As most people may know, there is a shortage of good 700x28 hookless clinchers. The other day I thought it was my lucky day because I got 700x28 GP5000s installed on my Zipp 303 Firecrests, only to find when I got home that they where for hooked rims. The question is, what is the real issue with mounting this tire on a hookless rim? Is there a real risk? Or is this more a corner case risk and corporate lawyers would like to cover their arses?
What are “hookless clinchers”?
As most people may know, there is a shortage of good 700x28 hookless clinchers. The other day I thought it was my lucky day because I got 700x28 GP5000s installed on my Zipp 303 Firecrests, only to find when I got home that they where for hooked rims. The question is, what is the real issue with mounting this tire on a hookless rim? Is there a real risk? Or is this more a corner case risk and corporate lawyers would like to cover their arses?There are two tubeless versions of the GP5000, the GP5000TL and the GP5000TR. The TR is hookless ready, the TL is not. I would not use a TL on a hookless rim as Continental has been very careful to note that they are not hookless compatible. If you want to use GP5000s on hookless rims, get the TR version (if you can find some).
The question is, what is the real issue with mounting this tire on a hookless rim?
The concern is that it hasn’t been designed to specifications meant to prevent tire blow-off when used on a rim that lacks hooks. Generally this is an issue where the safety margins will depend on a lot of particulars, and without having any controlled test data it would be difficult to guess the level of risk on your setup. But blow-off is a very dangerous failure mode, and the safety margins on hookless setups often aren’t huge even in nominally-matched setups.
As most people may know, there is a shortage of good 700x28 hookless clinchers.
Supply isn’t great, but it doesn’t look like the backlogs are all that deep at the moment. It appears that at least one retailer through Amazon has the hookless-compatible black-sidewall 28mm GP5000 S TR in stock right now, for instance.
I have just written 100 times “clinchers for hook-less rims”. Not my first language sorry. I hope you will not send a letter to my parents pointing this unforgivable mistake.
Would you care to share a link? I do find sites with them, but with delivery date unknown.
I would not ride them.
The 5000 S TR is not hookless compatible. The TL is for Tubeless and the TR is for Tubless Ready (tubeless or tubed). The dimension spec is listed as 700-XXC. XX is the width and C is for Crothet-type rims (hooked).
Per Conti website:
Compatibility and safety information for tubeless ready tires (XX-C = crochet-type rims ; XX-TSS = tubeless straight-side rims ):
None of there 5000 S TR are listed in a size 700-XXTSS.
Would you care to share a link? I do find sites with them, but with delivery date unknown.
Edit: Nevermind.
I had seen a listing that claimed “in stock”, but looking at the delivery information, I think they were anticipating a shipment arrival time and didn’t actually have them on hand. It appears that a lot of retailers expect them within 1-2 months.
I would not ride them. The 5000 S TR is not hookless compatible.
None of there 5000 S TR are listed in a size 700-XXTSS.
I’m looking at Continental’s S TR page right now, and according to the chart, all of the S TR tires are rated for use on hookless rims. Specifically, the 28mm 700c variant is rated for use on crochet and hookless rims with inner widths up to 25mm.
And it would be bizarre if this wasn’t the case, because the entire reason that Continental succeeded the TL with the S TR so quickly was to accommodate hookless compatibility.
The dimension spec is listed as 700-XXC. XX is the width and C is for Crothet-type rims (hooked).
If you’re looking at the “Dimension” column in their “Product Range” section, the “C” does not mean “crochet.” It’s simply the usual nonsense where the number and the letter in “700C” get broken up haphazardly, so that “a 28mm tire for a 700C wheel” becomes “a 700x28C tire.” Look at their “Dimension” listings for the 650B versions: they call them things like “650 X 32B”, where obviously the “B” does not refer to the shape of the rim sidewalls.
Rim shape compatibility information is in a separate chart, and on the website for the S TR, this is situated right below the text discussing what “TSS” means in the “Conti Knowledge” section.
I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing that out.
“I have just written 100 times “clinchers for hook-less rims””
I think you mean to say “tubeless tires for hookless rims”.
“I have just written 100 times “clinchers for hook-less rims””
I think you mean to say “tubeless tires for hookless rims”.
I think they meant to say “clinchers for hookless rims.” It’s true that clinchers for modern hookless rims generally also facilitate tubeless setup, but this doesn’t make the wording unintelligible or incorrect.
“I have just written 100 times “clinchers for hook-less rims””
I think you mean to say “tubeless tires for hookless rims”.
I think they meant to say “clinchers for hookless rims.” It’s true that clinchers for modern hookless rims generally also facilitate tubeless setup, but this doesn’t make the wording unintelligible or incorrect.
+1
.
“I have just written 100 times “clinchers for hook-less rims””
I think you mean to say “tubeless tires for hookless rims”.
You may very well be the most unbearable poster on slowtwitch. Everyone else was able to figure out what he was saying, not sure what your issue is
My apologies again, I thought clincher was a commonly accepted term for road bicycle tires. Particularly in this forum. Whereas tires alone could mislead people in this forum to think about tires for other types of vehicles.
I will stand 1 hour facing the wall as penitence.
My apologies again, I thought clincher was a commonly accepted term for road bicycle tires. Particularly in this forum. Whereas tires alone could mislead people in this forum to think about tires for other types of vehicles.
I will stand 1 hour facing the wall as penitence.
Better make it 2 hours for using the spelling “tire†rather than “tyreâ€.
You English speaking community better get your act together across different communities.
From Merriam’s Webster Dictionary:
tire
noun (1), often attributive
Definition of tire (Entry 2 of 4)
1 **: **a rubber cushion that fits around a wheel (as of an automobile) and usually contains compressed air
2 **: **a metal hoop forming the tread of a wheel
Nonetheless, and for the avoidance of doubt, I will rephrase my question.
What is the difference between the two different versions of the Continental GP 5000 rubber cushions that fit around a wheel (as of a bicycle) that usually contains compressed air, designed to be used without an inflatable usually ring-shaped rubber tube designed for use inside a pneumatic tire?
I hope that clarifies my question and avoids any further punishment. Specially since it has now become obsolete once I found Schwalbe’s Pro One TLE sized 700x28 in stock. Which are an adequate rubber cushion that would fit around a wheel that is designed and constructed without hooks in the inside section of the carbon hoop forming the tread of the wheel. And to be used without an inflatable usually ring-shaped rubber tube. As per both, the rubber cushion and the carbon hoop manufacturers compatibility lists.
Thanks everybody for your responses, particularly jimatbeyond whose sole aim was to help perfect my English.