On Thursday, 29 August 2019 11:15:27 UTC-4, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:01:12 PM UTC-7, Tosspot wrote:
On 28/08/2019 17.18, Tom Kunich wrote:

snip

Rolling test aren't accurate either because humidity, pressure and
wind make a far larger contribution than rolling resistance. The only
practical way is either pure feel or to make a testing machine which
I do not feel like doing.

Nothing available here?

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

I have been using that listing and as you see the Rubino has twice the rolling resistance of the Vittoria Corsa G+ tires. But can you believe that you would feel that? 7 watts when riding along easily you only use about 100 watts of power and the slower you ride the less power the tire absorbs.

But the EFFECTS I saw make this doubling of rolling resistance appear to be important. When I would stop pedaling the bike would slow rapidly. So it required enough strength to continue pedaling for the entire ride.

Yet the Michelin Pro4 shows about the same rolling resistance as the Rubino and it would not do this. If you stopped pedaling you couldn't detect the rather rapid slowing. I'll ride the Rubino again to see.

I don't think that ANY rolling-resistance test that's performed with the tire on a steel drum is going to be all that accurate or applicable to the real world of bicycle riding. Heck, even different types/coarseness of asphalt surfaces can make a real difference in how a tire feels/behaves. I guess that the best a steel drum rolling resistance test does is tell us how a tire MIGHT perform on a REALLY SMOOTH road.

Cheers