What Happened to Tubular Popularity?

[KarlC]

No one I ride with regularly beside myself uses tubulars, for what ever the reasons and what ever tires they try, they all flat regularly. When they flat its not a race to fix the flat, so it takes long enuf to become a chat fest. If I get a puncture its most often just sealed and I may never know, unless I do a close inspection of my tire.

PS - I love all the misconceptions with Tubular wheels, it makes it very ez to buy REALLY nice wheels for REALLY good deals.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by KarlC

The extra drag of tubular tires .... what extra drag ????

Sigh ...

Just about every rolling resistance test in the last few decades have shown that for otherwise similar tires, clinchers have less rolling resistance than tubulars (and also that the difference in drag due to rolling resistance is greater than the difference in drag due to weight).

Here's one such test, there are many others:

https://www.vittoria.com/news/clinch...r-or-tubeless/

Many top pro racers have switched to clinchers for time trials due to the lower drag vs. tubulars.

[Kontact]

Originally Posted by KarlC

The extra drag of tubular tires .... what extra drag ????

Glue flex increases rolling resistance.

Originally Posted by Imaking20

I have 192 gram tubular tires. Can you show me a clincher and tube that's comparable in weight?

Veloflex Record clincher is 145g + a 50g Vredestein latex tube is 195 grams. A 192 gram tubular + glue is a little over 205 grams.

Do you REALLY know anyone who has rolled a tubular? Have you seen it? Because I've ended up off the road flattish a clincher on carbon wheels.

Yes, I do.

As for the effectiveness of sealant in a clincher, I don't know if that's accurate. I'm also not willing to test it because my experience flattish clinchers is that they go flat almost instantly - whereas every tubular flat has been a slow leak down.

There is no mechanism that makes a clincher go flat faster than a tubular. They both have internal tubes, sidewalls and tread. And the tubeless guys certainly seem to think that they don't have a flat problem, either.




I like clinchers because I am lazy, and if my clinchers flatted all the time my laziness would motivate me to find a system that requires less of my time either mounting tires or fixing flats.


Another time factor no one is talking about is that when you change a tube after a flat, you are done. The tiny bit of extra time that takes is all the time you're going to be taking. Flatting a tubular allows you to swap it faster to get back to the ride, but you aren't going to keep riding it like that. When you get home you're going to peel that spare off, probably try to roll it back up and start the gluing process from scratch. And, if you're the type, you're going to open up the flatted tire and repair that, too. That's a lot of time dedicated to a hole in the inner tube of the tubular.

[StephenCL]

Originally Posted by .RJ

Euro trends die hard. No one wanted to ride carbon wheels with wid
All y'all tubular proponents get awful upset and go to great lengths to mansplain how awesome they are when someone doesnt agree they arent god's gift to cycling But what do I know, I ride aluminum bikes and use SRAM shifters.

I really don't care if people ride tubulars or not. It is a personal choice. My initial comments were focused on common misperceptions. I still stand by all of them.

Riding tubulars for the pros has nothing to do with Euro trends. It has to do with giving the rider the best chance to win. Think of these three things:

1) could you really ever run clinchers at 55psi during a rain soaked Paris Roubaix or better yet Flanders?
2) would you ever make it to the finish line if you punctured 700m from the finish line? Think of the great races that have been won when the rider crossed the line on his flattened tubular
3) do you really believe that Any pro team would endure the additional cost and maintenance involved with outfitting an entire team of tubulars if it wasn't a competitive advantage?

I'm not suggesting that clinchers haven't gotten a lot better, heck I even bought a pair last year. But the fact is that if they performed better, were safer or provided a competitive advantage, the pro team's would have all switched by now.

Oh, I bet you don't shave your legs either!!!

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by StephenCL

1) there is a significant difference between rolling weight and static weight. Sticking a spare 240gram tubular in your jersey or under your saddle has little impact on your overall perfomance...adding 200 grams of rotating weight at the rim....yup, a lot more impact to the rider...hence why tubulars spin up so much faster.

To apply the label "significant" you'll have to quantify the effects. I suspect that you can't, because if you could, you wouldn't call it "significant". Those who have actually done the tests to quantify it, know that in fact an extra 200 grams of rotating mass (vs. the same mass non-rotating) makes a barely measureable difference. In fact, it is so small, that it is dwarfed by other affects, including small differences in rolling resistance and aero drag.

Originally Posted by StephenCL

2) don't forget what we are talking about in terms of speed all of these so called "studies" are built around trying to prove that clinchers are as fast as tubulars...I see the benefit for time trials, but not in the real world of road racing. The constant ebb and flows of road racing demand better acceleration and better cornering. So triathaletes and tt specialists can run clinchers all day long......

There have already been multiple studies published that heavier, deeper aerowheels accelerate faster than lighter, shallower wheels (Here's one such study, but there are plenty more: http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/14...ghtweight-rims). There have been some rolling resistance tests that showed the difference in drag between tubulars and clinchers to be enough to make the (heavier) clinchers accelerate faster as well.

It used to be believed that aero wheels were only of benefit during TTs, and would be a disadvantage during road races. Now we know that aero wheels are still an advantage in road races, and racers have nearly exclusively switched to aero wheels. Likewise, there no net savings for tubulars vs. clinchers during road races, either.

[Ruimteaapje]

I use tubulars daily (and Campagnolo for that matter) for commuting and other rides. Far less punctures than I had with clinchers and if I do have a flat tire this is always solved with Pittstop. Love the ride quality.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by StephenCL

Riding tubulars for the pros has nothing to do with Euro trends. It has to do with giving the rider the best chance to win. Think of these three things:

I didnt know we are all pro riders here I'll let you know when I flat my clincher on the cobbles right before I win the profamateur cobbled world championships

Originally Posted by StephenCL

Oh, I bet you don't shave your legs either!!!

Right now they're a hairy mess, but, generally, yes. I do buy into some of the euro pro cycling machine I guess I could spend my time gluing tires, instead though...

[Kontact]

Originally Posted by StephenCL

1) could you really ever run clinchers at 55psi during a rain soaked Paris Roubaix or better yet Flanders?
2) would you ever make it to the finish line if you punctured 700m from the finish line? Think of the great races that have been won when the rider crossed the line on his flattened tubular
3) do you really believe that Any pro team would endure the additional cost and maintenance involved with outfitting an entire team of tubulars if it wasn't a competitive advantage?

1. Yes, they just wouldn't be 23c tires.

2. Maybe, but I don't ride anywhere with finish lines that wouldn't give me time to change a flat.

3. No one on this board is a pro. Very little riding that anyone, including the pros, do is for prize money. If there was prize money involved I might ride tubulars that day, but for training I would ride on clinchers, like the pros do.


Other things I don't do:
Radio the support car.
Pee while riding.
Throw away my water bottles before a climb.
Have the roads blockaded so I don't have to worry about cars.
Get paid to ride.

Maybe what is done in pro races only has so much application to real life?

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Now we know that aero wheels are still an advantage in road races, and racers have nearly exclusively switched to aero wheels.

And we also know that a solid set of aluminum wheels is only giving up a handful of watts to a zipp 404, too.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by Kontact

Maybe what is done in pro races only has so much application to real life?

Because tuesday night world championships is SERIOUS BUSINESS

[El Chaba]

StephenCL, don't waste your time. Tests are fine. However, any test whose results show that ANY clincher has a lower CRR than a properly glued Veloflex Criterium is a flawed test.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by StephenCL

I really don't care if people ride tubulars or not. It is a personal choice. My initial comments were focused on common misperceptions. I still stand by all of them.

And yet, data shows that many of your ideas are themselves misperceptions.

Originally Posted by StephenCL

Riding tubulars for the pros has nothing to do with Euro trends. It has to do with giving the rider the best chance to win. Think of these three things:

1) could you really ever run clinchers at 55psi during a rain soaked Paris Roubaix or better yet Flanders?
2) would you ever make it to the finish line if you punctured 700m from the finish line? Think of the great races that have been won when the rider crossed the line on his flattened tubular
3) do you really believe that Any pro team would endure the additional cost and maintenance involved with outfitting an entire team of tubulars if it wasn't a competitive advantage?

There is no doubt that tubulars and clinchers have different performance characteristics, and the ones listed above make them a competitive advantage in certain specific situations. But most of us don't have support vehicles at the ready to give us a spare wheel in the middle of a 200-300 km ride, nor do we have to be able to keep riding with a flat tire while waiting for the support vehicle to show up. When these things are important, the slight performance disadvantages (and somewhat larger maintenance hassles) don't matter. But even in some situations, such as TTs, the performance disadvantages of tubulars actually do matter, and the pros switch to clinchers.

Since most of us don't ride with full vehicle support, and don't have professional mechanics continuously maintaining our equipment, we never experience the specific conditions where tubulars might be an advantage. But, although most choose clinchers for reasons of convenience, we can still harvest the performance advantage that clinchers offer.

[KarlC]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Sigh ...

Just about every rolling resistance test in the last few decades have shown that for otherwise similar tires, clinchers have less rolling resistance than tubulars (and also that the difference in drag due to rolling resistance is greater than the difference in drag due to weight).

Here's one such test, there are many others:

https://www.vittoria.com/news/clinch...r-or-tubeless/

Many top pro racers have switched to clinchers for time trials due to the lower drag vs. tubulars.

I wish more testing was done with Tubular tires but its really rare, and we all know the top dogs for Crr are constantly changing.

I ride Zipp SL Speed 27 tubs, they where 1 of the top dogs in real 3rd party tests until recently, and still are in the top 4 based on the below.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...gid=2047093726

Im also willing to give up 3 or 4 watts to enjoy the ride of my 27mm Tubs over the ride of the 23mm vittoria clinchers

.

[Imaking20]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

...there are actually some pro riders who switched from tubulars to clinchers for descents, due to the danger of brake heat melting glue. The most famous was Miguel Indurain, but there have been others, as well.)

You are either intoxicated or you're leaving out a VERY critical piece of information (that being the material of the rim). I can't fathom someone would switch from a carbon tubular to a carbon clincher for BENEFITS of braking. The entire wheel (maybe bike) industry disagrees with that anecdote.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Sigh ...

Just about every rolling resistance test in the last few decades have shown that for otherwise similar tires, clinchers have less rolling resistance than tubulars (and also that the difference in drag due to rolling resistance is greater than the difference in drag due to weight).

Here's one such test, there are many others:

https://www.vittoria.com/news/clinch...r-or-tubeless/

Many top pro racers have switched to clinchers for time trials due to the lower drag vs. tubulars.

That's ONE test. And all of those tires roll faster than any tire you've likely got in your garage... like, you're talking about the pointy end of tire performance. The advantages of which are totally cancelled out by fat guy jerseys.

Originally Posted by Mark McM

And yet, data shows that many of your ideas are themselves misperceptions.

Now that you're hounding on data, how about you provide 2 more examples of tests that included tubulars and showed clinchers to be faster? I'll wait.

[Imaking20]

Originally Posted by Kontact

Glue flex increases rolling resistance.

el oh el

Veloflex Record clincher is 145g + a 50g Vredestein latex tube is 195 grams. A 192 gram tubular + glue is a little over 205 grams.

How about a tire that's actually in production?

Yes, I do.

You skipped the part where I asked if you've seen it. Because people say lots of things... like how durable Conti 4000s tires are... but the last two people I rode with who were on them borrowed my c02 to fix their flats...

Another time factor no one is talking about is that when you change a tube after a flat, you are done. The tiny bit of extra time that takes is all the time you're going to be taking. Flatting a tubular allows you to swap it faster to get back to the ride, but you aren't going to keep riding it like that. When you get home you're going to peel that spare off, probably try to roll it back up and start the gluing process from scratch. And, if you're the type, you're going to open up the flatted tire and repair that, too. That's a lot of time dedicated to a hole in the inner tube of the tubular.

This is an easier argument for you to make as long as you keep ignoring that the tubular users here are saying they carry sealant - not a spare tire. Also, who takes the glue off to start from scratch every time?