So after a disastrous first outing with a new set of SS tires, I’m curious if anyone is running the new 4000s II with supersonic tubes and what your experience has been?
Disastrous in what sense?
Why would you think a supersonic tube wouldn’t work? The only problem I can see is that it will be slower than a latex tube.
Double flat on new conti SS tires. I’ve never used them before today… Had a CO2 shake itself free on a bone rattling section. Only had one cartridge for 2 tubes. It wasn’t a cool situation.
I wasn’t implying that it would t work. I have read some reviews about the tubes that implied they were prone to easily flat. My take was that they flatted from user error. I was interested to know how this “fragile” tube was behaving with the new 4000s II. I’ve never used either the tube or the tire.
User error? What sort?
I’d stick with the Supersonic tires, and get latex tubes… and fix the “user error” problem.
So, I have obviously not clearly conveyed my situation. That is my failing and I apologize. Today, I raced on new set of Continental Supersonic Tires with butyl tubes. I have never used these tires before. I knew they were fast and wanted to try them. I also new that they are prone to flat easily. I double flatted. I would like to change to a setup utilizing the new 4000s II clincher tires together with Continental Supersonic tubes. From the reviews I have read online, it seems that supersonic tubes can be fragile. I was interested to know what people’s experiences had been with these tubes. But, more specifically, supersonic tubes with GP 4000S II clincher tires.
Thanks,
Ryan
You will pinch flat a lot less on latex tubes. Just saying.
You will pinch flat a lot less on latex tubes. Just saying.
I’ve never quite understood why pinch-flatting is brought up so much. I’ve never had it happen, latex or butyl, as far as I know. Probably > 100,000 miles, and hitting some horrific potholes, etc, and I’m not light…170lbs.
I think you’ve just been lucky. Sometimes you just hit a sharp edged hole and it will happen. Almost always on the rear tire.
I don’t see any reason why a SS tube would have issues.
With that said I like the Conti race tube better than the SS and they are a lot cheaper. Just seems better quality. Going one further, I like the Michelin Ultra light tube better than the Conti Race. They seem more slippery than the Conti tubes. All of those are butyl tubes
Up from there I like the Vittoria Latex tube even better than the Michelin tubes.
On the tire side, the 4000SII seems taller than the SS tires that I’ve used. It’s possible that the SS tires I had were an older model. Because of that I can run a lower pressure with the 4000SII and not pinch flat like I did on the SS tire.
jaretj
I don’t think I pinch flatted. I was running on a nice smooth downhill when they went. I was on the shoulder so I think I caught something. Regardless, I’m going with Michelin Air Comp Latex Road Tubes with Conti GP 4000S II’s. I think it should be a nice combo of performance and durability. Running on Supersonic tires was a bit nerve racking. Im not sure if I was faster or not. But, for me personally, I don’t feel it’s worth the risk. DNF’ing sucked.
Nerve racking?
When I get a flat I always try to figure out exactly what happened. I’ve gotten one flat on an SS in about 3000 miles or so. It was a tiny wire (from a radial belt I guess) that caused a slow leak. They seem less flat prone than many tires IME. The SS has the same casing and tread compound as the GP4000… but tread is thinner (they use to be super thin, but I’ve heard the tread is a little thicker now) and no vectran belt.
According to tests by Greg on ST, sealant works really well in latex tubes. I put some Slime in my race tubes last week just in case, even though I’ve never gotten a flat in a race.
I’ll throw some slime in there, too.
Though I suppose slime is probably the best sealant if you are going to use butyl. It still doesn’t work very well with smaller road sized butyl tubes.
The latex sealants (notubes, orange seal, etc.) work better with latex tubes and seal faster than Slime.
So, I have obviously not clearly conveyed my situation. That is my failing and I apologize. Today, I raced on new set of Continental Supersonic Tires with butyl tubes. I have never used these tires before. I knew they were fast and wanted to try them. I also new that they are prone to flat easily. I double flatted. I would like to change to a setup utilizing the new 4000s II clincher tires together with Continental Supersonic tubes. From the reviews I have read online, it seems that supersonic tubes can be fragile. I was interested to know what people’s experiences had been with these tubes. But, more specifically, supersonic tubes with GP 4000S II clincher tires.
Thanks,
Ryan
I’m reading between the lines here that you got a puncture/s and not that you pinch flatted. In terms of punctures it’s due to tires, it is the tires and not the tubes that have the puncture belt in them. Tubes themselves have no puncture resistence. Supersonic tires do not have puncture protection.
In terms of what you are suggesting, the 4000 tires do have a puncture layer in them and will be more puncture resistant than the supersonics, the tubes won’t make any difference to punctures
So, I have obviously not clearly conveyed my situation. That is my failing and I apologize. Today, I raced on new set of Continental Supersonic Tires with butyl tubes. I have never used these tires before. I knew they were fast and wanted to try them. I also new that they are prone to flat easily. I double flatted. I would like to change to a setup utilizing the new 4000s II clincher tires together with Continental Supersonic tubes. From the reviews I have read online, it seems that supersonic tubes can be fragile. I was interested to know what people’s experiences had been with these tubes. But, more specifically, supersonic tubes with GP 4000S II clincher tires.
Thanks,
Ryan
I’m reading between the lines here that you got a puncture/s and not that you pinch flatted. In terms of punctures it’s due to tires, it is the tires and not the tubes that have the puncture belt in them. Tubes themselves have no puncture resistence. Supersonic tires do not have puncture protection.
In terms of what you are suggesting, the 4000 tires do have a puncture layer in them and will be more puncture resistant than the supersonics, the tubes won’t make any difference to punctures
Not necessarily…I’ve had objects puncture my tire but not puncture the tube (latex). The last incident was just a few months ago when I managed to have a cardboard box staple skewer my rear tire. Fully expected an instant deflation when I pulled it out…but it was fine and I rode on. I later pulled the tire off and confirmed that the tread had been completely punctured and there was actually a small mark/nick on the tube (threw a patch over that spot just in case).
Anyway, I’ve never had that happen with a butyl tube…and it’s part of the reason I wish Greg had done a “control” round with no sealant. My suspicion is that the latex would most likely do just as well on the smallest punctures with or without sealant.
Lightweight butyl tubes are really a classic example of the “worst of both worlds”, or mis-optimization. As seems to be typical in cycling, lighter weight is always assumed to be “better”. However, even lightweight butyl tubes have significantly higher rolling losses than other tube options, and the thinning out of a material which has relatively poor elasticity just makes them more prone to failure, from both punctures and impact (snakebite) flats. Any weight savings isn’t even measurable as a performance factor…so, what’s the point?
My reason for getting Slime is because it lasts a long time… it’s also cheap… and according to Greg’s tests of Flat Attack (which seems very similar) it worked well. Of course the reason why all the sealants worked well with latex tubes, could be because the tubes were not actually punctured… so maybe I’m just adding weight for nothing…
The latex sealants dry out in a few months where I live, and my race wheels don’t get used that much.
The problem with Slime when I’ve tested it is that since it uses small fibers to close the hole, it require air pressure to seal correctly. And on a small road tube, there just isn’t much air volume in the tube. So by the time the hole plugs up, the tire is almost completely deflated. Slime works okay for mountain bike tires because there is so much more air volume in the tube.
Or at least that’s been my experience with Slime over the years. Fortunately I moved away from the southwest and haven’t really needed sealants since I moved.
So, I have obviously not clearly conveyed my situation. That is my failing and I apologize. Today, I raced on new set of Continental Supersonic Tires with butyl tubes. I have never used these tires before. I knew they were fast and wanted to try them. I also new that they are prone to flat easily. I double flatted. I would like to change to a setup utilizing the new 4000s II clincher tires together with Continental Supersonic tubes. From the reviews I have read online, it seems that supersonic tubes can be fragile. I was interested to know what people’s experiences had been with these tubes. But, more specifically, supersonic tubes with GP 4000S II clincher tires.
Thanks,
Ryan
I’m reading between the lines here that you got a puncture/s and not that you pinch flatted. In terms of punctures it’s due to tires, it is the tires and not the tubes that have the puncture belt in them. Tubes themselves have no puncture resistence. Supersonic tires do not have puncture protection.
In terms of what you are suggesting, the 4000 tires do have a puncture layer in them and will be more puncture resistant than the supersonics, the tubes won’t make any difference to punctures
Not necessarily…I’ve had objects puncture my tire but not puncture the tube (latex). The last incident was just a few months ago when I managed to have a cardboard box staple skewer my rear tire. Fully expected an instant deflation when I pulled it out…but it was fine and I rode on. I later pulled the tire off and confirmed that the tread had been completely punctured and there was actually a small mark/nick on the tube (threw a patch over that spot just in case).
Anyway, I’ve never had that happen with a butyl tube…and it’s part of the reason I wish Greg had done a “control” round with no sealant. My suspicion is that the latex would most likely do just as well on the smallest punctures with or without sealant.
Lightweight butyl tubes are really a classic example of the “worst of both worlds”, or mis-optimization. As seems to be typical in cycling, lighter weight is always assumed to be “better”. However, even lightweight butyl tubes have significantly higher rolling losses than other tube options, and the thinning out of a material which has relatively poor elasticity just makes them more prone to failure, from both punctures and impact (snakebite) flats. Any weight savings isn’t even measurable as a performance factor…so, what’s the point?
I will second the opinion of lightweight butyl tubes. Really make no sense.
I think some people have a tendency to ride without any finesse and don’t absorb the bumps with their body or something.
I’ve seen some pinch flats but only from cases where I had under-inflated a tire.
Anyway, to the OP - latex tubes are not any more fragile than thin regular ones, and faster. If you install them right, they aren’t fragile at all.
You will pinch flat a lot less on latex tubes. Just saying.
I’ve never quite understood why pinch-flatting is brought up so much. I’ve never had it happen, latex or butyl, as far as I know. Probably > 100,000 miles, and hitting some horrific potholes, etc, and I’m not light…170lbs.