I’m tubeless (700x40c) and I have them somewhere just over 25psi normally (Im about 62kg). When I started out I read start at 30psi and up or down it as you feel appropriate.
I’m running 700c Conti RaceKing 2.2s tubeless at 20 psi. I’m 83kg
Tire: Tufo Thundero (tubeless)
Size: 40mm (stated and measured)
System weight: 195 lbs (me: 170 lbs, bike: 17 lbs, water and gear: 8 lbs)
Pressure (Silca): front 37.5, rear 39 (so realistically this is a sniff or two under 40 on the pump gauge)
for 40’s I run ~25psi…adjust down or up slightly depending on tire width.
I am ~153 lbs for reference.
Just got some 650b w/ 2.1 ThunderBurts setup and will try them this weekend at Barry-Roubaix (I know, I know…nothing new on race day, but I live dangerously 
). Will probably run them ~20psi.
In theory, it’s like MTB technique - don’t sit on the seat and allow your body to lean to the inside, lean the bike under your body. You should be able to lose traction and drift a bit without the bike sliding out beneath you. That said, I struggle with this technique on both MTB and gravel and it’s harder with gravel since your COG is typically higher. That’s mostly because I’m an old cautious dude, so I usually elect to let others test the traction and I’ll just work a little harder to close the gap after a turn. Other MTB techniques also apply like trying to find a little berm/edge to ride or cut the corner a bit through the grass where traction is more predictable.
The technique that works for me is to shift my body inside the bike (in relation to the turn), keep the bike relatively upright and steer through the turn. Angling your hips on the saddle helps here a lot…think about pointing your belly button where you want to go.
IN a sense, you are pushing the outside of the handlebar away from you, which shifts the bike to the outside and turns the HB at the same time.
The advantage of this technique is that the bike stays more vertical, increasing traction vs. leaning the bike over and reducing the contact patch with the ground.
as luck would have it, some bike shop in Wisconsin was clearing out Bontrager Pro IsoCore VR-CF in size 42 hoods / 44 in drops. Pretty cheap upgrade from alloy to carbon… $90… and more importantly extend reach from 75 to 93. Easy experiment and only downside is I had to buy the $20 IsoZone gel pads. Swung by the LBS to order the gel pads, my other LBS buddy was working and he already used his 2 bike discounts this year (Checkpoint and SuperCaliber). When I left he was seriously checking out the ProjectOne Emonda and Madone frames they are selling for $900-$1500. Insane frame prices at Wheel And Sprocket if you are interested, not going to post in the deals thread (yet) so my buddy has time to decide.
Was hoping to get lucky and find @grwoolf 's older & discontinued Bontrager aero handlebars + TT bars but found nothing.
@MI-XC mostly hoods for me, although steep gravel descents on the Tarmac I’ll switch to the drops for easier braking.
Briefly back to the topic of how “slow” gravel bikes are compared to road bikes -
Here’s a dude racing a Trek Checkpoint in a pro crit. Setup with pretty aggressive position, same frame I have (not even the SLR with aero seat post). So much for gravel bikes aren’t fast enough or don’t handle well enough for road/crit racing. And it’s probably gonna be OK on your local group ride.
I Rode 38 on my Gravel bike with no flare and it worked fine, even on technical stuff. I now ordered a 36 cm for my rode bike with 10 deg flare and the same bar in 40 for my new Gravel bike. It’s really just getting used to the width for a ride or two after that I did not feel any difference. (ROSE Race Attack GF Aero Rennlenker jetzt kaufen | ROSE Bikes is the bar really good value if you live in europe to try it out.)
I rode a Cannondale Topstone Alloy until last year on the road in Groups and GF style events in groups and the thing handled well in those conditions, sure my Road bike is a bit snappier and slightly more responsive, but I’d argue you can ride most Gravel bikes in any Road setting as long as the gearing is adequate.
Regarding the “how to find the limits of traction” debate, to me the first answer is you don’t. You need to find the best line instead, which could mean most grip, but also least amount of holes/bumps/roots/deep gravel, or simply the one that carries the most speed.
The other answer is that you can often hear your tyres sliding, or you have micro slides that tell you you are close. But the big problem with gravel is that the surface, and the grip you have, can change very suddenly, and it can be unpredictable.
COGs are higher on a MTB because of bigger tyres and suspension E.g.
Canyon Grail BB drop is 75mm
Canyon Lux WC BB drop is only 38mm
Higher COG increases low speed stability because of pendulum effect. Oscillation period increases with length, imagine which is easier to balance vertically in the palm of your hand a 12"/30cm ruler or a metre/yardtsick.
Lower COG helps with high speed stabilty (correcting when you lose grip) because the “pendulum” is swinging faster you can make more corrections faster. Bikes with low BBs feel nimble and flickable.
This seems relevant. As someone who lives on a dirt road with a 50/50 chance of flatting before I can make the 1 mile to pavement out of my house on my road bike (which I sold several years ago), the speed versus versatility equation seems to tilt pretty heavily towards gravel for lots of people.
It might be due to the honeymoon as I bought my gravel just recently, but I’m enjoying way more my endurance rides on gravel paths. No cars, no looking over the shoulder every minute, and lots of alternative routes.
I left home through a big park, got in the city trails, and then gravel. I literally don’t need to ride 1km on roads/streets if I don’t want to. I often put some tarmac on my rides, but that’s because I want and they are far from the city, which means quiet and empty roads usually.
Nice article but he can’t be a Londoner. Drivers are so much better than they were ten twenty years ago,
I do keep wondering though. Plus as much as I want to do club rides it just doesn’t fit with my life. Having dedicated roadie is perhaps the wrong choice.
How limiting is the lack of a 50/52 big ring?
A 48 seems almost neglible but a lot of decent gravel bikes have much smaller big rings.
I get to 50/11 on my commutes because I want to, it wouldn’t be a big deal but in a group ride or sportif/gran fondo I’m not so sure
I posted this on another thread, here are speeds in smallest/largest gears on two bikes, at 90rpm cadence:
| 90rpm cadence | speed at smallest gear | speed at tallest gear |
|---|---|---|
| Tarmac 48x35 with 10-36 cassette | 7.1mph | 35.0mph |
| Tarmac 46x33 with 10-36 cassette | 6.7mph | 33.5mph |
| Checkpoint 46T with 10-52 cassette | 6.6mph | 34.4mph |
| Checkpoint 40T with 10-52 cassette | 5.8mph | 29.9mph |
- Tarmac with 32c tires Conti GP5K All Season TR
- Checkpoint with 42c tires S-Works Pathfinders
I have no issues without a 50/52 big ring.
Its not limiting at all the terrain, etc would make it ,ore of a hindrance.
I think that’s a key point when looking at top speed (which seems to be a big objection/complaint for 1x). 90rpm is typically pretty comfortable, but far from most people’s limit. Many can hold 100rpm for extended time and can push to 110+ for a while when the speeds are high. I’m not a high cadence guy normally, but if I have to push 110rpm for a bit on a tailwind section w/slight downhill, it’s not that uncomfortable.