Nice interview, thanks. 2 things leave me a bit puzzled:
1) Why does Kienle compare TL with clincher/butyl. This is always done to point out the advantages of TL.
Why does he not compare TL with clincher/latex. I think that that is the more relevant comparison.
2) To me and to many others, the 4% is a huge improvement compared to any shoe. Why does Kienle not consider it resp. does not talk about it.
as to butyl/latex, i don't know. i'll give you one possible
explanation, but i'm just guessing wildly. it seemed to me that sealant functionality was an imperative for him, that regardless of a tire's speed, or supposed speed, if a tire didn't seal upon "presentation" of a hole to the sealant, that it wasn't worth consideration. he might've viewed sealant in a latex tube as too poor a solution, because the sealing process takes too long; too much air is lost. but i don't think latex tubes seal any worse than butyl tubes. i don't believe conti makes latex tubes, it makes light race butyl tubes, perhaps his view of latex tubes is skewed by conti thinking. i don't know. latex works nice in the 4000SII. i think he's on tubeless because they're as fast as anything + latex; they're only going to get faster; and because they self-seal and do so more quickly than sealant in a tube.
i'm not convinced the 4% is a huge improvement over any shoe. in fact, i'm convinced otherwise. it appears kienle views it as i do, tho i didn't ask him.