Tyre Width

zil

Hey guys, I've recently started taking my old mountain bike for a few cycles and would like to get into it regularly. I figure changing my current full on knobbly tyres to slicks would make a big difference in the distance I can cover, however I'm a bit confused. The tyres I have atm are 26x1.95 but when I measure the bike rim it's only 1 inch wide. Does that mean I can order a pair of tyres that are 26x1 (and I assume by been thinner, therefore have less rolling resistance) or does tyre width not relate to rim width?

Was also wondering if all this puncture protection lark I see in the more expensive tyres is worth it?

blorg

The main thing is really to get slicks- the tread pattern or lack thereof is more important than the actual width of the tyre. Wider tyres actually have lower rolling resistance at the same pressures but are heavier. On the flip side you can inflate narrower tyres to higher pressures so reducing the size of the contact patch. But most important is to get rid of the knobs.

The rim does have a bearing on the width possible but you have a fair range, 26x1.0 is extremely narrow for a MTB slick though and would not be that common, 26x1.3 and 26x1.5 would be commonly available options.

As for puncture protection, depends on how much you want to avoid punctures I guess. Some level is important but generally most MTB slicks are geared towards commuters and will have something in this regard.

Bunnyhopper

I have 26x1.50 tyres for a hardtail MTB that I use on the road a fair bit and they are certainly a lot easier to roll on tarmac than the knobbly off-road tyres. They're Specialized Nimbus Armadillo, so they have pretty good puncture protection, but I haven't had them for long enough to judge how effective it is. I have run comparable Specialized off-road tyres for a long while and can only remember three or four punctures in about ten years.

One thing about those 26x1.50s is that so far they seem to have a slightly harder compound than some other tyres I've used, which seems to make them a touch less grippy in the wet - not much, mind you, but enough to take it handy on tight corners. That may improve with use, or it may be the pay-off for better puncture protection.

Blorg's absolutely right that losing the knobbles will make the biggest difference on the road. Keeping them pumped up to the right pressure will help too.

BostonB

I've got the Specialized Nimbus Armadillo 26x1.5 aswell. I agree with the comments above slightly hard rubber and thus maybe a bit more slippy in the wet. I've nothing to compare them to, so I think they are grand. I got a puncture with mine in the first couple of weeks. Shard of glass. But then I've had none since and thats well over a year ago. I only cycle a couple of times a week though.

You can get 26x1.3 in other brands of tyres, which I'd probably go for if I was doing it again. But having no punctures as been great.

I've just bought a FCR and cycling that compared to my MTB is light night and day. It has narrow tyres but the difference is the weight. Its about 4 or 5kg lighter. I also think I was carrying too much in the pannier on the MTB, making it even heavier.

gman2k

I tried a set of 1" continental slicks on my mtb, and whilst they do roll smooth, your next big problem is gearing and comfort!
If you are going to do biggish mileage, you are better off with a road bike