Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Experience with Tubolito
Quote | Reply
Anyone have experience with Tubolito inner tubes? From what I have read, they are very light, compact and have quite low rolling resistance compared to any butyl tube. Any downsides?
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JasonGeorge wrote:
Anyone have experience with Tubolito inner tubes? From what I have read, they are very light, compact and have quite low rolling resistance compared to any butyl tube. Any downsides?

The downsides would be more expensive and higher rolling resistance than latex tubes. (And unknown puncture resistance vs. latex).

The only use I'd consider them for is if I was doing like some week-long bike adventure, and then I could pack twice as many tubes into the same space of a saddle bag.

But it seems like neither a race tube nor a daily training tube.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would use latex tubes.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I use them on the mountain bike strictly as an emergency flat repair tube. For that, they work great and are way more compact than a normal MTB tube. I don't have any feedback on long term use though.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Can they be inflated with CO2? If so, that might be another reason to carry them as a spare instead of butyl.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IF I were running tubes, I think the order would be latex tubes in the wheels and the tubolito in my flat kit.

I have seen zero data showing the tubolitos to be faster than latex, but the tubolitos would be a lighter and more compact flat kit option than butyls, and would hold co2 better than latex.

IF I were still running tubes....

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would agree with the comments favouring latex over Tubolito (although the Tubolito S-Tubo is incredibly light at only 22g), but for normal riding/training when I would typically use a butyl tube, would the Tubolito Tubo (still very light at 40g and quite low rolling resistance) be a better option?
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looks like an awesome emergency option for my tubeless gravel bike. Don't see a point to this except as a space-efficient emergency tube.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would think the tubolito would be a better performing option than butyl, BUT the cost/benefit ratio doesn't work for me in any scenario where I would be running butyl tubes.

If the tubolitos were half the cost that would be a different story....

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i am running tubolitos for more then 18 months now and have not yet managed to flat them.
not sure about rolling resistance compared to latex, but my seat of the pants test does not feel slow.
on the other hand they definitely hold air longer then latex
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've been really satisfied with them, used as a compact spare tube for emergency use with my tubeless gravel setup. Have had to use them a couple of times when I couldn't get sealant and plugs to work. A bonus for this application is that the sealant doesn't seem to adhere to the tube the way it does with a latex tube (big time) or butyl (less so, but still) so they're easily removed, wiped off, and put back in the emergency kit.

I can't see any reason to use them for applications other than this (don't roll as well as latex, waaaaaay more expensive than butyl) but they're awesome spares. Pack up small enough to carry two if you would normally carry one, or one if you would normally go without.

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [Lav] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lav wrote:
I use them on the mountain bike strictly as an emergency flat repair tube. For that, they work great and are way more compact than a normal MTB tube. I don't have any feedback on long term use though.

Same usage here.

I bet they would do well with the fat bike crowd if they ever made them that size. I'm super curious if the 27.5 x 3" tubolito would fit a fat bike in a pinch. That's what I carry for a (butyl) spare, but I don't know if the tubolito stretches as much as butyl.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [JasonGeorge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
They're great for your flat kit (super tiny) but I couldn't justify running them as a full-time tube. Most tests indicate they're barely faster than butyl and the flat resistance claim doesn't seem to hold water (might be a smidge better). But for a flat kit they're perfect.
Quote Reply
Re: Experience with Tubolito [Lav] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've been thinking about a Tubolito as an emergency spare for mountain biking. I can't help but think of what I'd do if I come across someone on the trail who needs a tube. It's one thing to give away a $5 tube but a $35 tube? Hmmm.....
Quote Reply