[Closed] Tubeless weight saving?

Bugger all....by the time you've put in rim tape & allowed for the extra weight of a tubeless ready tyre + sealant.

I run tubeless so i can drop the tyre pressure more reliably and for the way it avoids stopping every five minutes for thorn punctures.

Stans Rim tape must be lighter than normal stuff if anything surely...?

I use Maxxis EXO tyres (same as I used with tubes) and I find they work just as well as the tubeless LUST equivalents.

Essentially - Even with the fluid I save quite a bit of weight on top of all the other benefits

Stans rim tape is very light, I use the same tyres as if I used tubes. Fluid vs tubes depends on what tubes.
Final result is better performance, weight is secondary.

Hmm, may be worth me considering just lighter tyres and tubes if theres not a great saving to be made.

The performance is much better and the puncture proof bit is great. Ride the bike that works and put the scales down 😉

On my weight weenie bike I use two layers of insulating tape as rim tape, and Conti Supersonic tubes @ 95g each. Tubeless won't be lighter.

And you'll be very pleased to hear I got a pinch flat last time I used it.

A tyre with Stan's in is lighter than a tubed tyre. Plus, you can run lower pressures, seal punctures and there's faster spin up/down time and less rotational mass meaning easier to keep going. OK these might all seem minimal things but it all helps. Weight loss slight but overall benefits make it worth it.

I'm a weight weenie. I've been running tubeless for 13 years I think (since before kits were available when the only option was ghetto).

Don't go tubeless to save weight. Plenty of other reasons to do it. but that's not one of them.

My mate has just gone tubeless on his DH wheels. Was running Maxxis DHR2's front and rear with Maxxis Freeride tubes (wheels have fabric rim tape on which, I assume, would be heavier than tubeless tape)

Tyres 1265g each
Tubes 296g each

100ml of Stan's 108g each
Valves 7g each

Before (tyres + tube) 3122g/pair
After (tyres, valves and sealant) 2760g/pair

Weight saved = 362g which is a fair bit of rotational mass.

I have to disagree - there are many benefits to tubeless and weight [b]IS[/b] one of them.

Tubes are heavy if you want ones that have even the slightest chance of lasting longer than a week of tough hard riding and don't cost the earth to buy.

I don't just save the weight of 2 tubes either as 80% of the time (i.e. when riding my local trails) I don't bother with a spare....or pump or repair kit.

Only time I need these is if I go somewhere really rocky like Bike Park Wales where there is a chance of cutting a tyre....or on long and unknown routes where I could be many miles from the car.

On my weight weenie bike I use two layers of insulating tape as rim tape, and Conti Supersonic tubes @ 95g each. Tubeless won't be lighter.

Yes it will as I don't use 95g of sealant in each tyre.
Realise it is splitting hairs as probably only 60g lighter than running Supersonic tubes.

The time saved by losing 60g may not matter but the hours spent fixing punctures will...

Don't go tubeless to save weight. Plenty of other reasons to do it. but that's not one of them.

Aracer is right.

If you do tubeless to save weight, you'll wind up with fragile tyres that lack the required sidewall support and protection. Granted, you'll have bragging rights but the fragility isn't worth it.

Every lightweight tube I've ever used punctured on a regular basis.

On my weight weenie bike I use two layers of insulating tape as rim tape, and Conti Supersonic tubes @ 95g each. Tubeless won't be lighter.

And you'll be very pleased to hear I got a pinch flat last time I used it.

+1

But it depends on the setup.

I use electrical tape in most wheels, just keep adding tape until it's thick enough to seal against the tyre (can take a whole roll in some wheels ~30g). So valve + gunk + tape ~ lightweight tube.

The advantage is that it's then as puncture resistant as a much tougher tube.

If you wanted XC racer light then stans tape (not the strips), alloy valve and no sealant would be <20g.

My fat bike's at the other end of the scale, tubeless setup was 200-250g. But it is better than tubes in terms of grip and puncture resistance.

Initially you might save a few grams by going tubeless. But if you keep the same tyres on for a bit, catch the sidewalls or have a few punctures, then there's only some much the fluid can do to help repair. You can then either take the tyres off, clean it all up, and put a small amount of fluid back in to maintain the lower weight, or as I do, put another little bottle of Stans in there.

I think I've got 4 bottles in the front and 6 in the back. I think the tyres may well be knackered, but they still have tread on them so I'm not throwing them out until they have been killed to death.

scrumfled - Member
Bugger all....by the time you've put in rim tape & allowed for the extra weight of a tubeless ready tyre + sealant.

Not much difference between stan's tape and regular rim tape. And most recent/decent tyres are tubeless ready, there;s no weight penalty there.

[quote=zippykona ]Every lightweight tube I've ever used punctured on a regular basis.

Yep, which is why I went tubeless. Saved no weight doing so, hence my comment above, but the advantages are huge.

kerley - Member
On my weight weenie bike I use two layers of insulating tape as rim tape, and Conti Supersonic tubes @ 95g each. Tubeless won't be lighter.
Yes it will as I don't use 95g of sealant in each tyre.
Realise it is splitting hairs as probably only 60g lighter than running Supersonic tubes.

The time saved by losing 60g may not matter but the hours spent fixing punctures will...

Don't forget to add the weight of the tubeless valves as well , I bet there's nothing in it at the end of the day .

I don't just save the weight of 2 tubes either as 80% of the time (i.e. when riding my local trails) I don't bother with a spare....or pump or repair kit.

Only time I need these is if I go somewhere really rocky like Bike Park Wales where there is a chance of cutting a tyre....or on long and unknown routes where I could be many miles from the car.

Must be great to know exactly where and when you are going to get a puncture

 

Of course it saves weight going tubeless!

My Spectral recently arrived - with tubes fitted.I don't have exact weights to hand but ...

Out of the box without pedals it weighed 28. something pounds

With pedals it weighed 29. a bit pounds

I removed the (very lightweight) tubes it came with, added some valves (the wheels already had tubeless tape fitted, but I needed an extra layer on the back to get the tyre to inflate), fitted valves and added 80ml of sealant per wheel

The tyres were are the same TR Maxxis the bike came with

The bike now weighs 28. something

weight saved . If you aren't saving some weight going tubeless you are doing it wrong

If you aren't saving some weight going tubeless you are doing it wrong

Depends on if the tyres work (many of the light weight ones are too porous) and how much sealant it takes to get it going.**

**Actual savings may vary

measuring more than 28 something and 29 and a bit might quantify it to more that 15g...

using gorrila tape and DT swiss valves I saved 300g on my boys 24 inch wheels. over 300g on my bro in-laws 26er. mine are UST wheels so I save more cause no rim tape lol

weight saving depends on the tubes you use.

it weighed 28. something pounds

With pedals it weighed 29. a bit pounds

The bike now weighs 28. something

😀 That has made my day. Bravo

Weight saving depends too much on what you have and how you do it. If you're using and OK with a 100g tube then you'll not save anything, might add a little. But that's not usually a useful comparison, any sort of hard use requires a tougher and heavier setup for tubes, so the weight difference soon stacks up.

Not all rims'll work with just tape, mind, it also depends on the shape of the bed. (just inflating doesn't mean they work!)

Don't forget to add the weight of the tubeless valves as well , I bet there's nothing in it at the end of the day .

There'll always be something,

Valves are 5-7g
Tape is between nothing and 30-50g depending on width, number of layers, requirement for a strop rather than just tape etc.
Sealent is 50g for a normal tyre.

The lightest tubes are ~95g, an average tube is 150-200g. So you're saving between 50g and 100g, maybe 150g if the tubes were towards the upper end.

The only place it doesn't save weight is with something like conti supersonic tyres and latex tubes Vs normal tyres setup tubeless. Where we can all agree that the tubeless tyre is going to have far more benefit than just being light anyway.

Must be great to know exactly where and when you are going to get a puncture

you are right its bloody brilliant.

http://www.vitalmtb.com/photos/features/THE-JARED-GRAVES-INTERVIEW,8652/Slideshow,0/sspomer,2
Slide 13 - Graves on Weight saving (not the joke about the plate but just after that)

IMO the weight saving may or may not be marginal, it aint a lot though.

Lower tyre pressures is only a benefit if you either like squirmy tyres or ran them stupidly high before.

IMO the real benefit is the lack of pinch & thorn punctures.
I would do it for that alone even if the overall weight was more.

scrumfled - Member
Bugger all....by the time you've put in rim tape & allowed for the extra weight of a tubeless ready tyre + sealant.

I run tubeless so i can drop the tyre pressure more reliably and for the way it avoids stopping every five minutes for thorn punctures.

+1 to this... I'd tend to think of tubeless weight saving "Nil-sum" argument looking at like for like tyres.

Hmm, may be worth me considering just lighter tyres and tubes if theres not a great saving to be made.

If its all about saving weight then probably yes, but the likelihood of a flat probably increases (IMO/IME), a marginally heavier bike is happily offset by less time spent fixing flats and getting more grip/traction/comfort out of the tyres, but it's a personally preference thing...

Your third option might be to run "Ghetto tubeless" with a Non-UST, super light tyre, it won't be quite as airtight perhaps, and may not seat as easily, but it can and has been done before...

NEWSFLASH

ok - Ive found the envelope I wrote the weights down on

out of box, no pedals = 28.6 lbs
with pedals = 29.3 lbs

tubeless = 28.7 lbs (with a bottle cage added too) - so 0.6lb saved, or approx 270g.

all this stuff about heavier tyres is a red herring IMO. If your tyres are too light and delicate they are too light and delicate. I'm not sure what being tubeless or not has to do with it, they will get torn either way

there might be a small weight saving with tubeless conversion on a mountain bike

but for me?

its all about reliability of inflated tires, and ride quality

electrical tape, then tubeless tape, then tubeless valve cores

couple of cups of Stan's No-Tubes, usually Specialized Control 2-Bliss tires

no drama, no fuss, no tire-roll

[img] [/img]

inflate twice a week to 30psi, as most tubeless conversions lose a little pressure after a few days

tires generally wear out, before the Stan's solution dries out, in our temperate climate

I worked for the original UK's Stan's No-Tubes importer for 5+ years, so have done 100's of conversions 😉

I have to disagree - there are many benefits to tubeless and weight IS one of them.

But yeah for more normal tyres with tr ready rims (ie you don't have to add rim strips or metres of tape to pad the rim out) you should be able to lose some weight, I reckon over 50g per wheel, more if you're skinny with the sealant.

*ranging from very slight faff to pain in the arse levels depending on components and skill.

I am bordering on weightweenie and the faff (zero) of fitting tubeless tyres far outweighs the number of punctures I used to get.
However, agree that if you get no punctures when running 95g tubes then just do that as even with little faff fitting a tubeless tube is easier to fit.

Tubeless does work best with some more sturdy tyres, most of the numbers being bragged about above ignore tyres.

I changed my rims and tyres and just went tubeless, whole bike is now 400g heavier 🙂 But I have better tyres and wider rims that look better!

It's also a bit of a fallacy to suggest you don't get pinch flats running tubeless.

Grant, you have no tube to pinch, but instead you get to enjoy pinching the tyre sidewall right up by the bead, where the sealant never gets to & won't therefore seal.

Which is rather annoying.

Yeah, but to be fair that's much harder to do than a tube pinch.

It's also a bit of a fallacy to suggest you don't get pinch flats running tubeless.

It's just better.

Like the Graves interview, build the bike that works for you and doesn't fail. If you try and build to a weight for the only reason of weight something will get compromised. I saw Bec Henderson & Dan Mconnel kiss a massive pay day good bye after having to pull out of a race due to shredding tyres.

If you [s]aren't[/s] are saving some weight going tubeless you [s]are[/s] where doing it wrong

FTFY

dirtydog - Member
If you aren't are saving some weight going tubeless you are where doing it wrong
FTFY

Why? Where is the weight coming from? And don't say "heavier tyres". You pick a tyre that's tough enough for where you ride, its irrelevant if your tubeless or not

Here's a breakdown...

Tubed setup 2x Maxxis 2.5 Minions @ 860 grams each, 2x Conti MTB light tubes at 130 grams each, cloth rim tape x2 15 gram each? = 2010 grams

Tubeless 2x Maxxis 2.5 Minions @ 860 grams each, 2x 60ml sealant per tyre (as per Stans instructions) @ 120grams per tyre , 2x valves @ 15 grams pair, 2x Stans tape @ 7 gram each = 1989 grams.

So a grand saving of approx 20 grams.

I only use 2.2 tyres and only use 50ml of sealant so I save more like 140 grams.

As many people have stated, it is not for the weight saving - that is a side benefit.

Stans sealant isn't 1g for 1ml. 120ml is about 90g. I was surprised, I thought it'd be heavier than water.

Good post though otherwise and highlights why people get different results- on a bike with minions (assuming I was riding it like it needs minions) I'd have to run too high pressure to make a conti light work. So I'd have either a big tradeoff of performance, or of weight. I used specialized standards when I use tubes, they're about 220g IIRC and that works alright.

But I'd only put 90ml of sealant in 'em too.