Because tubeless is better

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

answer to mark.


Popcorn out..

Yeah ok. I can’t argue with Paceline alternate reality where downtube shifters are better and faster shifting than di2 and and using latex tubes makes more sense than tubeless. Everyone loves to gloss over how basically all mtb and gravel bikes are tubeless. “But the pressure” is basically the same argument as “but her emails”. In reality it works fine at sane pressure levels as many people will tell you. People being foolish enough to use tires with the durability of a wet paper bag are not a valid counter example.

[AngryScientist]

one thing is for sure, it's a good thing the OP caught that little mishap while the sealant was still liquidy. at least with the sealant i use - once it's dry, it's not going anywhere. i spilled some sealant in my driveway over a year ago and just let it dry, and it's still there!

[MikeD]

How much rolling resistance difference is enough for a fast recreational road rider to notice?

[tomato coupe]

Originally Posted by MikeD

How much rolling resistance difference is enough for a fast recreational road rider to notice?

6 inches.

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by MikeD

How much rolling resistance difference is enough for a fast recreational road rider to notice?

I’m sure it depends on the person but I was able to sense the stock tires on my tarmac felt sluggish, they are 4-5 watts slower per tire than the tires I replaced them with.

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I’m sure it depends on the person but I was able to sense the stock tires on my tarmac felt sluggish, they are 4-5 watts slower per tire than the tires I replaced them with.

I switched from light butyl to latex tubes, and I'm not sure I can detect a difference. Maybe a slightly softer ride, but that may be all in my head.

[EB]

[mcteague]

Originally Posted by MikeD

I switched from light butyl to latex tubes, and I'm not sure I can detect a difference. Maybe a slightly softer ride, but that may be all in my head.

Tried latex tubes long ago and had too many punctures. Bought a pair of Silca latex recently, had a couple flats, had one tube massively rupture when trying to find the hole. Out of the tire I only put a bit of air in to plump it up and find the hole. It went bang and split wide open. Put the ultralight Michelin butyl tubes back in. Can’t say they felt any difference even though I thought the latex tubes felt better when first installed.

Tim

[ripvanrando]

Sealant on the hardwood floor would be grounds for divorce with some wives

[reuben]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I’m sure it depends on the person but I was able to sense the stock tires on my tarmac felt sluggish, they are 4-5 watts slower per tire than the tires I replaced them with.

Huh? Watts is not a measurement of speed or velocity.

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by reuben

Huh? Watts is not a measurement of speed or velocity.

I have two words for you

1. Colloquialism

2. Obtuseness

[El Chaba]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

Try again they’re still faster

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance...beless-sealant

Also feel free to some some homework about what pro teams are up to with tubeless tires.

You are aware that the VAST majority of pro teams are on tubulars no matter what their sponsors say, right?

[reuben]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I have two words for you

1. Colloquialism

2. Obtuseness

I'm not looking for a pissing match, but if you could explain your statement a bit more I'd appreciate it.

Thanks.

[yinzerniner]

Originally Posted by El Chaba

You are aware that the VAST majority of pro teams are on tubulars no matter what their sponsors say, right?

That is absolutely true but a lot has to do with general peloton intransigence, subjective preference and the safety / disaster factor.

Ride feel is still unmatched for tubulars, as is puncture safety and rideability. Tubeless feel is improving with each tire generation and new tech like the Vittoria Air Liners, combined with a full ETRTO tubeless rim and tire mating standards, could make safety and durability the equal of tubulars.

At this point rolling resistance between regular clinchers with latex tubes and tubeless with minimal sealant is either a wash or even show some benefit for the clinchers, but that might be due to the need for airtightness of tubeless requiring stiffer/more casing material vs the more supple/flexible material of the regular clinchers.

[cgolvin]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

… has to do with … subjective preference …

Despite the citations of favorite technical assessments and personal logic, I feel confident that this is the primary reason for the arguments on either side in this thread.

Good, you have a subjective preference for tubeless or tubed clincher or tubular (or wooden wheel) — enjoy yourself, and maybe ponder why it's important to convince someone else that you're "right".