pro race 3 vs. hutchinson fusion 3 road tubeless

cookiemonster

I've had a pair of pro race 3's on campag shamal ultra 2's for a year or so - no problems and no complaints. The pr3's had reached their end though - reasonably worn and cut to pieces - and needed replacing. As the shamals are two-way fit I thought I'd take the plunge and go road tubeless. I fired up wiggle and got myself a pair of Hutchinson Fusion 3's, a bottle of sealant and a tubeless repair kit (more of which later... ).

One of my main motivations for trying road tubeless is that getting pro race 3's on and off the shamals is a total 'kin 'mare. It may have just been _these_ rims with _these_ tyres, as ive talked to others with similar setups without the same pain I go through. Its doable in the comfort of your own home, but get a puncture on a cold wet day with cold hands and you're totally totally screwed. A system that promises less punctures (ho ho...) and repair while still on the rim sounds like a step forward.

Right - so the kit arrived and off we go. I followed the campy youtube instructions and found fitting them very straight forward. As there's no inner tube, I was happy to use a tyre lever to fit the tyre (which I'd rarely do with a clincher as 9 times out of 10 I'd wreck the inner tube when trying to fit the tyre). They pumped up with a standard track pump, first time every time - I took them to 120psi as per instructions, and then dropped back to the recommended 100psi (I'm 72kg). I then deflated them undid the valve and tipped in 30ml of hutchinson sealant, and pumped back up and gave them a spin. They held their pressure overnight, ready for their first outing on Saturday. Overall I reckon that fitting them is easier than fitting the pro race 3 clinchers.

So, saturday off to the Chilterns - 1500m climbing over 100km on mixed and often crap roads. I ran them at 100psi which is the hutchinson recommended pressure (while pro race 3's were at 110-115). The verdict here is that I reckon the pro race 3's are equal in comfort and roll quicker. I reckon it would be difficult to call in a blind test, but dropping off some of the steep hills I felt that I was on something more akin to a GP 4 Seasons than a race tyre. I did also notice the sharp turn in that others have mentioned; however I'm on a Cervelo RS which is reasonably relaxed so the change in handling was fine for me.

Then the heavens opened - sheeting rain and the roads turned to rivers. When this happens in the Chilterns all the crappy little flints get washed onto the road and it becomes puncturefest 2010, destroying race tyres in minutes (my record is 8 punctures between three of us a couple of years back). 5km from the end, I hear pssssstttttttt from the front. Bottoms. However it went quiet again, all seemed ok, so I kept on going back to the car (it was a total monsoon downpour by this point).

Back at home I found the front had punctured - a cut of a couple of mm's all the way though and the sealant had called a halt. There was only about 50psi in the tyre though - enough to stop me crashing, but not enough to not notice the puncture - I couldnt keep going if it was a race or other event. I took the tyre off cleaned out the crap and put a patch on the inside. To be honest, I dont know what you're supposed to do with these if they puncture - is a repair safe? Or are you supposed to junk them like tubs?

Overall I'm ambivalent. I reckon they're slower than a race tyre, and I dont notice any improvement in ride quality against a soft tyre like a PR3 or conti gp4000s. Weight is the same (or perhaps slightly heavier with the fusions), not that I'm that fussed. The sealant is a nice touch - but its a "stop you crashing" feature rather than a "you wont notice punctures" - if I was racing or on some other event, I'd still have to stop and sort out the puncture.

I kind of think that the concept has merit, but hutchinsons ownership of the rights (as I understand it) mean that they're the only player in town. And the fusion 3 just isnt in the same league as a pro race 3, conti gp4000s or the like.

I reckon I'll keep them on now, through the winter, but when they wear out I'm probably as likely to go back to clinchers.

jon

ilm_zero7

you dont exactly leave me convinced I should ditch my pro Race 3's with this write up, I know they are not the toughest tyres available and suffer punctures from time to time, but they roll so well, and the good times are thankfully longer lasting than the grubby moments with glue and patches

maddog 2

I think you need to base your overall judgement on more than one ride.

I've run the Fusion2s in the past, which are very similar to the 3s I suspect, and liked them a lot. They were grippy and supple, and tough.

The tubeless debate will rumble on of course, with some people actually having tried them 8) I've made my mind up though.

bam49

thanks for the write up - nice one ... I agree with Felt so Good re the Michelin PR3's - can cut up a lot in the rain, and pick up punctures, but , on a good road , they feel great , and grip wise they give me a lot of confidence.. I have a set of Conti gp4000's to put on soon, not expecting them to seem any faster but mabe be more p / resistant...

cookiemonster

maddog 2 wrote:

I think you need to base your overall judgement on more than one ride.

Hi - I take your point that they are grippy, supple and soft. But I was disappointed that they are not noticeable grippier, suppler and softer than a race tyre. Maybe its just my expectations were too high - I was expecting something similar to tubs, whereas they are "just" similar to pro race 3's.

The advantage of a back-to-back test (on Friday I was on pr3's, on Saturday it was the Fusions) is that a clear comparison can be made in terms of ride quality, handling and rolling. In six months time I may have a different view based on their longevity and puncture resistance, but I wont have a better view on a direct comparison with a pro race 3.

This back-to-back comparison was missing from the reviews I read - and to me its the most important thing. The decision to be made is not "fusion 3's, yes or no?", but "fusion 3's versus some other tyre, usually a pro race 3, gp4000s, etc"

cheers

jon

domhopson

maddog 2 wrote:

I've run the Fusion2s in the past, which are very similar to the 3s I suspect, and liked them a lot. They were grippy and supple, and tough.

.

I'm still running Fusion 2's but am on my last pair. Always seem to last me plenty of miles and are very grippy.

nferrar

I doubt Hutchinson are the only tyre maker that are allowed to make tubeless road tyres, I reckon most are just waiting for demand to pick up (although it's a bit chicken and egg). I've not gone tubeless on the road yet but use it on my mountain bikes and am converted, the only hassle really is changing tyres for summer vs mud which you don't need to worry about on the road.

Not sure I'd expect them to feel much different to a normal tyre + tube, especially vs a supple carcass race tyre like a pro 3. Quite a few people seem to be running non tubeless specific tyres now for road tubeless (as is common on MTBs) despite warnings that you may die if you try it It's about time more manufacturers brought out tubeless road tyres though.

As for what happens when you get a puncture - you're always going to lose some air and how much depends on the size of the whole and the air pressure. I wouldn't view tubeless as puncture proofing for races, more that it will generally seal a thorn puncture with very little air loss or on a bigger cut will mean you just need to stop and pump it up a bit rather than go through all the hassle of fixing/replacing a tube.

giant_man

I haven't heard or read of any reviews involving any Hutchinson tyres, tubeless or otherwise, to be positive have to say.

If Michelin or Continental had the exclusive rights to the tubeless 'phenomenon' you can bet your bottom dollar they would be better.

murph100

I ran Fusion 2s on my Shamals for nearly a year, having been a Mich PR 3 user before. I have to agree about the rolling resistance with the Fusions, not exactly the earth shattering sensation that some of the 'paid ? ' reviews rave about, in fact I'd agree with Cookiemonsters assessment.

I'm 70kg and after a lot of experimenting I ended up using 90 & 95 psi front & rear respectively, didn't feel any slower and had a decent level of comfort. Higher pressures for my weight just didn't seem to give me any advantage over a regular race tyre especially when a race tyre & light tube setup are about 25g less that the Fusions.

Over the course of the year, the Tubeless Fusions held up amazingly, not one puncture, despite the absolutely crap roads, the grip in the dry was very good, however I was never entirely convinced about the wet weather grip, and all the while I really felt the ride was ' fine ' but not exceptional by any means, regardless of pressure.

As a 'fit & forget' tyre system, they virtually tick all the boxes, and thats exactly why they stayed on my Shamals for nearly a year, I 'forgot ' about them. Then about 2 months ago I got bored and decided to try Veloflex Corsa 22 with latex tubes, just out of curiosity ... WOW !! It was like a complete bike upgrade, ran them at 110psi, waaay more comfort and incredible grip but also had great road feedback, something the Fusions dont have.

Yeah sure they are wearing a LOT faster than the Fusions, could be down to me cornering much harder on them, I'll be very lucky to get 2K out of the rear tyre, but I'm not switching back to the tubeless. I've a set of Vitt Open Paves waiting, once the Veloflex are scrubbed for the winter.

My bottom line in the tubeless is yes, there is considerable merit to the whole concept BUT we need more players to bring out more tyres with better compounds. I dont know if Hutch hold a license for the technology and all others manufacturers must pay a charge to them to produce tubeless, but until there is a decent choice of tyres I'm sticking with good clinchers & latex tubes.


( sorry for the long post )

Petromyzon

I agree with you Cookie, except to say that I think you understate the advantage of running sealant. In most cases I don't have to stop to sort out a flat. Wasn't impressed with Fusion2 durability.

The Hutchinson bead on a Michelin tire would be ideal IMHO- no need for that extra butyl air retention layer either once you have been running sealant for a little while. Look at MTB- the fast racers run tubeless, but not with UST tires- they set up normal tires tubeless because they roll faster and are lighter. You wouldn't want to try road tires tubeless with a normal bead though.