Ok then, thanks for the advice..
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Latex tubes - school me [ericMPro]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
Tom A. wrote:
BTW, according to my measurements, the "on the road" difference of latex vs. butyl is more on the order of 2-4W per tire. I think Jarno quotes a bit less on his site for the difference, even though his site also has data on it showing the difference is more in line with what I measured...perhaps it depends on what tube he's using? he tests tires. he knows exactly what the difference is between latex and butyl on his testing rig. what's the payoff for coming up with a number not reflective of how own testing? i wish he'd do it the other way. test with latex, and then add x watts for butyl. in fact, he could also quantify what you add based on the tubes. he would only have to do 1 set of tests. a conti race is this much penalty versus vittoria pink latex. michelin green latex is this much. why not do a tube shootout? maybe he has but if so i haven't seen it. why don't you do it?
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Slowman]
[ In reply to ]
When I get back from the UCI Gran Fondo champs this week I've got a whole stack of inner tubes waiting in the office to burn through doing roller testing. A few different latex tubes but also different types/weights of butyl tubes too.
AeroCoach UK
http://www.aero-coach.co.uk
AeroCoach UK
http://www.aero-coach.co.uk
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Mario S]
[ In reply to ]
You keep saying this "they can cause installation issues" but the only issues that happen are when you do not pay any attention at all. And those installation issues will create a pinch flat in a butyl tube too. It just so happens if you install latex wrong it pops immediately, which is probably better than mid ride. To me there are no drawbacks to using latex tubes but you keep using butyl and maybe everyone will get on board with you. That works for me.
Twitter - Instagram
Twitter - Instagram
Re: Latex tubes - school me [exxxviii]
[ In reply to ]
exxxviii wrote:
You can leave them kind of forever. My latex tubes sit unridden for months at a time and are fine. (I do nearly all my riding on a trainer, so I may use my latex tubes once every couple months.)Can I get you (or anyone else) to expand on this? I'm similar, ride primarily on the trainer and when I am outdoor, it is mostly on the gravel bike. So TT bike/race wheels only get ridden a couple times a year. If I put latex in them, they will most likely be flat when I go to use them. Do you just check the bead and pump? Or is there something else you need to do (best practices kind of thing) when inflating from flat?
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Slowman]
[ In reply to ]
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
BTW, according to my measurements, the "on the road" difference of latex vs. butyl is more on the order of 2-4W per tire. I think Jarno quotes a bit less on his site for the difference, even though his site also has data on it showing the difference is more in line with what I measured...perhaps it depends on what tube he's using? he tests tires. he knows exactly what the difference is between latex and butyl on his testing rig. what's the payoff for coming up with a number not reflective of how own testing? i wish he'd do it the other way. test with latex, and then add x watts for butyl. in fact, he could also quantify what you add based on the tubes. he would only have to do 1 set of tests. a conti race is this much penalty versus vittoria pink latex. michelin green latex is this much. why not do a tube shootout? maybe he has but if so i haven't seen it. why don't you do it?
He's done it...although this doesn't show the tubeless tire run with a latex tube inside: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...ne-tubeless-clincher
However, and you can find the results in my list, I've done runs with tubeless tires both with a latex tube inside and also set up tubeless with sealant, with the result being no difference. This is mostly why I just test tubeless tires with a latex tube inside. Faster to set up and much less messy. Also, I've never been able to find differences between latex tube brands. The losses are so low (as evidenced by it being no different than a tubeless setup on a given tire) that any differences, if they exist, are not measurable...even with the "power amplification effect" of the small diameter rollers I use.
One last thing to point out about Jarno's power numbers. They're the raw power of his drum. There's no attempt to convert the drum number to a "flat surface equivalent with typical surface roughness" estimation like I do with my own values. So, the power "on the road" may or may not be similar. It's good for comparative purposes though (percentage-wise differences).
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: Latex tubes - school me [ericMPro]
[ In reply to ]
ericMPro wrote:
no I'm serious... always inflate your tires the same way. Check the bead, care for the valve stem, inflate. Pumping up from flat is a recipe for disaster.Agreed.
You should really be doing this with all your tube installations, but especially with latex. The process really just takes an additional 10 seconds, and you should only be installing latex at home, with use of a floor pump (not using latex as a spare on the side of the road), so there really is no reason to take that extra care.
Re: Latex tubes - school me [MRid]
[ In reply to ]
MRid wrote:
So TT bike/race wheels only get ridden a couple times a year. If I put latex in them, they will most likely be flat when I go to use them. Do you just check the bead and pump? Or is there something else you need to do (best practices kind of thing) when inflating from flat?
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Tom A.]
[ In reply to ]
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
BTW, according to my measurements, the "on the road" difference of latex vs. butyl is more on the order of 2-4W per tire. I think Jarno quotes a bit less on his site for the difference, even though his site also has data on it showing the difference is more in line with what I measured...perhaps it depends on what tube he's using? he tests tires. he knows exactly what the difference is between latex and butyl on his testing rig. what's the payoff for coming up with a number not reflective of how own testing? i wish he'd do it the other way. test with latex, and then add x watts for butyl. in fact, he could also quantify what you add based on the tubes. he would only have to do 1 set of tests. a conti race is this much penalty versus vittoria pink latex. michelin green latex is this much. why not do a tube shootout? maybe he has but if so i haven't seen it. why don't you do it?
He's done it...although this doesn't show the tubeless tire run with a latex tube inside: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...ne-tubeless-clincher
However, and you can find the results in my list, I've done runs with tubeless tires both with a latex tube inside and also set up tubeless with sealant, with the result being no difference. This is mostly why I just test tubeless tires with a latex tube inside. Faster to set up and much less messy. Also, I've never been able to find differences between latex tube brands. The losses are so low (as evidenced by it being no different than a tubeless setup on a given tire) that any differences, if they exist, are not measurable...even with the "power amplification effect" of the small diameter rollers I use.
One last thing to point out about Jarno's power numbers. They're the raw power of his drum. There's no attempt to convert the drum number to a "flat surface equivalent with typical surface roughness" estimation like I do with my own values. So, the power "on the road" may or may not be similar. It's good for comparative purposes though (percentage-wise differences).
both the conti 5000 and the new Pro One come in standard tubed versions and TL versions. i'd like to see him do that test again, now, 5 years later: Pro One w/latex, light butyl and butyl; and then Pro One TL. and/or the same but with Conti 5000 w/various tubes and then 5000 TL.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Re: Latex tubes - school me [jrielley]
[ In reply to ]
jrielley wrote:
You keep saying this "they can cause installation issues" but the only issues that happen are when you do not pay any attention at all. And those installation issues will create a pinch flat in a butyl tube too. It just so happens if you install latex wrong it pops immediately, which is probably better than mid ride. To me there are no drawbacks to using latex tubes but you keep using butyl and maybe everyone will get on board with you. That works for me.there is one more thing that happens with tubed tires. it's not strictly an installation problem (it kind of is and kind of isn't). it's the thing in the tire you just can't find. you put in a tube, pump it up, it either goes flat again quickly or you get a slow leak. you put in another tube, same thing.
in some cases, it's not tube related, it can also happen with TL, your rim strip has moved a little and a small part of the spoke hole is exposed. altho you find that out very quickly with TL. but if it's something in the tire, you run your hand all around the inside, you can't find it, sometimes i've just thrown the darn tire away because it keeps happening and i just can't find what's poking the tube.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Xavier]
[ In reply to ]
Xavier wrote:
When I get back from the UCI Gran Fondo champs this week I've got a whole stack of inner tubes waiting in the office to burn through doing roller testing. A few different latex tubes but also different types/weights of butyl tubes too.lovely. love to publish any of that here.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Slowman]
[ In reply to ]
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
Slowman wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
BTW, according to my measurements, the "on the road" difference of latex vs. butyl is more on the order of 2-4W per tire. I think Jarno quotes a bit less on his site for the difference, even though his site also has data on it showing the difference is more in line with what I measured...perhaps it depends on what tube he's using? he tests tires. he knows exactly what the difference is between latex and butyl on his testing rig. what's the payoff for coming up with a number not reflective of how own testing? i wish he'd do it the other way. test with latex, and then add x watts for butyl. in fact, he could also quantify what you add based on the tubes. he would only have to do 1 set of tests. a conti race is this much penalty versus vittoria pink latex. michelin green latex is this much. why not do a tube shootout? maybe he has but if so i haven't seen it. why don't you do it?
He's done it...although this doesn't show the tubeless tire run with a latex tube inside: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...ne-tubeless-clincher
However, and you can find the results in my list, I've done runs with tubeless tires both with a latex tube inside and also set up tubeless with sealant, with the result being no difference. This is mostly why I just test tubeless tires with a latex tube inside. Faster to set up and much less messy. Also, I've never been able to find differences between latex tube brands. The losses are so low (as evidenced by it being no different than a tubeless setup on a given tire) that any differences, if they exist, are not measurable...even with the "power amplification effect" of the small diameter rollers I use.
One last thing to point out about Jarno's power numbers. They're the raw power of his drum. There's no attempt to convert the drum number to a "flat surface equivalent with typical surface roughness" estimation like I do with my own values. So, the power "on the road" may or may not be similar. It's good for comparative purposes though (percentage-wise differences).
both the conti 5000 and the new Pro One come in standard tubed versions and TL versions. i'd like to see him do that test again, now, 5 years later: Pro One w/latex, light butyl and butyl; and then Pro One TL. and/or the same but with Conti 5000 w/various tubes and then 5000 TL.
You really need to look around his site more ;-)
He's already done mostly what you asked for above on the 5000s, with the exception of the light butyl, if you combine the results of this:
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...prix-5000-comparison
and this:
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/...nd-prix-5000-tl-2018
Short answer: GP5000TL and GP5000 w/latex (both 25C) are basically tied (within 0.1W...I would say that's about in the range of measurement error for his setup). A 100g butyl tube adds another ~13% of Crr.
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Slowman]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Latex tubes - school me [ericMPro]
[ In reply to ]
One installed. One pinch flat. FML.
Re: Latex tubes - school me [robbieBDP]
[ In reply to ]
robbieBDP wrote:
One installed. One pinch flat. FML.Well, slap me with a moldy turnip and colour me flabbergasted
Re: Latex tubes - school me [Mario S]
[ In reply to ]
Mario S wrote:
robbieBDP wrote:
One installed. One pinch flat. FML.Well, slap me with a moldy turnip and colour me flabbergasted
Ai_1 wrote:
Mario S wrote:
robbieBDP wrote:
One installed. One pinch flat. FML.Well, slap me with a moldy turnip and colour me flabbergasted
I’ve installed latex tubes on both my wheels. No flats. 2-1. Latex FTW lol