You said that rolling resistance will suffer greatly and that you’d give up a ton racing that way while BRR show the difference is only 0.2w with a latex tube and Aerocoach show no difference, so that’s probably where the disconnect is.
Except for some Veloflex tires and a few others pretty much all the low CRR options are tubeless ready at this point so for anyone not wanting to ride tubeless, but still want a fast tire, the most likely choice will be a tubeless ready tire with a latex tube.
It does, although I think you’re conveniently avoiding all of the other statements/conclusions as well. from aerocoach, “There is also overall no difference in rolling resistance between the same tyre set up tubeless, and using a latex tube.”
and, I think you’re avoiding with BRR’s article, the results for latex tubes. we all know butyl is slower than latex. it is not up for discussion that tubless is faster than butyl tubes. but if we assume and look at the data for a latex tube, their test shows a 0.5w difference between a GP5000 S TR set up tubeless vs. a latex tube. This is essentially negligible, in terms of amount of additional RR.
I 100% agree that a butyl tube is slower. and if you take BRR’s conclusion statement (that tubeless is less RR) 100% literally and in a vacuum, yes it supports your position and the conversation you had with conti. But…with latex tubes (which anyone who cares about this discussion, is probably using latex tubes over butyl if they’re using tubes) it’s just half of one watt better according to this test. I would not call that “major” or “suffering greatly”, terms you used above.
I always get a kick out of the some of the responses when relaying information to people or adding something to the ring that others may not know. A conversation I had with Continental in 2020 seems to hold true. Maybe on the version of GP 5000 at that time the results were worse. Again, I stated I have not tested this and it was mentioned in conversation. Tubeless is still the fastest option.
If you’d like to settle on the fact that I’m conveniently avoiding something that’s fine. However, most people I know, especially on this form do care about 0.5 watts. In fact my business and podcast looks for 0.5 watts. I’ve worked with 80 year olds trying to make a cut off to qualify for Kona and world record holders in different categories. I do know 0.5 watts has helped them achieve their goals.
Let me begin by saying that of all the brands in the tri/cycling space, yours is one that I hold in very high regard for what you do and how you engage with the community. we need more brands like flo. and i recognize the value and effort you put forth to be on these forums and share information like this. please do not take any of this personally, this is more a reply to the industry in general, which you are a part of.
This reply frustrates me, as a consumer, quite a bit. you didn’t mention that the conversation with conti was 4 years go (sorry if i missed). agree that is a very relevant detail given the different models that were available at the time. however, what i was trying to get at in the other thread i created to discuss RR differences, and now with our discussion, is that I have become unconvinced that tubeless is ALWAYS definitively/significantly faster than tubes. i am a typical ST’er, i go after latest gear and all that and honestly, i have tried tubeless twice (2020, and 2023) with different wheel/tire setups each time, and each time i have chosen to go back to tubes. combination of factors, and that’s not relevant to this conversation. what is relevant, is that there are those among us that still prefer tubes. some brands recognize this (like flo) and others dont (like zipp, who essentially only produce hookless rims which mandate tubeless tires).
to me, tubeless is great for puncture protection, especially as tire widths get beyond 28 or 30 mm, and with gravel etc. i 100% recognize that. but, for many of us who ride road, and are running 28 or 30 mm tires, it appears that right now, the best estimate is that tubeless saves you 0.5 w. while i don’t discount your tale, i maintain that for 99% of riders and riding situations, 0.5 w will not matter significantly. and it is not even close to enough for me to “endure” living with tubeless on a day to day basis.
Essentially, i fear that the industry has pulled a fast one on us and said “tubeless is ALWAYS faster”. when in fact, in reality, for many people and many riders, it is at most a negligible difference and tubes are not significantly slower. and in this situation, the benefit of tubeless boils down to flat protection. on clinchers i’ve gotten maybe 5 flats in 10 years of riding, so for me i don’t care about that. heck, specialized sponsored teams in the world tour run clinchers whenever we see turbo cottons out there. yes i know that’s a sponsorship thing too but the point holds. if clinchers were slow enough such that they were not competitive versus other teams, they probably would not use them (or would ask specialized to make a better tubeless tire by now, which doesn’t seem to be the case).
In the end, i just want to create conversation about RR differences between tubeless and tubes, because as noted in this and other thread, there is a surprising lack of info out there on it. thanks for providing your insight, i truly appreciate it!
i guess i wonder why you care. let’s stipulate that a latex tube is as fast as a tubeless tire. i am still awaiting my first flat since 2019, and that flat was on a tubed tire. i have never, in my 5 years of using road tubeless, gotten a flat tire. for sure there are downsides to tubeless but those downsides seem pretty minor compared to the downsides of tubes.
when everybody who rides a road or TT bike does a particular thing, i wonder at people who chafe against it. it’s reminiscent of full-sleeve wetsuits which, like tubeless, creates a debate every time it’s stated that this tech is best for “everybody.” i promise you if i wrote that on this forum today i’d get a slew of posts saying, “it’s not the fastest wetsuit style for me!” even tho the use of long arm verses sleeveless wetsuits among professional triathletes is like 1000 to 0.
thanks dan for chiming in. i fear i’m becoming the token anti-hookless/anti-tubeless person here…not my initial intention but here i am! lol.
i care because many tire manufacturers are stopping to produce good clincher tires altogether. i would have no problem just sticking to my latex tubes and minding my own business. and everyone says “ok just run clinchers”. and that’s all well and good, but that’s becoming increasingly difficult to do (or at least, available choices are severely limited in number). currently i’m undergoing getting a new bike/wheels. i want to run 30c good all around clinchers, and prefer tan sidewalls. i can’t find anything to suit this simple need. GP5000 and pirelli pzero clinchers are black only in 30c, turbo cotton hell of the norths only are 28…so essentially what i’m saying is that tire choices are becoming really tough for us running tubes. i started the other thread because i am fine buying a TLR tire to suit my desires as i get my new bike/wheels, as long as running a tube in it is fine structurally, and doesn’t have a crazy RR penalty. but to capitalize on the latest and greatest tire tech, which i’d like to, i basically am backed into the court of buying a TLR tire and putting a tube in it, unless i run either GP5000s or hell of the norths. Which is fine, and i’ll probably end up doing one of those two options, but again its just tough to be denied of all the latest tire tech, and/or deal with severely limited choice in brand/size/color.
As you may recall from other threads - i’m 100% pro disc brake switch, so it is not that i hate new tech inherently. but tubeless i tried twice and said no because for me it’s a pain the ass to live with. installation woes (which admittedly are being alleviated as the tech progresses, but they still remain for some), monitoring sealant levels, topping off sealant are the big ones. but i have a toddler, sue me if i don’t want to take the time every 3 months to do this extra work to ensure my safety. also though, you have issues like inability to quickly change tires if i want to run a different set one day for whatever reason, new/different/additional flat kit stuff to have, etc. i just think its a pain in the ass and i prefer tubes.
just get yourself some 30mm vittoria corsa pros and call it good. run them tubeless on your tubeless wheels. which you have. or if you don’t get some. i have a set of brand new, never mounted DT Swiss dicut 1100, 80/62, prior-2020 edition (17mm inner bead width) i’ll sell you cheap. or i have some brand new zipp 808 firecrests i’ll sell you cheap and these are new edition, 23mm inner bead width, but of course they’re hookless so you’re against that even tho hookless ruled the TdF and in the vuelta the surprising wins. (the 3 by the kern team and the 2 by eddie dunbar were on hookless.) and no mishaps recorded during the 3 grand tours or any of the spring classics or any other races since the infamous sliced calf like issue suffered by whomever that was that sent escape collective into a collective heart attack. but when did actual engineering, testing and field experience ever matter to the readers of this forum!
What?
You going to buy me sealant, a new pump/compressor, a dart/dynaplug, and check/top off the sealant for me every three months???
This is what frustrates me. How do you not consider that there is extra baggage with tubeless?? Unlike disc brakes, it’s the opposite of a “set it and forget it” system. It’s the direct opposite.
For the record. I bought the brand new hunt carbon 50 discs. Tubeless ready. So it ain’t the wheels.
Maybe I don’t belong on ST since I still want to run tubes.
Why do you need clincher specific (non TLR) tires? Are you concerned about weight?
To my knowledge, there is zero issues with running tubes in TLR tires on a long term basis. I’ve done it on TLR wheels and non TLR wheels.
first, you already have a compressor (because you use it to wash/dry your bike and for all the other man skill stuff you certainly do). second, a year’s supply of stans (and that’s a full year for your tri, road and gravel bikes) costs you as much as one pair of latex tubes. third, the very fact that you still want to run tubes makes slowtwitch precisely the right place for you!
You snidely say this but in the 40 odd pages on hookless after constantly being pressed for the evidence/testing etc of why hookless was better you were only able offer that it was your gut feel?
I guess it’s because whenever this topic is discussed (whether here, in articles, looking at product webpages), it has never been clear to me that there’s no difference. half the time you get people (respected, knowledgeable people, like Jon Thornam) saying they’re not meant for it and its going to cause some sort of issue. other times you have people say it makes no sense, they’re not designed for it so why would you do it, or changing a flat will be harder because of the tighter tolerance of a TLR tire…and other times you have people saying it makes no difference at all. Frankly, I just have no idea!
Right now, there seems to be more opinion here that there’s no issues, and the only studies say the RR penalty is maybe in the range of 1w or less. but it doesn’t seem to be universally agreed upon.
in truth (rather than fiction) if you read what i wrote i’ve listed the advantages of the hookless wheels that i have ridden (and that you haven’t) a number of times. certain people here too lazy to read and prefer to just continue to write falsely. ride what you want. and for extra credit let the rest of the world safely ride what it wants.