1.5 or 1.75"

Cycle-touring, Expeditions, Adventures, Major cycle routes NOT LeJoG (see other special board)
Post Reply
Bike-Rich
Posts: 147
Joined: 1 Dec 2013, 7:57pm

1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Bike-Rich »

Hi all,

After a week tour i've found out my 2.0" tyres are creating too much rolling resistance for my type of riding. I also plan to remove front rack and travel with just 2 back panniers and ortlieb holdall therefore reducing weight considerably.

I've had some recommendations on the Schwalbe Marathon HS 368 for the type of tyre, which seems perfect and I will likely go for this, it's just the width of 1.5 or 1.75 i'm unsure of. I'm tempted by the 1.5's more, anyone have experience with them both?

Thanks,
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Si »

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=89225 :wink:


I've 1.5 M+s on mine. TBH, I can't really feel much difference to the 1.75s, especially if I don't pump them up every two or three rides.
Dudley Manlove
Posts: 249
Joined: 18 Jun 2009, 10:41am

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Dudley Manlove »

I doubt the 1.75" with the same tread roll much different to 1.5". Where I notice fatter tyres at least is on the acceleration, but once they're up to speed...

tbh on a loaded tourer I doubt you'd notice the acceleration much either.
simonhill
Posts: 5226
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 11:28am
Location: Essex

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by simonhill »

I also ride a LHT and tour with rear only.

I use the 1.5s and they are fine. I used to use 1.75 and they were also fine. I changed to 1.5s to reduce weight, make the bike feel more sporty, etc. I can't really see any difference.

I imagine that the bigger ones give you a bit more cushioning. You can pump the 1.5s up harder, but look up tyre pressures and you will probably find that you never need to go that high anyway I now ride at 50 psi or less.
Merry_Wanderer
Posts: 1002
Joined: 31 Aug 2012, 9:33am
Location: North Leicestershire

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Merry_Wanderer »

I ride a Disc Trucker and I used the 1.75 with front and rear panniers and 1.5 with rear only - both set-ups were fine and I couldn't really tell much difference between the two :-)
rualexander
Posts: 2639
Joined: 2 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Contact:

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by rualexander »

If rolling resistance and weight are two of your concerns then I don't think that Marathon hs368 (either 1.5 or 1.75) are the tyres you should be considering.
I would suggest 2" folding Marathon Supremes will roll better and are around 25% lighter weight.
Bike-Rich
Posts: 147
Joined: 1 Dec 2013, 7:57pm

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Bike-Rich »

Thanks, i'd not considered the Supreme before.
Just looking at some reviews for it though and although positive, it recommends not using with a dynamo (which I have), any reason for this?

Thanks,
geocycle
Posts: 2177
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 9:46am

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by geocycle »

Bike-Rich wrote:Thanks, i'd not considered the Supreme before.
Just looking at some reviews for it though and although positive, it recommends not using with a dynamo (which I have), any reason for this?

Thanks,


I have supremes they are excellent. Mine are 1.6" and weigh about 450g each. they have done 10,000 miles over all surfaces including tracks and forest trails - but true rough stuff is best avoided. The dynamo remark relates to those bottle dynamos that rub a wheel against the sidewall. Some tyres have a track or reinforcing. The sidewall of the supreme would be vulnerable long term. Of course it is fine with hub dynamos.
Merry_Wanderer
Posts: 1002
Joined: 31 Aug 2012, 9:33am
Location: North Leicestershire

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Merry_Wanderer »

I hadn't considered considered the Supreme before either. Thanks for the heads-up
Bike-Rich
Posts: 147
Joined: 1 Dec 2013, 7:57pm

Re: 1.5 or 1.75"

Post by Bike-Rich »

Yep, the Supremes are looking like the ideal choice, thanks guys :)
Post Reply