Latex or Tubolito*

daniel_b

My Pirelli ones are doing very nicely on my new bike - as in I don't give them a second thought, they hold air definitely better than butyl as well, but maybe other brands differ with regards to air retention.

Also very much liking the ability to carry two spares in pretty much censored all space, even managed to ditch the saddle bag, as have one of those rear pocket wallet (Craft cadence) things, and can now fit my phone in there, house key/garage remote, levers, multi tool, two TPU tubes - I then still have one pocket free for pump and maybe a jacket/gilet, and the other pocket for food etc.

super_davo

So nice being able to fit a full repair kit in a wallet that fits in a jersey pocket. I've long used bottle cage zip pockets over saddlebags, so liking having a second cage back, especially for the longer non stopping rides at this time of year.

froze

feelgoodlost said:

I'd be interested to know how they cope with longer descents where hear build up on the rim is concerned. I've seen latex tubes blow on carbon rims on steeper descents where you need to brake a lot more.

Latex won't blow if the bike was using disk brakes. In the old days before disk brakes, the CF rim, which cannot dissipate heat like aluminum rims can, using rim brakes, those would heat up a lot, and yes, Latex would blow, but they also had problems with the CF rims delaminating from the heat of braking.

froze

Are you racing? If not, then just use good ol fashion butyl tubes, they last a very long time, are not fragile like Latex, and are a heck of a lot cheaper than TPU tubes, plus you don't have to put 30 psi into the tires before every ride! If you're not racing, is saving 7 watts or so using Latex worth saving maybe 30 seconds on a 50-mile ride? And TPU tubes will only save about 2 to 3 watts over butyl, now you might save 15 seconds on a 50-mile ride? Will you even notice that? Nope, but you will notice your wallet getting thinner.

You could get a set of Conti Supersonic tubes that would weigh less than TPU tubes at around 62 grams vs 83 grams for TPU, or 78 grams for latex. The Conti Supersonic would need to be reinflated before every ride, they leak out slower than latex too but faster than regular butyl tubes. TPU tubes hole air the best.

Which one would I buy? Butyl for sure, because they're inexpensive and hold up very well.

pblakeney

froze said:

Are you racing? If not, then just use good ol fashion butyl tubes,...

Have you read the entire thread?
I doubt it because your information on TPU is incorrect.

daniel_b

@froze

I'd definitely re-read the thread if I were you, it's less than two full pages.

Looking at the cost of butyl inner tubes from Halfords, they are £3.99, I managed to order 8 inner tubes from china for £4 each.

Main benefits as I see it:

• They hold air better than butyl tubes (In my experience)
  
• They take up a quarter of the space of butyl tubes (I can now ride without a saddle bag as a result)
  
• They save me 300g in weight (25g versus 100g per tube), as I have two on the bike and two in my pockets plus the weight of the saddle bag, which is likely to be 200g although out of interest I will weigh it tonight - so it could be they are responsible for saving 0.5kg off the weight of my bike.
  
• They are no more expensive than butyl tubes
  
• They take up a ton less storage space at home
  
• They may have less rolling resistance would be an added bonus
  

feelgoodlost

froze said:

feelgoodlost said:

I'd be interested to know how they cope with longer descents where hear build up on the rim is concerned. I've seen latex tubes blow on carbon rims on steeper descents where you need to brake a lot more.

Latex won't blow if the bike was using disk brakes. In the old days before disk brakes, the CF rim, which cannot dissipate heat like aluminum rims can, using rim brakes, those would heat up a lot, and yes, Latex would blow, but they also had problems with the CF rims delaminating from the heat of braking.

This isn't a thread about disc/rim brakes. Thanks.

ugo.santalucia

I think it makes sense to invest in better inner tubes if that improves the ride experience. We spend hundreds for carbon bars that to be honest do not make any difference whatsoever. It is true they are consumables, but so are bibshorts, the life of which, in my experience is in the same ballpark of that of an innertube. These polymer ones might just be the ticket for those who do not wish to experience the faff of tubeless, benefit from an easier tyre installation and possibly are more conscious about the non recyclable nature of the standard butyl tubes.

DeVlaeminck

froze said:

Are you racing? If not, then just use good ol fashion butyl tubes, they last a very long time, are not fragile like Latex, and are a heck of a lot cheaper than TPU tubes, plus you don't have to put 30 psi into the tires before every ride! If you're not racing, is saving 7 watts or so using Latex worth saving maybe 30 seconds on a 50-mile ride? And TPU tubes will only save about 2 to 3 watts over butyl, now you might save 15 seconds on a 50-mile ride? Will you even notice that? Nope, but you will notice your wallet getting thinner.

You could get a set of Conti Supersonic tubes that would weigh less than TPU tubes at around 62 grams vs 83 grams for TPU, or 78 grams for latex. The Conti Supersonic would need to be reinflated before every ride, they leak out slower than latex too but faster than regular butyl tubes. TPU tubes hole air the best.

Which one would I buy? Butyl for sure, because they're inexpensive and hold up very well.

I don't find latex tubes an issue. Am I willing to spend 30 seconds putting air in the tyres for 7 watts - hell yeah! I've used them for years and have never found them fragile - I've only ever used alloy rims in the Alps so can't speak for them blowing more easily from rim heat - I've seen butyl blow from heat too though so neither are guaranteed.

bobones

I run tubeless, but I bought a Turbilito last May to carry in my repair kit because they pack down much smaller than standard tubes.

I haven't had occasion to use until last week, when I got a massive cut in my rear tyre, which obviously wouldn't seal and was too big for plugs. Incidentally, this was the first time in over 3 years/30k miles that I've had to remove a tyre and wheel to fix a puncture on the road.

Thankfully, my Park Tool tyre boot and the Turbilito were up to the task, and I was able to ride home without further drama.



The next morning, however, my tyre was completely flat. I couldn't find a hole in the tube by dipping it water, but there's obviously one there.

I've now ordered a couple of RideNows from AliX, but should I expect those to be similarly fragile, and how does one go about finding and repairing holes in these TPU tubes?

shirley_basso

They come with a sticky patch

pblakeney

bobones said:

...
The next morning, however, my tyre was completely flat. I couldn't find a hole in the tube by dipping it water, but there's obviously one there.
...

I'd be looking for something sharp and probably would have used a boot.
Not much use now I know. 😉

vincesummerskRoxcBTr

You can get a Tubolito patch kit, which is basically a tube of glue (not rubber adhesive) and some patches of the tube material, seems to make a permanent patch on the ones I have.

daniel_b

daniel_b said:

They save me 300g in weight (25g versus 100g per tube), as I have two on the bike and two in my pockets plus the weight of the saddle bag

So the saddle bag only weighs 80g, but still, I think most people would take a 380g weight saving across them and the bike, for effectively no extra outlay on what you would spend on normal tubes.

webboo

I bought some from Aliexpress they took about 3 weeks to arrive but appeared to be the cheapest. Some of the other places had lower prices but when I clicked on the valve length I wanted the price went up. My rear tyre which was requiring a lever to get back on with a normal tube went on with my thumbs.
However the ride seems a bit harsher with them but I might have put too much pressure in. I normally go to about 90/95 with normal tubes on my 25mm tyres but the tyres seem pretty hard at this.
Anybody used them on an Alpine descent.

charlie_potatoes

I used the Swalbe Aerothan's that came fitted on my bike for 500 miles without issue. I fitted some RideNow 24g when I parked up the Tubeless ready tyres for some lighter standard 5000. They sat for a couple of days and stayed inflated but the rear deflated 3 miles into a ride. I replaced it and so far so good (30 miles).
The sticky 'patch' looks to me to be something that is fitted around the valve entrance on the wheel rather than for a repair?
The RideNow arrived in about a week from AliExpress.

pblakeney

charlie_potatoes said:

I used the Swalbe Aerothan's that came fitted on my bike for 500 miles without issue. I fitted some RideNow 24g when I parked up the Tubeless ready tyres for some lighter standard 5000. They sat for a couple of days and stayed inflated but the rear deflated 3 miles into a ride. I replaced it and so far so good (30 miles).
The sticky 'patch' looks to me to be something that is fitted around the valve entrance on the wheel rather than for a repair?
The RideNow arrived in about a week from AliExpress.

I hadn't considered that as a possibility. Not needed so far, but best check.

froze

daniel_b said:

@froze

I'd definitely re-read the thread if I were you, it's less than two full pages.

Looking at the cost of butyl inner tubes from Halfords, they are £3.99, I managed to order 8 inner tubes from china for £4 each.

Main benefits as I see it:

• They hold air better than butyl tubes (In my experience)
  
• They take up a quarter of the space of butyl tubes (I can now ride without a saddle bag as a result)
  
• They save me 300g in weight (25g versus 100g per tube), as I have two on the bike and two in my pockets plus the weight of the saddle bag, which is likely to be 200g although out of interest I will weigh it tonight - so it could be they are responsible for saving 0.5kg off the weight of my bike.
  
• They are no more expensive than butyl tubes
  
• They take up a ton less storage space at home
  
• They may have less rolling resistance would be an added bonus
  

In America they want $35 for one Tubolito tube, not close to the cost of a butyl tube.

I'm not sure where you came up with 300 grams total savings from, if a Supersonic tube is only 62 grams, and a Tubolito is 83 grams for the standard one, that in my book that makes the Supersonic 41 grams lighter each, or 82 grams lighter for two. Yes, Tubolito does sell a lighter version, called the S Tubo but due to the very thin wall thickness they are more prone to be harmed by potential heat during long and hard brakes so they are only recommended for use in bikes with disc brakes, and they are a wee bit more prone to punctures. But since you said they were 300 grams lighter as a pair I'm going to have to assume you meant those S-Tubo's and those cost $38 each in the states, and those are 45 grams each which is only 17 grams lighter than the Supersonics, thus 34 grams for the pair, again not near 300 you stated, nor do the S tubos weigh 25 grams, they weigh 34.

In addition, your math is off. Let's assume you use 100-gram butyl tubes as you said, that's 200 grams, not 300; minus your incorrect 25 grams each brings down the total weight to 150, not 300, not 200. But it gets worse, since the S Tubo weighs 45 grams each or 90 a pair, you really are only saving 110 grams that's only 3.8 ounces in the American measurement system, which is only say 2 ounces each wheel if we round up. Not worth the cost of $76 for a pair...here in the states anyways.

pblakeney

Read the thread in its entirety. Your "facts" are incorrect.
There are other suppliers available. Well, for us outside of the States anyway.

ibr17xvii

froze said:

daniel_b said:

@froze

I'd definitely re-read the thread if I were you, it's less than two full pages.

Looking at the cost of butyl inner tubes from Halfords, they are £3.99, I managed to order 8 inner tubes from china for £4 each.

Main benefits as I see it:

• They hold air better than butyl tubes (In my experience)
  
• They take up a quarter of the space of butyl tubes (I can now ride without a saddle bag as a result)
  
• They save me 300g in weight (25g versus 100g per tube), as I have two on the bike and two in my pockets plus the weight of the saddle bag, which is likely to be 200g although out of interest I will weigh it tonight - so it could be they are responsible for saving 0.5kg off the weight of my bike.
  
• They are no more expensive than butyl tubes
  
• They take up a ton less storage space at home
  
• They may have less rolling resistance would be an added bonus
  

In America they want $35 for one Tubolito tube, not close to the cost of a butyl tube.

I'm not sure where you came up with 300 grams total savings from, if a Supersonic tube is only 62 grams, and a Tubolito is 83 grams for the standard one, that in my book that makes the Supersonic 41 grams lighter each, or 82 grams lighter for two. Yes, Tubolito does sell a lighter version, called the S Tubo but due to the very thin wall thickness they are more prone to be harmed by potential heat during long and hard brakes so they are only recommended for use in bikes with disc brakes, and they are a wee bit more prone to punctures. But since you said they were 300 grams lighter as a pair I'm going to have to assume you meant those S-Tubo's and those cost $38 each in the states, and those are 45 grams each which is only 17 grams lighter than the Supersonics, thus 34 grams for the pair, again not near 300 you stated, nor do the S tubos weigh 25 grams, they weigh 34.

In addition, your math is off. Let's assume you use 100-gram butyl tubes as you said, that's 200 grams, not 300; minus your incorrect 25 grams each brings down the total weight to 150, not 300, not 200. But it gets worse, since the S Tubo weighs 45 grams each or 90 a pair, you really are only saving 110 grams that's only 3.8 ounces in the American measurement system, which is only say 2 ounces each wheel if we round up. Not worth the cost of $76 for a pair...here in the states anyways.

He was also factoring how many he was carrying as spares into the weight saving which you haven't.

super_davo

You can also order the same 30 gram RideNow TPUs from AliExpress as we've been talking about here in the states.

Yes the first branded TPUs like Tubolito and Aerothan were/ are expensive, but £4 or $5 a tube for RideNow isn't. And I can no longer find £1 inner tube deals anymore - they tend to start from £2-3 even for the most basic 'standard' butyl that weigh 120g and ride like hosepipes.

daniel_b

The lack of attention to detail on certain replies here is on another level

I've now also weighed my saddle bag at 80g which I no longer have to take.

So the weight saving for my bike and I, is 380g, for a 'cost' of £16, but arguably nothing at all, as the butyl tubes cost the same.

FACT: The Ridenow lightest tubes weigh 23-25g each.

FACT: They are what I have bought.

ugo.santalucia

seems a bit anachronistic having to defend spending 15 pounds on an inner tube, in a sport where 3 grand barely buy you an entry level carbon bike.

In other news, last Friday I obtained my first better than expected result in an Open race. Power and power to weight were not particularly spectacular, but I managed to beat or equal a few folks who normally beat me up a hill by some margin. The accumulation of marginal gains no doubt played its part and among those, possibly the TPU inner tubes… winner of the race just turned 16 the previous week and won with a blistering time, only a second off the course record… watch out for this Isaac Oliver, I will not be surprised to see him win something big in a few years
https://www.cyclingtimetrials.org.uk/race-results/24943#anchor

andrew_s-2

bobones said:

I run tubeless, but I bought a Turbilito last May to carry in my repair kit because they pack down much smaller than standard tubes.

The next morning, however, my tyre was completely flat. I couldn't find a hole in the tube by dipping it water, but there's obviously one there.

I've now ordered a couple of RideNows from AliX, but should I expect those to be similarly fragile, and how does one go about finding and repairing holes in these TPU tubes?

Most things have disadvantages as well as advantages.

In the case of tubeless, should you get a cut large enough to require a tube, you ought to carefully check the whole tyre for bits of flint, glass etc that sealed at the time, but are still there waiting to puncture a new tube. That can take a fair while - 15 or 20 minutes for a reasonably proper job.
Dare I suggest that the people who go for tubeless aren't the sort of people who are going to take that time?

In the case of TPU tubes, as they stretch permanently, you can't inflate them to an extra large size outside of the tyre as you would with a latex or butyl tube when looking for a small hole. That makes finding the cause of a puncture quite a lot harder, especially out on the road where you've got things like breezes interfering with the detection of small leaks.
The detection methods are the same though - listen, feel for airflow (eg with lips), bubbles from a submerged section of tube or a section that's wet with soapy water.
Having found the hole, there are suitable repair kits available, generally from the same place you got the TPU tubes.

davebradswmb

I tried latex many years ago and gave up on them because they required the tyre to be virtually free from damage. I had a small cut in one of my tyres and the tube extruded through the hole. I couldn't justify the expense of replacing tyres whenever they got a small cut so I went back to Butyl, plus my bum obviously is not sensitive enough to detect the claimed improvement in rolling comfort.

Has anyone any experience with the TPU tubes and small cuts inthe tyre?

super_davo

I've had no real problems with small cuts, but TPU doesn't stretch like Butyl or Latex. So if it's a large cut and it can bulge through you'll wreck the tube. Mind you if you rode your bike with a bulging tyre you'd probably wreck a lot more than the tube.

clubsport

Partly due to this thread, I ordered some TPU tubes from AliExpress. They arrived in under a week, which was a pleasant surprise.
I am impressed with the way they spool up, similar to a lighter flywheel conversion on a car engine, where as I do not notice any improvement in rolling speed on 28MM Conti 5000, the reponse when applyong power is a noticeable benefit especialy up hills.
I had a "blow out" at slow speed after around 60 miles of use. I was anticipating this?
I removed the tyre and tube to find the section of inner rim where I had replaced a spoke last year and covered with insulation tape had worn through and caused a 4mm hole in the inner part of the TPU. This part of the rim with the tape looked fine a few days ago when I fitted the TPU?
I rode home on a Butyl tube, repaired the TPU with the alcohol wipe and one of 4 patches that came with it. I thought I was wasting my time with a 4mm hole, but the patch held air overnight and I will keep it as a spare.
I can't really blame the tube, I should have reinforced the rim taping over the spoke hole (which I have now done), I have ridden 50 miles since fitting a new TPU and inspected the rim tape, all is well.

Just a heads up of a different type of puncture not experienced with a Butyl tube and repairing a 4mm hole with a stick on patch...a new experience!

froze

He was also factoring how many he was carrying as spares into the weight saving which you haven't.

Not sure why that matters when the Conti Supersonics are lighter, which means times 3 as you suggested, is still lighter than 3 Tubi's, or 20 Supersonics would be lighter than 20 Tubi's, point not taken

super_davo

froze said:

He was also factoring how many he was carrying as spares into the weight saving which you haven't.

Not sure why that matters when the Conti Supersonics are lighter, which means times 3 as you suggested, is still lighter than 3 Tubi's, or 20 Supersonics would be lighter than 20 Tubi's, point not taken



Can you do us a favour and spend $14.59 of your hard earned dollars and order these https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805273499520.html and come back.

I've checked and they deliver to the States.

It's obvious you're not talking about the same thing as the rest of us... so this is what they are, give them a try.

Note there is also an even lighter version https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805321138902.html? which is the version Dan B has ordered. IMO the standard version is already very light and small enough to not warrant the theoretical fragility of these, but others may disagree.

froze

super_davo said:

froze said:

He was also factoring how many he was carrying as spares into the weight saving which you haven't.

Not sure why that matters when the Conti Supersonics are lighter, which means times 3 as you suggested, is still lighter than 3 Tubi's, or 20 Supersonics would be lighter than 20 Tubi's, point not taken

Wow, that was pointless.