Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've been using Vittoria Rubino Pro tires for many years through many iterations of their models, 700x23c and now always 700x25c. I have never had what I would consider a problem mounting these tires on a variety of rims. A little elbow grease and I always get them to pop on.

Today I installed their Rubino Pro G2.0 tires on my wheels (Sun Assault rims) and my Wife's Alex DA22 rims. I've installed hundreds of tires but the installation on the former rims took several hours. I ended up with finger blisters and using a tire lever. Something I would never do. Has Vittoria covertly reduced the diameter of their tires considering rims without hook beads?

Next, I installed these tires on my Wife's Alex DA22 rims. Pop, pop, tires on in 5 minutes. She's been getting some pinhole flats making me think the Alex rims are out of spec and smaller in diameter than others. I am wondering if the tires are squirming around because they are not tight enough bead to rim. No response from Alex Rims regarding this concern.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Weird thing about these latest Rubino Pro 622-25s. When I put a caliper on the tire, I get 23.3mm. My other bicycle has an older version of the same tire and calipers measure 25mm or slightly above.
 

·
Banned Sock Puppet
Joined
·
13,813 Posts
I have a Rubino Pro 2.0 on my front wheel - a DT Swiss R460. No more difficulty than any other tires I've mounted on those rims.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
This got interesting when I spoke with Vittoria. They indicated that complying with new ETRTO standards, their 25c Rubino Pro tests out with a 24mm outer, 17mm internal width rim.

The Sun Ringle Assault rim I am having trouble with is 18.3mm wide outside and 13.3mm internally, so I guess that is impacting the finished tire width as I measure it at 23.4mm. The odd thing is that the tire that it replaced, an older model Rubino Pro mounted to this same rim at 25.4mm width. Seems changing ETRTO standards can make it difficult replacing a tire with the same model from the same manufacturer.
 

·
Banned Sock Puppet
Joined
·
13,813 Posts
This got interesting when I spoke with Vittoria. They indicated that complying with new ETRTO standards, their 25c Rubino Pro tests out with a 24mm outer, 17mm internal width rim.

The Sun Ringle Assault rim I am having trouble with is 18.3mm wide outside and 13.3mm internally, so I guess that is impacting the finished tire width as I measure it at 23.4mm. The odd thing is that the tire that it replaced, an older model Rubino Pro mounted to this same rim at 25.4mm width. Seems changing ETRTO standards can make it difficult replacing a tire with the same model from the same manufacturer.
It sounds like Vittoria is changing their standards based on most road rims becoming wider. A 13mm rim is a relic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Planned obsolescence I guess.

I'm not willing to part with my beautiful Campy Chorus wheels and my Wife's 10sp wheels are certainly not antiques, yet those too have 13.4mm internal width.

Guess this industry move to tubeless has impacted me after all. Didn't see it coming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,603 Posts
This got interesting when I spoke with Vittoria. They indicated that complying with new ETRTO standards, their 25c Rubino Pro tests out with a 24mm outer, 17mm internal width rim.

The Sun Ringle Assault rim I am having trouble with is 18.3mm wide outside and 13.3mm internally, so I guess that is impacting the finished tire width as I measure it at 23.4mm. The odd thing is that the tire that it replaced, an older model Rubino Pro mounted to this same rim at 25.4mm width. Seems changing ETRTO standards can make it difficult replacing a tire with the same model from the same manufacturer.
That's not odd at all. Tires stretch over time. Comparing an old used one to a brand new one and getting different measurements doesn't mean there's any difference in the tires other than the stretch that has only happened with one of them.
 

·
Banned Sock Puppet
Joined
·
13,813 Posts
Planned obsolescence I guess.

I'm not willing to part with my beautiful Campy Chorus wheels and my Wife's 10sp wheels are certainly not antiques, yet those too have 13.4mm internal width.

Guess this industry move to tubeless has impacted me after all. Didn't see it coming.
Planned obsolescence is what keeps the economy rolling along.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,603 Posts
Planned obsolescence I guess.

I'm not willing to part with my beautiful Campy Chorus wheels and my Wife's 10sp wheels are certainly not antiques, yet those too have 13.4mm internal width.

Guess this industry move to tubeless has impacted me after all. Didn't see it coming.
I doubt who ever came up with narrow rims (and 19mm tires) decades ago was planning on someone figuring out they suck so would be obsolete.

Wider rims have about nothing to do with tubeless per se. Hed was doing that long before tubeless on the road became a big thing. If tubeless on the road never happened rims would still be wider than your relics.
 

·
Banned Sock Puppet
Joined
·
13,813 Posts
I doubt who ever came up with narrow rims (and 19mm tires) decades ago was planning on someone figuring out they suck so would be obsolete.

Wider rims have about nothing to do with tubeless per se. Hed was doing that long before tubeless on the road became a big thing. If tubeless on the road never happened rims would still be wider than your relics.
Sometimes I have to wonder what "engineers" are thinking. The train of thought on road bikes used to be that narrower everything was faster. I can't believe engineers with advanced degrees just figured out that this is all false. Then again, maybe I'm giving engineers with advanced degrees too much credit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,709 Posts
When road bikes first became a thing, the thought was narrower everything was faster.
When road bikes first became a thing engineers with advanced degrees weren't building and testing bikes like they do today. Bikes were made from tubes. Tubes aren't aero. Narrow tires were (and still are) more aero.

In the old'n days roads weren't great. Most racing was on velodromes. Narrow high pressure tires were, and still are, faster on smooth surfaces.



I can't believe engineers with advanced degrees just figured out that this is all false.
This wasn't 'just' figured out. It's been known for decades. But the bike industry (particularly road) is a fickle business filled with luddites. Even when something is proven better... they don't want it.
 

·
Banned Sock Puppet
Joined
·
13,813 Posts
When road bikes first became a thing engineers with advanced degrees weren't building and testing bikes like they do today. Bikes were made from tubes. Tubes aren't aero. Narrow tires were (and still are) more aero.

In the old'n days roads weren't great. Most racing was on velodromes. Narrow high pressure tires were, and still are, faster on smooth surfaces.
Point taken.

This wasn't 'just' figured out. It's been known for decades. But the bike industry (particularly road) is a fickle business filled with luddites. Even when something is proven better... they don't want it.
It isn't just the bike industry that is guilty of this. A very good example is the American car industry and why Chrysler almost went bankrupt..........twice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Jay, for the most part I would agree with you except the tire I replaced really wasn't "old" or "used" per se. I really was just replacing it to spruce up the color for the bike and moved it to another bicycle.

So, again what I am saying is that the manufacturers seem to be acting on the fly to any changes in ETRTO standards. It seems quite possible that the 25-622 Rubino Pro from 2 years ago is a different width tire from the 25-622 Rubino Pro from today. Since these tires are all I've ever used since moving from sewups, when replacements don't "exactly replace" it is surprising.

Not sure if it is just Vittoria doing this, or other manufacturers are acting similarly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
I doubt who ever came up with narrow rims (and 19mm tires) decades ago was planning on someone figuring out they suck so would be obsolete.

Wider rims have about nothing to do with tubeless per se. Hed was doing that long before tubeless on the road became a big thing. If tubeless on the road never happened rims would still be wider than your relics.
You really think wide rims are an improvement? For one thing, they weigh more. They can also be too wide for rim brake pads to fit properly (e.g. the Velocity Quill on a Ritchey Swiss Cross).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,003 Posts
Manufacturers change products with the same name all the time. What once was, has been changed to improve, save money, or ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
You really think wide rims are an improvement? For one thing, they weigh more. They can also be too wide for rim brake pads to fit properly (e.g. the Velocity Quill on a Ritchey Swiss Cross).
I think you make some good points. The industry sort of got everyone to move from sewups to clinchers and they have had to continue to shake things up or reinvent the wheel. So we go to wider rims, tubeless, etc.

I'm not so sure any of these are an improvement over the ride and performance of a narrow section GL330 with Conti Sprinters glued on. To me the footprint of the sewup was better than any clincher or tubeless clincher could match.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top