It appears that Silca has entered the tyre game at the premium end. Note that the Silca guy says that he thinks the ideal tyre width is going to turn out to be in the 55 to 60mm range. It’s worth a watch because they going into tyre design and testing data.
A thread and discussion here if you are interested;
https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2005466#p2005466
Thanks. No one has tested yet. But at $159 AUD each, there won’t be a stampede.
John Karrasch apparently has and they test fast so it is said.
I don’t do instagram or discord so have no access to it. It was mentioned on WW he had tested them also.
Yeah I like good bicycle tyres but I am not paying car tyre prices for them.
Agreed. That’s ridiculous for us hacks. For a tyre that will last a few thousand kms at most
Expect a heavily biased review below as these are Silca prototype tyres, by a Sica dealer. The only meaningful bit is that 06:50 when he mentions that at 16 psi they tend to pull to the side. I noticed this on my Maxxis Recons 2.6" which are more of a flat tread pattern left to right across the tyre and tend to pull more noticeably than other tyres.
Interesting, the bush and roads that he rides on looks quite similar to some parts of Australia 
.
Including the corrugations 
Interested in seeing what independent testing shows. I expect they will roll quite well given the light casing they appear to have. I have read snippets elsewhere that they are a similar RR result to Hutchinson Caracal race which is a fast tyre.
I don’t know about casing strength and puncture resistance though. Tufo Thundero are well rated on WW. They are piss weak ime. Had multiple failures with the Thundero/Speedero combo I had. Can’t handle our sharp flinty gravel we have locally. Even had a stick punch through the rear Speedero.
I don’t expect I will ever use Silca tyres, unless the price halves, regardless of how they test anyway.
Same here. They are race spec using the best materials. Just thought it was interesting because they’re new. Like 32" wheels, etc.
The sharp rocks/gravel are a downer. The only flats I’ve had locally on gravel are pinch flats.
Some explanation of pricing at the end of the video here.
I still aint paying it, but plenty will I guess. Hopefully they are good tyres.
Thanks for posting
This problem in the bike industry appears to have been around since the Wiggle/CRC days. Products just appeared to be too cheap, so someone, somewhere was taking a loss.
Maxxis colour their OE tyre labels white and standard labels yellow. So they must have thought it was enough of a problem to do that.
I’ve heard with MC tyres that the some OE ones come with less tread depth than the standard models.
And now it’s the other way. I took up chain racing as chains went from $20-odd to $50-odd overnight. 14k-16k per year, along with costs for tyres, tubes, brake pads etc, i had to try and reduce something. A $100 tyre that lasts 4000kms or less when a $200 car tyre lasts 60,000kms, something doesn’t add up. Even a sporting car tyre at $600 will last 40,000kms. To get that distance i would need 10 tyres.
Yeah, price wars appear to be over as most of the major players exited or failed. Also many manufacturers are geo-blocking in recent years.
But there is another problem, which is partly of our own doing as customers. The bike industry has got everyone used to very high performance tyres. Which cost more to R&D and make. But also give the manufacturers a more exclusive market so they can charge more, for more profit.
The $100 bike tyres are typically race tyres. You can’t compare them to general purpose car tyres or even sports tyres because neither are race tyres. We do the same thing with MC tyres. Leading edge performance costs a lot. I recently bought some Schwalbe The Green Marathon tyres for commuting. They were $31.30 each for 50mm tyres and are expected to last 5,000 to 10,000 km. Probably 10,000 km with me riding them.
I also downgraded my MC tyres within the same Sport Touring class (general road performance) and the cost was about half. I doubt I could tell the difference in grip. Wear is better so far.
Maybe we just need to focus less on the marketing machine of racing and become a bit more pragmatic in our choices of bikes and components. All my current bikes are low performance. But at 58 years old I need to continually remind myself that high performance equipment is wasted on me. Since I’m just out for some exercise, or to commute somewhere.
We all love fancy stuff. I’m sure a Ferrari would get to me to work just fine. But my cheap MC gets me there too at a much lower cost.
Now just waiting for WH to come along to tell me I’m wasting my finite life away riding old rubbish. 
There is no drastic change in materials or technology between a more basic bicycle tyre and a high cost bicycle tyre. A conti GP5000STR is indeed a volume seller but it costs over $100-. There are a limited number of sizes and much less material and freight/storage/ handling costs to car tyre, that also must run a much more extensive number of sizes. The engineering challenges in a top line car or motorcycle racing tyre are hardly comparable imo either. Hundreds of hp and much higher weights and braking/cornering/acceleration forces.
They are relying on us using that “these are racing tyres” analogy to justify the rip off they are performing on us imo.
If road side finds are what you enjoy riding good luck to you. 
I would sooner have good wheels that roll nicely and run cheaper tyres. 
Foo
I have both. Been getting Conti GP TR off AliEx for a reasonable price but word has got out and they are up a bit now. A bit over $50- delivered. Have bought some Michelin pro5 from bikeinn for a similar price recently along with some Schwalbe gravel tyres. The postage is expensive however so you need to buy a few at a time.
Unfortunately tubeless appears to have allowed manufacturers to raise their prices. I use BRR to find what tests well and buy tyres that are not the top tier but roll well for what I am prepared to pay. 10s of thousands of ks on tubeless now. I aint going back to tubes. For me it has been that much better and I have the wheels to suit.
I gave a workmate some used tyres and he said the speed difference to the cheap ones he was buying was crazy. He felt the difference. And then there’s the “life is too short to ride shit bikes”
Thanks.
But the roadside bike was build for a relative that hasn’t picked it up yet.
So I rode it to the shops yesterday to test if the seatpost is still slipping after I used some non-hardening gasket sealant on it. It has worked in the past on other bikes, but takes a week or two to dry enough to work. Seems to be working this time too, and cheaper than carbon assembly paste.
The mid '90s 7 speed changes are a bit clunky. But that may be due to a derailleur hanger misalignment, so I’ll check that. Otherwise if the fit is right, then largely, a bike is a bike.
No doubt there’s a difference in tyre speed. But I’m still buying name brand tyres for purpose. Just not the fastest available.
As for cheap bikes. As long as everything works OK, fits well, and it suits the purpose. Then I’m in the “a bike is a bike” category. I’ve got a 1995 bike and a 2025 bike setup to do the same thing with a similar fit. Not much difference really in riding them. Hedonic adaptation is sure to sort out any pleasure gain in riding a better bike within a year. Then you have something that’s more expensive to keep that really isn’t doing it for you anymore. But then it’s even harder to go back. So one becomes a bit stuck.
