this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
31 points (94.3% liked)
Bicycling
2562 readers
1 users here now
A community for those who enjoy bicycling for any reason— utility, recreation, sport, or whatever!
Post your questions, experiences, knowledge, pictures, news, links, and (civil) rants.
Rules (to be added on an as-needed basis)
- Comments and posts should be respectful and productive.
- No ads or commercial spam, including linking to your own monetized content.
- Linked content should be as unburdened by ads and trackers as possible.
Welcome!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, 1/3 the production rate per tire compared to a car over 100km. Not to mention half the number of tires. I wonder how much of that is due to the weight difference alone.
Has anyone ever made tires out of something that isn't plastic? Looks like NASA has. Nickel-titanium alloy flexible mesh. No popping and lasts the lifetime of a bike. Doesn't look like the company has a mountain-bike version yet.
It actually appears to be per bike per 100km. I find that quite surprising given it's half the number of tyres, there's substantially less initial volume per tyre than a car's and, as you say, there's a lot less weight on them.
Given their focus on MTBs, I wonder if it's related to the type of terrain being ridden (higher incidence of gravel/sharp rocks than your average road) or different tyre compounds between the two vehicle types.
I would bet on different rubber being the culprit. My downhill and trail tires are super soft in order to grab the rocks and roots better. They wear out quicker than road tires because of this. Still takes a few years in with me riding every day but it’s noticeably faster than the roadies.