Would you go tubeless on the next wheel set?

Flâneur

Simply curiosity as the number of tubeless road wheels increase are people looking at them, is there the divide like there was with disc brakes, or will the industry force the matter by making them the standard (for instance Giant).

No I don't work in the industry or care about the outcome, it just came up in a discussion the other day and I thought I'd increase the number of responses/arguments

singleton

Both my bikes are currently running road tubeless and have been for a couple of years.
The ride feels slightly better and I've had a significant reduction in punctures.

Gone down from about 4 per year to 1 since I went tubeless and it sealed itself. For me a year is about 5000 km.

dstev55

Singleton wrote:

Both my bikes are currently running road tubeless and have been for a couple of years.
The ride feels slightly better and I've had a significant reduction in punctures.

Gone down from about 4 per year to 1 since I went tubeless and it sealed itself. For me a year is about 5000 km.

I take it you're quite a heavy rider? Unless you're not using suitable tyres for the time of year you're riding? Failing that you must be very unlucky!

Had 1 puncture in 3 years using clinchers, around 6000km per year.

Also the OP missed an option off:

"Yes if a tubeless version of the wheels I wanted became available."

cgfw201

definitely. seems to be a massive reduction in punctures, improved performance and limited drawbacks.

Run tubeless on my CX and had zero issues to date.

Flâneur

dstev55 wrote:

"Yes if a tubeless version of the wheels I wanted became available."

Valid view, given the limited options of peoples favourite wheels be them zipps, campag or other.

Added option and wiped results. Poor management. however yes was just in the lead with a tiny number of participants

singleton

dstev55 wrote:

I take it you're quite a heavy rider? Unless you're not using suitable tyres for the time of year you're riding? Failing that you must be very unlucky!

I'm not that heavy, 74kg.

Most flats were on the winter bike which was using Conti 4 season tyres and regular thickness butyl tubes. Summer bike had GP4000 and lightweight butyl tubes.
I had one or maybe two pinch flats when group riding and hitting holes, but the rest were probably due to riding country roads in all weathers so maybe stuff just got washed onto the road.

ZMC888

I already have four bikes running tubeless. Two mountain bikes, a CX and a road bike.
For mountain bikes tubeless is a no-brainer, but for road not so much and here's why.

Road tubeless run at higher pressures than tubeless was designed for (MTB). That means common sealants like Joes and Stans won't seal your tire until the pressure drops to 30-50psi. Meaning you need to stop and reinflate. Orange sealant can work much better, but has limited or no availability in some parts of the world. There are no real standards for tires and rims. Some just won't work together. Manufacturers are tempted to make tires that are smaller or rims that are larger as a safety net. Better systems such as UST can fix this, but that means paying Mavic and increased weight penalty. Many sealants aren't compatible with CO2 cartridges. Limited variety of tires and higher cost. Better performance and higher speed claims mostly bogus, imagined or very marginal. Tires can be very hard to remove to put a tube in, a big gash can strand you. Worms and glue can be better, but learning curve to getting this right. Marginal if any weight savings. Sealant dries out and needs refilling quite often especially in dry regions.

All in all it's a bit of a half baked system for road tubeless, they just aren't as essential as they are for mountain bike. However the system could be improved if manufacturers could agree on real standards and R&D their own sealant and sell them with their tires.

I feel tubeless is a niche. If you are living in an area that's very puncture-prone but you want something quicker than a winter endurance tube tire then tubeless could be a good move. If you only get a few punctures a year why bother with the extra complication?

JesseD

MTB is tubeless
Cross Bike has a set of tubeless wheels with cross tyres on and a set of road wheels running tubes.
Roadbike has a set of Hunt wheels running tubeless (came like that) and a set of DT Swiss race wheels which can be run tubeless but have tubes in.

To be honest I agree with ZMC88, dont see the point really for road, but for offroad then yes its worth it

lincolndave

Definitely, 3 road bikes all running tubeless now, in my opinion less hassle

ZMC888

One thing I do prefer is that wheels come tubeless ready with tubeless tape already applied, so you always get the choice to run tubes or not.

I hate traditional rim tape as it can move around, get damaged and can cause punctures. Veloplugs or tubeless tape work best for any kind of clincher setup IMHO.

shortfall

I can't say that tubeless is hassle free due to some of the issues mentioned above. I had real trouble mounting IRC tyres onto my Kinlin rims but YMMV. Having said that, my completely unscientific experience is that they ride absolutely fabulously. It might just be the IRC tyres which are fairly expensive and nothing to do with the tubeless thing, but I can run them at much lower pressures than clichers and achieve higher average speeds (according to Strava) with greatly improved comfort and grip. In fact the rice bran compound IRC tyres offer astonishing grip. There's still plenty of choice out there so you pays yer money as the saying goes.

joe2008

Running tubeless tubular: the convenience of tubeless with the weight saving, and safety, of a tubular rim.

Poppa Wheelie

What always surprises me whenever I read about tubeless tyres in magazines or on the web is that no one ever mentions why cars and motorbikes ditched inner tubes many, many years ago.

Quite simply tyres with inner tubes were killing people. That’s where the term blowout comes from. Inner tubes can literally bust causing almost instant deflation.

At the low speeds some people cycle this isn’t an issue but for me I love speed. Whilst I’m not a strong, fast rider, show me a downhill section and I’ll do my utmost to go as fast as I can and regularly exceed 40 mph. I’ve had a rapid puncture in a front tyre at that sort of speed and whilst I didn’t fall off, I over shot a T-junction. Thankfully there was no other traffic but that was all the convincing I needed to switch to tubeless. I don’t care if they ‘could’ be more faff than a conventional inner tube I want the safety that comes from tubeless tyres.

I’ve now done over 1500 miles on some Schwalbe Pro One’s without a single puncture and I can’t see me ever going back to inner tubes. As for faff, they were easy to fit and I carry an inner tube, disposable gloves plus a bit of industrial tissue should I ever need to fit the inner tube. Which hopefully I never will.

For the record, Pro One’s can be bought for £35 each from http://www.mantel.com/uk so they are no more expensive than a normal good clincher.

sloppyschleckonds

JesseD wrote:

To be honest I agree with ZMC88, dont see the point really for road, but for offroad then yes its worth it

So you are getting the benefits of lower pressures, improved speed, comfort and grip but dont see the point? :roll:

davidof

Poppa Wheelie wrote:

Quite simply tyres with inner tubes were killing people. That’s where the term blowout comes from. Inner tubes can literally bust causing almost instant deflation.

That and better comfort are the reason I went tubeless in 2014 but they can be a bit of a faff at times. Worse thing is getting tires that have been on the rim for a time to reseal, best thing is the tires may stay on the rim until they wear out.

Htclee

Anyone run Vittoria Corsa Speed G+ tubeless? I’ve always run GP4000s but thinking about making the move to tubeless but want something at least as fast as the GP4000s..

cycleclinic

I ride 20000km per year and the reduction in road side stops for me is really noticeable. The lack of blowouts is nice too.

I am testing various tubeless tyres and it is quite clear they are not all created equal. Some tubeless tyres are no better for grip than clichers or any faster. Some are though shortfall mentioned one. The Mavic yskions tyres though are not one of these. If used conti gp4000s tyres I am not sure I would notice except when the puncture fairy strikes.

Also given tubeless tyres can be fixed externally with worms you don't have to carry as much.

The Corsa speeds are for TT s they wear out quick and puncture easily. The IRC roadlite is as quick as the conti. IRC call this a training tyre, they could have fooled me.

g00se

I've been running tubeless on the road for three years now and only had one puncture of note - a descent from the Cormet de Roselend and I didn't notice the loss of pressure until I was at the bottom. The sealant had taken care of it and I had lost about 30PSI.

Yes, installation can be a real faff but you treat it as a 6-monthly chore when you replace the sealant/tyre. After a few goes, you get to learn the tricks and the new tools.

g00se

Htclee wrote:

Anyone run Vittoria Corsa Speed G+ tubeless? I’ve always run GP4000s but thinking about making the move to tubeless but want something at least as fast as the GP4000s..

Those Vittorias are very thin and really for TTs. There are various comparisons here:

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... ke-reviews

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... actik-2017

And the new Hutchinson Fusion 5 Glactik TL looks a good replacement for the GP4000s - as does the Schwalbe Pro One tubeless.

The IRCs are good too - it would be useful if they were tested on that site.

Htclee

That’s my problem at the moment - I don’t want to move to tubeless unless I can see a reduction in rolling resistance over GP4000s and the Vitoria are the only ones I’ve been able to find test results for...

singleton

I've used Schwalbe pro one tubeless and now have the new Fusion galactik 25mm on my summer bike.

I prefer both of these to my previous GP4000s with a light butyl tube.

It's interesting to read other tests that try to compare "real road" rolling resistance as well as the above tests that are done in a lab on a metal cylinder.

g00se

Htclee wrote:

That’s my problem at the moment - I don’t want to move to tubeless unless I can see a reduction in rolling resistance over GP4000s and the Vitoria are the only ones I’ve been able to find test results for...

See the links above, the Schwalbe Pro Ones and the Hutchinson Fusion 5 Galactiks TLs have less resistance. As do the Specialised tyres here:

https://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/art ... ted-49101/

I've used IRC Formula Pros too and find them similar to the Schwalbes - but that anecdotal.

milemuncher1

Off road yes. The low pressures you can run without getting pinchies, help with comfort, grip and traction,over rocky uneven XC routes. Nearly all my XC routes are ( relatively ) short loops, with a car / easily accessible transport, never too far away, if it all goes badly wrong ( torn tyre / big puncture that defeats a worm etc). The advantage of a ( relatively) high pressure ‘road’tubeless tyre, being lighter, and not possible to pinch flat, is instantly negated by the inevitable big puncture, necessitating a long walk somewhere, or a messy ( relatively difficult / time consuming ) repair, roadside. So unless I was doing a long road ride with support, I would never again ( based on previous experience ) use tubeless tyres. If I was riding with support, I’d use high end tubular tyres, because I’d have support and a spare wheel or two, with prepped tubs on them. Road tubeless are (yet another ) example of road bike equipment snake oil salesmanship.

timothyw

thecycleclinic wrote:

I ride 20000km per year and the reduction in road side stops for me is really noticeable. The lack of blowouts is nice too.

I am testing various tubeless tyres and it is quite clear they are not all created equal. Some tubeless tyres are no better for grip than clichers or any faster. Some are though shortfall mentioned one. The Mavic yskions tyres though are not one of these. If used conti gp4000s tyres I am not sure I would notice except when the puncture fairy strikes.

Also given tubeless tyres can be fixed externally with worms you don't have to carry as much.

The Corsa speeds are for TT s they wear out quick and puncture easily. The IRC roadlite is as quick as the conti. IRC call this a training tyre, they could have fooled me.

While I don't doubt that the IRC tyres are perfectly good, you could hardly be called impartial, being the sole UK distributor for IRC tyres.

Perhaps in this position you could send a sample or two over to the reviewers at https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com in order that we could have a proper test of rolling resistance done?

timothyw

Milemuncher1 wrote:

inevitable big puncture, necessitating a long walk somewhere, or a messy ( relatively difficult / time consuming ) repair, roadside.

Talking nonsense again Milemuncher? There's a surprise.

You can have a big puncture on tubed clinchers too - one sufficiently bad that a boot won't do it - and if you carried an innertube when you were tubeless I can't see how you'd be any worse off.

One anecdote is not statistically significant.

EDIT: I note with amusement that your next post was to moan the fragility of standard GP4000 clinchers. What a clown.

Flâneur

Side note to all managed to loosely test out the weighting side of the matter.

Comparison was
Campag Zonda (prev gen 1550g) running vittoria latex tubes and 25mm open Pave
Giant SLR1 (2018 1380g) ran with slime and Giant AC 0 Tubeless tyres.

Both put onto the same bike and weight difference was 100g (on the nose) in favour of the Giant wheels. So the note would be, if you are buying for weight loss reasons it probably isn't the best way.

Note this doesn't take into account a ride difference, feel, watt savings, stiffness, braking difference etc etc

timothyw

Flâneur wrote:

Side note to all managed to loosely test out the weighting side of the matter.

Comparison was
Campag Zonda (prev gen 1550g) running vittoria latex tubes and 25mm open Pave
Giant SLR1 (2018 1380g) ran with slime and Giant AC 0 Tubeless tyres.

Both put onto the same bike and weight difference was 100g (on the nose) in favour of the Giant wheels. So the note would be, if you are buying for weight loss reasons it probably isn't the best way.

Note this doesn't take into account a ride difference, feel, watt savings, stiffness, braking difference etc etc

That's a pretty loose test of weight, are the AC 0 tyres also 25mm? How much slime did you use? Are the Open Pave tyres used, and so worn and lighter than they would have started? Are those wheel weights from your sets or have you looked them up?

I agree with your point though, there isn't much weight to be saved by going tubeless (if any) although I suppose the argument would be that to get equivalent puncture resistance you would need heavier armoured tyres (Like a gatorskin or durano) which have even worse rolling resistance to boot.

Mostyn

So what's next??
We have electric gears; power meters, disk brakes and tubeless tyres for a bicycle. Anyone like to see bicycles road taxed?

Flâneur

TimothyW wrote:

That's a pretty loose test of weight, are the AC 0 tyres also 25mm? How much slime did you use? Are the Open Pave tyres used, and so worn and lighter than they would have started? Are those wheel weights from your sets or have you looked them up?

I agree with your point though, there isn't much weight to be saved by going tubeless (if any) although I suppose the argument would be that to get equivalent puncture resistance you would need heavier armoured tyres (Like a gatorskin or durano) which have even worse rolling resistance to boot.

As you note it was a loose test, not pretending it tells the whole story but just an indicative point, but both tyres have at most a few 100 miles, both 25mm. Slime didn't measure the weight, just put in the recommended amount and just because so many wheels come in differently I used the stated weights, but used the same QR skewer for both.

Personal view is, why not use them if you have them. I don't think they are needed for road riding but nor is it detrimental. Bit like disc brakes for myself (light rider and the hills I descent don't need constant, prolonged braking). But neither are negative for riding on.

burnthesheep

My answer depends on the following:

for road tubeless, if you get a decent puncture in the tire could you patch internal and then utilize a tube to get home?

If so, then yeah, I would. Kind of tired of pinch flats when hitting a piece of gravel you didn't see or something like that.

singleton

burnthesheep wrote:

My answer depends on the following:

for road tubeless, if you get a decent puncture in the tire could you patch internal and then utilize a tube to get home?

If so, then yeah, I would. Kind of tired of pinch flats when hitting a piece of gravel you didn't see or something like that.

You could just use a tube to get you home like any other clincher.