Please could somebody explain the difference between UST, TL and ‘standard’ tyres? What do you need to do to use each type on a tubeless rim? Thanks.

Fairly good summary of it all here…

http://www.utahmountainbiking.com/goodies/go-tubeless.htm

UST tyres are like car tyres, in that they are not porous (or not very porous), have a tight bead to fit on the sealed rim, and are heavier and thicker walled.

Tubeless Ready tyres have the tighter beads of a UST tyre, but thinner carcass of a normal tyre, and are still porous unless used with a sealant. In many peoples eyes, this is a good half way house.

Normal tyres have a looser bead, and lighter porous carcass in general (though differs from manufacturer to manufacturer how loose and how porous).

If you want 100% reliability, no matter whether you’ve got UST rims, stans rims, rimstrips, or ghetto method, use UST tyres… They are the most reliable, but they are heavier.

If you want lighter weight, then Tubeless ready tyres make a lot of sense.

If you want to run your existing tyres cos you like them, then by all means, go ahead. Just be prepared that some work better than others when converted tubeless. I’ve tried lots and lots of tyres, found some better than others for this, but even Maxxis can still be burped quite easily I’ve found. I’m gonna stick with either UST or tubeless ready tyres from now on myself.

Just a quick heads up that the Continental Tubeless Rubber Queens are as porous as swiss cheese and mine couldn´t be run without loads of sealant added.

If it´s a choice I´d say go for Tubeless ready.

Just a quick heads up that the Continental Tubeless Rubber Queens are as porous as swiss cheese and mine couldn´t be run without loads of sealant added.

Interesting, I found just the opposite.. straight on, no sealant, bead seated and air in. That was trail kings though… perhaps there’s a gender difference?

On the flip side, i tried to run non-tubless Baron 2.3’s as tubeless.. like you say, porous as Swiss cheese. Gave up after I p*ssed half of my sealant out the sidewalls without it setting so I went back to tubes..

As I understand it, UST was developed by Mavic, Hutchinson and Michelin.. so, to use ‘ust’ you have to meet their specific standard and presumably be licensed to do so.

Other systems may work just as effectively, e.g. Conti tubless on DT rims.
The term UST only related to meeting that specific standard, not the construction of the tyre.
DT Swiss’ Tricon rim has an un punctured inner rim (no spoke holes) but isn’t classified as a UST rim..

Mavic holds a patent on a specific rim-bed shape and the corresponding tire-bead shape, which it licenses to other companies. To ensure compatibility across brands, however, a product must be certified before it can bear the UST label. According to Maxime Brunand, Mavic’s product manager, an independent lab in Belgium is responsible for granting “technical approval” of products (tires and/or rims). Upon passing the lab’s tests, Mavic grants a five-year license for that product to bear the UST logo.

http://www.bicycling.com/mountainbikecom/bikes-gear/pssssst

So, really any tyre should mount on a tubless rim.. UST rims with UST tyres with both meeting the UST standard should presumably work best as they should bead perfectly.
However, no reason you couldn’t have equally as good results with a tubeless rim or UST/tubeless rim stripped standard rim with tubeless tyres.. or even some standard tyres.. Add a little or a lot of sealant depending on how good your tyre seats to the rim.. if you need lots of sealant, then you’d probably better look for another combination.

Interesting…. Anyone had experience of Shimano tubeless rims? I’m thinking of my first foray into the confusing world of tubeless, and my choice will likely be the new Shimano SLX level MT66 wheels.

Shimano list these as “Rim type: UST” and “UST tubeless compatible” so I’m hoping they’ll work perfectly with UST tyres, but anyone had experience with Shimano’s UST rims before? Thanks.

Just a quick heads up that the Continental Tubeless Rubber Queens are as porous as swiss cheese and mine couldn´t be run without loads of sealant added.

Another one who’s found the total opposite. In use, my UST Rubber Queen has been about the most reliable tubeless tyre I’ve run. But then my non UST Rubber Queen is as porous as a porous thing, and it just keeps going down!

There’s about 250g weight difference between the two though, that’s a heck of a lot of extra rubber in the carcass to keep the air in! It works well though…

perthmtb, no experience personally, know a few people who have run Shimano tubeless wheels though, and in use seem no different to Mavic UST rims. Which in my book can only be a good thing. Expensive for spares though mind if you ding one!

Opposite here too. I put some RQ UST’s on a few weeks back ready for the Alps. Haven’t had time to put sealant in yet and my girlfriend confirms they are still at high pressure. Used them a few years back and had no issues with leaks then either.

Maybe the person having issues with the RQ’s has damaged the bead or something.

I’ve used 3 brands tyres tubeless.

Continental gravity UST
Specialized purgatory and eskars (2bliss)
Maxxis high rollers (2.35, sinlge sply, kevlar bead)

Only the expensive ‘ust’ tyres ever gave problems. always flatting, sidewalls tearing etc etc. One of the high rollers worked for ages and was swapped on and off several times for other tyres with no problems, but won’t work following a recent tyre swap, suspect the bead has some damage and the tyre itself has too many holes to seal effectively. The 2bliss tyres have so far been flawless.

Thanks for all the replies. I’m running TL Nobby Nics on my 29er with sealant at the moment but wanted to understand the other options.

Just gone tubeless (a week ago or so) on Conti tyres.

Stan’s Flow rims with Stan’s tape and valves (no rim strip).

Rubber Queen UST on the front – went straight up first time with track pump (no soap) and has stayed up.

X King Protection on the rear. went straight up but very porous. Took two rounds of soaping, reseating and sealant before it stayed up. Lasted two 20km rides before burping itself to flatness. Soaped, reseated, resealed and ridden and now seems to be holding up OK. Time will tell.

slainte ➡ rob

X King Protection on the rear. went straight up but very porous. Took two rounds of soaping, reseating and sealant before it stayed up. Lasted two 20km rides before burping itself to flatness. Soaped, reseated, resealed and ridden and now seems to be holding up OK. Time will tell.

Good to know.. I am about to mount Mountain King II – 2.4 protection on my Tricons for my Spark rather than the bigger knobbed 2.2 RQ tubeless…
I suspect I might find the same issues 🙁
Guess that’s the reason I should be using the tubeless version and not trying to save 230g