Almost always weight is a non-factor, or at least not a major player; however, I think this tale of greater CRR is a poor myth propagation. Is anyone even testing tubies? They're more of a pain to test and the industry does seem to be hitting the tubeless hammer hard, but a good tubie ime doesn't give up much if anything to a good clincher. Even Zipp was able to have a faster tubular tire in the SL Speed at the time of its release.
ETA: Just went and checked BRR's site and the Vitt CS is 2.1w faster than it's tubular stable mate. So, 4.2 watts off the pace of the market leader for the pair in the lab? Not the dog it seems for being a tubular. That being said, I'm taking the 4.2 watts over a few grams of weight. Not to mention the ability to refresh tires much easier and cheaper. But CRR advantage of clincher over tubular is overblown, imo.
Titanflexr wrote:
Yes, tubies are lighter (no rim hook), but they are net slower unless you are talking lightweight climbing wheels. The CRR penalty exceeds the weight benefit for the vast majority of courses, even hilly ones like Wildflower and Nice.
My YouTubes