Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:


So tubeless is for people who ride their bikes. :)


That's basically the point Caley was making about road tubeless, and what I related about MTB tubeless...it's for EQUIPMENT that's ridden often.

That said, although I've dabbled in using tubeless on my road bike, the benefit/cost ratio can't match a nice clincher tire with a latex tube...at least for me, and where I ride. And it's not like I baby my tires either.




In fact, the set of 28C Turbo Cottons and latex tubes I put on my road bike before my April 3-day, mixed-surface trip are still going strong, with no punctures or pinch flats of any kind...and I've ridden a bunch of dirt roads and gravel on that setup in the mean time (I have ~1300-1500 miles on them about now).

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
benefit/cost ratio can't match a nice clincher tire with a latex tube...at least for me, and where I ride.

It has for me, so far. I fully admit there's a hassle factor in the garage in setup and maintenance. But the tradeoff in greatly reduced roadside time is worth it for me. I *hate* having people in a group ride stop and wait for me, even though I can do a full tube change in < 2 minutes.

The other factor is in greatly reduced racing pinch flats, particularly given the tire pressures suggested by the optimal "impedance" pressure indicated by you and Josh. Using examples you're probably familiar with, the Lake Los Angeles TT course or Santa Barbara RR course have sections that are both, to put it mildly "roughened concrete" *and* absolute minefields for pinch flats. Running at ~90 PSI with a 23mm tire and 175lb bodyweight is an absolute risk with any tube. I was livid last year after making the final selection of 4 riders in the RR, and then being led into a pothole and pinch-flatting out of the winning break (in that case with a Vittoria latex tube).

So I'm nearly a pure convert. Only my track bike (tubular) and commuter bike (butyl) haven't been converted.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
endosch2 wrote:
I am sure we will be paying the same for road tires.


Maybe tire prices just went up? Here are some MSRP's for good road tires, TLR and just plain clinchers:

$75 Conti GP 4000SII
$80 Conti GP TT
$80 (t) Schwalbe Pro One
$70 (t) Hutchinson Fusion 5G
$75 Michelin Pro4 Comp
$79 (t) Vittoria Corsa Speed
$74 (t) Zipp Tangente RT25
$74 Conti Force
$80 S-Works Turbo Cotton
$100 (t) S-Works Turbo Tubeless:

None of those tires are exactly cheap, but I don't see any real pattern except the one outlier from Specialized.

Of course you can get 25-50% off those MSRP prices by avoiding your LBS. :) (except Specialized)

Sealant is pretty cheap too. You can get a quart of Stan's for like $25, or roughly the price of 2 latex tubes. A quart should last years for road applications.

remember to add $15 to each non-tubeless.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
remember to add $15 to each non-tubeless.

I was going to, but didn't want to fight the two people here who've claimed to have used the same pair of latex tubes since like 1962.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Benv] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Have not ridden tubeless. Don’t really plan to. It’s not that I’m stubborn or not open minded it’s just that tubeless seems to cost a lot more money and limit choices for minor improvements that are not across the board. The day I can get a pair of tubeless that cost the same as a pair of conti ultra or Vittoria Zaffaros AND a pair of race tires such as my attack force combo, added to my stock but very fast TTR3 wheels is the day I begin to look at tubeless. Unless I’m missing something that’s still a ways off.

I still lapped everyone on the couch!
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:

remember to add $15 to each non-tubeless.
Tubeless also requires the cost of sealant (it's not zero) and maybe a special pump. Butyl tires are cheaper than latex (5 Conti's for $32 on amazon was my last order). I prefer butyl tubes over latex - I don't care about the giving up speed thing.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's interesting Tom.
I'm putting some EL Snoqualmies on my new Open so will be curious to see how I get on with the sealant in those. It will be my 1 bike (sort of) so will get well used.

I've always used Stans so maybe there's a difference in how it does its thing compared to other sealant.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [mickey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would have loved to have seen message boards when index shifting first arrived in road biking...

I bet there were tons of purists talking about how friction shifters were better, easier to maintain, provided exactly the same level of performance, cost less money and were just industry pushing a new standard on us!

Would anyone want to go back to friction shifters on the downtube? Only the most obnoxious purists would....

It's the same thing with road tubeless. The technology is objectively better, it just requires a new skillset to maintain and a new mindset to accept.

I got a 1/4 inch gash yesterday in my tires and the puncture sealed itself right back up. I could have continued riding but I stopped and added some air for better road feel. I'm never going back to tubes.

In ten years, only the most obnoxious purists will be riding tubed tires on their road bikes. Especially, because the technology is only going to improve.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [xcskier66] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think topics such as this one show exactly that the technology is not objectively better. Too many people have mixed experiences with tubeless. You may be a passionate advocate for tubeless but doesn't change the many issues with today's technology others have reported.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Benv] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Benv wrote:
I think topics such as this one show exactly that the technology is not objectively better. Too many people have mixed experiences with tubeless. You may be a passionate advocate for tubeless but doesn't change the many issues with today's technology others have reported.

That's all anecdotal evidence, not objective. We don't have much in the way of objective data, except my price list and the various Crr data. Darn near impossible to objectively characterize things like comparative flat frequency or maintenance time.

I'm not sure why people are dividing into such dogmatic camps over it. There are disadvantages and advantages, and picking an option is based on how much you ride, where you ride, type of riding, and willingness to spend time learning new skills. E.g. quite a few here in goathead terrritory report "mixed experiences" with tubes.

I'm not upset that some people continue to use tubes. Not sure why some are upset that people choose to speak positively about going tubeless.

I guess the tubular-clincher argument has lost some steam, so we need something new.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [xcskier66] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
xcskier66 wrote:
I would have loved to have seen message boards when index shifting first arrived in road biking...
You can find folks riding with friction downtube shifters, clips and toe straps, and leather saddles today. But they know why they're doing it, and it's not about there being an advantage to using them.

I remember going from friction to index shifters, and I thought it was great. There were some holdouts, but pretty much everyone made that change within a couple of years. Then someone (pro cyclist?) back in the 1990's-early 2000's made a comment to the effect, "The two recent changes that have been significant improvements are STI shifting/braking and clipless pedals. Everything else has been window dressing." I was there for these two changes too, and there were very few riders who didn't jump on the bandwagon from day one with both of these. The advantages were obvious and, more importantly, they worked straight out of the box and they were easy to use.

The advantages of things like disc brakes on road bikes and tubeless tires for road bikes are less obvious. Throw in the time it is taking for manufacturers to agree on standards that everyone will use and the issues people have had with tubeless tires, and it's not surprising that these two innovations haven't seen the same level of acceptance.

"Human existence is based upon two pillars: Compassion and knowledge. Compassion without knowledge is ineffective; Knowledge without compassion is inhuman." Victor Weisskopf.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Alvin Tostig] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that one reason road tubeless hasn't caught on is exactly what you described.

The upfront costs of tubeless are high (new wheels, tires, compressor, sealant, tape, frustration) and the benefits are less visible because they are avoidance benefits (ie..less likelihood of flats).

When you take a bike setup tubeless around the block you can't tell the difference. It's only overtime that you notice the benefits and even then you might not really notice them because you can still get flats.

It's really a matter of statistics and no ones brain thinks statistically. We think emotionally (even those of us who think we are Spock).

I live in MN and ride some pretty busted roads. Lots of pot holes that cause pinch flats. I was previously able to avoid pinch flats by running 110 PSI and as a consequence was getting my taint smashed by the end of the ride. Now I can ride 60 PSI on 28 mm tires and don't get taint-smashed and never get a flat. It is wonderful.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
I'm not upset that some people continue to use tubes. Not sure why some are upset that people choose to speak positively about going tubeless.

It seems to me, the folks who get the most upset in this discussion are the ones who say "road tubeless is the future" and then are met with calm responses of "Meh...I tried it. Doesn't seem to be worth the hassles".

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [xcskier66] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
xcskier66 wrote:
I would have loved to have seen message boards when index shifting first arrived in road biking...

I bet there were tons of purists talking about how friction shifters were better, easier to maintain, provided exactly the same level of performance, cost less money and were just industry pushing a new standard on us!

Would anyone want to go back to friction shifters on the downtube? Only the most obnoxious purists would....

It's the same thing with road tubeless. The technology is objectively better, it just requires a new skillset to maintain and a new mindset to accept.

Not true. I was there. With both indexed shifting and clipless pedals, the transition was nearly immediately accepted. It didn't take a decade+ like what is going on with road tubeless. That tells you something about whether or not the technology is truly "better"...

xcskier66 wrote:
I got a 1/4 inch gash yesterday in my tires and the puncture sealed itself right back up. I could have continued riding but I stopped and added some air for better road feel. I'm never going back to tubes.

Based on my experiences (i.e. nothing greater than ~1mm puncture will actually seal effectively on the road), I'm calling BS on that...


xcskier66 wrote:
In ten years, only the most obnoxious purists will be riding tubed tires on their road bikes. Especially, because the technology is only going to improve.

About the only things I can see causing that to come true is one of the following:
- Tire manufacturers make more tubeless-ready models like the Corsa Speed (i.e. an "open tubular" style construction with latex coatings), but with more tread thickness (for better wear life)
or,
- Latex tubes are no longer being produced

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [xcskier66] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
xcskier66 wrote:
I would have loved to have seen message boards when index shifting first arrived in road biking...

I bet there were tons of purists talking about how friction shifters were better, easier to maintain, provided exactly the same level of performance, cost less money and were just industry pushing a new standard on us!

Would anyone want to go back to friction shifters on the downtube? Only the most obnoxious purists would....

It's the same thing with road tubeless. The technology is objectively better, it just requires a new skillset to maintain and a new mindset to accept.

I got a 1/4 inch gash yesterday in my tires and the puncture sealed itself right back up. I could have continued riding but I stopped and added some air for better road feel. I'm never going back to tubes.

In ten years, only the most obnoxious purists will be riding tubed tires on their road bikes. Especially, because the technology is only going to improve.



I was one of the few people running road tubeless at Battenkill 2012. The race was MADE for tubeless road tires.

Over 6 years later, and road tubeless hasn't caught on much more than it had in 2012.

Mostly everyone converted to 11 speed in 2-3 years, disc brake bike sales have gone way up in 2-3 years, electronic road shifting has taken a bit more time but still more common than road tubeless and in less time on the market.

All of these other technologies have caught on incredibly quick, after the initial debate- compared to road tubeless.

-Physiojoe
Instagram: @thephysiojoe
Cycling coach, Elite racer on Wooster Bikewerks p/b Wootown Bagels
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
trail wrote:

I'm not upset that some people continue to use tubes. Not sure why some are upset that people choose to speak positively about going tubeless.


It seems to me, the folks who get the most upset in this discussion are the ones who say "road tubeless is the future" and then are met with calm responses of "Meh...I tried it. Doesn't seem to be worth the hassles".


this is a nutshell... I'm in the meh crowd ( and it's a larger crowd) then road tubeless fans will admit too. I have 3 sets of tubeless ready rims.. so I'm ready when it improves, but I have a feeling I'll be road disc before I'm tubeless.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I seems like latex tubes with sealant provide all the benefit of tubeless and none of the hassle with extra tight tires, air compressors, etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
That comment made me chuckle a bit, because that's basically the same reason I DON'T run tubeless on my full-suspension MTB. I use it so infrequently, it's infinitely easier to just run latex tubes in the 26" wheels. You can run pressures just as low as with tubeless with little worry about pinch flatting. In fact, I've NEVER flatted a latex tube in a MTB tire. Thank science 26" latex tubes are still being made! The fact that latex tubes aren't made in 650B size really makes me hesitant about committing to a wheel set (for either the MTB, or the "gravel" bike) with rims that size.

With 27.5 wheels being all of ~5% larger, why wouldn't a 26" tube work in 27.5" wheels/tires?
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [dangle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dangle wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
That comment made me chuckle a bit, because that's basically the same reason I DON'T run tubeless on my full-suspension MTB. I use it so infrequently, it's infinitely easier to just run latex tubes in the 26" wheels. You can run pressures just as low as with tubeless with little worry about pinch flatting. In fact, I've NEVER flatted a latex tube in a MTB tire. Thank science 26" latex tubes are still being made! The fact that latex tubes aren't made in 650B size really makes me hesitant about committing to a wheel set (for either the MTB, or the "gravel" bike) with rims that size.


With 27.5 wheels being all of ~5% larger, why wouldn't a 26" tube work in 27.5" wheels/tires?


It might...might be something to try.

Also, if it does work, doesn't that just point out the silliness of the bike industry in not being able to just "go back" to 26" after discovering that 29" isn't necessarily the "be all, end all" it was originally promoted as? Oh no, we can't do that. It would be admitting a mistake...we have to instead use a different wheel size that's only ~12mm on the radius larger than a 26" wheel <smh>

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Last edited by: Tom A.: Jun 11, 18 11:51
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spntrxi wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
trail wrote:

I'm not upset that some people continue to use tubes. Not sure why some are upset that people choose to speak positively about going tubeless.


It seems to me, the folks who get the most upset in this discussion are the ones who say "road tubeless is the future" and then are met with calm responses of "Meh...I tried it. Doesn't seem to be worth the hassles".



this is a nutshell... I'm in the meh crowd ( and it's a larger crowd) then road tubeless fans will admit too. I have 3 sets of tubeless ready rims.. so I'm ready when it improves, but I have a feeling I'll be road disc before I'm tubeless.

Ironically, there are 2 road tubeless technologies that I've found make clincher use even better than it was before, and that's smooth, plastic rim tape (awesome for latex tubes) and tubeless-ready rim bed shapes (which do a better job of retaining a bead if you do happen to flat, especially on polycotton casing tires, and make coming to a stop on a soft, or flat, tire safer).

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Benv] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Benv wrote:
I think topics such as this one show exactly that the technology is not objectively better. Too many people have mixed experiences with tubeless. You may be a passionate advocate for tubeless but doesn't change the many issues with today's technology others have reported.

I'm in the process of trying tubeless so have no real experience........but these really are the exact same conversations that were being had when mountain bikes went from thumb shifters to index, canti, to V's to disc, tubes to tubeless, cables to electronic shifting, road canti's to disc and tubes to tubeless. I'm no expert, but I don't think any of these new developments came, failed and everyone went back to the old tech?? Sure there will be some that hand one for whatever reasons, but "overall", the new developments turn out to be better once we have a few years behind them.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [MKirk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MKirk wrote:
Benv wrote:
I think topics such as this one show exactly that the technology is not objectively better. Too many people have mixed experiences with tubeless. You may be a passionate advocate for tubeless but doesn't change the many issues with today's technology others have reported.


I'm in the process of trying tubeless so have no real experience........but these really are the exact same conversations that were being had when mountain bikes went from thumb shifters to index, canti, to V's to disc, tubes to tubeless, cables to electronic shifting, road canti's to disc and tubes to tubeless. I'm no expert, but I don't think any of these new developments came, failed and everyone went back to the old tech?? Sure there will be some that hand one for whatever reasons, but "overall", the new developments turn out to be better once we have a few years behind them.
I don't think anyone is arguing that - but some people are early adopters of new technology and are willing to try things and take risk, whereas others want a technology to be established more before they jump in. No real right vs wrong there, that's a pure personality thing. People like myself who express a rationale why we're not convinced are more doing so because we are interested to jump on board, but feel the technology isn't established enough to our liking. Others may agree or disagree with that.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
All I can say is I have been running tubeless on my new Roubaix for six months. The Spesh Turbo Pro's on Roval CLX 50's are super easy to install. I suppose sticking with one manufacturer helps but so far no downsides at all. Not a single flat to date and i love running 70-75 PSI on size 28 rubber than measures out to 30+. I am pretty confident it will get better just like it did in the mountain bike world. Tubes seem kinda silly to me now...just like they were in cars and motos.
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [TriMike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriMike wrote:
All I can say is I have been running tubeless on my new Roubaix for six months. The Spesh Turbo Pro's on Roval CLX 50's are super easy to install. I suppose sticking with one manufacturer helps but so far no downsides at all. Not a single flat to date and i love running 70-75 PSI on size 28 rubber than measures out to 30+. I am pretty confident it will get better just like it did in the mountain bike world. Tubes seem kinda silly to me now...just like they were in cars and motos.

Yeah, see...everyone's experience is different.

~1 year ago, I set up a Turbo Pro tubeless on my rear wheel (Jet 6+) to try out. After multiple punctures (each one requiring a plug) just riding as I normally do (and in a relatively short period), I decided to go back to a Turbo Cotton w/latex on that rim. Much less prevalence of flatting...in fact, I don't believe I've had a flat on the rear of my road bike since. Go figure.

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Road Tubeless Poll [GreenPlease] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreenPlease wrote:
This is a handy solution for draining your tires of most of their sealant prior to deflation: https://milkit.bike/en
I saw that and it is pretty cool. Their Valve Stem is interesting, but if you use it with wheels that are deep enough you need a valve extender you cannot release are from tires. Their bottle they are coming out with is pretty interesting too.
Quote Reply

Prev Next