Interesting tube from Schwalbe

[Tony]

Can not be used with rim brakes. This might be the a great back-up tube for those of us that ride tubeless, much less weight!
http://www.schwalbe.com/en/schwalbe-evotube.html

Review on pinkbike
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/schwalbe-evo-aerothan-innertube-review-2016.html

[rab]

Definitely interesting.
But 20 euros!
Wonder how the durability compares against latex and butyl, particularly tear and abrasion resistance.

[CMiller]

Will totally use this as a back-up tube on my tubeless mountain bike, and that's where I see the real market for this. Are any racers really still running tubes? Genuine question, I don't see myself ever going back for dirt riding.

[Pelican]

I'm going to try and get a couple of these. I heard about them, but thought they only came in the 26" size. Plastic tubes make a lot of sense now that most bikes are moving to disc brakes.

[Dave B]

Are these like the FOSS tubes? They seem to be "like" them in theory. I am sure they are wildly different, but the similarity is there from what I am reading. Using a lighter to "patch melt" the tube is kind of cool. Not sure it is as safe as a patch, but if it did work carrying a lighter to fix a flat is a fun idea. Very MacGuyver-like

http://foss.imb2b.com/sell/index.php?itemid=8781

http://www.actionsports.de/en/Foss-Environmentally-Friendly-Tube-700/23-26c-6584

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/foss-inner-tubes-673150.html

[Tony T]

Only available for mountain bikes?
Didn't realize they were weight weenies.

[stephenmarklay]

Maybe the small 29 size would work for a gravel grinder with discs?

[Tony T]

Why would a gravel grinder be concerned with saving weight in the tubes?
This would be an interesting tube if it wasn't susceptible to failure from heat.

[JStonebarger]

So... the selling point is weight savings? And not a word on rolling resistance?

I don't get it.

[v531xc]

Are these just rebranded Foss tubes? They look extremely similar. Foss makes tubes for all sizes and a pinch flat can be "fixed" with a lighter.

edit: ah, Mr. President beat me to it.

[v531xc]

Further investigation shows that the materials between Foss and Schwalbe are different. Schwalbe Evotube use BASF Aerothan as the material, which cannot be used on a bike with rim brakes according to this article (http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/production-to-start-on-schwalbe-s-thermoplastic-inner-tube/018702).

The Schwalbe tube is also seemingly lighter than the Foss tube. Foss is ~60g for a 700x23-26mm tube, whereas Schwalbe is 76g for a 29er tube.

[cadence90]

So... the selling point is weight savings? And not a word on rolling resistance?

I don't get it.

Excellent point; this really is consideration #1, right?

[benb]

I don't get it for MTBs. I haven't had a tube in my mountain bike in 10 years.

I can maybe see it for a disc-equipped gravel grinder type bike. But for MTB where tubeless has long been the standard I can't see the benefit of a super expensive tube.

[Mikej]

I wonder how durable that valve attachment area is- as a spare it would ban to be folded in my pocket.

[Mark McM]

Butyl tubes are sometimes known to fail on bike kept inside cars on hot, sunny days. How will these fair in a hot car?