|Michelins - which one||granda|
Apr 1, 2002 1:45 PM
|Bought my bike used and it's time to replace the rear tire. It has 700x23 axial pro's and I'd like to stick with Michelin since that's what the front is. Question is, does it matter which one I go with (pro race, pro lite, etc...)? I don't race but I'd like to have as much performance and duralibity as possible with an edge towards durability. |
Apr 1, 2002 4:44 PM
|If you want to stick to Michelin and you don't race I would suggest either the Axial Pro Folding or the Axial Carbon. The Carbon is a little heavier than the Pro but more durable. I have ridden the Pro Folding and liked it alot.
Hope this helps,
|Whichever one . . .||Kerry|
Apr 1, 2002 5:06 PM
|move the front tire to the back and put the new rubber on the front. Otherwise, by the time you wear out the second rear tire, you have an old, cracked, dried out front tire, increasing the chances that it will slip out on you in a turn. You always want your best rubber on the front.|
|re: Michelins - which one||weiwentg|
Apr 1, 2002 5:58 PM
|the axial pro lights are RACE DAY ONLY tires and are recommended ONLY for lighter riders - quite a few people have had issues with them. I ride them, and they're fine, but I've had one rear puncture (ran over gravel). I weigh in at 120 pounds.
if you don't race, there's no need for axial pros. the axial carbons are not exactly light, but they are durable.
|Axial Carbons||Mike Prince|
Apr 2, 2002 6:29 AM
|Just replaced a tire after 2600 miles (probably could have gotten 500 or so more out of it). In the past I thought GP3000's and Axial Pros were the way to go but I got significantly less mileage (about 1200-1500 best case) from them along with the occasional ride-interrupting issue. I was initially concerned about the extra 50g or so per tire with the carbons but after a year plus on them I have no regrets. Losing a pound off of your body probably has a better impact. IMO the carbons are worth the weight "penalty" unless you are racing on a regular basis. In everyday situations the race tires will not last as others have said above. Also the carbons are a bargain compared to the pros & lites.
One important consideration that has not really been addressed here is your weight and riding style. FWIW I am large in cycling terms (6'4", 195-200 lbs.) and the choice was easy as in a typical year I go through 4-6 Axial Pros and only 2 Carbons. So from a financial point of view, the AP option is something like $200/year versus $50 for the Carbons at retail prices.
|re: Michelins - which one||Bacco|
Apr 2, 2002 5:41 PM
|I just switched from Axial Pros to Axial Carbons. I had good luck with the Pros, but I wanted a more durable tire on what was now my training bike since I had just bought a new bike. I just came back from riding in Bike Florida and I did some local riding before that with the Axial Carbons. I really couldn't tell much difference in the feel between the Pro and the Carbon. I never could figure out what the TPI rating was for the Carbon since it was not posted on Michelin's website or on the packaging, nevertheless, the ride is pretty supple. With the addition of carbon to the tire, it should perform better in wet conditions which is a plus. Bottom line, if you don't race and want a solid tire for recreational or training rides, go with the carbon and save your money for a new jersey.|| |