draggy in comparison to a ‘summer’ tyre,


Here is the rollingresistance comparison for three tyres:
Compare/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-2014-vs-continental-grand-prix-4-season-2015-vs-schwalbe-durano-plus-2017
The Schwalbe ones are a good lot heavier and score no better on puncture resistance than the 4 Seasons.
See current thread on tyre advice for more.


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

Woaaahhhaaaaa wind your necks in lads  . All my own opinion, i did not trust the M+ in a 25mm size at all when it came to wet roundabouts, the back end would slip and slide underneath me. Not what I want on a roundabout. Very similar if not worse were the Vittoria Voyagers, but again I had them pumped up hard to roll better and less punctures. That is my experience, others on here think both tyres are the best thing since sliced bread, that might be the case but I`ve done plenty commuting miles on various tyres to know what works and what doesn`t for me.

Currently running Conti 4 seasons on the CX and they have been fine up till now, I run Mich Endurance on my road bike again, they are a good tyre. Everything is a compromise if you want to avoid punctures, fact. Me I like a bit of feed back from my tyres.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Dec 2018)

Was just making sure the OP had some objective facts/opinions on the D+s.


----------



## Shortandcrisp (4 Dec 2018)

Were I to ride on half decent ‘A’ roads during the winter, I’d opt for 4 seasons as my winter tyre. As it is, I ride on muddy, flint infested Norfolk country lanes where they wouldn’t last five minutes, so it’s Marathon +’S for me. 
With no scientific basis whatsoever, but merely going on a hunch base on experience, I reckon the Marathon’s account for something like a .5mph drop in average speed in comparison to my summer tyres ( Continental 4000’s).


----------



## Pale Rider (4 Dec 2018)

Shortandcrisp said:


> Were I to ride on half decent ‘A’ roads during the winter, I’d opt for 4 seasons as my winter tyre. As it is, I ride on muddy, flint infested Norfolk country lanes where they wouldn’t last five minutes, so it’s Marathon +’S for me.
> With no scientific basis whatsoever, but merely going on a hunch base on experience, I reckon the Marathon’s account for something like a .5mph drop in average speed in comparison to my summer tyres ( Continental 4000’s).



The air is thinner in summer - I thought everyone knew that.


----------



## Shortandcrisp (4 Dec 2018)

Pale Rider said:


> The air is thinner in summer - I thought everyone knew that.



I know that. I included that parameter in my ‘calculation’!


----------



## HobbesOnTour (4 Dec 2018)

Dogtrousers said:


> Note for anyone who doesn't already know: We have in the past had long, fruitful and profoundly interesting* threads on the directionality of tyres.
> 
> *Some of these descriptions may be inaccurate.



Thanks for that. 
I didn't realise that I had wandered into a conflict zone.




Yellow Saddle said:


> Interesting. Please share this bitter experience with us.



I don't think you're interested at all.

I posted in a genuine manner, not realising the history of the subject with the view of offering some assistance to the OP.

As for my bitter experience... I've mounted the rear wheel "the wrong way around" twice.
One time was before a weekend of loaded touring - I only realised the difference afterwards when I rode the bike unloaded. I just put it down to the wind!
The second time I realised straight away on my way to work. What I noticed was that I had to work very hard to try to reach my normal cruising speed. My average speed was about 3-5 kph less than normal.

As for the info from Schwalbe....

_What do the direction arrows mean?
Most Schwalbe tire sidewalls are marked with a *“ROTATION”* arrow, which indicates the recommended rolling direction. When in use, the tire should run in the direction of the arrow. Older tires have the marking *“DRIVE”*, but it has the same
meaning.

Why are so many treads direction dependant?
In the case of a road tire the rolling direction is mainly important for aesthetic considerations. Tires marked with arrows simply look more dynamic..
Off road, the rolling direction is far more important, as the tread ensures optimum connection between the tire and the ground. The rear wheel transmits the driving force and the front wheel transmits the braking and steering forces. Driving and braking forces operate in different directions. That is why certain tires are fitted in opposite rotating directions when used as front and rear tires.

There are also treads without a specified rotating direction._

Now, if I look up the Marathon Plus tyre on the website, the tyre is classed as a "Tour" tyre (That's why I use them), so I am *assuming *that this is a separate classification to road tyre, hence the aesthetics argument does not apply. My *understanding *is that "Tour" tyres are designed to operate well off road as well as on road, so we're moving more towards the statement that "_Off road, the rolling direction is far more important"_

It's also worth noting that there are 12 different Marathon tyres listed, of which 3 are Pluses. There's always the possibility that some of us are talking at cross purposes, one referencing one type of Marathon tyre, another a different type of tyre, all Marathons, and even all Marathon Pluses. I'm sure none of the experts on here have ever made a mistake in nomenclature, but me? I do it all the time. 

My understanding from the OP was that they had recently fitted Marathon Pluses while waiting for new tyres (slicks). They had noticed a significant drop in performance. From my experience, I thought it helpful to offer something to check that may help.

Mea culpa.

Enjoy the bickering. I'll stay in the Touring forum.


----------



## MikeG (4 Dec 2018)

Yellow Saddle said:


> ..........A tyre pumped to the max or left soft, has exactly the same grip on the same surface.



In terms of per unit area of the contact patch, then yes, you're right. However, the effect of having a tyre very soft is that the contact patch is much larger than one pumped hard, so in absolute terms a soft tyre has much greater grip than a hard tyre.


----------



## MrGrumpy (4 Dec 2018)

I would go with that as well, but....... running a tyre softer increases puncture probability. Unless your some light weight wippet , of which I’m definitely not ;-)


----------



## MikeG (4 Dec 2018)

Dogtrousers said:


> But it has less downward pressure over that much larger patch. So the frictional forces are unchanged - according to the numpty physics that I can remember at least. It's true. If you don't trust me, then just google "friction independent surface area" or some such.
> 
> Of course in the real world your under-inflated tyres will be squashing along and deforming giving them a higher rolling resistance, and your rock hard over-inflated tyres will be bouncing which will make them feel much different. And also maybe the numpty physics that I can remember which was all about ideal blocks of stuff on inclined planes breaks down a bit in the real world. But the priniciple is there.



Have you tried driving a car in soft dry sand? If you have normally inflated tryes you soon sink. If you deflate your tyres, you carry on driving. Tell me it's not so and I'll ask how I am not stuck in the middle of the Sahara or the Namib.

In other words, deflated tryes offered me more grip when driving off road across Africa. How do bike tyres fundamentally differ from car tyres in this respect?


----------



## Heltor Chasca (4 Dec 2018)

Schwalbe Marathon Plus. If ever 3 words conjured up dread, predictability and tribalism. Religion, politics and Marathon Pluses. Same thing. 

I have written to Schwalbe to ask they cease production of said tyre so that peace and good will will prevail across all bike forums.

No reply yet.

*Oh and I prefer them in Raceguard flavour.


----------



## rogerzilla (4 Dec 2018)

Oh, I don't know, Conti UltraHamsterSkins are just as polarising.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

MikeG said:


> In terms of per unit area of the contact patch, then yes, you're right. However, the effect of having a tyre very soft is that the contact patch is much larger than one pumped hard, so in absolute terms a soft tyre has much greater grip than a hard tyre.



No. Contact patch size has no effect on friction at all.

Friction is calculated using the co-efficient of the two surfaces and the downforce, not area.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (4 Dec 2018)

MikeG said:


> Have you tried driving a car in soft dry sand? If you have normally inflated tryes you soon sink. If you deflate your tyres, you carry on driving. Tell me it's not so and I'll ask how I am not stuck in the middle of the Sahara or the Namib.
> 
> In other words, deflated tryes offered me more grip when driving off road across Africa. How do bike tyres fundamentally differ from car tyres in this respect?




No. Your science is flawed.

You don't get more grip, you get more float, in those situations. It is not the same as on a hard surface.

You musts distinguish between situations where the substrate leaves an imprint on the tyre (in which case Van der Waal's forces contribute to friction, or the specific type of friction we're after called, traction) and, where the tyre leaves an imprint in the substrate, in which case we rely on the shear strength of the substrate to give traction. 
The two modes are completely different.

In sand, the vehicle stalls because the wheels sink into the sand due to small surface area and then can't go forward because the undercarriage is jammed in the sand. With lower tyre pressure, you get bigger surface area, which doesn't increase friction but increases float.

All is not what it seems in tyre science.


----------

