Just to add in a little more info regarding my post and description of my use of Tufo tubulars. I know there is data out there regarding poor Crr for Tufo's. My only question regarding that data is this: what PSI where the tested Tufo's pumped too? I pump mine to 170-175Psi. I weigh in at 152lbs, and my bike is 19ish lbs. So, my PSI is way high, and thus creates less Crr based on pressure vs. weight absorbed.

Again, I am not saying that me running Tufos at 175Psi is a supple ride, but it is a fast ride. There is not much deflection when total weight is around 180 pounds, and each tire is at 175 psi (350psi between the pair to spread out 180 lbs.).

Again, I am not trying to sell anyone on Tufo, or tubular, or any tire for that matter. It works for me, and may not work for everyone else.

---

Team Zoot-Texas, and Pickle Juice

Oh dear

---

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Your set up is a disaster. It is not a fast. Slow tires and ridiculous air pressure. It's physics. Unless you are on a perfectly smooth velodrome (and your pressure might even be too high for that), every slight surface imperfection is causing vertical deflection precisely because there is "not much deflection" You are oscillating up and down below your threshold of awareness, but nevertheless, you are. Consider you are the only energy going into this system, and you are very weak, between 1/4 and 1/4 horsepower max. So any up and down movement is powered by your very weak engine, and is energy that gets robbed from forward propulsion.

That is a very brief description. There is a ton of information on the reasons why your pressure is way too high. You seem to be mired in the myth and lore of cycling. It is a bad place to be, but just think how much faster you will go instantly if you decide to run fast tires at proper pressure!

With the current tires out there right now, tubeless is not any faster than the same tire with a latex tube (see toma testing on Vitoria corsa speed). I believe tom’s testing has both tests at the same pressure which isn’t how people will run those tubeless tires. People will actually run the tubeless tires at a lower pressure which just increases the contact patch and increases crr compared to a latex tube and the same tire at a higher pressure.

---

blog

With pressure that high, your bike is literally pogosticking the whole race course. The energy losses you have is drastic. A lot of your power is not being transferred to propel you forward.

---

blog

But do I understand correct that its partly because of the rim too, right? So if I have a good tubeless ready wheel but use it with Clincher/tube setup, it will still be tougher to get a standard clincher (lets say the Conti GP 4000 SII) off at the side of the road, correct?

I have a set of tufo elites on carbon rims that had been in my cupboard for years. I was naively thinking I might actually race again (although I have another set of race wheels with better rolling tubs on for that). so I decided use them on a training ride. Just to see how they rode. I have the about 100 psi in damp conditions.

I don't know how much was the carbon aero rims or tubs but I blew my training partners away. What a difference. I put them back in the cupboard after that as it's against the rules to ride carbon wheels while training.

I've always used tubs for racing and clinchers for training but think that clinchers have come on so far in the last 10 years it's pretty close now. However, I still maintain that using tub you can get lighter better rolling wheel for racing.

I think this question needs to move on now that road disc brakes are become more common and developed. This opens the possibility that wheels will last longer because of no side wall break down. Plus carbon rims will not have to be treated around this area. However, I think the performance benefit of disc wheels for triathlon is small. Seeing that brakes should be avoided.

Mavic has some new tubeless/clinchers that appear to be very easy to install a tire, and they state 15% less crr. There is a GCN video showing installation of the tire. Anyone tried these? or know anything about them?

I don't think the diameter of the rim or tire has changed. If I understand correctly, The material for the tire bead can't be as stretchy (highly scientific term). Then the rim itself has a raised section just below the bead hook. When you add air pressure, the bottom of the tire bead presses against the raised section. The tubeless rims have a deeper channel in the spoke bed so you can get the tire on and off. The key is to make sure the bead is down in the channel. A lot of people complain about how tight the TLR is, but I installed one by hand the other day on a HED 3+. Now getting the same tire on a non-tubeless HED ain't happening without a tire lever because it lacks the deep channel.

Grumpier.mike nailed it. There's also not as high of consistency with standard (non-tubeless) clincher beads. Some are tighter than others. They also stretch slightly more than a road tubeless bead. I find it easier to install tires on road tubeless specific rims......but I have only owned one. I have never had a problem using non-tubeless road rims in a road tubeless setup. Road tubeless existed long before road tubeless-specific rims.

I have raced clinchers and in one race had a huge delay as my latex inner tube popped. I then changed it and put on a new inner tube, but my co2 canister didn't inflate it well and I only ended up getting to maybe 20psi. I then rode like that for 3 miles until I found a bike pump, pulled over to the side and pumped it up. All told I lost about 20 minutes and ended up 2nd in my AG because of it.

I have used tubulars for a couple years since then and in general I have really liked them. No flats ever. However, right before my last race, I inspected my tire and realized I had a big bald spot and had to change the tire. There was literally only one tubular tire in the city and the place where it was didn't have the tape to install it (glue wouldn't have time to set). So I had to buy the tire, then go elsewhere and wait a bunch of hours for them to tape it. Normally I would do that as I do most of the work on my own bike, but the day before a big race with nerves frayed I would have messed it up. I like tubulars, but data indicates they are not as aerodynamic. I think they are better for the peloton and not triathlons/TTs.

So, as I change bikes this year, the first time in over a decade, I have to switch my race wheels and I am getting clinchers with the plan to go tubeless, which I have no experience with. If it doesn't work, I can fall back on clinchers. I am excited to try going tubeless and the data I have seen shows that they have less rolling resistance. But, I am cautious about it and more than willing to admit failure and go back to clinchers if need be.

---

2018 Races: IM Santa Rosa, Vineman Monte Rio, Lake Tahoe 70.3

If Mavic has control of the the rim and tire making process, it seems reasonable they could match them pretty well. I'm not aware of any rolling resistance data on Mavic tires from the last 3-4 years. A 15% improvement from bad would maybe get them to average? It's all a guess right now.

There is no rolling resistance difference between latex inner tube vs. set up tubeless when using the same tire.

Respectfully as possible, if you lost that much time fixing a flat with a standard clincher in a race, I don't think fixing a road tubeless flat would go well. Make sure you get a little practice swapping in a tube on your race wheels if you go that route.

Dangle,

Yeah, that was a botched tire change for sure. Everything went wrong probably because it was early on during the bike and my fingers were still not completely functional after a very cold swim. Usually I can do it super quick. But, I only had one CO2 canister and it didn't connect well with the valve releasing a lot of air. The 20 minutes figure includes going slower for 3 miles due to 20 psi, I was going about 19 instead of 25, and then also stopping, getting permission to use the bike store's pump and then they took awhile to find it believe it or not and then pumping and going. I will never forget how euphoric I felt right after that to be on a fully pumped tire.

---

2018 Races: IM Santa Rosa, Vineman Monte Rio, Lake Tahoe 70.3

Oof. That stinks. At least you stuck with it for a 2nd place (and hopefully didn't tell 3rd place what happened).

LOL, all three of us happened to be at the same table afterwards talking about how bad our races were and then our names were called and we looked at each other dumbfounded like no way that was possible.

---

2018 Races: IM Santa Rosa, Vineman Monte Rio, Lake Tahoe 70.3

In my opinion:


Tubulars: only use if you're a pro racer with a full time mechanic or on cross race days if you're rich.

Clinchers: work fine. Default option.

Tubeless: can be a serious pain in the ass to set up and make reliable, but work very well once ready to go. In desperate need of a universal standard.

It's not really fair to penalize tubeless tires compared to clincher/latex by saying that tubeless users will run lower pressure and thus suffer higher Crr. The tubeless user has the option to run the same (high) pressure as the clincher/latex user. The tubeless user simply has the additional option of running a lower pressure due to the elimination of pinch flats. Optionality is good.

Then again, for road (i.e. non-velodrome) applications, lower pressure may indeed be faster, not slower:

"We found that he rode his fastest when we reduced the tire pressures down near 60 psi. Basically the lower we went, the faster he went until he broke his wheels."

---

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

Can you please elaborate on the bold part here? I just picked up some enves recently and the previous user has them set up as tubeless. I've always ran clinchers, and am wondering why I shouldn't just try tubeless? I like how the sealant works on small holes (found that out quickly) and that tire is still holding air and running fine.
Is the rolling resistance that much worse on tubeless? Is it the replacement costs? I read through the thread and most Ppl say something like "tubeless are great for everything but road..." but then they don't really explain why?

The fastest tubeless tire out there (also the fastest tire out there period)... the Vittoria Corsa speed is no faster setup tubeless compared to with a latex tube. So there’s really no benefit from a crr perspective to running tubeless.

Tubeless is great for not getting pinch flats but when you get a flat and the sealant doesn’t hold, what do you do? Throw a tube in there? Sure but then you have to deal with a very messy situation with all the sealant in the tire. And then you have to deal with changing a flat on the side of the road on TLR wheels. TLR wheels are a little harder to mount tires than non TLR. Enve and HED seem to be most difficult wheels to get tires mounted and properly seated. Depending on the wheel/tire and your skills, changing a tubeless flat during a race MAY ruin your race. I would suggest trying to do it many times before race day so you have it down.

---

blog

Agree. Had my first flat with tubulars this year in a tri (5 IMs and multiple other races) and DNFed since I didn't carry a spare (olympic) and if I did would have not known how to change it. Was a PITA to find a LBS that could repair. Leaning towards selling the Zipps and replacing with clinchers.

Or track or criterium. Good for both because in track you have a much higher chance of not sliding out on the bank if you get a flat. Also the fastest Crr there are very likely track tubulars. And in criterium if you flat, you can ride back to the wheel pit without screwing up your expensive race wheel rims.

Regarding flat repair on a tubeless setup:
Does the bacon stripes (or butcher's twine) solve most punctures that don't seal themselves?
If that's the case, wouldn't most repairs actually take much shorter than tube change outs?

https://www.aero-coach.co.uk/gp-5000-tubeless-data

My comment was more geared toward the thinner Corsa speed, but applies regarding the 5000s too. Is that 1-2 watts worth the decreased sealant effectiveness, as well as the increased repair time if you do have a puncture. Haven't ever used it, but I'd imagine the difference between tube change and a plug repair differ by 2 minutes, favoring the plug