Sure this has been done before - but - whats the advantage of going tubeless?
It seems to me that all you're doing is replacing the inner tube with sealant and can't see any advantage to this - can you enlighten me?
Bike Forum
Tubeless?
-
Posted 5 months ago #
-
No. If you don't have a problem then tubeless isn't the solution. If you want better traction and puncture resistance then maybe it is. But it's a faff to get right, unless you go UST from the start.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Why does it confer more puncture resistance?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Posted 5 months ago # -
You almost never get punctures. Like years between them.
You can run lower tyre pressures, which can help bike handling.
If you almost never get punctures right now, with tubes, then I guess the advantages are less clear cut.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Eh? (re flow's pic)
Posted 5 months ago # -
never get punctures eh? i wish that was the case. was half way round kirroughtree black tonight when i got one and i forgot to pack a spare tube aarrgghhhh!!!
Posted 5 months ago # -
Went tubeless after puncturing on EVERY ride on the South Downs.
4th ride tubeless - puncture. Admittedly it was more of a stab from a sharp flint.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Why does it confer more puncture resistance?
Two reasons:
1) sealant inside the tyre, which seals any thorn punctures you might get
2) no tube to pinch, so eliminating pinch puncturesNow arguably you can get slime filled tubes which help avoid getting punctures, but they don't work as well as sealant in tyres, and they're also heavy, whilst tubeless (non-UST version) is lighter than using a normal tube (not as light as using really lightweight tubes, but then they puncture if you ride within 100m of a thorn bush).
I've still yet to get even half as many punctures when using tubeless as I did in a single year before I switched - that was 9 years ago!
Posted 5 months ago # -
Fewer punctures, and (done right) less weighrt. That's all really. Oh, in theory you can run lower pressures but I've rarely found that a benefit.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Oh, the sealant remains liquid and plugs gaps? Sorry possibly being a bit thick
Posted 5 months ago # -
Sealant dries in the gap to form a flexible plug. It is worth checking the sealant say every six months to ensure you still have sufficient liquid sealant in the tyre.
Posted 5 months ago # -
It is worth checking the sealant say every six months to ensure you still have sufficient liquid sealant in the tyre.
People leave the same tyres on for that long?
I'm only messing, but in general I check my summer tyres (which are more like 2-3 season tyres) half way through and maybe top them up. Winter tyres are usually taken off well before the sealant has dried up.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Pinchflats!
before = 3 pinchflats in a single descent
after = the single pinchflat I've had was from hitting a sqaure edged waterbar at high speed (clumbsy git). But that put a 3/4" slice through the tread and nothing would have saved that!
Posted 5 months ago # -
People leave the same tyres on for that long?
(yes I saw the clarification) Given two sets of wheels, normally until the tyres are worn out. Then again I tend to ride my summer tyres (Racing Ralphs) most of the winter anyway, and if I only had one set I doubt I'd swap at all - I once carried on using Double Fighters (real old-fashioned semi-slicks) right through the winter. I'm really not into lots of swapping of tyres - I know what I like.Posted 5 months ago # -
More hassle than its worth IME
Posted 5 months ago # -
I've found less rolling resistance with tubeless. Dont understand the science but have spoken to other tubeless riders that find the same. Over a long distance they feel easier to pedal and you notice the difference. They also have a different feel to them. If you like riding very large volume tyres that feel supple and mould themselves to the terrain then you will get the same feeling with tubeless but with a tyre that is much skinnier. Im not sure I would want to use a conversion kit. Right tool for the right job and all that. Proper tubeless is no faff at all. I've never had any issues blowing them up etc.
Posted 5 months ago # -
More hassle than its worth IME
I have 2 sets of wheels and about 8 sets of tyres. All will go straight up with a track pump and seal immediately. I'm confident I can change tyres in 10 minutes and be ready to ride (quicker if I'm not bothered about re-using sealant). It can't really be much easier!
I ripped a couple of tyres in 2010, but haven't had a single flat in 2011, pulled a nail out of my tyre and it sealed immediately. Works for me!
Posted 5 months ago # -
I have 2 sets of wheels and about 8 sets of tyres. All will go straight up with a track pump and seal immediately. I'm confident I can change tyres in 10 minutes and be ready to ride (quicker if I'm not bothered about re-using sealant). It can't really be much easier!
I ripped a couple of tyres in 2010, but haven't had a single flat in 2011, pulled a nail out of my tyre and it sealed immediately. Works for me!
IME is an abbreviation for in my experience, and in my experience that doesn't include any of your experiences.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Advantages far outweigh faff....No puncture in 7 years....or should i say possibly 30 thorns etc and never noticed till changing tyres...less rolling resistance as the rotating mass is so much less.This means faster acceleration.The less weight you can get at the rim has a massive difference.Lower pressures for better grip but in my experience this only needs to be 5 psi or so..I ride with 30psi....11.5 stone. No pinch flats or snakebites ever.
Posted 5 months ago # -
IME is an abbreviation for in my experience, and in my experience that doesn't include any of your experiences.
"Works for me" is an acknowledgement that my post relates to my experience, and potentially not those of others, really a casual nod to the fact that opinions can of course vary and a way of offering the OP 'both sides of the coin' as it were. Please disregard as you see fit, and continue to be a luddite
Posted 5 months ago # -
Less weight
Less punctures
Less rolling resistance
More gripObviously it's a comprimise between those; run more (i.e same as you would with tubes) pressure = simialr grip but lower roling resistance. Add more sealent = more weight, but even less chance of a puncture. Etc.
With a bit of preperation and a few layers of electrical tape, or a stans strip or both, so a bit or experimentation's required to find out what works with what rims. They're less faff than tubes as there's no tubes, and mine always go up first time with either a hand pump on the trail or a track pump at home. A litre of sealent is ~£15-£20 and does ~15 tyres even if you don't re use it, I must be on my 8th or 6th set of tyres and the original litre bottle is still not empty, although there is a solidified ball in thebottom of the bottle now.
Only punctures I get now are the kind where the tyre is written off.
Posted 5 months ago # -
IME is an abbreviation for in my experience, and in my experience that doesn't include any of your experiences.
IME is an abbreviation commonly used by people who don't have much experience, (IME )
Posted 5 months ago # -
I've found less rolling resistance with tubeless. Dont understand the science
I'd forgotten that one - though in reality you only get a significant difference if you use normal tyres (or tubeless ready) converted rather than UST. The science is that you have less rubber being deformed (which is something which isn't really an advantage with UST), and no interaction between two different layers.Posted 5 months ago # -
can't say i've noticed any difference in the rolling resitance at all. Like anything when it's all working well it's great when it's not it's a pain and a tubless failure is a PITA, leave you looking like the star of a Bukake party.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Been tubeless for about 6 months. Had no punctures to repair( must have repaired 15/20 tubes in the 6 months before that) & it has been a completly painless process (using stans rims & a trackpump)
Posted 5 months ago # -
IME is an abbreviation commonly used by people who don't have much experience
Maybe in your experience.
Posted 5 months ago # -
The check enough sealant was learnt the hard way. The only puncture I got in years was due to it all having dried up. I am one of the fit and forget brigade as far as tyres go. I do not change my tyres on the car every six months so why do it on the bike? Yeah there may be some benefits to certain types of tyres but I can get my bike over most stuff on one set. It just make it a bit more "interesting"
Posted 5 months ago # -
So, what's a good tubeless rim then?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Thing is, yes there is faff, but it's at a time and a place of my choosing. Whereas with tubes, there's also faff and it always strikes when you don't want it- in the middle of a race run, halfway down the big descent you've been waiting all day for, when you're late, or racing the rain home, etc. I'll trade 10 minutes faff in a warm garage for 1 minute's faff on a muddy hill any day of the week.
Can't feel any difference in rolling resistance personally. Not saying it's not there though but I'm oblivious to it if it is.
andycs - Member
So, what's a good tubeless rim then?
I'm a big fan of Stans... Got a set of Mavic 819s which are OK I guess, no better or worse than Stans as far as actually going tubeless but way heavier for the equivalent products (my Flows are lighter, wider and stronger)
Posted 5 months ago # -
I have Stans and Racing Ralphs - no punctures for about 2 years now. Wish I'd gone proper tubless ages ago; and by that I mean tubeless rims and tyres with sealant as there seem to be a few issues with conversion kits. I've not noticed lower rolling resistance. I've even taken to not bothering brining a spare tube just in case now; sods law I'll come a cropper mind.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Been running slime for years. As above, only ever really notice punctures when removing tyres which is when they wear out generally.
You guys seem to champion the puncture resistance as the main advantage. Given this is a none issue for me, what am I likely to gain from converting?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Depends - if you go for something exotic like American Classic hubs, Stans rims and a light tyre you'll save a heap of weight; but to be honest if I didn't get punctures on my pre-tubeless set up I wouldn't have bothered. But to ride for years without a puncture - that's good enough reason right there. Hope this helps.
Posted 5 months ago # -
MarkyG82 - Member
You guys seem to champion the puncture resistance as the main advantage. Given this is a none issue for me, what am I likely to gain from converting?
If you do it right, quite a lot of weight saving. I've not had a slime tube recently but I weighed an old one I had lying around, 400 grams. Vs 60g~ of sealant.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Always like running low pressures on my tyres which resulted in a lot of nip punctures. The last straw was three in the space of 5 minutes one day in the lakes. Converted to tubeless ( albeit the " cheapo" ghetto method ) 12 months ago and haven't had a single flat. Able to run even lower pressures ( 20f,23r) without any worries of nip punctures.
Posted 5 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
