700x23 vs 700x25, what's the difference and which is faster?
397356
The 23s are thinner, lighter (because they are thinner), and a little faster. 25s are 2mm greater in diameter, so they are a little heavier and better on rough roads. I have the 25s for training and 23s for racing. These are great tires if you don't like flats. Probably not the fastest tire around, but for me they are fine.
397357
The 2nd number is the circumference in millimeters, from bead to bead. So the 25 is slightly fatter than the 23. It has a slightly smoother ride but the 23 has a tiny amount less resistance so it would be considered a little faster.
397358
Hi Hungryman, others may correct me, but I've rode both and while the skinnier of the two *may* a wee bit faster I'd opt for the 700X25 for the greater handling and comfort. In fact, my evolution of being an enthusiast rider for 10+ years has led me to choose nothing skinnier than 700X28 tires -- on wheels big enough to accept them, of course. Forgive me pointing out the obvious, but the right tire for you also depends largely on your size, your bike, your level of experience and your kind of riding (commuting, going for speed or going for distance, pavement, gravel, etc.)
397359
23's are more narrow and faster. Depends on the kind of riding. They are a heavier tyre because of the layers of threads and designed to take a few more rocks and stickers. More difficult to get on and if you flat. If it's endurance you ride, get the 25's. A bit smoother.
397360
The numbers refer to the dimensions of the tire. 23millimeters will have less drag. 25 millimeters will have more traction. So, the thinner tire will move slightly faster with less effort.
397361
Here is an interesting article that explains it pretty well.http://www.competitivecyclist.com/learn/25-vs-23
397362
Here is an interesting article that explains it pretty well. http://www.competitivecyclist.com/learn/25-vs-23
397363
There is some controversy about whether to use 23s or 25s, but there really isn't a that much difference. If you're looking for more speed, there are much more important factors. Color for instance. White bikes go faster.
397364
Tires aren't fast; riders are. Yes, I get the gist of this question, but an empirical answer depends on too many factors. Are you talking about sprinting? Climbing? Long distance? Many believe a thinner tire will give less rolling resistance, but some studies prove otherwise. If we're talking 2mm difference, I'd opt for comfort and handling over numeric assignments. I ride 25 rear, and 23 front generally speaking, but change up the combos depending on wheels I'm using, and what I'm doing. There are a lot of inconsistencies out there as well. Take a peek at any of the articles written by Sheldon Brown, and you'll get the upshot of why the numbers aren't always what they appear to represent. Tires aren't fast; riders are. Yes, I get the gist of this question, but an empirical answer depends on too many factors. Are you talking about sprinting? Climbing? Long distance? Many believe a thinner tire will give less rolling resistance, but some studies prove otherwise. If we're talking 2mm difference, I'd opt for comfort and handling over numeric assignments. I ride 25 rear, and 23 front generally speaking, but change up the combos depending on wheels I'm using, and what I'm doing. There are a lot of inconsistencies out there as well. Take a peek at any of the articles written by... » Read More Tires aren't fast; riders are. Yes, I get the gist of this question, but an empirical answer depends on too many factors. Are you talking about sprinting? Climbing? Long distance? Many believe a thinner tire will give less rolling resistance, but some studies prove otherwise. If we're talking 2mm difference, I'd opt for comfort and handling over numeric assignments. I ride 25 rear, and 23 front generally speaking, but change up the combos depending on wheels I'm using, and what I'm doing. There are a lot of inconsistencies out there as well. Take a peek at any of the articles written by Sheldon Brown, and you'll get the upshot of why the numbers aren't always what they appear to represent. « Show Less
397365
Really interesting hyperlink article posted by Bruce, from competitvecyclist. Personally I can't get my head around a smaller contact patch on a larger tire, but I'm no one to argue with these guys. I used to ride sportbikes. everything equal (same tire model), we assumed we were getting a larger contact patch, with the larger model. That's why we went for larger tires (same aspect ratio of course). but interesting article!!
742695
Almost the same thing. The GL model is gigabit on each port versus 10/100 in the non-GL. Also more RAM and higher CPU speed if I recall correctly. There are other smaller differences as well, but these are the too areas that I usually utilize the GL model over the non-GL model for.
707272
You should not see any performance difference, the only reason I chose 4x4 > 2x8 was for aesthetics.
1967763
The 26x1.75x2.125 will replace the 1.95. The 2.125 is just slightly bigger but will be fine.
2161243
Others have already answered. I was going to suggest comparing dimensions of x10 and x20
92621
Those are the same thing. The "23" is millimeters and refers to the width of the tire. There is no "23c." The "C" after the 700 refers to the rim type and they all should be "700C"
296831
The "other size" is the width of the tire. Unless you are light and ride on clean surfaces or don't mind an occaisonal flat, forget the 23mm. The 25mm is a good trade-off between weight and durability. The 32 mm will be heavy and slow, but it will take more abuse if that is your priority. 700 either is or isn't the right tire for you, it isn't a choice. If your rims don't require 700C tires, find out what size they take and buy the correct tire for the rim. If you are really looking for a speed tire, the Schwalbe is the wrong tire. You will want no wider than a 23mm, but in a much higher quality tire.
1294199
per apricorn specs: the x1 has data transfer speeds up to 400 MB/sec*..the x2 up tp 550 MB. Depends on your need and whether or not you want to tie up your only x16 slot.Also you need to look at where it will fit in your case. Hope this helps
2237193
4x6x4 is a thicker feel than the 2x5x2. It all has to do with thickness. The 4x6x4 absorbs more and is better quality. :)
59823
Tire size (apart from brakes) is also different according to the description. This one uses 700x25c and the other uses 700x28c
70898
You'd want 700c x 19-28 it's really personal preference. For me in the city I run 700x28. The key here is the 700 part.
1645860
Hey RobertFrom image itself I don't see there is much difference... I guess 8x42 having only one type so you should be good to purchase the other one @180$. I got it in 150$ while massive discounts going on Amazon and even I got 50$ rebate coupon from Vanguard so it same in 100$ .I hope I answers your question
100547
Mate, it's always best for overhead. You're gonna need higher res textures anyways so just go for the 3gb
528075
Don't quote me on this but I don't believe much. I think that they are different model years. According to a Google search, they look nearly identical. When comparing their product specs, their product measurements are vary very, very slightly. I think the 700 is newer but don't believe they are appreciably different. I really enjoy my 700 and think it is a good buy. It was pretty easy to put together.
644054
From manufacturer's website - 2.5K RAW at 2432 x 1366.ProRes and DNxHD at 1920 x 108023.98p, 24p, 25p, 29.97p, 30p
2185288
It's plenty fast for us. It does an 8 1/2 x 11 in about 3 or 4 seconds (after processing the data - a couple seconds)That's for a relatively small file - lower resolution. Higher resolutions take more time - 1/2 minute or so, maybe.
740545
I believe the only difference is the size of the filter. The x6672 is 16x25x5 and the x6675 is 20x25x5. They are both Merv 16...