Inner tubes

Damo66
Damo66 Posts: 59
edited April 2010 in MTB buying advice
Any recommendations for lightest weight inner tubes?
Thanks everyone...
Damo

Comments

  • blister pus
    blister pus Posts: 5,780
    depends how light you wanna go. You can get too light as to be pretty pointless riding off (and on) road.
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    Maxxis do really light tubes but TBH, if you want lightweight tubes, how about no tubes :wink:
  • Damo66
    Damo66 Posts: 59
    How reliable/easy is "no tubes" ?? S'cuse my ignorance but don't know too much about that... Can I use standard rims ??

    Thanks

    D
  • cavegiant
    cavegiant Posts: 1,546
    notubes is the overpriced version of ghetto tubeless.

    Google ghetto tubeless and youtube it.

    It is a skill that must be learnt,
    but once you know what you are doing, better traction, lower rolling resistance and say goodbye to punctures.


    if you want to stick to tubes, I have got a 20" ultralight onto my 29er rims before.
    Lasted just as long as a normal tube, a few rides.
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?
  • SDK2007
    SDK2007 Posts: 782
    I use Conti supersonic tubes, they weigh 100g.
  • Northwind
    Northwind Posts: 14,675
    edited April 2010
    Schwalbe XXlight are another one, 100g +/- a bit and in my experience they just work like any other tube- I had one in the front down the fort william DH :lol: And tubeless in the rear. Made sense at the time.

    People keep saying tubeless gives better traction and lower rolling resistance, almost nobody will ever tell you how. You can run lower pressures, but then most people already run the pressures they want with tubes- I ran 30-35 with tubes, now I do the exact same with tubeless, and the grip and drag is as far as I can tell exactly the same, if there's a difference it's too small to feel.
    Uncompromising extremist
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    The difference in rolling comes from the friction between tube and tyre, it will also deform more easily as there is less rubber to move. Traction comes from the better deformation/lower pressure.

    Tubeless is great, even ghetto. I've very tentatively run it at 10psi to see what would happen, rolled around a lot so i wouldn't recommend it, but 20/25 is reasonable, which is far lower than i ever dared with tubes.
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    The difference in rolling comes from the friction between tube and tyre, it will also deform more easily as there is less rubber to move. Traction comes from the better deformation/lower pressure.

    Geuss what Northwind, thats exactly what we said someone would say :lol:

    Was your Soul on tubless tyres? Couldn't tell a difference TBH, prefered my tyres
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    I'm fairly confident i could tell the difference between the two. It was very noticeable for me, although it wasn't a blind test.
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    Exactly, most people feel a difference because they want to :wink:

    Have to admit they were nevegals and I was used to a minion on the front so that was probably some of it
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    that's the weird thing, for a while i was running the same tyres on the 456 and the inbred before i stripped it to whiteify it. The inbred was like a rocket, even ss, and the 456 felt sluggish in comparison. I then converted the 456 to tubeless, it gained a lot of the rocketesque characteristics of the inbred...
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    that's the weird thing, for a while i was running the same tyres on the 456 and the inbred before i stripped it to whiteify it. The inbred was like a rocket, even ss, and the 456 felt sluggish in comparison. I then converted the 456 to tubeless, it gained a lot of the rocketesque characteristics of the inbred...

    Riding improved?

    I noticed this suddenly after the whole snowy time not off road. Got back on and it was suddenly a lot nippier/I was a better rider
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    not really, it was something that I ran in parallel for a while...

    And i made the swap last summerish :P
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    You probably changed something else as well or like I said, you feel a difference because you want to :wink:
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    I'd imagine that... or i was running lower pressures because i was slightly terrified of it blowing off again (did it when i pumped it up to 65psi before adding the sealant to get the bead formed was deaf for a while)
  • Northwind
    Northwind Posts: 14,675
    The difference in rolling comes from the friction between tube and tyre, it will also deform more easily as there is less rubber to move.

    Yup, standard answer but I'm pretty unconvinced. Like I say, couldn't tell any difference myself. But maybe I'm getting anti-placebo, I just don't want to feel a difference ;)

    Peter, yep, tubeless on both my bikes. Or will do if the ****ing rubber queens will ever stop gassing out.
    Uncompromising extremist
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    we need that phd student who did the schwalbe testing to do the same for ghetto/stans/lust/ust!
  • peter413
    peter413 Posts: 5,120
    But that wouldn't solve anything :roll:

    The recent brake test, although great, was pointless IMO :wink:

    I have found that out on the trails some of the brakes (havn't tried them all lol) are more powerful/give better braking performance than those higher up the chart :S

    Science is great but the real test is to hit the trails :D
  • ride_whenever
    ride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    science.jpg

    I blame arm pump/wild fluctuations in strength in correlation with sunspot activity. And the placebo effect. :lol: