Tubular vs clincher...

[bostondrunk]

Interesting (from cyclingnews.com's review of Ulrich's tour bike):

"We frequently get asked whether pro riders are generally using tubulars or clinchers and as you can see, Jan Ullrich is a tubs man. Despite the advances that have been made in clinchers in the last ten years or so, tubulars still retain an undeniable weight advantage, especially when paired with carbon rims. Ullrich's tyre sponsor, Continental, makes both tubulars and very highly-regarded clinchers, so it's not as if he has sponsor obligations here - this is the choice of a man who can make a choice and who has a Tour de France to win."

[Too Tall]

Speech Speech :)
I'm back. Oh heck yeah.

[zap]

Two guys I rode with last Saturday in Virginia blew out their clinchers on a bridge reduced to one lane with sections of pavement removed. Ouch. One guy blew out both tires. One of my water bottles flew out as I hit the "ravines", but my Zipp carbon rims and tubulars retained there shape :)

So, tubulars still rule :banana:

[Andreu]

I would always race tubs if I could be bothered and could afford them....in my opinion nothing beats them (though there is 1 wheel/clincher combination that comes close for me but it still doesn´t beat top quality tubs on a good wheel).
When you are going well with a tail wind those things sing.
I cannot see the point of hacking around lanes and racing (at the level I now race at) on tubs.
A

[bostondrunk]

If you could afford them?? Conti Sprinters are cheaper than most high quality clinchers.

[Andreu]

yeah ...but you can repair a inner tube or buy a new one. Tubs are a bit more problematic. I just cannot be ar"ed with ´em.
And I can get good tyres cheaper than I can get good tubs.

[bostondrunk]

Regarding the repairing, yeah, it is a pain, I haven't yet tried, but most of my tubies have lasted long enough that once they flat I'm happy to just toss them.

[Andreu]

Continental's latest GP tyres, the Attack for the front and Force for the rear are nearly 100 quid (stirling) for the two thats well over $170. Have I got the figures and conversions right? Conti tubs are about 60 - 70 quid for the two.
I guess it depends what you are comparing but I can get two pretty good tyres for normally around 40 quid here in Spain and they last me about 4-6 months depending on mileage and weather. That will do for me right now.
I will be avoiding the latest clinchers until I can win the lottery (....wait a minute....if I won the lottery I would go to tubs).
A

[defenestrator]

??? (http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2004/tour04/tech/?id=ullrich-bike/CH8855) i am waiting for the jerk to reveal whether dario or eddy is responsible for this carbonious creation. surely it cannot be the neanderthals at giant?!

[bostondrunk]

I don't know why the Giant Carbon's get such a bad rap here. Well, I guess its cause the jerk doesn't like them.
I know a lot of people who ride them, and they have nothing but good things to say. They are also very light, I believe under 2.5 pounds for the medium frame. If it fits ya, then its a damn good frame for the money (about 1400 I think for frame/fork?)

[Andreu]

You will never be able to get away from fashion victims and fashion fascists.
(try saying that after a couple o' pints)
A

[Dekonick]

Funny thing.

Today I was enjoying a great ride - was 2.5 miles into a 3 mile climb and was flying! (for me) - heart rate was ALMOST to max... and what happens? PFFffffssssstttttt -

CRAP - I flat.

Pull over, take rear wheel off, take off mich. clincher (ironman) - look, see, find shard of glass - remove it.

Put in spare tube - start pumping away with my mini pump - pump... pump... pump........................................pump.. ..pump....pump..................................<insert profanity here>...........pump....pump....pump...

finally feels decent enough to limp home to a 'real' pump -
disconect pump and what happens??? the nipple pulls out with the &%%# pump!!!

Now I am &%&^% - really mad. Call my wife on cell (only have 1 spare tube, didnt bring patch kit) - she tells me she doesnt know where I am - so I start giving directions......(she is great, but not with a map...)

What happens? A truck with a hunting dog and decoys in the truck bed slows down... driver asks if he can help!!!

He gives me a ride to a local Target (my wife KNOWS how to get THERE!!! LOL) - and asks me about Lance and how he is doing.

Wow - I was really thankful (and suprised) for this unexpected aid! This would have been the same kind of truck I would expect to run me off of the road.

anyway - 2 things happened to me

1) met someone I would otherwise never have met. Nice guy - and cyclist friendly thanks to Lance

2) went and bought specialized armidillo's to put on my bike. Man they ride like cave man stone wheels. (and I dont feel that I can corner as fast with them...) but I know they wont flat!

well - off on a tangent - but I might consider trying tub's if they ride better and dont flat.

after replacing the tires, (and a new spare tube) I went out to finish my ride. Couldnt get HR up to max, seemed to have lost something after the morning ride. Bummer....

<the same thing with the nipple pulling from the stem happened to a friend last weekend - might be a bad batch of tubes>

oh well... such is life. :D

[Andreu]

I rode those Armidillos in the UK for about three years and they were still going strong when I left.....what the hell do they make them out of....Armadillos or summat?
Tubs, I would say, in my long experience of riding grand tours and Northern European classics are slightly more resistant to puntures then clinchers.
A

[Dekonick]

The Armidillo's are made from granite...with a marble inner band supported by quartz. (at least thats how they feel)

[Kevan]

I'm tubular...man.

Sandy's the clincher.

[Litespeeder]

There have been a number of independent tests that have confirmed that clinchers in general have a lower rolling resistance when compared to tubies. This has to do with the glue that's used to hold the tires to the rim. I have never run across any credible articles that conclude that tubies have less roll resistance or outperform clinchers. It's all in your head. If you have anything that supports the superiority of tubies then please share.

:crap:

[bostondrunk]

I think it has to do with some simple, non scientific facts:

1. They often feel better.
2. They are rounder and corner better
3. They can take higher pressures (may not matterto some people)
4. NO PINCH FLATS!!!
5. They are usually lighter than clinchers/tube


As for rolling resistance, I have no idea...

[Ozz]

...It's all in your head...
:crap:

half of winning is 90% mental! ;) :D :beer: :banana: :banana: :banana:

[rustolium]

I could be wrong, but the technical and the experience side of my brain would think that a wheel pumped to 180+ PSI will have less rolling resistence than a tire at 125 PSI.

Look at tubless mountain tires. The point is to run less PSI so you get better grab which will equal more resistence.

I just got a set of Bora wheels and must say I love the tubies a lot. Once you do a change it is actually easier than a clincher. The only thing I dislike is the bulk of the spare tubular you have to carry.

There really is difference, is it a big advantage? Probably not, but nice though. The weight savings is probably the most important aspect of tubies. Rolling weight is important.

[froze]

The BostonDrunk is RIGHT!!! He may be drunk but he ain't stupid; and the rest of you pro tubulars have never read Jobst Brandt or Sheldon Brown on this subject. The 2 web sites I gave answer all the questions and discusses all the theories you all asked plus some you didn't; so for your entertainment pleasure go to:

http://www.yarchive.net/bike/tubulars.html

Then when you finish that page or say something like: "Well I don't agree with everything that J Brandt says"; then you can disagree with Sheldon Brown by reading this site:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tires.html

Funny, the two most respected cycle gurus in America don't like tubulars.

[Andreu]

There have been a number of independent tests that have confirmed that clinchers in general have a lower rolling resistance when compared to tubies. This has to do with the glue that's used to hold the tires to the rim. I have never run across any credible articles that conclude that tubies have less roll resistance or outperform clinchers. It's all in your head. If you have anything that supports the superiority of tubies then please share.

:crap:

Tubs are lighter and more responsive. Quite important in a race.
As far as tests go....who paid for the tests and what comparisons were made?
How would glue under the tyre affect rolling resistance?
A

[Too Tall]

Nobody's talking about cornering?

Who can point me to good data showing higher rolling resistance?

[zap]

Now your going to make me dig through my archives :confused:

I do recall reading something some time ago regarding clinchers superior rolling resistance. Just like inner tubes, glue and base tape would have a small affect on rolling resistance.

As far as responsiveness and cornering is concerned, tubs definetly rule. So, since all good roads aren't straight or flat......

[Litespeeder]

Tubs are lighter and more responsive. Quite important in a race.
As far as tests go....who paid for the tests and what comparisons were made?
How would glue under the tyre affect rolling resistance?
A


Tubs are not always lighter or more responsive than clinchers. I'm currently riding on Veloflex Corsas (160 grams) with latex tubes (60 grams). IMO, they are lighter and more responsive than any tubular that I have ever encountered.

Read the two links above for an explanation of why rolling resistance is greater with tubulars. Neither Sheldon Brown nor Brandt gets paid by tire companies to perform their testing. They are arguable the most honest reviewer of cycling product on the market.


:bike:

[froze]

As far as responsiveness and cornering is concerned, tubs definetly rule. So, since all good roads aren't straight or flat......

But good cornering is more about the rider then the tires! I got into a race about 9 months ago with a guy on tubulars and I was on clinchers...Specialize Armadillos of all tires...and I was able to out corner him by a lot in a series of tight S turns coming down a mountain road! My tires, which are not racing or handling tires, never raised a fuss; he just did not have the skill or nerves or both to push harder into the turns; and over the years I found this to be true with most cyclist.

So your arguement about cornering isn't going to apply to most people. If you have 2 identically skilled riders...clones riding on identical bikes using top of line tires, then your right, the tubular rider should do better than the clincher on cornering.

[zap]

Well now, if we are looking at the lightest, you can find rideable tubulars that weigh 160g. Also remember that tubular rims are lighter as well.

My current set of tubulars that I ride regularly weigh 213 & 215g each according to my scale.

Still researching additional rolling resistance tests.

[froze]

Right Zap, in general tubular rims and tires will be lighter. American Classic make a 250 gram clincher, combine that with the new 145 gram Veloflex Record and a 50 gram Conti racing tube and you got a really light clincher set up. Problem is, lighter is not aways better especially for street use.

[bostondrunk]

And a clincher rim will likely be weaker than an equal weight tubular rim, since some of that material is used in the hook part of the rim, taking away weight/strength from the rest of the rim.
tubies rule!!

[Ken Robb]

I ride on Conti Ultragatorskins which somehow combine great resistance to punctures with a lively ride. $32 list.

[zap]

Froze, the name of those 250 gram clincher rims are.............

But you are right, as with everything else, the rider is the most important part of the equation. We all know that ;) Just imagine how much faster you would have been on a tubular setup.

[BigMac]

I do not know if there has been an emperical study performed that would prove sewups have lower rolling resistance than wire-on, but it is a fact. Speak with engineers at Continental, who produce high quality versions of each design used by pro's worldwide, they will tell you sewups are lower rolling resistance, at least in theory. Places where ultimate speed is the only criteria, velodrome racing for example, only use sewups. It does have something to do with casing design and friction losses due to the loose tube, this is one of the supposed benefits of the new tubeless clinchers. For practical terms, anyone around this forum, including yours truly, is not going to be even fractionally faster based on tire design choice, at least in straightline racing.

If you were however to include high speed descents in your riding regimen, I do believe the sewups will be faster for most aggressive riders due to much improved handling response, feel and performance(grip). I also suspect any triathletes competing over most long courses could gain considerable time using faster rolling sewups as used by every elite triathalete and professional road racer over long TT events.

For most stage events, pro teams generally prefer sewups for 2 reasons, performance and servicability. In reality, the field is nearly even at this years TdF due primarily to Michelin being the largest professional sponsor. All Michelin support contracts REQUIRE teams to use clinchers a minimum of 50% of total miles, some teams much higher. Michelin does not produce sewups however teams are allowed to contract for mock-up sewups that employ cosmetic features of Michelin clinchers, namely logos and tread colors. Yes, pinch-flat prevention, low rolling resistance, handling performance are all important factors but perhaps the biggest factor in choosing sewups among pro teams is ability of wheel to continue to be ridden when flatted while race support attempts to get to rider. If a puncture occurs with a clincher, the wheel can rarely be ridden safely thus rider often must wait helplessly at roadside till a race support vehicle can get to him for assistance. This can mean minutes, not seconds and has often occurred thus far in this years Tour.

On this very forum this topic has often been rehashed with the identical arguments. There are in fact fans in both camps, perhaps a few may even convert to clinchers with soon introduction of Mavic-Michelin road tubeless design. I would not dismiss either design w/o a full hands-on demo of each under your normal riding conditions. The difference in feel is considerable, as is installation and servicabilty. Use whatever works and feels best to you and your needs. Heck whatever gets people on their bikes more often is ALWAYS the best choice. Debating rolling resistance is synonymous with debating whether smooth or file tread offers better performance...it just don't matter.

Ride on! :banana: :banana: :banana: