Tubeless Road

[jeduardo]

Hello all,
I am seriously contemplating building up a set of tubeless road wheels for the spring, but I am definitely not interested in utilizing the obvious tire offerings from Hutchinson. I will be lacing up White Industries Ti Campy road hubs, Velocity A23 rims, but as far as tires, though I am partial to Ultremo R.1, I am looking for advice/guidance from other tubeless road riders. After speaking with the folks at Velocity, I've learned that most every clincher tire can paired with that A23 and Stans-No Tubes "tubeless road kit".
With this said, has anyone the tried Stans tubeless road Kit and if so which tires/rims have worked for you?
Thank you to all
J

[dekindy]

Not an option.

A road tubeless tire is the only tire designed to be used tubeless. All regular clinchers will roll off the rim before you get a block away from your house if you try to run them without a tube.

Why don't you want to use the Hutchinson's? They are fine tires. There are now 3 models: lightweight racing(Atom), middle of the road(Fusion 3), and long lasting(Intensive).

I am a heavyweight and the Fusion 2's lasted as long or longer as Continental 4000s and the Intensive has lasted much longer despite getting a couple of sidewall punctures. They patch easily.

[Likes2ridefar]

I think the fusion 3 tubeless is a great tire. At least try it once.

[CNY rider]

I agree with the above posters, the Hutchinson tires are excellent.
I've used the Intensive and the Fusion.
Would also be on the lookout for the DA 7850's, they seem to be popping up for sale at great prices and are another option for the wheels.

[oldpotatoe]

[QUOTE=dekindy]Not an option.

A road tubeless tire is the only tire designed to be used tubeless. All regular clinchers will roll off the rim before you get a block away from your house if you try to run them without a tube.

Not really true. Altho I don't do it nor advocate it, being a bike shop, there is a guy named Mike Robson who has done a tubeless conversion using lots of non tubeless tires. Just wrote an article for Velonews..look it up.

He says mostly to use a wire bead tire, BTW.

[dekindy]

I didn't say that there weren't idiots out there trying it. Really a shame that VeloNews would print something like that.

Is this the article that you are referring, too? http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/09/cyclocross/going-tubeless-for-cyclocross-tires-and-technique_142245

[QUOTE=dekindy]Not an option.

A road tubeless tire is the only tire designed to be used tubeless. All regular clinchers will roll off the rim before you get a block away from your house if you try to run them without a tube.

Not really true. Altho I don't do it nor advocate it, being a bike shop, there is a guy named Mike Robson who has done a tubeless conversion using lots of non tubeless tires. Just wrote an article for Velonews..look it up.

He says mostly to use a wire bead tire, BTW.

[oldpotatoe]

I didn't say that there weren't idiots out there trying it. Really a shame that VeloNews would print something like that.

Is this the article that you are referring, too? http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/09/cyclocross/going-tubeless-for-cyclocross-tires-and-technique_142245

[QUOTE=oldpotatoe]

That's the one. I know Michael, and believe him when he says he has converted lots of clincher systems to tubeless using standard rims, wire bead tires and a Stans' 'kit'. He rides a lot and says he has no problem whatsoever. He has even created his own sealant. But in this litigious society and with an eye towards liability, we'll advocate tubeless rims and tires only.

But like they say...YMMV.

[torquer]

That article is specifically about tubeless conversions for CX, which requires much lower pressure than most road riders use.
"Remember: Non-tubeless tires don’t have the bead strength for super high pressure, so don’t go over that 70psi mark."

[jeduardo]

I wish to thank all of you who took the time to weigh in on the tubeless road subject. It has become glaringly obvious, to me, that road bike tubeless technology is in dire need of further R & D. It will/may take quite a bit more time before a higher percentage of riders are willing to veer off of their, tried and true, clincher/tubular paths.
I have been running both my MTB and cross bikes tubeless, for several years, without serious issue, but a foray into the tubeless road arena seems rather ill conceived at this juncture.

[Likes2ridefar]

Odd conclusion. based on what? I'd run tubeless any day on the road before cyclocross.

[fjaws]

70 PSI was what he recommended for seating the tires. I think you'll find it mentions in the article that all the tires were tested at 33 PSI. Certainly not in the range of road tire pressures.

Apples and Oranges to use this article to justify it being safe for the road.

[oldpotatoe]

70 PSI was what he recommended for seating the tires. I think you'll find it mentions in the article that all the tires were tested at 33 PSI. Certainly not in the range of road tire pressures.

Apples and Oranges to use this article to justify it being safe for the road.

After talking to him he recommends a wire bead tire and then you can raise the pressure above that 70 psi. For lots of foldable tires, it just didn't work. I DON'T advocate it or justify it, I'm just saying what Michael has done, since he comes into the shop all the time.

[LegendRider]

I wish to thank all of you who took the time to weigh in on the tubeless road subject. It has become glaringly obvious, to me, that road bike tubeless technology is in dire need of further R & D. It will/may take quite a bit more time before a higher percentage of riders are willing to veer off of their, tried and true, clincher/tubular paths.
I have been running both my MTB and cross bikes tubeless, for several years, without serious issue, but a foray into the tubeless road arena seems rather ill conceived at this juncture.


Those of us who are road tubeless fans likely sound like a broken record, but I'll say it again. If you compare a standard tubeless set-up (DA wheels, Hutchinson tires. ~90psi) versus a typical clincher wheelset (Ksyriums with Michelin ProRace3 tires. ~110 psi), you will find the tubeless are more comfortable, flat less and corner better. There may be less rolling resistance as well, but that's a different discussion.

[bobswire]

Those of us who are road tubeless fans likely sound like a broken record, but I'll say it again. If you compare a standard tubeless set-up (DA wheels, Hutchinson tires. ~90psi) versus a typical clincher wheelset (Ksyriums with Michelin ProRace3 tires. ~110 psi), you will find the tubeless are more comfortable, flat less and corner better. There may be less rolling resistance as well, but that's a different discussion.

Ditto!

http://i55.tinypic.com/168ijgl.jpg

[oldpotatoe]

Ditto!

http://i55.tinypic.com/168ijgl.jpg

How about the clinchers at 90 psi?..you don't automatically get pinch flats any more than low pressure on tubeless when you hit the same 'thing' produces a burp.

[dekindy]

How about the clinchers at 90 psi?..you don't automatically get pinch flats any more than low pressure on tubeless when you hit the same 'thing' produces a burp.

Any time there is a tube involved there is a danger of a pinch flat. Even if your statement were true, you will still get a better ride with tubeless than with tubed assuming the same psi in both.

Even if they were equal in all respects except tubeless is much less prone to rolling off the rim when a flat occurs on a fast downhill, I would go with tubeless for the additional safety. Safety is a much overlooked feature of tubeless, atmo.

[fjaws]

90 PSI feels squishy (for lack of a more technical term) to me on a traditional tubed clincher. It doesn't at all on my tubeless set up. I assume this is due to the increased sidewall stiffness.

[Mark McM]

90 PSI feels squishy (for lack of a more technical term) to me on a traditional tubed clincher. It doesn't at all on my tubeless set up. I assume this is due to the increased sidewall stiffness.

you will still get a better ride with tubeless than with tubed assuming the same psi in both.

We've finally found the Holy Grail of bicycle equipment! Tubeless tires are 'Stiff yet Compliant!'

I really don't understand how a tubeless tire can behave much differently than any other similar clincher tire in use (yes, a tubeless is still a clincher). They use the same basic casing construction (bias ply fabric casings with a tread molded or bonded on), they are both attached to the rim in the same way (bead clinched under a hooked rim sidewall).

The primary difference is that tubeless tire has an extra thickness or layer of rubber inside the casing to become air impermeable, whereas a standard clincher uses seperate inner tube inside the casing for the same purpose. Under pressure, the tube presses so tightly against the inside of the casing that they might as well be bonded together (in some cases, after some use the tube actually does become mildly bonded to the casing, and has to be peeled off the casing), so that the mechanical properties of the tire carcass should be the same.

The similarity between standard and tubeless clincher tires probably explains why tubeless tires have never been objectively shown to be lighter, have lower rolling resistance, or better traction, than tubed tires.

[Likes2ridefar]

We've finally found the Holy Grail of bicycle equipment! Tubeless tires are 'Stiff yet Compliant!'

I really don't understand how a tubeless tire can behave much differently than any other similar clincher tire in use (yes, a tubeless is still a clincher). They use the same basic casing construction (bias ply fabric casings with a tread molded or bonded on), they are both attached to the rim in the same way (bead clinched under a hooked rim sidewall).

The primary difference is that tubeless tire has an extra thickness or layer of rubber inside the casing to become air impermeable, whereas a standard clincher uses seperate inner tube inside the casing for the same purpose. Under pressure, the tube presses so tightly against the inside of the casing that they might as well be bonded together (in some cases, after some use the tube actually does become mildly bonded to the casing, and has to be peeled off the casing), so that the mechanical properties of the tire carcass should be the same.

The similarity between standard and tubeless clincher tires probably explains why tubeless tires have never been objectively shown to be lighter, have lower rolling resistance, or better traction, than tubed tires.

The primary difference is the bead, not the tire.

A scale will easily show which is lighter.

Rolling resistance is quite tricky to test as you probably know thus the lack of reliable data available. I've seen one test where they did a tubeless inside on rollers along with the common tubulars and clinchers, but unfortunately they pumped it up to 120psi which is about 30-40psi higher than what is typically run. I don't know if that would change the results.

Cornering in dry conditions is so obviously better with tubeless I'd think anyone could feel the difference. On wet roads I've found the fusion 3 to not be as stable feeling when cornering as my typically used clincher conti 4000s.

[Mark McM]

The primary difference is the bead, not the tire.

The bead is locked rigidly (statically) to the rim (and must be, to maintain pneumatic seal), so how can that affect how the tire performs dynamically?


A scale will easily show which is lighter.

Yes, and the scale shows that tubeless is pretty much the same weight as a standard clincher plus inner tube. The Hutchinson Fusion 3 appears to be the most popular tubeless tire, and according to Hutchinson's website (http://www.hutchinsontires.com/en/catalogue.php?cat=route&clear=1) the tubeless version of the 700x23c tire weighs 290 grams, the standard version weighs 210 grams, and butyl tube weighs 70 grams. Throw in a valve for the tubeless tire and a rim strip for the standard tire, and the total weight will be within grams.

Rolling resistance is quite tricky to test as you probably know thus the lack of reliable data available. I've seen one test where they did a tubeless inside on rollers along with the common tubulars and clinchers, but unfortunately they pumped it up to 120psi which is about 30-40psi higher than what is typically run. I don't know if that would change the results.

Difficult to run or not, in rolling resistace tests tubeless tires have not demonstrated any tendency at all to produce lower rolling resistance. As demonstrated in other tests, higher pressures give lower rolling resistance, so running the tubeless tire at a lower pressure would result in higher resistance.


Cornering in dry conditions is so obviously better with tubeless I'd think anyone could feel the difference. On wet roads I've found the fusion 3 to not be as stable feeling when cornering as my typically used clincher conti 4000s.

Cornering in dry conditions is limited more by rider skill/confidence than tire traction. The limit of adhesion of better tires approaches 1 g (a 45 degree lean angle), which is further than most riders dare to go. Even so, I've seen no objective testing which showed tubeless tires to be any better than standard clinchers. The data is a bit old, but the 2007 Tour Magazine Tire (http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/bicycle/general/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf) showed that the Hutchinson 2 tubeless tire had not particularly remarkable rolling resistance and slightly worse than average wet traction.

[Pete Serotta]

thanks for all the contributions to the forum and the wine and beer will be on me when i meet you in COLO around the next Ride the ROckies. :beer: PETE


[QUOTE=dekindy]Not an option.

A road tubeless tire is the only tire designed to be used tubeless. All regular clinchers will roll off the rim before you get a block away from your house if you try to run them without a tube.

Not really true. Altho I don't do it nor advocate it, being a bike shop, there is a guy named Mike Robson who has done a tubeless conversion using lots of non tubeless tires. Just wrote an article for Velonews..look it up.

He says mostly to use a wire bead tire, BTW.

[Likes2ridefar]

The bead is locked rigidly (statically) to the rim (and must be, to maintain pneumatic seal), so how can that affect how the tire performs dynamically?




Yes, and the scale shows that tubeless is pretty much the same weight as a standard clincher plus inner tube. The Hutchinson Fusion 3 appears to be the most popular tubeless tire, and according to Hutchinson's website (http://www.hutchinsontires.com/en/catalogue.php?cat=route&clear=1) the tubeless version of the 700x23c tire weighs 290 grams, the standard version weighs 210 grams, and butyl tube weighs 70 grams. Throw in a valve for the tubeless tire and a rim strip for the standard tire, and the total weight will be within grams.



Difficult to run or not, in rolling resistace tests tubeless tires have not demonstrated any tendency at all to produce lower rolling resistance. As demonstrated in other tests, higher pressures give lower rolling resistance, so running the tubeless tire at a lower pressure would result in higher resistance.




Cornering in dry conditions is limited more by rider skill/confidence than tire traction. The limit of adhesion of better tires approaches 1 g (a 45 degree lean angle), which is further than most riders dare to go. Even so, I've seen no objective testing which showed tubeless tires to be any better than standard clinchers. The data is a bit old, but the 2007 Tour Magazine Tire (http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/bicycle/general/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf) showed that the Hutchinson 2 tubeless tire had not particularly remarkable rolling resistance and slightly worse than average wet traction.

I have to admit you have me shaking my head, wondering why I bother responding. This'll be my last.

I was simply pointing out the fact the bead is the primary difference and not that it changes the ride quality.

I was simply pointing out the fact a scale would show the true weight if that is some peoples concern. There was no suggestion one was lighter than the other.

Cornering is what it is. I and many others I ride with will say the exact same thing tests be damned. And, I'm probably one of those in your willing to go too far category racing crits at the pro level.

[dekindy]

thanks for all the contributions to the forum and the wine and beer will be on me when i meet you in COLO around the next Ride the ROckies. :beer: PETE


[QUOTE=oldpotatoe]

Let's hope nobody gets hurt running tubed clinchers tubeless on the road at high pressure.

[LegendRider]

Cornering in dry conditions is limited more by rider skill/confidence than tire traction. The limit of adhesion of better tires approaches 1 g (a 45 degree lean angle), which is further than most riders dare to go.

Does that apply at any pressure? So, whether your tires are pumped to 90 or 120 psi, they won't slip until a 45 degree lean angle? Alternatively, can you lean more at lower pressures than higher?

[Likes2ridefar]

Does that apply at any pressure? So, whether your tires are pumped to 90 or 120 psi, they won't slip until a 45 degree lean angle? Alternatively, can you lean more at lower pressures than higher?

At 90psi you can lean 45.3 while at 120psi you can lean 44.7.

[bobswire]

How about the clinchers at 90 psi?..you don't automatically get pinch flats any more than low pressure on tubeless when you hit the same 'thing' produces a burp.

Had two pinch flats on that very bike with those tires three weeks ago, nada , no way going to happen on my tubeless running 10 lbs lighter over the same terrain. That's a fact.
Tubeless bike wheels no more "burp" than you car tires, neither should you compare them to home made "clincher" rims and tires using sealant which I see a lot of folks are confusing the two.
Sure you can get a puncture in that case just throw in a tube and be on you way then patch it once you get home.

[oldpotatoe]

Had two pinch flats on that very bike with those tires three weeks ago, nada , no way going to happen on my tubeless running 10 lbs lighter over the same terrain. That's a fact.
Tubeless bike wheels no more "burp" than you car tires, neither should you compare them to home made "clincher" rims and tires using sealant which I see a lot of folks are confusing the two.
Sure you can get a puncture in that case just throw in a tube and be on you way then patch it once you get home.

OK, I admit it, when it's wet outside I ride clinchers. Rubino pros, 25c, and I pump them to...drum roll...95 psi. Same as my Conti Sprinter tubies and I have not had a pinch flat for years....I'm .1 offa ton BTW.

Tubeless when at really low pressure burp all the time.

Once again, if ya like these tires and wheels, then use 'em but like anything 'bike' they have 'goods and others'. Can't understand why others(not you) seem to get irritated when some others(not you) question the holy grailness of tubeless.

[LegendRider]

Tubeless when at really low pressure burp all the time.


I've ridden DA tubeless wheels for two years at pressures as low as 85 psi and I've never had them burp, nor have I ever heard of it on tubeless-specific road wheels at the recommended range of pressures. Maybe on clincher conversions, super-low pressure for cross or mountain bike wheels, but it's a non-issue for DA or Fulcrum tubeless-specific wheels.

[Likes2ridefar]

I've ridden DA tubeless wheels for two years at pressures as low as 85 psi and I've never had them burp, nor have I ever heard of it on tubeless-specific road wheels at the recommended range of pressures. Maybe on clincher conversions, super-low pressure for cross or mountain bike wheels, but it's a non-issue for DA or Fulcrum tubeless-specific wheels.

I've let mine go lower on a few occasions and never had them burp and I've never used them on tubeless specific wheels. I generally run 85f and 90r but only weigh a bit less than 160lb's.

I've raced the crap out of them on the nastiest most technical crit courses hammering potholes every lap for 50 laps hard in corners and never managed to get them to burp.

I've had my cross wheels burp once out of 5 races this year. Tubeless is not ideal for cross in my opinion, but better than regular clinchers. Both are clearly inferior to tubulars still. I've found in the front you can get away with very low pressures and have no issues but the rear is a different story. During hard cornering it burped nearly all the air out once causing a DNF and on numerous other corners I felt it wiggle quite a bit beneath me.

[bobswire]

Well then check this out. http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech/2008/probikes/?id=philippe_gilbert_FDJ_Lapierre08

Exact wheels and tires Gilbert team used.
From the article," Gilbert's bike is fitted with a full Shimano Dura-Ace groupset, right down to the wheels, pedals and relatively standard 53/39T and 11-23T gearing. While the frame and fork are made almost exclusively of carbon fiber, there's virtually none of it to be found elsewhere on Gilbert's Het Volk machine. In fact, most teams stick with alloy in the northern classics as having slightly heavier components is a small price to pay for a little more insurance on the cobbles.

One such example is Gilbert's Shimano WH-7850-SL clincher wheelset whose toughness and predictable handling outweighs the slight weight and aerodynamic disadvantage of its 23mm-deep scandium alloy rims. The entire team also opts for Hutchinson's Fusion 2 tubeless (700x23c) on all their bikes. These are still catching on in the road cycling world, as they're not the easiest things to install, but they roll well and offer great grip."

[dekindy]

This thread is really bugging me. The OP specified road tubeless. Then oldpotato said someone was converting tubed tires to tubeless and referenced an article. The article is for cyclocross, not road.

Let me emphasize again, a tubed road tire cannot be used tubeless under any circumstances. It will stretch and roll off the rim, even with sealant. If you don't believe me, consult Stan's No Tubes Sealant website. He is the authority on road tubeless. Use Hutchinson's tubeless tires.

If there is evidence to the contrary, please show me.

SerottaPete, I could not tell if your reply complimenting oldpotato on his contribution or endorsing using a tubed road tire tubeless. We need to be very clear on this point as I consider this very dangerous. Again, show me the evidence and I will drop my crusade on this issue as it has been somewhat controversial in the past, though not recently.

[oldpotatoe]

This thread is really bugging me. The OP specified roadtubeless. Then oldpotato said someone was converting tubed tires to tubeless and referenced an article. The article is for cyclocross, not road.

Let me emphasize again, a tubed road tire cannot be used tubeless under any circumstances. It will stretch and roll off the rim, even with sealant. If you don't believe me, consult Stan's No Tubes Sealant website. He is the authority on road tubeless. Use Hutchinson's tubeless tires.

If there is evidence to the contrary, please show me.

SerottaPete, I could not tell if your reply complimenting oldpotato on his contribution or endorsing using a tubed road tire tubeless. We need to be very clear on this point as I consider this very dangerous. Again, show me the evidence and I will drop my crusade on this issue as it has been somewhat controversial in the past, though not recently.

I'll see if Michael will email you. No reason to get upset or bugged about this. People do all sorts of dangerous things. He isn't selling them, just doing it and using them himself. To be clear, I don't advocate it, recommend it, do this conversion. The 'evidence' is Michael saying he has done it. I don't think he's lying. No need to try it yourself or recommend anybody else doing it.

[dekindy]

I'll see if Michael will email you. No reason to get upset or bugged about this. People do all sorts of dangerous things. He isn't selling them, just doing it and using them himself. To be clear, I don't advocate it, recommend it, do this conversion. The 'evidence' is Michael saying he has done it. I don't think he's lying. No need to try it yourself or recommend anybody else doing it.

Not upset, just concerned and wanting to be very clear. Also, would like to learn if there is something to this but not a big interest as I am entirely satisfied with Hutchinson's offering.

[oldpotatoe]

Not upset, just concerned and wanting to be very clear. Also, would like to learn if there is something to this but not a big interest as I am entirely satisfied with Hutchinson's offering.

Sent you a email.

[hairylegs]

Fascinating thread!

I've been thinking about going tubeless and am now even more confused...

Maybe I'll just save the money and stick to clinchers (which I have!)

:)

[LegendRider]

Fascinating thread!

I've been thinking about going tubeless and am now even more confused...

Maybe I'll just save the money and stick to clinchers (which I have!)

:)

See if you can ride a set before making a decision.

[97CSI]

Am wondering if it would be possible to use Stan's kit and a pair of Hutchison's tubeless tires on a set of Campy Proton wheels? While the Conti 4000 w/Vectran are working quite well, am intrigued by tubeless and would like to try a set. Where is the best place to purchase a set.

[Likes2ridefar]

You can buy it as a kit that any shop can order for you or direct from notubes.com or a number of online shops.

or buy it in pieces if you have some of the stuff already.

I bought my first kit from excel sports online. they had a 10% off price.

it should work fine on your wheels. the only rim I've read that has caused minor grief for some is the mavic open pro rim.

the conversion is super easy to do and there's a video on stan's site you can watch before. Just follow that exactly and you'll be fine. In other words, unless you really, really don't trust your abilities I'd do it yourself. It's roughly as easy as changing a clincher tire/tube.

[BillG]

I am entirely satisfied with Hutchinson's offering.

This seems the biggest problem with tubeless, the lack of alternative tires. That said, I love the Fusion 3s. Has anyone tried the Intensive tires?

[bobswire]

This seems the biggest problem with tubeless, the lack of alternative tires. That said, I love the Fusion 3s. Has anyone tried the Intensive tires?

Not yet but I'm keeping my eyes open. The three offerings I'm aware of are the Atom (race) , Fushion3 (training/race) and Intensive 25mm (long distance road).
I'm using the Fushion3 and really like them.
Here are some Intensive for $48.95 http://www.ebikestop.com/hutchinson_intensive_700x25_tubeless_black-TR2537.php