Road Cycling - pros and cons of tubular tires vs. clincher

hi,
great forum you have here. stupid newbie question. whats good and bad about tubular tires vs. clinchers. i know a little(started riding in december) but not which is better and also have any of you heard of these TUFO clincher/tubulars?
http://tufonorthamerica.com/tiretypes.php

Tubulars
Pro
- the lightest practical tubulars will always be lighter than the lightest clincher
- if you flat, you can ride on it for a little longer
- if glued properly and the tire will stay on the rim even if it flats
- ride quality
Con
- costs more (rims, tubulars)
- more difficult to maintain/repatch as an individual without team support on the road
- you could get tire/rim seperation, esp when rims are hot from braking and end up like Beloki.

Clincher
Pro
- cheaper
- more common
- wheels are more common
- easier to patch on the road, no need for gluing, stretching tire, etc

Con
- if you flat, you can't really ride on it
- some say a lower quality ride
- will always be heavier (tube, tire, clincher interface)

The ride quality and weight differences are getting smaller, but will always continue to be there. Esp with carbon wheels - carbon clinchers are more difficult to make... and will be heavier than their carbon tubular rim counterparts.

I've heard of TUFO tubular clinchers... altho I don't see the point of them. Listening to the experiences and advice of others, they only seem to make sense for things like cyclcross... allowing you to run at lower pressure? sorta like a tubeless clincher for MTB. But why use it on a road bike? They're not necessarily lighter, cost a lot more, requires liquid sealant to patch? *shrug* But a lot of people love them so they must offer something - so listen to their input too.

d-new.
Ok, this is right up there with Campy v shimaNo, in terms of controversy.
To set the record straight I ride tubulars almost exclusively so I'm a
bit biased.
first do a seach here for Tubulars there are quite a few threads.

If you flat on a tubular the tire stays on the rim
(usually there are rare cases where you roll a tubular), if you are on a
downhill or riding fast its easier to maintain control. On rare occaisions
you can ride a flatted tubular home and not kill your rims (but I don't
recommend it). This doesn't work with clinchers, you end up with rim on
road which is not a good thing.
Clinchers by design make it easier to repair/replace tubes on the road.
with a Tubular you need to cut threads, repair the tube then sew up the
carcass.
Tubulars are easier to change on the road, break the seal, roll the old
tire off, stretch new tire on center it, pump it up and away you
go (and NEVER go out without spare tubular or repair kit).
Clinchers are cheaper that tubulars. Good tubulars can be very expensive
(I think there is one that is $300 per tire but its a track only tire).
Cheap Clinchers are better than cheap tubulars.
The Tufo tubular clincher is the best of both worlds in terms of
a clincher rim with a beaded tubular tire, btw Tufo's are NOT repairable
if the sealant does not work, sol.
Tubulars do not pinch flat.

I've said enough for now. I'm sure others will chime in shortly
from both sides of the camp.

Marty

I really miss my Chris King hub/Reflex rim tubular wheelset and Zipp 303 tubular because I have been racing/training/riding with my Powertap SL wheels. They are clincher.


hi,
great forum you have here. stupid newbie question. whats good and bad about tubular tires vs. clinchers. i know a little(started riding in december) but not which is better and also have any of you heard of these TUFO clincher/tubulars?
http://tufonorthamerica.com/tiretypes.php

hi,
great forum you have here. stupid newbie question. whats good and bad about tubular tires vs. clinchers. i know a little(started riding in december) but not which is better and also have any of you heard of these TUFO clincher/tubulars?
http://tufonorthamerica.com/tiretypes.php


The above post leaves out the reason I have tubulars on my race bike - they are faster, and you can pump them up to much higher pressures. Of the Pros that I know, I don't know one who rides on clinchers.

I use clinchers for my training bike, because tubulars are too expensive, and too much a pain in the butt (and expensive) to change.

I really like the Tufo tubular clinchers. I like pumpin' my tires up to high psi though.

Compared to tubulars they weigh more, but they don't have the glue problem that supposedly increases rolling resistance due to tire squirm on the tubular rim.

The Tubular clinchers are very easy to mount and I believe safer than a regular clincher during a blow-out at high speed.

thanks shinybaldy,
thanks for the info

I like tubulars. They ride better, and very easy to change if you get a flat. I just carry a spare (already stretched), and some glue. You can also ride when they go flat.

thanks everyone for your imput!!!

Note that Beloki's tire did not roll off. this has been an issue that has been discussed extensively and if it did roll, he would have just slid and laid down the bike and he would not have landed the way he did.

General riding - clinchers.
Racers - tubulars.

Hi Folks,

Another newbie question about tubulars. I am 6ft tall, 185lbs and race CAT3. Always have used clinchers in the past, but recently bought my first set of carbon tubulars. Do you think there is any danger of the tires rolling off in fast, hard corners due to the fact that I am heavier than the average racer - assuming the tires are glue properly?

Thanks,
Rob

There's always a chance, but not if they're mounted correctly.

I ride a set of box-section (ambrosio f20 and an old gel280) tubulars in crits and a set of deep carbon tubulars in road races. For crits, I prefer the round, lower profile of good tubulars for cornering, plus they are light as hell and spin up fast. Tubulars make for a much lighter wheel, they are more comfortable, and "feel" faster.

I train exclusively on clinchers, because both of my tubular setups are race-only, very light wheelsets and because carrying an extra tub with you on a training ride is just a pain the as$. Plus I train with a powertap laced to a clincher rim.

A better compromise, IMO, are the so-called "open tubulars" like the Deda Corsa RS or Vittoria Open Corsa CX. These are clinchers that mount on clincher rims, but the tread side is built like a tubular. They have a high tpi (threads per inch) of 290, and you can run a high psi - up to 145. If you ride-compare them side by side to other tires on the same bike/wheels you'll never run anything else - if you can afford them. They're not cheap and they don't last very long. Here's a couple of links:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2005/reviews/dedatre_rs_corsa
http://www.bikeforums.net/archive/index.php/t-378247.html

And here's a cut-away pix:
http://www.wiggle.co.uk/images/vittoria%20open%20corsa%20evo%20cx.jpg

Hell, I can hardly get them off when I want to. I happen to use glue on my Zipp 999 set which are on my time trial bike, but I use Tufo extreme tape on my road bike to mount my tubulars. I changed a tire yesterday, and I finally had to cut the damn thing off it was so hard to even begin to remove. I can't imagine that these things would ever roll off if mounted properly. I just wish I had a better method to get them off!

Hi Folks,

Another newbie question about tubulars. I am 6ft tall, 185lbs and race CAT3. Always have used clinchers in the past, but recently bought my first set of carbon tubulars. Do you think there is any danger of the tires rolling off in fast, hard corners due to the fact that I am heavier than the average racer - assuming the tires are glue properly?

Thanks,
Rob

No problem

Here in the High desert and Southwest, we have these pesky thorns called "goatheads", They will go ttrough any tire at some point, but Conti Vectrans and Gatorskin and the Armadillos resist them farily well but I still use tufo or stan's sealant. If you ride through broken glass and then through goatheads, there is a grater chance for your tire to be punctured by goatheads before the glass. A glass may tear the thread but a goathead is guaranteed to go through.

I still use tubulars, because ,my bike came with 2 tubular wheelsets and 1 more pair with no freehub body. I use tofus but now using Conti Sptinter Gatorskins and the Vectrans. Most of tofu's work too but you have really to get them inflated at higher PSI.

Here's what I found... My traditional looking wheels Mavic SUP and some really light Campy rims are better at climbing than newer clincher wheels I've tried (no carbon though) . They are also durable and hold their roundness. Plus all the benefits above. As long as I use the conti gators or vectran plus the sealant, I have zero flats most of the season. The only time that the sealant failed are when the threads got cut (this was a cheaper tufo) and if this was a clincher the inner tube would burst out of the hole anyway unless you boot the tire.

Having said that my other bikes have clinchers and I am happy with them as well.

If you dont have a high disposable income don't run tubulars. Clinchers offer a variety of tire sizes that are not offered with tubulars.

Unless you want to pay big bucks you can't get a wider tubular. Tufo tires are crap. I don't care what people say about them. You can't repair a tufo once it is punctured it will leak. The magic sealant might work okay but thats just more $$$

If you aren't racing stick with clinchers. Having a race only set of tubulars is logical. A 20$ clincher will be rounder than a 20$ tubular.

If you want a lighter wheel get tubulars but be prepared to spend big bucks. The main advantage of a tubular is that a flat will have more control because it is fixed to the rim.

open tubulars are clinchers. don't be fooled by the terms

I switched from clincher to tubulars last summer. Have not had a flat since.

just sayin.

the ride is very nice too. yes it is noticeable. I will say that the Michelin Pro Race 2 were a nice clincher

If you dont have a high disposable income don't run tubulars. Clinchers offer a variety of tire sizes that are not offered with tubulars.

Unless you want to pay big bucks you can't get a wider tubular. Tufo tires are crap. I don't care what people say about them. You can't repair a tufo once it is punctured it will leak. The magic sealant might work okay but thats just more $$$

If you aren't racing stick with clinchers. Having a race only set of tubulars is logical. A 20$ clincher will be rounder than a 20$ tubular.

If you want a lighter wheel get tubulars but be prepared to spend big bucks. The main advantage of a tubular is that a flat will have more control because it is fixed to the rim.

All of these are silly and please pay no attention to them.

I am broke and use tubulars.

for sealant you can use just about any sealant. I use stans

this is very silly

my take on tubulars vs. clinchers.... for me, when i started racing, i used clinchers. i didn't trust myself gluing a tire on a rim, just that thought alone scared me. so i stuck with clinchers. while the pro's and con's of each are good, my take on it would be are you racing or just out riding? i think needing the extra roll resistance with tubulars for racing makes sense, but not for everyday riding. if it's for price, then clinchers are cheaper. a tube is a lot cheaper than a tubular.

Please correct me if I'm wrong,
but I'm in the understanding the a tubular
is less likely to puncture over a clincher.

Please correct me if I'm wrong,
but I'm in the understanding the a tubular
is less likely to puncture over a clincher.

Too bad if you do puncture, then you're ****ed. Seriously. Nobody in their right mind would ride tubulars on the street unless they're racing, or really like carrying spare tubulars with them on every ride.

General riding - clinchers.
Racers - tubulars.

It doesn't get much more complicated than that. I've been riding/racing tubies for the better part of 20 years, and I even trained on them for a time. But they are a massive pain in the ass compared to clinchers, very expensive, and between the need to repair (very difficult or a mail order project) a tubular after a flat and re-GLUE the stupid things, I mean, forget it. It's up to you, tubulars are really lighter, better riding, handling, climbing, sprinting, etc., but for most cyclists clinchers are just dandy. I have tubular racing wheels (Zipp 404s) because you just can't beat 'em for light (about 1250 grams for 58mm carbon deep section rims) wheels that are aero and super light. And because in a race, I don't carry a spare. It ain't the Giro, you flat, your race is over. But my races are 30-50 miles long, I have never punctured in a USCF event, only on training or competitive street rides. So I ride my Zipp tubies on The Nyack Ride and Park Ridge Rides here locally (local racer dude fast training rides that are like sandlot bicycle races) and for racing. So they'll see <2000 miles each season.

The rest of the time I'm on clinchers. If I didn't race I wouldn't bother with tubulars. I like them, but I don't love them enough to put up with the hassle. They are worth it for competitive riding. I can feel the difference with those Zipp tubies, particularly on the late ride cimbs when I'm on the rivet, or when my nose is in the wind @ 30mph. To be sure zero doubt. Everybody I know who rides/races similar wheels will tell you the same thing. Everybody who's too cheap to buy Zipps or light tubie wheels comes on here to tell you it's all a crock of ****. The entire pro peloton in Europe is riding this stuff. Who do you believe?

Will tubies propel you from Cat V to Cat II? No. Do they make hanging on for dear life a marginally less desperate endeavor? Yes.

Too bad if you do puncture, then you're ****ed. Seriously. Nobody in their right mind would ride tubulars on the street unless they're racing, or really like carrying spare tubulars with them on every ride.

If you get a flat you simply peel off the flat tire and mount your spare tire and you are on your way in under 5 minutes.

Many of us old-timers ride sew-ups on the street and most of us don't race.

Carrying a spare tire is a non-issue. It fits under the saddle in a bag with the CO2 cartidges.

This has worked for many, many decades.

If you get a flat you simply peel off the flat tire and mount your spare tire and you are on your way in under 5 minutes.

Many of us old-timers ride sew-ups on the street and most of us don't race.

Carrying a spare tire is a non-issue. It fits under the saddle in a bag with the CO2 cartidges.

This has worked for many, many decades.

Essentially. You'd have to live with tubies for a while and decide if the glueing hassles and costs of keeping yourself in fresh tires is worth it overall. Possibly. I decided long ago to use both as described above. I've known a few cyclists who ride sew-ups exclusively.

Tubulars
Pro...
- if you flat, you can ride on it for a little longer...

This is the biggest reason to race on tubulars for me. If I get a flat on the back straight of a crit, I can ride to the wheel pit to get my spare on tubulars. Running 1/4 mile on cleated shoes because I can't ride a flat clincher just doesn't seem like it will work too well.


Hi Folks,

Another newbie question about tubulars. I am 6ft tall, 185lbs and race CAT3. Always have used clinchers in the past, but recently bought my first set of carbon tubulars. Do you think there is any danger of the tires rolling off in fast, hard corners due to the fact that I am heavier than the average racer - assuming the tires are glue properly?

Thanks,
Rob
No more danger than a clincher unseating and rolling off the rim. Actually, probably LESS likely than a clincher.

Tubulars resist flats better, handle better, corner better, are more comfortable and faster.

this is what a tubular looks like in cross-section ---> O
it is always a perfect circle to the ground no matter if you are cornering or going straight.

this is what a clincher looks like--> U

I like tubulars because they are the best performance upgrade you can add to your bike. People are willing to pay outrageous prices for clincher wheels, $100+ clincher tires and uber lightweight tubes for no gain in real performance. I think too many have bought into the clincher marketing koolaid.

Spend less for a comparable set of tubulars and you get better handling, comfort, lighter weight & a faster bike.

Essentially. You'd have to live with tubies for a while and decide if the glueing hassles and costs of keeping yourself in fresh tires is worth it overall. Possibly. I decided long ago to use both as described above. I've known a few cyclists who ride sew-ups exclusively.
I would venture to say that it's actually about the same cost or less to run tubulars because of how few flats they encounter. My only hesitation is that when you DO get a flat that can't be sealed, you need a whole new tire right there with you. I have never had a flat on a tubular tire in the 4 years I used them... although I primarily did crits, RRs, time trials, and velodrome on them. I spend much more on tubes and patches... and for those of you who use CO2...

I was going to start a new thread to ask this question, but maybe I can hijack this one instead:

I would like to get a set of tubular wheels for the reasons noted above, but also because I raced cyclocross this year and was jealous of the guys running tubulars, who could run very low psi without fear of pinching. I am also planning to do some road racing this year. It would be great to get a set of wheels that would work for both cross and road. High-end carbon wheels are out of my range and inappropriate to my abilities anyway. It seems like I could just get some wheels built with Ultegra hubs and a Mavic box section rim for pretty cheap. Are there any other inexpensive, durable wheels I should consider? Would I really miss the aero qualities of a deeper section rim while on the road?

thanks.

Ultegra/Mavic would be fine. Also look into Velocity Fusion (?). You might miss the aero benefits while on the road, but I really don't buy into it being as crucial as people make it seem (otherwise I'll be winning every race when I step up to aero wheels).

Beloki locked up his rear wheel, slid sideways. Should have been end of story. However his rear tire rolled off the rim and locked up the rear wheel. This appeared to cause him to high side over the bike. Since I don't know Beloki and I've never rolled a tire in that situation, I don't know if he'd have kept it up otherwise. However, I know that I've seen plenty of riders slide at high speeds, release, and recover successfully. If his rear tire hadn't rolled, he'd have had a better chance at recovering from his skid. What's unbelievable is that the mechanic allowed such a glue job to become a primary or even secondary wheel. I guess fatigue, pressure, etc., will bring the worst out from a mechanic.

The argument that the glue melted doesn't hold water with me - if that was true, heavier riders would have been rolling tires earlier. And though I've never descended for more than 3-4 miles at a time on tubulars, I have driven for hours with the wheels sitting in the back of a very hot van/car/wagon, parked for more hours with the sun beating down, etc. The heat's been so intense that I've warped helmets and such. But my glue never "melted". If the glue "melted" it still had solvent in it (or whatever makes it liquid). Therefore it was simply not dry.

When I train on tubulars I don't carry a spare. I can ride 80% as fast on a flat rear and about 60% on a front (except turns, where I have to slow down to perhaps 8-10 mph). I trust a well glued flat tubular a thousand times more than a hurriedly-thrown-on tubular that holds air. I know I'll never roll a tire I've glued on because I know that I won't be able to remove the tire without using screwdrivers or pry bars (seriously). I can't say the same about a tire I just put on the rim on the side of the road.

Tubulars have three major advantages as pointed out before:
1. no pinch flats so you can run whatever pressure you like, high or low, for whatever reason.
2. lighter, usually, and lighter for a given durability
3. ride a flat
A minor advantage is when you look at the exotic carbon rim wheels, tubular carbon rims are a few hundred dollars cheaper than a clincher carbon rim.

Clinchers have one major advantage - when you fix a flat on the road, you have 100% of use of that tire/wheel/bike immediately. You can corner just as fast, brake as aggressively, skid, do whatever your tire can withstand. The tire mount job will be as good as new. It's a relatively quick process (1-2 minutes for a very quick tube change and pump-up), and usually it costs you a tube versus a $50-100 tire.

I race and train on clinchers and tubulars, sometimes one of each.

cdr

This is an argument that I don't particularly want to get into, but it has to be said.

Tubulars are not faster just because they are tubulars. Many a test has shown that a good clincher with latex tube will have a lower RR than a glued tubular. To get them even, the tubular needs to be glued perfectly.
To get them similar in RR, you need a good quality, generally high dollar tubular, with a good glue job.



And I race tubulars and train on clinchers.

ok, for the last time.
Beloki's tire rolled because the tar on the road melted, he slid, and the tire/rim caught in
the goo, rim dug into the road surface, tire rolled, rim got a good bite into the surface and
he high sided. Rolling his tire was not the cause of his going down, it was the heat and
the melted tar, end of story. Given the speed, road conditions etc. would have happened
with a clincher too, exert too much force on the side of tire (perpendicular to the rim) and it's
gonna start to peel off (atmo).

Someone really nailed the difference a few posts up, the cross sections of tubular vs clincher
O vs U shape. I seriously doubt the difference in rolling resistance due to glue is going to
make a difference to anyone here ( just saying).
My own experience suggests that tubulars better resist pinch flats caused by bad road surface
etc. than clinchers, but both cut equally as well when presented with glass, goat head thorns,
wire debris from auto tires etc.

fwiw I don't own clinchers, carry a spare tire all the time and have not had any issues that
weren't caused by either debris, or my own stupidity.

Marty

I seriously doubt the difference in rolling resistance due to glue is going to
make a difference to anyone here ( just saying).

~15-20 seconds for a moderately strong rider in a 40 km TT. (tubular being slower)

~15-20 seconds for a moderately strong rider in a 40 km TT. (tubular being slower)
Either I failed to see the sarcasm again, or could you please tell me why tour riders still do time trials on tubulars if clinchers could save them 15-20 seconds?

I for one don't care. Tubulars corner better because of the cross section, and as someone who primarily does crits, that's reason enough for me. They also "feel" faster to me, but that has no weight in a debate.

Either I failed to see the sarcasm again, or could you please tell me why tour riders still do time trials on tubulars if clinchers could save them 15-20 seconds?

I think my post is self explanatory. In direct response to the statement that rolling resistance won't make a difference to anyone here, I pointed out the difference between the best tubulars and best clinchers is worth ~15-20 seconds over 40 km. People can judge for themsleves whether that makes a difference to them.

I don't recall saying anything in this thread about why anyone would or would not choose a certain tire; but in answer to your question, you might want to look at the anecdote here: http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesTires_Page.html

Tubulars are not faster just because they are tubulars. Many a test has shown that a good clincher with latex tube will have a lower RR than a glued tubular. To get them even, the tubular needs to be glued perfectly.


I don't understand how people fall into this little white lie.
Sure, at equal pressure, a clincher will have theoretically better rr. However, tubulars can be run comfortably at 220psi+

Let's pump up a clincher to 240psi and see how long the rim lasts or how many blowouts you have. You also get pretty bad handling characteristics in comparison.

Clinchers are practical but if you want to know what's better, it's tubulars.

I don't understand how people fall into this little white lie.
Sure, at equal pressure, a clincher will have theoretically better rr. However, tubulars can be run comfortably at 220psi+

You know, of course, that rolling resistance increases above ~120 psi; so what's your point?

By the way, if you check the rolling resistance curves, you'd see the rolling resistance of tubulars asymptotes to a constant value even as pressure increases due to losses in the glue. This value is higher than for a quality clincher above ~115 psi

I would venture to say that it's actually about the same cost or less to run tubulars because of how few flats they encounter. My only hesitation is that when you DO get a flat that can't be sealed, you need a whole new tire right there with you. I have never had a flat on a tubular tire in the 4 years I used them... although I primarily did crits, RRs, time trials, and velodrome on them. I spend much more on tubes and patches... and for those of you who use CO2...

I agree with Urban! Decent vintage rims are $25 to $65, decent tires (I have no problem iwth the Rallyes, Servizios and siblings!!) are $15 to $25 each, I have not had a puncture flat in 4 years, and so-called decent clinchers like Veloflex Pave and latex rims are ~ per bike, with $140/pair for good Veloflex, DT, or Open Pro rims. And then tubulars are usually lighter?

Plus, I have no problem with field tire installations or sewing my own tires.

It's a learning curve, but a nice curve.

Road Fan

You know, of course, that rolling resistance increases above ~120 psi; so what's your point?

of course it does.

I think my post is self explanatory. In direct response to the statement that rolling resistance won't make a difference to anyone here, I pointed out the difference between the best tubulars and best clinchers is worth ~15-20 seconds over 40 km. People can judge for themsleves whether that makes a difference to them.

I don't recall saying anything in this thread about why anyone would or would not choose a certain tire; but in answer to your question, you might want to look at the anecdote here: http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesTires_Page.html
What you failed to say is that the 15-20 second savings is theoretical. I'm sure anyone looking to break a TT record in the tour would love to save 15-20 seconds.

Anyway, I still have no argument against, but real world applications can obviously differ from lab tests.

By the way, on the chart you referenced, it looks like the advantages from raising pressures only go stagnant on tubulars after about 9-10 bar, which iirc is around 140-150 psi. I also don't see anywhere on that chart where rr starts to go up. I do agree that there's no road smooth enough to want more than 140 psi anyway. Maybe velodromes.

If you're willing to put up with the hassles of tubulars and fix them when you get flats (or ship them off to one of the Internet elves that do), the cost isn't such an issue. It's the hassle.

What you failed to say is that the 15-20 second savings is theoretical.

False. The rolling resistance data have been directly measured and confirmed many times. Similarly, the performance model has been validated over and over again. You might have cause for concern if I had said the benefit is exactly 17.638 seconds, but there is no doubt that the change in rolling resistance between quality tubulars and clinchers is worth at least that much time (analyticcycling.com puts it at four times greater).

By the way, on the chart you refenced, it looks like the advantages from raising pressures only go stagnant on tubulars after about 9-10 bar, which iirc is around 140-150 psi.

That's nice, but I didn't write about where the rolling resistance curve flattens out. I was talking about where the asymptotic value for tubulars crosses the clincher rolling resistance line. Further, That 115 psi is for hard track glue. If someone uses road glue, the high pressure tubular rolling resistance limit is about the same as a clincher at 60 psi.

Quick, somebody alert every UCI pro team in Europe asgelle says they're racing on the wrong tires.

Whew. Thank God BF is here to save their ignorant know nothing asses.

Quick, somebody alert every UCI pro team in Europe asgelle says they're racing on the wrong tires.

Whew. Thank God BF is here to save their ignorant know nothing asses.

Apparently some have trouble reading as well. Asgelle is saying tubulars have higher rolling resistance than tubulars. Most pro teams have known this for quite a while.

Quick, somebody alert every UCI pro team in Europe asgelle says they're racing on the wrong tires.

It seems strange to me that after rhapsodizing about all the advantages of tubulars over clinchers, none of which I challenged, you would infer that a single quantitative difference in favor of tubulars would overcome all the benefits you listed.

False. The rolling resistance data have been directly measured and confirmed many times.
On a time trial course or in a lab?

I did misread your other posts, however. My apologies.