- This topic has 53 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by Toasty.
-
£40 for a tube!
-
njee20Free MemberPosted 11 years ago
But no matter how tough they are, they will still puncture, unlike tubeless. Yes I know tubeless can burp or puncture if you slash your tyre but it still will cost you a lot less than £40 to sort out.
Tubeless can still puncture, and if you slash your tyre you slash your tyre, you can repair this tube, and you have to replace the tyre regardless. What an odd analogy 😕
stevewhyteFree MemberPosted 11 years agoOh no the old rotational weight chestnut is rearing its head, some of you guys need to stop reading internet forums.
You really have to wake up to the fact that when you save weight on a bike of a few hundred grams its make sod all difference, regardless of the weight being on the wheels or grips or tyres etc.
Looks at the weight of the fatty who is riding the bike, even at 70kgs the rider is a much bigger influence on the bike than anything. By a factor of 350 when talking about these tubes.
How many on here could still lose at least 5kgs. Do that before you start spending £40 on a tube just to save weight.
Most sensible rider buy gear on its function and durability not weight.
njee20Free MemberPosted 11 years agoIf you read the thread you’ll see that the claims are that these tubes are more durable than butyl. Although that’s questionable.
Should someone buy some Halfords £20 wheels rather than Enve carbon ones, because the lighter Enves are not functional or durable? Is lighter never better? Again, I assume your bike weighs 70lbs? Shouldn’t have wasted your money on that Cervelo eh? You’d do better to ride an Apollo and stay off the pies.
You’re commenting on stuff that you have no idea about, and looking silly.
philwarren11Free MemberPosted 11 years agoIf you didnt have tubless ready rims and tyres im guessing the cost to swap them to tubless ready would be way more than a set of these tubes?
cookeaaFull MemberPosted 11 years agoWell they’re hardly likely to tell you they’re more delicate than Butyl are they, for £40 I’d be hoping for them to be as near as damnit bulletproof… But they are still rubber tubes, they will inevitably pick up more flats than UST.
I think it comes down to the old “cost benefits” thing, if after spending £80 on two magic inner tubes (Stiil sound ridiculous) you’ve not actually managed to significantly reduce the likelihood of punctures occuring (and punctures cost far more time in a race than lugging about 200g more rotational mass) then that reduced weight advantage is pretty easily negated by a thorn or two…
UST being 90% (My own estimate) less likely to get a flat in a race looks the more sensible investment then, simply because the rider that gets to the end of a race without having to stop and fix a flat will almost certainly finish first, even if he’s had to lug a whopping 200g more around the whole time…
Gambling on reliabilty for marginal weight loss is a Mugs game, “to finish first, first you have to finish” and all that…
brakesFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI definitely think that if I lost 100g off the tyres/ tubes I’d notice it more than if I left the bag of Haribo in my pocket at home.
IF accelerating/ decelerating a rotating object requires more effort if there is more mass at the edges of the object then it will make a difference as mountain biking requires a lot of accelerating and decelerating of the wheels.stuff that you have no idea about, and looking silly.
take it easy chief.
njee20Free MemberPosted 11 years agoBut they are still rubber tubes, they will inevitably pick up more flats than UST.
But UST is heavy, people will be prepared to make that trade off, again I’ll use the tub analogy – these are half the price of a reasonable tub, and should be more puncture resistant.
But they’re an unknown quantity, you can’t just say “they’re worse than butyl tubes”, you don’t know! They’ve been making them for years, so they’re obviously on to something! If you read the blurb they’re tougher than a DH tube for thorn punctures, which probably makes them more puncture resistant than a lightweight tubeless tyre.
I wouldn’t go back to UST again, Stan’s conversions are vastly superior IMO.
gofasterstripesFree MemberPosted 11 years agoFrom
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ARolling_Racers_-_Moment_of_inertia.ogvwhich is on the right of the page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia
[as I already stated]
“This final result reveals that the mass and radius of the object are irrelevant, and what determines the rate of acceleration is the geometric distribution of their mass, which is represented by the value of k. Additionally, we observe that objects with larger values of k will accelerate more slowly.”
i.e. if you place the same mass on the outside of a wheel as on the body of non-rotating part [or in the very center, pretty much the same] it will have more effect on acceleration.
In other words, the tubes will reduce the F[orce] required to A[ccelerate] the total M[ass] of the bike and ride as the F is F=MA and the A is both the Linear and the Rotational Acceleration. The Rotational acceleration is a function if Rotational Inertia, which has a non-linear relationship with the distribution, and value of,the mass. It is infact GREATER than linear, buy a substantial margin, and so this is why the 100g saved, will reduce the total F required for a given A more in the location in the outside of the wheel/tyre than in the frame/rider/pies.
For my next trick I will prove Black=White and likely get killed on a zebra crossing.
ToastyFull MemberPosted 11 years agoI’d rather buy those tubes than a top end cassette to be honest.
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=91007&gclid=CKz7iZblx7UCFZDKtAodWUcAAg
(I love that the 9 speed XT one I use is lighter than that anyway 🙄 )
Depending on where you’re riding, tubes can last for years.
As soon as light, expensive components start getting spoken about, every quickly changes the topic to fat people and poo.
njee20Free MemberPosted 11 years agoWhatever you say Njee20 as long as it make you happy.
It does! But why are you still here? I’m struggling with your useful contribution!?
Love that as soon as light, expensive components start getting spoken about, every quickly changes the topic to fat people and poo.
Indeed, and anything light = fragile and silly!
These could be a step too far, but equally they could be rather good! IIRC the problems I’ve heard about are failures on the joins rather than ‘normal’ punctures.
aracerFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI definitely think that if I lost 100g off the tyres/ tubes I’d notice it more than if I left the bag of Haribo in my pocket at home.
IF accelerating/ decelerating a rotating object requires more effort if there is more mass at the edges of the object then it will make a difference as mountain biking requires a lot of accelerating and decelerating of the wheels.That 100g is 0.1% of the mass of a typical rider/bike combo. If it’s all at the outer edge of the wheel then taking into account rotational inertia it means you’ll accelerate 0.2% faster. I very much doubt you could notice 0.2% difference in acceleration in a proper double blind test (IIRC a difference has to be at least 5% for the average human to be able to detect it).
gofasterstripes – we’re not disputing that rotational inertia of your wheels has an effect on how fast your bike accelerates, just that it’s not 16x and whether it’s actually at all significant.
stevewhyteFree MemberPosted 11 years agoaracer, not worth the bother, it clear is worth it to some folk. That 0.2% gain just turns you into wiggins. 😆
Hopefully common sense will prevail for the majority. Being STW i dont hold my breath.
ToastyFull MemberPosted 11 years agoSo many ways of blowing £40 for far less savings. Titanium anything for a start, QRs/pedal axles/saddle rails/bolts.
The topic ‘£40 for a tube!’ is closed to new replies.
