Quote:
Originally Posted by Calnago
Yes, they absolutely handle better. You talk in terms of "ifs" and "musts" and "don't seem to", which leads me to believe that perhaps you have never ridden tubulars for any length of time. I'm sure you know that tubulars are pretty much exclusively used at the Pro Tour level, save for a few individuals using some clinchers here and there in time trials perhaps, for the most part pretty flat, non technical courses, just put on your go fast face and pedal. But when the course gets sketchy and fast as it might on a mountain descent, I doubt you would find any pro saying "Can I have clinchers please". So why do Pros still use them. They're a lot safer for one, but primarily it's the handling. Or are pros just resistant to change? Ha.... not if the change is better. If new technology is truly better, it is adopted quickly and completely, sponsorships allowing. On the flip side, sometimes they have to ride less than ideal stuff as well due to sponsor commitments or marketing reasons. Tubulars are a relatively niche market in the real world of you and I's however, so if manufacturers could get the pros to showcase their clinchers, they would. It's not like tubulars are easier for teams to deal with. The pros ride tubulars because they are superior to clinchers, period. The ride quality, handling and safety aspects are unsurpassed by any clincher. And those things far outweigh any rolling resistance difference that anyone would be hard pressed to notice in real life. Do you think the mechanics find tubulars easier to maintain for a pro team... hardly... I'm quite sure if pro mechanics never had to scrape or glue another tubular wheel in their lifetime they would be much happier. It's a thankless job, and one I am happy to do for myself, but really don't care doing for others. It's as if they want the nice clean car but want you to always wash it for them. No thanks. Bottom line is, tubulars are the supreme interface between the man/machine and the road, have been for a long time, and continue to be to this day. Are they worth the effort for the average rider, probably not. Are they worth the effort for the discerning rider, absolutely. If you don't care, that's fine too. And there you have my contribution to the debate, sometimes it just has to be reiterated.
 (I know you guys like dancing bananas over here). |
Yes, these are the many of the same arguments we've heard before, but they are largely full of
logical fallacies (in particular
Argument from Authority), not to mention a lot of anecdotes. Sure, the pros still use them, but that could be for lots of reasons. The greater ability to ride a flat tire is probably enough reason. There's also the "legacy" factor ("that's what we've always done.). Just because pros tend to use a product doesn't prove that is the best, even for them (remember when pros wouldn't use aerobars during time trials because they thought they'd slow them down? Or how they didn't start using wider tires until a bunch of "amateur" riders showed that on wider tires can actually be faster?)
Being an empiricist, I'm all about evidence. We've seen time and time again that riding impressions can be biased, so I look for objective evidence. And that evidence just isn't there when it comes to the absolute superiority of the handling of tubulars. When Tour Magazine tested the wet cornering traction of a group of tires (both tubular and clincher), there was no clear trend that the tubulars were better. In fact, if you averaged the performance of the tubulars in their test, it was slightly worst than the average of the clinchers - but that was probably more about the tread material than how the tire was attached to the rim.
Go ahead, keep riding tubulars if that's what you like. You just won't convince me they handle better without showing me objective evidence.