Tubs or clinchers

moag

Trying to to weigh up the pros and cons of the tubs vs clinchers.

I ride reasonable mileage, and have dropped the weight off the rider, but have been seduced by weight saving...

Can any of you sages of carbon and ceramics help me decide the way to go?

Bhima

Tyre weight isn't really an issue, as you'd be saving only a few grams. There will probably only be a few grams difference between the lightest clincher and lightest tub. Save weight elsewhere where it might actually be felt - frame, wheels, etc. I just got some new shoes which are a lot lighter and the difference is actually noticable! My other ones were like tanks though...

Rolling resistance is more important and a good tyre can save you about 10-20 watts of power for the same speed compared to a poor tyre. As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

Tubs are good because you can ride on them if you get a puncture and not damage the rim, but I rarely use them because the whole process of fixing punctures/gluing them to the wheel is a pain.

There was a bikeradar article recently which claimed that the fastest tyre is a clincher. Not sure which exact tyre they mentioned though...

redddraggon

Bhima wrote:

As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

I thought with you having your own wind tunnel you'd understand aerodynamics a bit better. It's actually been proven that the tyre that is closest in width to the width of your rim is the most aerodynamic.

andrewjoseph

I believe you'll need specific rims to run tubs. This may mean new wheels or a rebuild with new rims.

moag

Bhima wrote:

Tyre weight isn't really an issue, as you'd be saving only a few grams. There will probably only be a few grams difference between the lightest clincher and lightest tub. Save weight elsewhere where it might actually be felt - frame, wheels, etc. I just got some new shoes which are a lot lighter and the difference is actually noticable! My other ones were like tanks though...

Rolling resistance is more important and a good tyre can save you about 10-20 watts of power for the same speed compared to a poor tyre. As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

Tubs are good because you can ride on them if you get a puncture and not damage the rim, but I rarely use them because the whole process of fixing punctures/gluing them to the wheel is a pain.

There was a bikeradar article recently which claimed that the fastest tyre is a clincher. Not sure which exact tyre they mentioned though...

Cheers - useful stuff...I'll look up the article. The gluing them aspect of tubs does seem like a pain.

I am on Conti GP4000's which have been a marked improvement on previous tires I have used. I need a fairly strong wheel for (regrettably) pot holed roads where I live, so am considering Mavics with Carbon spokes...

Thanks for your help.

Infamous

I love bhima's posts.

Bhima wrote:

Tyre weight isn't really an issue, as you'd be saving only a few grams.

How long have you been riding bikes bhima? The total weight of the rim and tub is always lighter than the clincher rim/tube/tyre combo. AND it's at the rim of the wheel, where it matters the most.

Bhima wrote:

As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

The aerodynamics is the last thing you should be considering when picking tyres.

moag, tubs are for racing or maybe just sunny days, but it's not a great idea to ride them daily. The biggest problem is what happens when you puncture, you can carry a spare tub with you or get some vittoria pit stop stuff.

andyp

What Infamous said.

With regards to Bhima, I'm reminded of the phrase, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing"!

Bhima

Infamous wrote:

AND it's at the rim of the wheel, where it matters the most.

The aerodynamics is the last thing you should be considering when picking tyres.

1) It doesn't matter most there at all. If you're reffering to rotational inertia and all that, it will make a difference, but it's about a 0.001% improvement compared to saving the same weight at the hub. So, you wont get a massive improvement shifting all the weight to the hub - that's all marketting hype i'm afraid.

2) If you have aero wheels, of course it makes a difference. How can you say aerodynamics are not important? Perhaps the original poster wants to do TTs...? If you're going to spend money on good tyres, you might as well check that you get the most aero ones possible, especially as there is usually no price difference between 23mm and 18mm versions of the same tyre.

Bhima

redddraggon wrote:

Bhima wrote:

As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

I thought with you having your own wind tunnel you'd understand aerodynamics a bit better. It's actually been proven that the tyre that is closest in width to the width of your rim is the most aerodynamic.

True. With most rims, this is 18mm though.

Bhima

moag wrote:

I need a fairly strong wheel for (regrettably) pot holed roads where I live, so am considering Mavics with Carbon spokes...

Mavic carbon spokes have a really bad reputation. A wheel with a super-stiff rim will stay true for longer, such as the mavic cosmic elite wheels. Cheap and very aero too. The deep-section bit is metal, so you'd have to bend it with severe force for the wheel to go out.

APIII

If you want access to the lightest wheel/tyre combos then you have to go with tubs as Infamous said. There is no need for the rim to 'hold' the tub, so it has a much simpler, lighter construction than a clincher. If you think gluing tubs is a pain, then stick with clinchers.
I use both, and prefer the ride of my tubs, but then it's hardly an apples with apples comparison, as they cost a lot more than my clinchers.
You don't have to spend a fortune on tubs though. You can get some nice Ambrosio rims built up by wheelsmith.co.uk for the same cost as clinchers and much lighter.

bikerZA

Tubs are a real pain, only worth doing as a set of race wheels that you hardly ever use. They don't seem to puncture as often (but that could just be due to tyre quality), but when they do, it's a real hassle.
For day to day stuff, I'd stick with a clincher.

aarw

wow some seriously dubious advise going on here.

Ifyou ride on less than perfect roads you'll want to be staying clear of 18mm tires. a 21-23mm tub/tyre will work out the most comforatble and save more energy through the lack of fatigue than the precious little you would save with the aero properties of an 18mm tyre. :roll:

Rolling resistance, ride quality, punture resistant are the kings here.

Tubs generally puncture less, you don't get pinch flats.
They're a pain in the arse to fit or replace unless you're experienced.
Tubs will weigh less and in general corner better. They're great for racing.

A decent set of clinchers with some latex tubes is a good upgrade to your standard tyre tube combo.

Al_38

Bhima wrote:

1) It doesn't matter most there at all. If you're reffering to rotational inertia and all that, it will make a difference, but it's about a 0.001% improvement compared to saving the same weight at the hub. So, you wont get a massive improvement shifting all the weight to the hub - that's all marketting hype i'm afraid.

Bhima, I hope you aren't an engineer. The rotational inertia is most affected by the mass that is further from the axis of rotation, it is also a square law based on the perp distance to the axis (I = {integral} r^2 dm): i.e. if you had a mass of 1kg at a radius of 1m, this is equivalent to a mass of 4kg at a radius of 0.5m. The hub of any wheel is at a tiny fraction of the radius of the rim and so the mass of the hub has minimal effect on the rotational inertia of the wheel. Not marketing hype just physics. For translational inertia 1kg at the hub has the same effect as 1kg at the rim.

As for the OP... tub wheels will be lighter than their equivalent clincher as there is a significant weight saving in the rim. Which means you should find climbing a bit easier and be able to accelerate at a greater rate.
The downsides are that they can be a bit of a pig if you puncture. I carry a can of vittoria pitstop when out on my tub bikes, but then also carry a spare inner tube when out on a clincher one. Tubs are harder than an inner tube to repair yourself and so normally have to be sent off to be fixed properly.
Also I really really wouldn't ride a flat tub, yes you wont be directly on the rim, but there is very little protection for the rim. Much more to the point having properly inflated tubs holds them onto the rim (There is no lip, just a concave surface) so when flat there would be a sizable chance of pulling the tub of the rim

MrChuck

I've not used tubs but IMHO they aren't worth it except for very special occasions. To echo what other people have said you might save some weight where it will make the most difference but I'd think the extra hassles outweigh the advantages for everyday riding.

And as for how aero your tires are- forget it! Or at least save it for when you make the British Cycling team

IanLD

Have always found tubs to give a nicer ride and I punctured less often with them. In saying that, when I did puncture I generally threw them away as they took a long time to unstich and then sew up again.

Still nice to dig out my old road bike from my racing days and feel how good tubs are, but for day to day convenience, modern high pressures at a decent pressure (Vittoria Rubino Pros at 10.5 bar) are really good.

Still to try out the Corsa CXs I have and they may be even more tub like.

I always found tubs easy to get on and off the rim, unlike my Rubino Pros on Campag rims - a combination from hell at the roadside!

dennisn

MrChuck wrote:

I've not used tubs but IMHO they aren't worth it except for very special occasions. To echo what other people have said you might save some weight where it will make the most difference but I'd think the extra hassles outweigh the advantages for everyday riding.

And as for how aero your tires are- forget it! Or at least save it for when you make the British Cycling team

I disagree with you on tubular hassles. But your last sentence got me to thinking about
how much wheels are talked about on this forum. Everyone writing in saying how this wheel out does that wheel, this one is faster than that one, aero is better than low weight, this tire or that one makes all the difference in the world, factory wheels are the way to go, hand builts are the way to go, tubulars suck, no they don't, and on and on and........ I sort of get the impression sometimes that people, new to cycling, are buying into all this wheel hype and think that the reason they aren't going quite as fast as others
is because they don't have the right wheels and when they buy these wheels it will make a MAJOR improvement in their cycling. They fall for the hype what with new wheels coming out for someone different on pretty much a weekly basis(or so it seems). And all of these new ones are better than last weeks offerings. And you must have carbon. Nothing else is even remotely acceptable. Although I'm convinced that most buyers only want them for bling factor. i.e. see a pro use it - gotta have it.
But I drag on.....................

moag

Bhima wrote:

moag wrote:

I need a fairly strong wheel for (regrettably) pot holed roads where I live, so am considering Mavics with Carbon spokes...

Mavic carbon spokes have a really bad reputation. A wheel with a super-stiff rim will stay true for longer, such as the mavic cosmic elite wheels. Cheap and very aero too. The deep-section bit is metal, so you'd have to bend it with severe force for the wheel to go out.

Thanks for this...I will bare this in mind. The cosmics are not specifically light though?

Do you have a view on the relationship between areo and weight?

moag

Infamous wrote:

I love bhima's posts.

Bhima wrote:

Tyre weight isn't really an issue, as you'd be saving only a few grams.

How long have you been riding bikes bhima? The total weight of the rim and tub is always lighter than the clincher rim/tube/tyre combo. AND it's at the rim of the wheel, where it matters the most.

Bhima wrote:

As for aerodynamics, an 18mm tyre is supposed to be a dramatic imrpovement on a 23mm compared to a 20mm.

The aerodynamics is the last thing you should be considering when picking tyres.

moag, tubs are for racing or maybe just sunny days, but it's not a great idea to ride them daily. The biggest problem is what happens when you puncture, you can carry a spare tub with you or get some vittoria pit stop stuff.

I will probably buy clinchers...cheers for your help.

Infamous

Bhima wrote:

1) It doesn't matter most there at all. If you're reffering to rotational inertia and all that, it will make a difference, but it's about a 0.001% improvement compared to saving the same weight at the hub. So, you wont get a massive improvement shifting all the weight to the hub - that's all marketting hype i'm afraid.

Is this in your expert opinion as a professional fruit salesman ?

Bhima wrote:

2) If you have aero wheels, of course it makes a difference. How can you say aerodynamics are not important? Perhaps the original poster wants to do TTs...? If you're going to spend money on good tyres, you might as well check that you get the most aero ones possible, especially as there is usually no price difference between 23mm and 18mm versions of the same tyre.

Because there are lots of things that are many many times more important when picking tyres... things like:
Weight
RR
Comfort
Handling
Durability
Puncture Resistance
Ride Quality

I love it when you give expert advice as if you know what you're even remotely talking about. Keep it up.

moag

dennisn wrote:

MrChuck wrote:

I've not used tubs but IMHO they aren't worth it except for very special occasions. To echo what other people have said you might save some weight where it will make the most difference but I'd think the extra hassles outweigh the advantages for everyday riding.

And as for how aero your tires are- forget it! Or at least save it for when you make the British Cycling team

I disagree with you on tubular hassles. But your last sentence got me to thinking about
how much wheels are talked about on this forum. Everyone writing in saying how this wheel out does that wheel, this one is faster than that one, aero is better than low weight, this tire or that one makes all the difference in the world, factory wheels are the way to go, hand builts are the way to go, tubulars suck, no they don't, and on and on and........ I sort of get the impression sometimes that people, new to cycling, are buying into all this wheel hype and think that the reason they aren't going quite as fast as others
is because they don't have the right wheels and when they buy these wheels it will make a MAJOR improvement in their cycling. They fall for the hype what with new wheels coming out for someone different on pretty much a weekly basis(or so it seems). And all of these new ones are better than last weeks offerings. And you must have carbon. Nothing else is even remotely acceptable. Although I'm convinced that most buyers only want them for bling factor. i.e. see a pro use it - gotta have it.
But I drag on.....................

I can see your point here. I think I am after light for the hills and aero for the flats. I weight around 75kgs, and am not going to get much lighter. My current rife (Focus) weighs just over 8kgs with Askiums and Sram Force, both of which I can alter to reduce the weight and increase my performance...or so the theory goes?

Or have I missed somethng?

moag

dennisn wrote:

MrChuck wrote:

I've not used tubs but IMHO they aren't worth it except for very special occasions. To echo what other people have said you might save some weight where it will make the most difference but I'd think the extra hassles outweigh the advantages for everyday riding.

And as for how aero your tires are- forget it! Or at least save it for when you make the British Cycling team

I disagree with you on tubular hassles. But your last sentence got me to thinking about
how much wheels are talked about on this forum. Everyone writing in saying how this wheel out does that wheel, this one is faster than that one, aero is better than low weight, this tire or that one makes all the difference in the world, factory wheels are the way to go, hand builts are the way to go, tubulars suck, no they don't, and on and on and........ I sort of get the impression sometimes that people, new to cycling, are buying into all this wheel hype and think that the reason they aren't going quite as fast as others
is because they don't have the right wheels and when they buy these wheels it will make a MAJOR improvement in their cycling. They fall for the hype what with new wheels coming out for someone different on pretty much a weekly basis(or so it seems). And all of these new ones are better than last weeks offerings. And you must have carbon. Nothing else is even remotely acceptable. Although I'm convinced that most buyers only want them for bling factor. i.e. see a pro use it - gotta have it.
But I drag on.....................

I can see your point here. I think I am after light for the hills and aero for the flats. I weight around 75kgs, and am not going to get much lighter. My current rife (Focus) weighs just over 8kgs with Askiums and Sram Force, both of which I can alter to reduce the weight and increase my performance...or so the theory goes?

Or have I missed somethng?