A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What is the point of tubeless tires?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old January 13th 19, 05:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,261
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 8:07:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/13/2019 1:58 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 2:03:53 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Saturday, January 12, 2019 at 10:17:49 PM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, January 12, 2019 at 10:24:23 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 9:11:35 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do they solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for non-racing riders?

You have to have tubeless rims. Otherwise you can use any tire you want. You can use extreme racing tires. Even pretty large punctures can seal almost instantly with the right sealing compound. No detectable air loss.

If you DO have a flat too large for the sealing compound to work which is possible, they make a device that puts a rubber plus in sealing the hole. I haven't even heard of anyone getting a hole that large. I do know one guy that picked up a carpet nail and left it in clicking on every turn before he got home. He said that when he pulled it out the tire got soft but sealed. He pumped it up and still rides it.

Besides being lighter and having a lower rolling resistance tire you also don't have to carry a flat kit on you. Frank tells us his flat his weighs 1/2 lb but mine - two innertubes, two CO2 cartridges, the filler tool and levers in a pack weights 2 lbs. This is more weight than my Look 206 delta pedals.

I have had no trouble at all with my Michelin Pro4 Endurance tires since converting to tubeless. Before I had flats so often that everyone around here runs Gatorskins which are heavy and have lousy traction.

You can run Pro4s tubeless? Hmmmm. I have a bunch of Pro4s and a tubeless ready wheel set with OE valves in a bag somewhere. Maybe I'll get some sealant and give it a whirl.

As an aside, what I don't like about tubeless ready rims and regular tires/tubes is that the tire beads practically weld themselves to the rim. It's a pain getting the tire off the rim, and they're really tight getting tires on the rim. All that is necessary if you're running tubeless but not so necessary with an ordinary tire/tube combo.

-- Jay Beattie.

I noticed that too. Annoying. Everytime you change a flat you hear the tire bead pop into place. Or not...

Lou


I'm surprised that those who want to avoid flats don't just use foam filled tires instead of these or other Slime-like concoctions.

Cheers


You could argue about 60g of inner tube vs 60g of goop, and
people do, but I have to assume you have never ridden a foam
or urethane tire.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


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.

There's horses for courses I suppose but after trying these for several months I like them.
Ads
  #32  
Old January 13th 19, 05:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/13/2019 1:58 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Snipped
I'm surprised that those who want to avoid flats don't just use foam filled tires instead of these or other Slime-like concoctions.

Cheers


You could argue about 60g of inner tube vs 60g of goop, and
people do, but I have to assume you have never ridden a foam
or urethane tire.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


You assume correctly. I have no need to use a foam or urethane tire. I can patc my clincher tire or swap a tube pretty quickly but i don't puncture very often - maybe once a year or so.

If punctures weren't so darn hard/time consuming to repair I'd put tubulars back on a couple of my bicycles. I like the ride of them but man what a pain if you puncture two tires on a ride and you only have one spare. If i do get tubulars again I'll make SURE they have removable valve cores so i can put slime or similar in them if I do happen to puncture both tires - again like I did years ago far from home.

Btw, once in desperation, I think it was just last year, I put a tubular tire onto a clincher rim and rode it for a fair number of miles until I could get to a bicycle shop that was open and get another tube.

If the shipping wasn't so darn much I'd order your 3 for $50.00 USD deal of tubulars; maybe even two sets of three.

Cheers
  #33  
Old January 13th 19, 05:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

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
  #34  
Old January 13th 19, 07:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 7:35:05 AM UTC-5, Tosspot wrote:
On 1/12/19 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/12/2019 12:11 AM, wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do they
solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for non-racing
riders?


Part of the point is "churning." Bikes and bike parts are a super-mature
industry, and bikes and their products last decades. (My favorite bike
is from 1986.) So the industry tries to come up with new ideas every
year, just to entice you to buy _something_.

Going back to the 1970s, it was "Ten speeds!" then "Touring bikes!" then
"Aluminum!" then "Mountain bikes!" ... and on and on, with front
suspension, full suspension, 6 speeds, 7 speeds, 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 speeds,
carbon fiber, electronic shifting etc. It goes on forever.

Currently it's disc brakes, tubeless tires and "gravel bikes." For
almost everyone who rides a bicycle, the improvements (if any) are
almost undetectable. We are deeply into diminishing returns, no matter
what miracles the supposed connoisseurs claim.


I take issue. Indexed ergo shifters vs downtube friction shifters, LED
LiPo lights vs dodgy glow worms, and this is going to cause trouble,
yes, hydraulic discs vs cable rim brakes.

I see what you are saying, but people don't *buy* crap. They buy it
because it's [marginally] better than what the had. Eg. I could buy
this mountain bike

https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadma...Black/55376950

Or I could buy this;

https://www.damianharriscycles.co.uk...8-touring-bike

By your argument, the first is a clear winner, because it's every bit as
good as the latter and 600 bucks cheaper!

Just ride.


Not wrong :-)


No, they buy it because they have no other choice. If I could, I would buy down-tube levers and top-mount shifters, but they are no longer available. I have three or four of the stupid Shimano push-button shifters. Every single one of them is broken.
  #35  
Old January 13th 19, 08:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ralph Barone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 7:35:05 AM UTC-5, Tosspot wrote:
On 1/12/19 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/12/2019 12:11 AM, wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do they
solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for non-racing
riders?

Part of the point is "churning." Bikes and bike parts are a super-mature
industry, and bikes and their products last decades. (My favorite bike
is from 1986.) So the industry tries to come up with new ideas every
year, just to entice you to buy _something_.

Going back to the 1970s, it was "Ten speeds!" then "Touring bikes!" then
"Aluminum!" then "Mountain bikes!" ... and on and on, with front
suspension, full suspension, 6 speeds, 7 speeds, 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 speeds,
carbon fiber, electronic shifting etc. It goes on forever.

Currently it's disc brakes, tubeless tires and "gravel bikes." For
almost everyone who rides a bicycle, the improvements (if any) are
almost undetectable. We are deeply into diminishing returns, no matter
what miracles the supposed connoisseurs claim.


I take issue. Indexed ergo shifters vs downtube friction shifters, LED
LiPo lights vs dodgy glow worms, and this is going to cause trouble,
yes, hydraulic discs vs cable rim brakes.

I see what you are saying, but people don't *buy* crap. They buy it
because it's [marginally] better than what the had. Eg. I could buy
this mountain bike

https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadma...Black/55376950

Or I could buy this;

https://www.damianharriscycles.co.uk...8-touring-bike

By your argument, the first is a clear winner, because it's every bit as
good as the latter and 600 bucks cheaper!

Just ride.


Not wrong :-)


No, they buy it because they have no other choice. If I could, I would
buy down-tube levers and top-mount shifters, but they are no longer
available. I have three or four of the stupid Shimano push-button
shifters. Every single one of them is broken.


Well, this is a bike tech group (notwithstanding the 90% ratio of politics,
helmets and general personal defamation posts). Learn how to fix them.

  #36  
Old January 13th 19, 08:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ralph Barone[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

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/

  #37  
Old January 13th 19, 08:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tosspot[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,563
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On 1/13/19 7:55 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 7:35:05 AM UTC-5, Tosspot wrote:
On 1/12/19 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/12/2019 12:11 AM,
wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do
they solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for
non-racing riders?

Part of the point is "churning." Bikes and bike parts are a
super-mature industry, and bikes and their products last decades.
(My favorite bike is from 1986.) So the industry tries to come up
with new ideas every year, just to entice you to buy
_something_.

Going back to the 1970s, it was "Ten speeds!" then "Touring
bikes!" then "Aluminum!" then "Mountain bikes!" ... and on and
on, with front suspension, full suspension, 6 speeds, 7 speeds, 8
& 9 & 10 & 11 speeds, carbon fiber, electronic shifting etc. It
goes on forever.

Currently it's disc brakes, tubeless tires and "gravel bikes."
For almost everyone who rides a bicycle, the improvements (if
any) are almost undetectable. We are deeply into diminishing
returns, no matter what miracles the supposed connoisseurs
claim.


I take issue. Indexed ergo shifters vs downtube friction shifters,
LED LiPo lights vs dodgy glow worms, and this is going to cause
trouble, yes, hydraulic discs vs cable rim brakes.

I see what you are saying, but people don't *buy* crap. They buy
it because it's [marginally] better than what the had. Eg. I could
buy this mountain bike

https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadma...Black/55376950



Or I could buy this;

https://www.damianharriscycles.co.uk...8-touring-bike



By your argument, the first is a clear winner, because it's every bit as
good as the latter and 600 bucks cheaper!

Just ride.


Not wrong :-)


No, they buy it because they have no other choice. If I could, I
would buy down-tube levers and top-mount shifters, but they are no
longer available. I have three or four of the stupid Shimano
push-button shifters. Every single one of them is broken.


Quite reasonable prices, as you'd expect.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=do...w=1067&bih=903

https://www.google.co.uk/search?biw=...bar+shifter s

For the real 1970s experience'

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Sun...-/254061406502

Sometime ago I thought I had an application for those friction bandon
shifters, but I'm damned if I can remember it now!
  #38  
Old January 13th 19, 10:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On 1/13/2019 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2019 at 7:35:05 AM UTC-5, Tosspot wrote:
On 1/12/19 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/12/2019 12:11 AM,
wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do they
solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for non-racing
riders?

Part of the point is "churning." Bikes and bike parts are a super-mature
industry, and bikes and their products last decades. (My favorite bike
is from 1986.) So the industry tries to come up with new ideas every
year, just to entice you to buy _something_.

Going back to the 1970s, it was "Ten speeds!" then "Touring bikes!" then
"Aluminum!" then "Mountain bikes!" ... and on and on, with front
suspension, full suspension, 6 speeds, 7 speeds, 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 speeds,
carbon fiber, electronic shifting etc. It goes on forever.

Currently it's disc brakes, tubeless tires and "gravel bikes." For
almost everyone who rides a bicycle, the improvements (if any) are
almost undetectable. We are deeply into diminishing returns, no matter
what miracles the supposed connoisseurs claim.


I take issue. Indexed ergo shifters vs downtube friction shifters, LED
LiPo lights vs dodgy glow worms, and this is going to cause trouble,
yes, hydraulic discs vs cable rim brakes.

I see what you are saying, but people don't *buy* crap. They buy it
because it's [marginally] better than what the had. Eg. I could buy
this mountain bike

https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadma...Black/55376950

Or I could buy this;

https://www.damianharriscycles.co.uk...8-touring-bike

By your argument, the first is a clear winner, because it's every bit as
good as the latter and 600 bucks cheaper!

Just ride.


Not wrong :-)


No, they buy it because they have no other choice. If I could, I would buy down-tube levers and top-mount shifters, but they are no longer available. I have three or four of the stupid Shimano push-button shifters. Every single one of them is broken.


??
Top shifters are $9.95 a side w/wire, or not much more than
the gear wire alone.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #39  
Old January 13th 19, 11:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,261
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

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!
  #40  
Old January 13th 19, 11:21 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default What is the point of tubeless tires?

On 1/13/2019 7:35 AM, Tosspot wrote:
On 1/12/19 6:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/12/2019 12:11 AM, wrote:
Seriously, what is the point of these things? What problem do they
solve and is it worth the extra maintenance hassles for non-racing
riders?


Part of the point is "churning." Bikes and bike parts are a
super-mature industry, and bikes and their products last decades. (My
favorite bike is from 1986.) So the industry tries to come up with new
ideas every year, just to entice you to buy _something_.

Going back to the 1970s, it was "Ten speeds!" then "Touring bikes!"
then "Aluminum!" then "Mountain bikes!" ... and on and on, with front
suspension, full suspension, 6 speeds, 7 speeds, 8 & 9 & 10 & 11
speeds, carbon fiber, electronic shifting etc. It goes on forever.

Currently it's disc brakes, tubeless tires and "gravel bikes." For
almost everyone who rides a bicycle, the improvements (if any) are
almost undetectable. We are deeply into diminishing returns, no matter
what miracles the supposed connoisseurs claim.


I take issue.Â* Indexed ergo shifters vs downtube friction shifters, LED
LiPo lights vs dodgy glow worms, and this is going to cause trouble,
yes, hydraulic discs vs cable rim brakes.

I see what you are saying, but people don't *buy* crap.Â* They buy it
because it's [marginally] better than what the had.Â* Eg. I could buy
this mountain bike

Â*Â*Â*Â*
https://www.walmart.com/ip/26-Roadma...Black/55376950

Or I could buy this;

Â*Â*Â*Â*https://www.damianharriscycles.co.uk...8-touring-bike

By your argument, the first is a clear winner, because it's every bit as
good as the latter and 600 bucks cheaper!


Sorry, but no. There's almost always a wide range of price and quality
in every consumer good. Nobody's saying a Roadmaster is equivalent to a
Dawes. And really, I'm not even saying that (for example) cable discs
are _exactly_ as good as hydraulic discs.

What I'm saying is that for almost all cyclists, the difference between
hydraulic and cable discs is negligible, and so is the difference
between discs and decent rim brakes. Really, what percentage of cyclists
really need absolutely perfect braking in heavy rain or deep mud? Are
there really many people here who have had significant brake problems
riding before the modern disc mania? Has a high percentage of the
world's bike riders had those problems? I very much doubt it. For me,
like most, braking more than gently is a rare event.

The same logic applies to 11 cogs vs. 10 or 9 cogs; to wheels that
differ in mass by 50 grams; to derailleurs moved by electricity vs.
steel cables, and more.

But the industry (including the publishing portion) pushes discs as THE
thing everyone must have, as if we're incredibly lucky to not have been
killed multiple times by our caliper brakes. Likewise, carbon fiber is
purported to change your life; tubeless tires will make you wish you
never saw an inner tube; and how could someone possibly ride without 11
cogs in back? Oh, and with more than one sprocket in front?

But I know I'm an oddball retrogrouch. I still shift with both my right
hand and my left hand! I still know how to let go of the handlebars to
shift! And I still more than keep up with my (um, somewhat decrepit)
peer group while using 1980s technology.

I just ride.

But boy, when they start selling carbon fiber inner wires for shifters,
I'm jumping on those. And carbon fiber safety pins for keeping my pants
cuffs out of the chain. Think of the weight savings! ;-)

--
- Frank Krygowski
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tubeless Tires. [email protected] Techniques 0 November 18th 18 10:09 PM
Tubeless Tires [email protected] Techniques 16 August 20th 18 03:57 PM
Tubeless Tires [email protected] Techniques 5 April 12th 17 03:49 AM
tubeless tires steve Techniques 2 March 14th 08 12:18 PM
Tubeless tires MT Techniques 2 March 30th 05 09:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.