#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Maybe I drank the koolaide too quickly Last edited by Clancy; 07-18-2019 at 11:25 PM. |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Cheers...Daryl Life is too important to be taken seriously |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Well substantiated? If you are willing to accept biased reporting as the truth. Facts? I actually weighed tubeless vs. tubed as you ride them on the bike. Vittoria Open Pave 27mm vs Hutchinson Sector 28mm....both tires inflated to riding pressure. Care to guess the outcome? I think not, because it goes against the "published facts" (what a joke). All I was trying to say was; try tubeless, actually ride them, you might find you enjoy them (others have). Don't just read (and repeat as fact) the internet "birther ism" about tubeless tires. Perhaps we should allow Mark to have the final say on the "girls on bikes getting sore" thread. I'm certain he has some "well substantiated" facts he read somewhere on the internet to prove us all grossly misinformed. Last edited by tombtfslpk; 07-19-2019 at 08:13 PM. |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Ok guys...let's back off the bickering, or this discussion will be closed.
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
I have been riding road tubeless for several years now, across multiple wheelsets and different brands of tires. I have never found it to be lighter than a tubed combination, but that hasn’t been my goal. My experience is that they ride significantly better than tubed, but not quite as nice as tubulars. The reliability is awesome, I have ridden right through small leaks without stopping many times. When I get home, I just pump back up to pressure to see if the tire holds. I have also patched tires from the inside using vulcanizing fluid and quick grips, getting many more miles. It’s a solid system, don’t knock it until you try it
Ari |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Note-, note- Geez, they are bike tires...not the tire design for the moon rover.. 50th anniversary BTW..Apollo 11... True American Heroes..those guys.
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels Qui Si Parla Campagnolo |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The choice between tubeless/sealant and tubes therefore becomes very situational. If a rider experiences frequent tire punctures, then the trade-offs may favor using sealant (and maintaining it). But if one experiences infrequent punctures, then the using sealant may require more work than fixing the occasional flat (which usually only takes a few minutes to replace a tube). If one experiences few flats and has many wheels they switches between, (which all need to be continually maintained), the lesser maintenance for tubes may be become even more attractive. Here's something I'm curious about, but don't know the answer to: There are many bike share companies, and more seem to be popping up all the time. Any time these bikes have flat tires mean time that they aren't generating revenue (plus the costs in retrieving and fixing the bikes). Do bike share bikes typically use tubeless tires? If not, why not? |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
-Once a year check for me, sealant still liquid in my tires. -Also if you are installing rim tape up on the sidewall of the rim you are doing it wrong. Don't blame user error on the rim tape, it only goes where you put it. -Install a tube once and forget? Sure, until its flat then you have to repeat it as many times as necessary...talk about less maintenance give me a break. To keep with the Thread Title, yes- sealant works and keeps you riding with less overall maintenance and more miles than riding tubes on the road. Last edited by kppolich; 07-19-2019 at 10:33 AM. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
For rolling resistance, selection of the tube becomes important, but with a lightweight tube, there is little measureable difference in rolling resistance. I previously referenced a comparision of the rolling resistances of the GP 5000 TL tubeless tire with GP 5000 (non-tubeless) tire with a latex tube. It was also basically a tie. Other parties that do independent testing of rolling resistance have similar findings. For example, Tom Anholt has tested many tires, including tubulars, tubeless and standard clinchers and publishes them on his web site. In this post, he presented his results when testing the Vittoria Corsa Speed TLR (one of the lowest rolling resistance tires on the market) with either sealant or a tube. He found no difference in the results: Quote:
Finally, there was an article on the Velonews web site 2 weeks about riders using clinchers in this year's Tour de France. Here's an interesting portion of the article: Quote:
Last edited by Mark McM; 07-19-2019 at 10:45 AM. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
That being said you're still being very selective in your numbers and scenarios. The 80g tube you keep referencing is obviously for a Latex Tube, which introduces it's own installation and maintenance hassles. 90-95% of cyclists will use butyl tubes for everyday clinchers, and those weigh anywhere from 90-130g. Obviously you can use a 90g race tube in a 28mm clincher, but it will stretch out so much that the reliability is compromised. And the "set and forget" nature of clinchers you cite leaves out a huge part of the equation - you have to fill up the tube much more often than tubeless and you often have to perform periodic checks for deep slashes/punctures/embedded sharp objects as well. For tubeless, the 2oz figure you continuously reference as the sealant install amount is up to interpretation as well. 30-60ml (1-2oz) is usually the number quoted for 23-28mm tires, and even the amount doesn't have to go larger depending on use. Less sealant will obviously provide less puncture resistance and more topping off, but it's a similar boat as clinchers with regards to variability based on end user. From experience tubeless loses MUCH less air vs butyl tubes, and if using endurance sealant you have to to off at MOST every 4 months with cleanup of residue once a year. But the crossroads of air pressure, comfort and grip shouldn't be ignored. The difference in grip between tubeless/clincher/tubular tires simply by type hasn't been proven yet, but what has been proven is the effect of contact patch area on grip. With clinchers you HAVE to run higher pressures than tubeless to mitigate the risk of pinch flats. While this gets you less rolling resistance it also makes the ride less comfortable and provides less grip since the tire can't deform as much, thus the contact patch is smaller. For tubeless the scenarios are reversed - higher rolling resistance, but increased comfort and grip. So it really depends on the end user and their priorities. If weight and performance is the #1 factor then yes, a clincher with latex tubes is the way to go. But if comfort, grip, after-install maintenance and puncture resistance are on the wish-list it just makes sense to go with the goo. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
As I said, its situational. What would you recommend for this rider:
Rides about 3500 miles a year, including fast rides, training, about half a dozen criteriums, plus some long "fun" rides including a century or two. Owns and rides 5 road bikes, with tires from 25mm - 28mm, with an additional 3 sets of wheels (mostly used for racing), so 8 sets of wheels total. At 160 lb., this rider uses 70 - 80 psi in 25mm tires, and 60 - 70 psi in 28 mm tires. This rider has gotten 3 flats in the past 5 years (roughly 1 every year and a half), so he has spent about 15 minutes changing flat tires in the past 5 years. Is it worth it for this rider to tubeless tires with sealant? (This rider is not fictitious, it is an accurate description of my recent riding.) Quote:
Quote:
[QUOTE=yinzerniner;2568172]But the crossroads of air pressure, comfort and grip shouldn't be ignored. The difference in grip between tubeless/clincher/tubular tires simply by type hasn't been proven yet, but what has been proven is the effect of contact patch area on grip. With clinchers you HAVE to run higher pressures than tubeless to mitigate the risk of pinch flats. While this gets you less rolling resistance it also makes the ride less comfortable and provides less grip since the tire can't deform as much, thus the contact patch is smaller. For tubeless the scenarios are reversed - higher rolling resistance, but increased comfort and grip. While I don't use road tubeless, I have used MTB tubeless. And from that I know that you still don't want to run pressure so low that the tire flattens against the rim too often, because that can lead to damaged rims or at least wheels going out of true. Quote:
|
#42
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This is true of flatted tubes, but you also have to take into account the inflation and inspection time. Granted your roads seem better so maybe you don't even consider tire wear and tear, but for people like myself who deal with much crappier surfaces it was a weekly necessity to ensure longer life on the tire and tube. Quote:
Quote:
Like the example above - citing a five year old article on a rapidly maturing product since it supports one of your statements and arguments. Or completely disregarding another person's viewpoint by referencing "observer bias," but never ONCE ascribing such misgivings on your own thoughts. And then citing the numbers from bicyclerollingresistance tests, then somewhat dismissing the results when they don't match up to an argument you're making and instead referencing another testing protocol. If you want to explain your own positions that's totally fine, but straight dismissal of other's opinions by constantly moving the goalposts is not a good look. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
I've used both extensively and settled on clinchers with tubes. In my experience, the maintenance of tubeless is higher than tubes. With sealant I got less flats, but when I'd get a puncture that wouldn't seal, the effort to get going again was equivalent to getting a bunch of flats. And I have multiple bikes, so sometimes the tubeless bikes would sit long enough for the sealant to start to harden or the bead seal to break, and then I had to do the setup all over again. And at the pressures that make sense for me with 25-28mm tires, I'm not at risk of pinch flats so there's no benefit there on the tubeless side. I'm sure I'll give it a shot again and it is a good system for some people, but it's not universally better.
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
And why do you assume that I have an "apparent focus on riding cleaner/better roads?" If you ask anybody in my cycling club (Northeast Bicycle Club), they'll tell you that I'll ride over just about anything. I've gotten complains that the road rides I lead often include unpaved sections. This sounds like an attempted strawman, or a goalpost movement. Quote:
Quote:
What goalposts did I move? I merely provided counter-arguments to resist the movement of goalposts by others. I'd say we all need to look into our mirrors. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
But I was told recently that was true with some sealants years ago but now all of them have change formulas and can be used with Shimano wheels. True? |
|
|