I’ve been running tubeless wheels in one form or another now for over 12 months. I’ll not go into the whole setup process as that’s been well documented on here and elsewhere.
Now, I’m not a weight weenie by any stretch of the imagination but I do keep an eye on the weights of my bikes, and like to save weight where there are large savings to be had as long as performance isn’t compromised etc.
I’ll not go into all the different types of tyres I have used, but what is interesting is the different set up scenarios and their weights. Forgive me if everyone already knows this, but it strikes me that there is a lot of confusion about. I for one have only just managed to get my head around it all.
Here are my findings so far (all weights are approx and based on a standard XC 2.1ish tyre).
Scenario 1 - Non tubeless rim
Non tubeless tyre = 500g. Tube = 200g
Total = 700g
Like – Simplicity, cost.
Dislike – Punctures, snakebites at lower pressures.
Scenario 2 - Non tubeless rim
Non tubeless tyre = 500g. Rubber Rim Strip = 100g, Solution = 50g
Total = 650g
Like – Weight, no punctures, lower pressures.
Dislike – Sidewall rips
Scenario 3 - Non tubeless rim
Tubeless Tyre = 700g. Rubber Rim Strip = 100g. Solution = 50g
Total = 850g
Like – No punctures, lower pressures, strong sidewalls.
Dislike – Weight
Scenario 4 - Tubeless rim
Tubeless Tyre = 700g. Solution = 50g
Total = 750g
Like – No punctures, lower pressures, strong sidewalls.
Dislike – Maybe weight but it’s minimal
Scenario 5 - Tubeless rim
Non tubeless Tyre = 500g. Solution = 50g
Total = 550g
Like – Weight, no punctures, lower pressures.
Dislike – Sidewall rips
Scenario 6 - Tubeless rim
Tubeless Tyre = 700g
Total = 700g
Like – Weight, lower pressures.
Dislike – Punctures
I’ve personally tried pretty much all of these scenarios. Since running tubeless I’ve been puncture free. I had tried Scenario 5 for a while and the weight saving was an advantage but I kept ripping sidewalls despite playing around with pressures etc. I also had case recently where a tyre deformed quite badly and kept blowing off the rim. Scary stuff.
For the last few weeks I’ve been running scenario 4. I seem to have found the perfect compromise. Obviously I’m puncture free, but the UST tyres seem a lot more robust. I’ve just spent a few days in the lakes and I no longer cringe when hitting any rocks for fear of ripping the sidewall. I know it’s one the heaviest options but its only by 50g.
Obviously I know everyone’s abilities are different and it may be just my riding style, but I’m sure there are others out there with similar issues that this may help.
GEEK!
*hurls bricks*
Ha ha, I did'nt set out to come up with all of that honest, it just happend over time.
I use scenario 5. No punctures, never ripped a sidewall. Maybe I don't hit nasty rocks hard enough but it works for me.
Have to admit that I couldn't be arsed to actually read your whole post but I thought the whole tubeless thing was about stopping pinch flats and enhancing ride quality rather than weight reduction?
It's a good survey but you are missing a couple of points:
1) Non tubeless wheels and tyres are lots cheaper, in fact zero cost as I already own some.
2) 500g is a fairly light tyre for hard use IMO. A 700g tyre, tubeless or non-tubeless will have have fewer sidewall problems.
So for me, Scenario 2 with a more suitable tyre is perfect.
I confess to still using scenario 5 on my hardtail which I use around where I live but it's quite tame with no sharp rocks etc.
As soon as I hit a trail centre or a rocky area I may as well take my wallet with me as I know I'll my calling at the local bike shop for a new tyre.
I should mention that I'm 6ft 3 and weigh 15 stone. It probably has alot to do with it.
And lack of ability!
More things you're missing:
Tubeless rims weight more (if you're talking proper tubeless as opposed to Stans with yellow tape).
No mention of sidewall rips for scenario 1 where it should be just as much of an issue.
100g for a rim strip what the blinking flip are you using? you are also forgetting the weight saving of a tubless rim, stans rims will also save a lot of rotational weight over a normal rim, so overall weight saving is more than just the tyre and solution. Nice and geeky, but actual wheel build weight inlcuding rims etc... would be more accurate. 😀
Have to admit that I couldn't be arsed to actually read your whole post but I thought the whole tubeless thing was about stopping pinch flats and enhancing ride quality rather than weight reduction?
Yes but in some cases theres a massive weight increase which may interest some people.
1) Non tubeless wheels and tyres are lots cheaper, in fact zero cost as I already own some.
2) 500g is a fairly light tyre for hard use IMO. A 700g tyre, tubeless or non-tubeless will have have fewer sidewall problems.
I must admit cost is a big factor for people with existing wheels. I guess it may influence new purchases though.
Granted 500g is light, but I guess you could just add 200g to all scenarios for heavier duty tyres.
This is usually me:
Scenario - Non tubeless rim
Tough Non tubeless tyre = 760g. Tube = 160g
Total = 920g
Like – Simplicity, cost, strong sidewalls.
Dislike – weight.
100g for a rim strip what the blinking flip are you using
In Mistral's defence, he's only using it on non-tubeless rims and I'm guessing it's a split 20" inner tube incl. valve.
Factor in the weight of a pair of plyers!
Punctures are so infrequent that, as I found on the last ride, when you get one and try to remove the valve to get a tube in, the nut on the valve has almost siezed.
Plyers are the answer (or a rock and a screwdriver, which is what we resorted to!)
By the way, you are very much a weight weenie. 😉
Tubeless rims weight more (if you're talking proper tubeless as opposed to Stans with yellow tape).
My findings are based on some Stan's Flow and Roval Traversee rims for the tubeless rims and Mavic 717's for the non tubeless ones.
Factor in the weight of a pair of plyers!
Good point. I thought it was just me, but they were a bugger to unscrew with cold wet hands.
Good summary!
I like to change tyres a lot though, and I'm finding the tubeless thing a a real faff.
200g is a porky inner tube?
I’ve just spent a few days in the lakes and I no longer cringe when hitting any rocks for fear of ripping the sidewall. I know it’s one the heaviest options but its only by 50g.
This is not an appropriate comparison then is it. You cant compare tyres that will rip with tyres that wont. A more sensible comparison would be to compare the protection version and UST versions of the same tyre. Eg. RaceKing Protection 580g, RaceKing UST 700g. Also, a stans rubber rim strip is only 56g (max) and the yellow tape is lighter than a rim tape youd need with a tube (the weight of which you didnt include).
This is not an appropriate comparison then is it. You cant compare tyres that will rip with tyres that wont. A more sensible comparison would be to compare the protection version and UST versions of the same tyre. Eg. RaceKing Protection 580g, RaceKing UST 700g. Also, a stans rubber rim strip is only 56g (max) and the yellow tape is lighter than a rim tape youd need with a tube (the weight of which you didnt include).
I purposely didn’t mention the tyres as everyone has preferences. My experiences were UST and non UST tyres between two manufacturers. Both marketed the UST versions to have a stronger sidewall.
I did'nt mention rim tape as its fairly light anyway. The weights are approx and I appreciate other peoples tyres, rubber strips, inner tubes etc will be slightly different.
Stan's Flow and Roval Traversee rims for the tubeless rims
They're not tubeless rims though, merely easier to convert than a 717 because they were designed with tubeless use in mind.
The whole 'scenario' thing is flawed, a UST tyre/rim (scenario 4-ish) is generally the heaviest combination, and that's the one you say you're using!
Modified to use same rim throughout and more similar tyres (ie not comparing light thin tyres with thicker stronger UST tyres)
Scenario 1 - Normal
Stans rim + (velox)rim tape
Raceking protection = 580g. Tube = 200g
Total = 780g
Scenario 2 - Tubeless conversion with rubber rimstrip
Stans rim + yellow rim tape
Raceking protection = 580g. Rubber Rim Strip = 56g, Solution = 50g
Total = 686g
Scenario 5 - Tubeless conversion on Tubeless ready rim
Stans rim + yellow rim tape
Raceking protection = 580g. Solution = 50g
Total = 630g
Scenario 3 - Full tubeless setup with rimstrip for extra security
Stans rim + yellow rim tape
Raceking UST = 700g. Rubber Rim Strip = 56g. Solution = 50g
Total = 806g
Scenario 4 - Standard tubeless setup with solution for extra thorn protection
Stans rim + yellow rim tape
Raceking UST = 700g. Solution = 50g
Total = 750g
Scenario 6 - Standard tubeless setup
Stans rim + yellow rim tape
Raceking UST = 700g
Total = 700g
So, lightest solution is 630g, tho this is a normal tyre with no rubber rimstrip so liable to burp/come off the rim. Second lightest 686g has a rubber rim strip, so a good viable solution (what most people use). Next is 700g and is where tubeless setups started, before everyone used latex, a viable option tho as you can always add latex at a later date or run with only a small amount (much less required as sidlewalls dont need sealed like with standard tyres)
The whole 'scenario' thing is flawed, a UST tyre/rim (scenario 4-ish) is generally the heaviest combination, and that's the one you say you're using!
I do mention that is one of the heaviest options in my conclusion, but I personally found it the best compromise for strength.
It just goes to show that the weight difference isn't really that important compared with other factors. Which I think agrees with what most people on here who run tubeless solutions keep saying 🙂
Ah, you missed the point where latex dries up a bit and is lighter due to evaporation but it still seals the non-UST tyre. Saves 20g.
I run 400g tyres on a 'tubeless' (Roval) rim with a dash of sealant. Very few punctures and very light. Work for me. Admittedly fit sommat slightly tougher if I'm going somewhere rocky though.
What about 'Super Ghetto' tubeless? Rimstip (Just tape) is about 25g......if that.
🙂
you forget option-X
WGAS? I run tubes on some bikes and tubeless on others, tubeless is better, but generaly a faff. The cost/benifit is about even IMO.
From experience...............
Conti UST tires looked like frankenstine by the time i'd stiched and glued all the cuts back together, gave up after abotu three months and more punctures than i used to get with tubes.
I'd probably go tubeless again with my summer play bike (2.35 HR front and 2.35 HR-semi slick rear) as it tends to handle those tires well in anything from dry and dusty to muddy.
The winter bike will probably always be tubes, unless I can pick up some cheep wheels to run some dryer tires and mud spikes.
I use scenario 2. Not noticeably lighter, but miles more grip, and no pinch flats so far.
Your tubes in scenario 1 are a bit chunky don't you think? I mean, I've been using Schwalbe XXlights for about 6 months, they're about 100 grams and don't seem any more fragile than regular inner tubes, for example. 200g is above average I reckon.
My scales show my 20" split tube to weigh 50g each. Not tried it on drug measuring scales yet, if I do I'll let you know 🙂
I like to change tyres a lot though, and I'm finding the tubeless thing a a real faff.
& that's why tubeless never works for me either.