The ricks don’t have very much grip in very wet conditions but could work if the course isn’t very tight with inconsistent elevation. I’ve never used the Ralph’s but the Ray/Ray combo works great in the wet so I assume the Ralph’s would be similar.
I haven’t gotten thru the video so apologies if this is in there but with your method of testing are you running A-B or more runs like A-B-A-B? Also, are you getting similar differences between tires on different days. As in tire A is running faster by about this much on day 1 vs. tire B and that is pretty much replicated on a different day?
The reason I’m asking is that, for whatever reason, once in awhile I have an outlier lap (or rarely more than one) and if I didn’t have multiple runs I wouldn’t know that. The other thing is getting consistent and repeatable differences…have you proven to yourself that you get repeatable results?
I did some chung testing in the mid-teens and was never able to convince myself the results were reliable and repeatable with what I was doing back then…although I can easily see some problems with my protocol back then.
My own anecdotal experience in rain is that the Ray’s fully packed in with mud. I guess I didn’t fall so maybe they still had grip, but boy did the wheels get heavy. Changed my view on what defines a proper mud tire (for racing).
Within a single test, it is more like A-A-A-A, and you end up with a rolling resistance value that you can see repeated across the laps…and yeah, it holds up across different days also. Multiple A-B are fine, assuming the air density, wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature stay the exact same across a somewhat long time span with swapping tires, etc. That pretty much never happens, so picking wind sheltered courses and Chung it is my go to.
Here is an example. I did a rough cobblestone test a few months ago and had kind of gusty wind in the middle so redid it the next day on a dead calm wind day to see how off the prior day was. Went through both in Aerolab and the values were 0.0125 vs 0.0124 coefficient rolling resistance…meaning an error of under 1% even on a bad day, so to speak.
I do redo old tires here and there, mainly to recheck CdA values if other equipment has changed, or to double check I’m staying in the right soil moisture window to get good tests done.
If you have a power meter, speed sensor, and good courses, I’d revisit the Chung method stuff again. It takes practice to get good at it, but the results are SO good. Def watch that video as lots of this is in there also.
(Air Trak 2.35 results up today when I get around to posting btw)
I ran the Rick’s F/R in very wet conditions at Mohican (Ohio) and they were excellent on the wet rocks and roots. I was truly shocked on the wet roots, but the small knobs gripped when riders around me were slipping. In the true slop sections, they obviously were not great, but not sure anything but a fat tire would have been good there. So at least in these specific wet conditions, the Rick’s excelled.
It’s too early for me to tell. I’ve been swapping between two wheelsets, one with the Rick’s and one with Dub 2.4s (Trail/Grip), so not that many miles on them yet.
I have the red and blue versions of the Rick and haven’t had one puncture yet with plenty of racing/training miles this season. I’ve had a lot of luck with all of my more recent Schwalbe tires.
Not super consistent lap times today but dubs and thunder burts ran the same. All laps at 165 watts +/- 1 watt and ran them TB-TB-Dub-Dub-TB-TB-Dub-Dub-TB-TB. My buddy ran the Dubs at 13:34 and 13:32, the TB’s at 13:31 and 13:34, and the race kings at 13:40, 13:43, and 13:45 all at 165 +/- 1 watt.