On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 11:28:06 AM UTC-8, Ralph Barone wrote:
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 11:56:49 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Snipped
If you have an innertube it rotates with the wheel and needs to be
accelerated or decelerated. If you have sealant it rides more or less at
the bottom of the tire not requiring to be accelerated.
Snipped
Absolute BULL****!
Cheers
Jan Heine would disagree with Tom.
https://janheine.wordpress.com/2018/...s-roll-faster/
Ralph - that is largely an opinion piece. (whereas most of his other "mythbuster" pieces are well founded.) Using one tire type to make your tests on isn't scientifically exacting.The lowest rolling resistance in the RR tests were with a Vittoria tubeless tire.
If you think that a tube doesn't increase rolling resistance by decreasing the tire reflex action but the lack of the tube does, or like Ridesalittle thinks that other than a small amount of frictional cohesion that the sealant doesn't stay mainly on the plain I can only refer to other tests:
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance...ex-butyl-tubes
But if you look at the rolling resistance tests the differences in the same size tires at the same pressure over the same surface, the difference is so slight that it is only of interest with a TT rider in competition. And even in those cases it is no doubt purely psychological.
So really the only difference between tubeless, tube or sewups is the almost total absence of flats. If you want to say that you only have a flat once a year so it's no trouble to carry a 2 lb flat kit with you all the time that is certainly your decision. But I have a very expensive bike that has its weight increased to that of a moderately priced bike by doing so.
And having carefully tested them I can tell the difference but what the hell that matters for a sport riders is open for interpretation. I just feel that my $4,000 Time should not be the same weight as my $8,000 Colnago.
Beside, I want you to be able to pick up the Colnago with one finger and ooh and ahh!