Except that this is Genuine Innovations, my first reaction is that this was a joke. This looks exactly like a shrunken version of tire patch kits I have used on car tires for years. There is nothing wrong with that, but I would treat it like a last resort on a bike. The problem is that it will leave a lump of material on the outside of the tire that will need to wear off. No problem on a car. But, on a bike it will take forever to wear off and you will get a pronounced bump on the tire that would drive you nuts. And, the tire itself is so thin, that as soon as the plug wears off from riding, it will likely fail, because there is so little tire material to hold it in place.

On the other hand, if you have a major hole during a long ride, this would probably get you home.

It's exactly a shrunken version of car tyre plugs. MTBers have been using these for years and they work a treat - it's the first resort, rather than the last resort (GI is also just one of many brands that makes them). If you cut the end off very close to the tyre, it's barely noticeable.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Also, for larger holes, apparently it's possible to insert more than one in a given hole to "staunch the bleeding" ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

The small tool (my MTB version has two - a reamer and the open-ended needle head) is definitely the key. Ream, stuff the plug in, and pull out with a twisting motion. Storage-wise, have a look at Sahmurai Swords, I think the MTB bar-end plug can just as well fit on a road bike or an aerobar extension.

Keep me updated because road tubeless repair has been the one thing keeping me from converting, at least for training. My rims are ready, my LBS carries TLR tyres...

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Nice. I imagine a kit like this would likely have the most success with a 5inch tires at 3 or 4 psi, compared to the other extreme of the range - a 25mm tires at 80psi. Yeah, "staunch the bleeding" is a good way to look at it.

---

_______________________________________________

Correct, it was actually a mention of MTB use (and using the "t-shirt material patch" technique I first tried) that I first ran across. One of the main differences between this application and automotive/motorcycle use is the ubiquitous use of liquid sealant, which means the plug doesn't have to be "perfect", and any excess inside the tire is going to eventually form a "cap" inside that will make it less likely for the plug to come out, especially since air pressure is working against that.

I cut off the cotton patch I used flush with the tire surface...and after riding on it a few days, I can barely find it in the tire.

To be honest, I only bought the GI kits for the tool. It seemed like it would make the process quite a bit easier/faster. And yes, I would look at this being a FIRST option for a road tubeless puncture large enough that the sealant alone has a hard time plugging (IME, anything >1mm). Although putting in a tube is always an option, in practice breaking a road tubeless tire bead in the field is a royal PITA, so if this can avoid this, then it would be the preferred option.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

BrentwoodTriGuy wrote:

How are there something like 100 posts and not one that specifically calls out the Vittoria Corsa Speed (Open TLR).

I have been on road tubeless since 2012. Zero flats the last 3 seasons except for one random rim tape failure. Well into xx,000 mile range during those 3 years. Mounted the Corsa Speeds a couple weeks before Steelhead 70.3. Did leakdown tests to see how well they held air. Beat the heck out of latex tubes, but not quite as perfect as butyl. Did a 5-6 mile shake down ride on them to verify my pressures were right. Inflated and checked with digital gauge a couple minutes before transition closed at Steelhead.


I had used 90f/90r on a previous tubeless setup that measured 24mm f/27.5mm r. I went 90f/95r since these both measured 24.5mm on my wheels. According the athlete tracker later that day, I was well into the top 10 for bike splits at the 2nd checkpoint. Mile 42 my front tire blew. Not deflated, blew. There was a cut across a third of the tread and both sidewalls. I tried my tiny (I cut the Park tool ones in half) tire boot, tube, and the tube blew through the other sidewall the boot didn't reach. That was an awful experience changing that with super tight bead, sealant and glitter. I sat about 45 minutes waiting for support and didn't see another person blow a tube/tire on that same mystery item. There had to have been at least 1,000 people go by during that wait.


Since my LBS couldn't get them last summer, I went the Ebay route for the Corsa Speeds. The seller wasn't helpful. After multiple emails, Vittoria finally responded after four months. Their reply, "We are deeply sorry to read this but unfortunately we do not always produce perfect goods even if that's the actual goal; it could be an unfortunate batch or just bad luck."


They went on to explain why you should NEVER repair a tubeless tire and said have a nice day. They never responded to my follow up about a discounted replacement tire. Then again, it's only been a month since I responded.


They *seemed* fast and smooth. I was a bit ahead of my BBS estimate for the first 42 miles. But I also sat alongside the road pouting for a good chunk of my A race last year. Was it just bad luck after no flats in several years? Maybe. Will I give those fragile tires and their poor customer service another try? I'm not sure. Let's see the testing for the new Supersonics! I already picked up 3 latex inner tubes last weekend.


Another perk with Conti or Specialized is they are actually at the LBS and they can help you when there is an issue. The one time I had an issue with a Specialized product, the LBS handed me a replacement before I could even set the defective one on the counter. I don't know much about the LBS world or how easy it is to get Vittoria, but last July I was just told "I don't see them available to order." (and the Turbo Cottons and Supersonics were out of stock) so I Ebayed the Corsa Speeds.

So you had an unfortunate incident where you ran over something that cut the tire from sidewall to sidewall, blame it on the tire being "fragile", and expected the manufacturer to take responsibility? Sounds like anything short of a Gatorskin would have suffered the same fate considering the severity of the damage.

I've always been happy with the Continental Grand Prix, that is, the one with no other designation, just plain od Conti GP road tire.

Continental has been the standard for a long time. Specialized Turbos are a bit faster tire, but not as resilient to punctures as thee 4000s.

Calling the thinnest tire on the market "fragile" doesn't seem like a stretch.

I asked Vittoria if it was possible to repair the tire, not to take responsibility. No crying or whining to them. I have repaired plenty of mt bike tires, a couple cx tires, but never needed to repair a road tire so didn't want to take the same approach as it's a much higher pressure application. It should not have taken multiple emails and four months to get a reply. Then I asked to buy a replacement tire (albeit at a discount) as I still have not seen one at an actual shop yet. Maybe I could have been more clear that I didn't like their customer service, not because of their failure to change my diaper, clean off my tears then overnight me a pair of new tires. Go click around their website. No phone number and the same general email for all inquiries.

I'm sure there were plenty of other non-Gatorskins hitting that same object/hole in the tiny space we had on the side of the road at Steelhead. It's really hard to tell if it was a pinch flat or something with a horizontal edge to it. People with road tubeless experience know that you can usually hit something hard enough to rotate the handlebars before the tire would typically pinch flat. I would guesstimate a Gatorskin would pinch flat well before most road tubeless tires, but have never owned one.

As I said, I'm not sure if I'll give them another try. I have one perfectly functional one already and I was in love with them until that happened. Having to resort to Ebay and poor luck could send me back to a ~5 watt higher setup.

So related to the original question, that's my thought process for tire choice.

At the time I started this sport five years ago, the Conti 4000s seemed to be the highest rated tire at the time for combo of speed and durability....so I made the choice. Since then, other brand/models may now have slightly higher ratings but I guess I'm superstitious....have never had a flat and am usually satisfied with my bike split times. Use 23s front and back with Vredestein latex tubes on my P4 with Enve 8.9s or on a Zipp 900/404 combo. Don't use the bike for road training. Still plan to use the 4000s II again this season.....satisfied with the speed and durability.....and still somewhat superstitious.

I run Super Sonic versions on my tri bike and I run 4000s on all my other road bikes. All with Latex Tubes.

I have used Conti on all my bikes back as far as I can remember. I have tried others during that time but nothing is as good as the Conti's

Is this really the best we can do to answer his question -- raw inference and a Tom A. platitude?

Slowman is making these assertions without clear and convincing evidence. And you know maybe he's right but this thread has been exceptionally heavy on claims not backed by demonstrated facts. And if I'm going to pay $50 per tire premium with puncture concessions, I better have more than stan's word for it that I'm going to get 4-5 watts out of that trade

To clarify my response:

I currently race on tubular ENVE 8.9s and they recommended Conti Competitions (or at least that is what they tested with). I've raced on Competitions before and had good results, so I have no problem racing on them now. I also used to race on Tufo tubulars on my 650c HEDs.

For clinchers, I train on Michelin Pro Race 4s, but I also have a pair of tubless Ultegra wheels that I run Hutchinson tubeless (25mm) tires on.

It seemed that the Michelins were the tires to have for a while, but have fallen out of favor, but you can get them anywhere, any time, and usually pretty inexpensively. The Hutchinsons were some of the only tubeless tires available when I got them, and I know Shimano first worked with them on the tubeless systems.

A big part of it is that - in my opinion - tires became the new race wheels, in the past ~5 years or so. By that I mean that they're seen as a way to buy speed. Add to that economic woes and the fact that tires (and tubes) are much cheaper than wheels. People see it as 'cheap speed insurance'. Conti has a good product at a good price, and was in the right place at the right time.

Take that, plus the fact that accurate Crr and aero testing for tires/tubes takes a lot of expertise/time/equipment. It's intimidating. People don't want to do their own testing, and most don't trust manufacturer-provided data. They don't want to think about it, and will never test on their own. Just tell me what's fast and reliable. I think people like Tom A and Al Morrison have had a bigger impact on tire sales than the tire manufacturers realize. Their info has filtered out via forums and word-of-mouth to the point that everyone just "knows" that the Conti stuff is fast. Or at a minimum, they're confident that they're not going to be at a disadvantage because of their tire choice.

I look at something like Vittoria, and they've got the Crr, but I've had awful luck with punctures, and the aero side seems unknown. I really like Michelin - generally great puncture protection, but Crr has been a little bit of an abyss, since they've changed their offerings quite a bit over the years... plus aero seems to be relatively unknown or low-ish on their priority list. Conti has it all going for them (with what seems to be good 3rd party data to back it up): Crr, flat resistance, and aero. It's really validated when you see *several* wheel manufacturers using Conti as their default tire choice for tunnel testing. More and more wheel manufacturers are promoting the idea of a wheel/tire system, and people are confident that Conti will work well in this respect. Other tire manufacturers make some really great stuff, but there always seems to be a compromise (perceived or real) in one of the performance areas.

I think a couple key things would change the poll results:

1. Tires that check all of the performance boxes better than Conti (Crr, flat resistance, aero) - and a good price won't hurt.
2. Father time. The information will just take time to get out there. Plus you have to hope that distribution woes don't hijack this process.

"Slowman is making these assertions without clear and convincing evidence. And you know maybe he's right but this thread has been exceptionally heavy on claims not backed by demonstrated facts."

are you serious? what evidence do you need beyond what has been either demonstrated or linked to? you sound like a climate change denier.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Not at all -- in fact, I'm stopping by my Specialized dealer later today to pick up a bunch of TCs, just based on the supposition that they are superior by that order of magnitude. However, what would really instill confidence is a combined crr and cda tire study, like the one Tom linked in response to chrisgrigsby, around wheels that most of us actually use (Zipp, Enve). If there are all these rim/tire interaction effects, plus pressure variance, et al, as has been stated, then I don't know how confident we can be drawing inferences from two separate studies that are combined and applied to a rim very few of us use.

If I'm missing something, help me out here. I don't care what the answer is, even as you seem confident in it. But you also mischaracterize the choice when you say "$15 more" -- a Turbo Cotton is $80 (plus 8% tax) and Specialized products are the only products in the industry I have to pay retail for. So we're talking about a financial difference of $60 per tire and hundreds of dollars per year, given the GP4ks2 is $30 shipped tax free.

I was a bit confused about where you think the landscape has changed in tires since 2013. The Spec Turbo Cottton has plenty of testing data to show it is at the top w/r to Crr. And Toms testing shows it rolls so well that it maintains this advantage over everything but the Conti SS.

But in another posts you seem to be claiming the new Vittoria Speed tubeless is the fastest tire. It has only been tested by Bicycle Rolling Resistance which is a site that uses butyl tubes for testing all tires. They tested the Vitorria tubeless and found it rolled 2.2 watts better than a Conti GP TT and 2.4 watts better than a Spec TC. So...change out the tests for the GP TT and TC to use latex tubes and most of us believe those tires will move well ahead of the Vittoria. Also known that the Conti SS is faster than the TC which makes it the fastest tire outright.

I might have misunderstood, but you might have hinted earlier that Michelin's new tires up the ante. I haven't seen any Crr or aero testing ranking the new Michelin tires.

For the past 3 years the only tire that has made a dent in the Conti dominance is the Spec TC. I think they would sell a lot more of them if they were more available and priced a bit lower. There are probably some that aren't fans of old school skinwall tires too.

Conti has changed the casing and treads on the Attack, Force and Supersonic for 2017. For better or worse hasn't been validated yet. I doubt they would ever made them roll worse. I could see the aero properties reduced unintentionally.

"in another posts you seem to be claiming the new Vittoria Speed tubeless is the fastest tire."

did i say that? i think others mentioned it. i think i've mentioned mostly the turbo cotton and the michelin power competition as examples of tires that deserve market share based simply on their performance and value proposition.

"you might have hinted earlier that Michelin's new tires up the ante. I haven't seen any Crr or aero testing ranking the new Michelin tires."

i didn't hint. i stated. it's on BRR. it's probably 3w better than the 4000S II for the pair, on a bike, at 23mph, and it has puncture resistance about equal to the conti.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

4000S II - durable, cheap, perform well. ...Those three combinations don't often come together. Usually, you pick two and forego the other.

Specialized tires - Only available at your LBS (or perhaps not readily available on-line). Tends to be more expensive.

Vittoria - usually miss my vote on pricing alone

Michelin - I really liked the cornering feel of the ProRace 2/3's, the price was good, but the durability sucked. The tires would be squaring off far too quickly. The PR4's seemed to not-be-so-good in the crr department. The newest tires might be better, but they haven't really been out long enough to gain much of a reputation (or I haven't noticed, at least).

Hutchinson / Schwable - went down the early tubeless path and found them to be a pain in the ass to work with. The crr data showed the earlier versions to be slower than tubed options. I gave up and never looked back. They're also more $.

History / experience predicts future behaviour. The 4000sII has been one 'constant' over the last 3 years and I'm not surprised that us average joes stick to what we know will work.

Do you have any idea how these or the other Compass tires roll? Thinking about some in 700x however big will fit on my CX bike.

---

/kj

http://kjmcawesome.tumblr.com/

"what would really instill confidence is a combined crr and cda tire study"

i'm sure you would. as would i. just, when you write "slowman is making these assertions without clear and convincing evidence," which assertions? i don't believe i made any assertions beyond those for which we have clear data.

i am talking right now to jarno bierman, josh poertner, and the folks at enve and hed, and damon rinard, about what makes a tire aero. not just the tire, but how the profile of the tire changes depending on the width of the rim on which it's mounted, and are there rules of thumb about the tire widths matched to specific wheels?

i think we have a long way to go before we have good aero data, because of the mountain of options that would need to be tested.

but what we DO have is SOME aero data from specialized, and we have the data from wheel makers in their private testing which they may be willing to share. and we have Crr testing.

and we know that the 4000S II is a pretty aero tire. i think we also can assume that tire makers knew that when working on some of the newer tires (the 4000S II came out in 2013) and took this into account.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Regarding the Corsa Speed I was going by your response in Post 90 of this thread:

[BrentwoodTriGuy] "How are there something like 100 posts and not one that specifically calls out the Vittoria Corsa Speed"

[Slowman] yup. slays everything. the only knock on that tire (notwithstanding the experience of your cohort) is tread punctures. it's got a nice sturdy sidewall, which i think is pretty amazing considering the rolling resistance (or lack of it). but it does test a little thin on tread punctures.

i think your point demonstrates my point in starting this thread.


Ok. Fair enough. I've previously missed where you are clearly stating which new tires you believe are faster than what Continental offers. You are wondering why no more love for three candidates - Spec TC, Michelin Power Competition and Vittoria Corsa Speed Open TLR, over the Conti offerings? For the Michelin and Vittoria offerings I would say lack of data and lack of users. As I mentioned much earlier in this thread BRR hasn't been around as long as other testers and uses only butyl or no tubes for testing these tires. When these tires start showing up on other Crr test lists, and even better, aero tested, they may get more play. Even if we follow the BRR testing rankings, there are two Conti offerings on the list that are equally fast or faster than the Michelin. Plus the Supersonic.

If I road raced or raced crits regularly the Spec TC would be in my inventory, but because I ride, race TT's and race Tris, Conti has me covered.

I still believe it would be very informative to ST users and cyclists interested in performance to have a ST tire shootout. I can't see where it would benefit most manufacturers to do this on their own, so we probably won't see it anywhere else. That Flo shared there carbon clincher development testing results with tires is unprecedented!

I haven't roller tested them, but I picked up the 26"X1.8" versions of that tire I showed last fall, and even though they aren't the "lightweight" versions, they seem to roll really well according to the semi-calibrated "butt-o-meter" ;-)

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/