The clincher tire is quite a bit lighter.

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/compare/continental-grand-prix-5000-latex-tube-vs-continental-grand-prix-5000-tt-tdf
This tells you the TT TDF with 20ml sealant is a little more than a watt better (but 20ml is certainly less than I'd put in a tubeless tire).


https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/specials/top-3-fastest-tubeless-vs-tubes
and
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/specials/grand-prix-5000-s-tr-tubeless-vs-tubes
seems to show that a latex inner is ~0.3W slower than 20ml sealant.

So you'd look at a little less than a watt difference in rolling resistance I suppose...

---

https://besse.info/
https://www.strava.com/athletes/2012033

Great, thank you. In one of the links you sent they summed it up with...
"If you still want to run inner tubes, it's better to go with the "regular" clincher version of the Grand Prix 5000. It's cheaper, lighter, offers better tread puncture resistance, and will roll faster when fitted with the same inner tube."

That's what I wanted to know.

In our testing this isn’t the case - a GP 5000 TT is faster than a GP5000 clincher, when both are fitted with a latex tube. I’d be surprised if Brr didn’t find that as well?

---

AeroCoach UK
http://www.aero-coach.co.uk

If you do the testing as carefully as you read, then you've got an issue. The BRR article says, that if you want to run with latex inner tube, then you'd be better with standard GP 5000 than the GP 5000 S TR. They didn't say it for standard GP 5000 over the GP 5000 TT, probably because the GP 5000 TT is considered too fragile for running only with an inner tube.

You’re assuming he went to the BRR site and read the article rather than responding to this thread. Posts like yours are why fewer and fewer industry contributors take the time to offer their insights on ST.

I’m running the GP5000TT with Latex tubes and they are not fragile at all. I also have a wheel with a GP Supersonic with a Latex tube and it is far more fragile but has not been problematic

I would have assumed he did indeed read that review, yes.


Well... I'm not sure this is how the cycling market (or any other for that matter) works ;-)

Congratulations then, really. It's always a matter of probability plus your skills in avoiding road debris.

I've never had the GP Supersonic, but have 1 pair of GP5000 TT TdF freshly installed as tubeless for the full distance race day. With roughly 40-50ml of sealant, not 20ml as described on BRR. It had been sweeping through side walls for 2 days before sealing completely. I have ridden it outside for 150km, with no signs of puncture/sealant since then. I'd have been more afraid of running it with an inner tube though. Funny enough, I might need to use a shallower front on race day, and I don't have another GP 5000 TT TdF available. If this happens, I'll put a standard non-tubeless GP5000 on my gf's front wheel (currently set-up as Canyon delivered, with GP5000 S TR and butyl inner tubes). Like on BRR page, the standard GP5000 is lightweight with decent rolling resistance and puncture protection.

This isn't the cycling market. This is ST. A public forum.

Apparently you don't get out much. This is very much how the world works. Posts are down ST. Posts here from relevant industry experts and athletes on are down. You are a random dude on the internet talking down to a guy who has riders like Mathieu van der Pol using his products to win TdF stages. He comes on here and offers insight and data. While you come on here with under a 100 posts and your contribution is vitriol. I know which one of you I want info from...

Look. He can be here as a private individual or a company representative. If he refers to his (their) tests, then he chooses the latter. Ergo, I expect professionalism from a professional company (again, professionalism = reading the article you're commenting on and putting yourself in alleged opposition in terms of conclusion).

Now on the market thingy, which I didn't want to go much into initially... Those 'industry contributors' are market players, interested in making profits. If they're on any forum, it's to directly or indirectly increase their market position, therefore sales, therefore profits. They don't do it because they're keen on volunteering or out of the warmth of their hearts. They might have a portfolio of forums / channels (ST, magazines, Instagram, YouTube channels etc.), where they operate. They choose where (and how much) to be active based on the forum/channel popularity and its purchase power potential. Not because I criticised somebody well-established for not reading an article he contradicted.

See. There you go. He didn't contradict BRR. He said he suspects they found the same thing he did. Either way, your response was rude. Funny for you to quote professionalism and then respond in the way that you did. So, go ahead and keep justifying your behavior while you hide behind your keyboard. Unfortunately, this is pretty wide spread behavior these days.

Woah. Who pissed in your coffee this morning? Ever try to be nice to someone that is actually contributing as has a history of positive contributions to our shrinking community? No wonder our beloved sports are dying.

No they're not... Guys like Xavier, Josh @ Silca, Robert Chung etc. genuinely love what they do and have made significant contributions to this community. I'd much rather continue to benefit from their actual knowledge and experience at the top of the sport rather than have this place taken over by dickheads like you. So... learn to show some respect.

---

What's your CdA?

This is a strangely hostile way to lead, and you're actually the one who misread. Someone had made a point that seemingly (but not explicitly) had been made with respect to the S TR in the middle of a discussion that was mostly about the TT, and Xavier responded by clarifying what Aerocoach had seen with respect to the TT. Xavier wasn't really responding to the BRR article, and also...


...did not contradict it.

Can someone explain to me please why anyone would run a tubeless with latex in it? Why not just run it as a tubeless?

Because tubeless can be messy, a pain to setup, often requires compressed air to install - all solely in the name of reducing punctures. It’s certainly not rolling resistance, as tubeless w/ sealant vs tubeless tires with latex tubes have the same rolling resistance. I guess my experience is probably unique, because I ride a couple thousand miles a year and get 0 to 1 punctures a year, and it takes me about 2-3 min to change a flat. But based on the way everyone posts about tubeless, I think the majority of people ride in rough areas and are flatting weekly - hence the desire for sealant. If I flatted that often I’d probably make the switch.

---

___________________________________
MS: Exercise Science
Your speed matters a lot, sometimes you need to be very fast, where sometimes you need to breakdown your speed.

Read line 2 of post#1

I do this as I have a Latex allergy. It’s safer for me to install a Latex tube wearing nitrile gloves that to use liquid Latex which is far more messy.

Then it's you that has a reading comprehension issue, not Xavier.

"I’d be surprised if Brr didn’t find that as well?"

Implies he had not read it. Otherwise he would be saying BRR found that as well, and no question marks.

Thank you for the response! I realized after reading the Brr article and replying to this thread, that I don't believe they tested the latex in a GP TT, only the S TR. The TT w/ latex vs original clincher w/ latex is the actual comparison I was after - as you tested.

However I decided to fork up the cash on a tubeless rear disc, so now double tubeless GP5000 TT tires it is for me!

That's just categorically false. Many of the contributors here from inside the industry are simply consumers as well. Many just happen to work in the same field as their hobby, passion, or past athletic profession.

-sd

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/...bike-for-the-new-era

No problem and apologies for any confusion earlier. I think that Brr testing most of their clinchers with butyl tubes rather than latex is a shame as it perpetuates a myth that tubeless is way faster all the time which as we know isn't always the case!

My partner and I spent a week before the Gran Fondo TT champs in Italy last year training exclusively on GP5000 TTs to answer the question of whether they'd be puncture resistant, good grip in the wet etc. to potentially have as an alternative on race day if the weather was bad. We both ran 25mm front and rear, with latex tubes in, and didn't have any problems. On race day we used Corsa Speeds, but I've since raced on GP5000 TT with latex tubes in and they've been fine.

It's really my preference (and recommendation really) to race with latex tubes as it gives you a lot of flexibility in terms of tyre choice, which in my opinion is more of a performance enhancement than having one set of race wheels set up tubeless, as makes it difficult to swap between tyres.

---

AeroCoach UK
http://www.aero-coach.co.uk