By golly, sealant actually works

[kppolich]

Originally Posted by johnniecakes

Can sealent be added into regular clincher tubes? Would it add any puncture resistance?

Yes, if the tube has a removable valve core.
Resistance? No. Stop a leak, yes.

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Nope.

Tubeless tires themselves weigh more than non-tubeless clincher tires. After adding a tube, a tubeless tire weighs virtually the same as a non-tubeless. TLR (Tubeless Ready) tires weigh about the same as regular clinchers. But TLR tires need sealant, which weighs about as much as a tube.

For example, the Continental GP 5000 TL tire weighs 300 grams, but the GP 5000 (non-tubeless) tire weighs 220 grams. Add an 80 gram tube, and the two tires weigh the same. Or add 2 1/2 oz. of sealant to the GP 5000, and it again weighs the same.

Contrary to the marketing claims, tubeless do not have lower rolling resistance, better grip, nor lower weight, than standard tires.

And you know this.....not from actual experience....but from internet "experts".
Because if you actually researched road tubeless, and tried it for yourself, those "experts" might have feet of clay.

[kppolich]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Nope.

Tubeless tires themselves weigh more than non-tubeless clincher tires. After adding a tube, a tubeless tire weighs virtually the same as a non-tubeless. TLR (Tubeless Ready) tires weigh about the same as regular clinchers. But TLR tires need sealant, which weighs about as much as a tube.

For example, the Continental GP 5000 TL tire weighs 300 grams, but the GP 5000 (non-tubeless) tire weighs 220 grams. Add an 80 gram tube, and the two tires weigh the same. Or add 2 1/2 oz. of sealant to the GP 5000, and it again weighs the same.

Contrary to the marketing claims, tubeless do not have lower rolling resistance, better grip, nor lower weight, than standard tires.

Oh boy.
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

closed system, controlled variables, lower rolling resistance every time for tubeless (see right hand column). It's science, no tube in the way to cause unnecessary resistance = faster.

Better grip, that depends on how you ride em'/rider weight/tire pressure/rim width/etc.

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

I think the question was really meant to be "if you're not using sealant, why would you use tubeless tires?" In other words, if you're not using sealant, there's not much advantage to running tires without tubes.

Ah, if you have a flat tire, don't you replace the tube?
If you are riding road tubeless without sealant, don't you install a tube?
What's the difference? Of course, you could enjoy the options provided by tubeless tires.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by tombtfslpk

And you know this.....not from actual experience....but from internet "experts".
Because if you actually researched road tubeless, and tried it for yourself, those "experts" might have feet of clay.

When it comes to most characteristics, "Trying it yourself" is about as unscientific as you can get. Look up the various work on observer bias to understand why (plus a small dose of dunning-kruger effect as well).

I know that tubeless tires do not have lower weight, lower rolling resistance or better grip, because everyone who has done objective testing of tires and reported the results has found no improvements that can be attributed to tires being tubeless.

The weight part is easy, and many people have weighed tires and tubes, so there's lots of data there. The rolling resistance part is more difficult, but there are a number of organizations and individuals do this, and they have found no meaningful improvement in rolling resistance with tubeless tires. Traction is the most difficult of all to test, and sadly there have been few well controlled studies of bicycle tire traction. But of those that have been done, no clear advantage to tubeless tires has been found.

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

When it comes to most characteristics, "Trying it yourself" is about as unscientific as you can get. Look up the various work on observer bias to understand why (plus a small dose of dunning-kruger effect as well).

I know that tubeless tires do not have lower weight, lower rolling resistance or better grip, because everyone who has done objective testing of tires and reported the results has found no improvements that can be attributed to tires being tubeless.

The weight part is easy, and many people have weighed tires and tubes, so there's lots of data there. The rolling resistance part is more difficult, but there are a number of organizations and individuals do this, and they have found no meaningful improvement in rolling resistance with tubeless tires. Traction is the most difficult of all to test, and sadly there have been few well controlled studies of bicycle tire traction. But of those that have been done, no clear advantage to tubeless tires has been found.

I made my living pushing boundaries.
If you are comfortable with your approach, good for you. Thumbs Up!

[Black Dog]

Originally Posted by kppolich

Oh boy.
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

closed system, controlled variables, lower rolling resistance every time for tubeless (see right hand column). It's science, no tube in the way to cause unnecessary resistance = faster.

Better grip, that depends on how you ride em'/rider weight/tire pressure/rim width/etc.

Well you are assuming that the construction of the tire needed to make it tubeless does not add resistance. A tubeless tire is not a regular tire without a tube.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by kppolich

Oh boy.
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

closed system, controlled variables, lower rolling resistance every time for tubeless (see right hand column). It's science, no tube in the way to cause unnecessary resistance = faster.

It's also science that adding an extra thick tube increases rolling resistance. The folks at BicycleRollingResistance.com do a good service by conducting well controlled tests. But they've been criticized for standardizing on a heavy (thick) inner tube for their standard clincher testing, which biases the results in favor of tubeless over standard clinchers. They have tested a few tires with lighter, less lossy latex tubes, and when they've done that, they've found virtually no difference in rolling resistance between tubeless and standard clinchers.

Here's an example:

Continental GP 5000 TL (tubeless)

Continental GP 5000 (with latex tubes)

So you're right - it's science that the tube can increase the rolling resistance, so the selection of the right tube is important. And when the right tube is selected, the tubeless tire has no rolling resistance advantage.

[ariw]

As usual, when road tubeless comes up, we can be guaranteed of two things:

Much of the commentary is negative, and almost all of this commentary comes from folks who don’t actually ride road tubeless

Ari

[Keith A]

Originally Posted by ColonelJLloyd

So that tire's remaining life was served with a tube in it then? Or you patch it on the inside after riding home with a tube?

I used a Hutchinson tire patch and repaired the tires. Never had a problem with these leaking.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by ariw

As usual, when road tubeless comes up, we can be guaranteed of two things:

Much of the commentary is negative, and almost all of this commentary comes from folks who don’t actually ride road tubeless

Ari

Clearly, this comment isn't aimed at me, as I've written no negative commentary on tubeless tires. I've only corrected unfounded claims of superiority. Have I said that tubeless tires are heavier, have higher rolling resistance, or worse traction? No. I've only pointed out the evidence showing that they are no better than traditional clincher tires in these regards. This can only be viewed as "negative commentary" to those with an agenda to exaggerate their performance.

I'm neither promoting nor bashing tubeless tires, I'm just keeping it real.

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Clearly, this comment isn't aimed at me, as I've written no negative commentary on tubeless tires. I've only corrected unfounded claims of superiority. Have I said that tubeless tires are heavier, have higher rolling resistance, or worse traction? No. I've only pointed out the evidence showing that they are no better than traditional clincher tires in these regards. This can only be viewed as "negative commentary" to those with an agenda to exaggerate their performance.

I'm neither promoting nor bashing tubeless tires, I'm just keeping it real.

Clearly this is directed at you.....you don't ride tubeless tires....you repeat myths spouted by biased internet "experts" who also don't ride tubeless.
In this thread you made multiple references to opinion pieces published on the internet which must be more accurate than actual operator experience.

I like this line....."When it comes to most characteristics, "Trying it yourself" is about as unscientific as you can get. Look up the various work on observer bias to understand why (plus a small dose of dunning-kruger effect as well)."
Sure....If I try it and am pleased with the result.....I must be wrong, mistaken, biased.....stupid.
Just go ahead and say 'It only pleases you because you're not as intelligent as I am'.....that's the gist of your conversation!
Dunning-Kruger effect.....Holy Crap....Do you even have any friends with an attitude like that......Have you looked in a mirror lately! You're the poster boy for Dunning-Kruger. Heck I even know how to capitalize names.
I try to offer up some common ground and you respond with arrogance.
........You know what they say about wrestling with PIGS or arguing with fools.
Anyway, I'm glad you enjoy it.
I'll let you have the last word now.....which I expect to be TLDR.
BYE!!!

[P K]

popcorn.jpg

[kppolich]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

It's also science that adding an extra thick tube increases rolling resistance. The folks at BicycleRollingResistance.com do a good service by conducting well controlled tests. But they've been criticized for standardizing on a heavy (thick) inner tube for their standard clincher testing, which biases the results in favor of tubeless over standard clinchers. They have tested a few tires with lighter, less lossy latex tubes, and when they've done that, they've found virtually no difference in rolling resistance between tubeless and standard clinchers.

Here's an example:

Continental GP 5000 TL (tubeless)

Continental GP 5000 (with latex tubes)

So you're right - it's science that the tube can increase the rolling resistance, so the selection of the right tube is important. And when the right tube is selected, the tubeless tire has no rolling resistance advantage.

So when weighing the options of latex tube/clincher vs tubeless the fact that tubeless provides protection against flats that any tube does not should be worth it for anyone. If it is indeed the same performance why bother with the chance a tube flats when you could keep riding along on tubeless tires for the same price?

[dmurphey]

Originally Posted by kppolich

So when weighing the options of latex tube/clincher vs tubeless the fact that tubeless provides protection against flats that any tube does not should be worth it for anyone. If it is indeed the same performance why bother with the chance a tube flats when you could keep riding along on tubeless tires for the same price?

I don't like how tubeless tape doesn't sit flat and even in the bed of the wheel. It can make tire rims not seat evenly on the rim. I don't like the build up of hardened sealant in the rims over time. It you don't refill sealant then you get flats that don't seal up. I don't like tubeless punctures that wont seal. If you refill sealant then over time you get a bunch of hardened goo inside the tires. After messing with tubeless I think thin tubes are better, better tire fit, lighter over time with no accumulated goo inside. I use veloplugs instead of rim tape so tire rims seat very evenly and this is lighter. I use good quality lightweight butyl tubes. I know folks love tubeless. I say knock yourself out with that goo. I am interested in trying sealant inside tubes, but haven't yet.