Squeezebox

The new bicycle has Bontrager duster elite TRL rims, which are tubeless ready. So tell me the pros & cons of tubes or tubeless.
When I tried to put 700x32 tires on these rims, Victoria randonneur, they were so tight that they did not seat properly, created a low spot that thumped every rotation. I'll try the Victoria tires on my around town bicycle, and see if that's any better. The 700x 35 tires are fine , as well as the 29x2.0 that the bicycle came with.
Any ideas about this is about?

dcwldct

The biggest con to tubeless as far as I'm concerned is that it complicates repair of flats. With clinchers you can quickly replace the tube if you get a puncture.

A spare tube is lighter and more compact than a spare tire.

Mr IGH

Tubeless doesn't complicate flats, it eliminates 99% of them. For the rare occasion when the hole is too big for tubeless self-sealing just carry a spare tube, no need for a tyre.

As far as seating a tyre, I use soapy water to help seat the tyre's bead, sometimes it takes extra pressure to get it right.

HillRider

Tubeless tires with sealant are significantly more flat resistant but, if you do get one, changing it is a mess and you are going to have to carry a spare tube anyway. Unless you install a tube, getting a tubeless tire to reseat after a repair is almost impossible with any portable pump and even with most floor pumps.

The advantages to tubeless are mostly the ability to run lower pressure without getting snakebite flats and less stability issues riding out a flat. They potentially have a weight advantage but the thicker tire casing needed to make them airtight plus the sealant weight pretty much negate that benefit.

Leebo

Commuter bike or cross? The best way tubeless set ups work is a matched pair, that is tubeless rims and tires. Are the tires tubeless ready? Rim width and psi used? The advantage of tubeless is far less flats, like from thorns and other small punctures. Run sealant, carry some super glue and/ or tubeless repair kit. CO2 can also help reseat he bead if needed. Don't listen to the naysayers, the future is here to stay. I flat in 3 years on two different mt bikes. "Nuff said.

bikepro

If you get a flat you can install a tube until you get home.

HillRider

Yes, but I've seen it done and with sealant it's a huge mess.

fietsbob

9 month tour from SW Ireland to NE Scotland , zero flats.. Nokian Utility tires 700-40 w thorn resistant presta tubes .

cyccommute 

Not to mention that the sealant has to be refreshed regularly. It took some time for me to wrap my head around the idea that a fluid in a tire that is air and waterproof could have the sealant "dry" out. Where does it go and how does it get out and why doesn't it take the air with it?

After a lot of head scratching and MSDS reading (Oh joy!) and a lot of chemical and material hand waving, I came to the conclusion that the sealant, which has a glycol base, is passing through the rubber and out of the tire. This does beg the question however of what does the glycol do to the rubber of the tire? I've seen early attempts at using non-UST tires that resulted in severe blistering and delamination of the tread on the tire. I've not seen that in more modern tubeless tires but the sealant is still escaping from the tire and since it is dissolving through the rubber, it has to be changing the rubber characteristics.

Finally, tubeless tires are only more flat resistant because they use sealant. Without sealant, they are just as prone to flats as regular tires. On the other hand, if I wanted the same flat resistance in a tubed tire, I could just run sealant in the tube. That would be less messy when the tire has a puncture that the sealant can't fix...which happens even with tubeless tires and sealant.

Squeezebox

Maybe I'll compromise with sealant in the tubes.
Soapy water to help seat a tire!! That's a big DUH !! on my part.

Mr IGH

The best part of tubeless is the ride quality, lower rolling resistance and lighter weight are nice to have.

Proper tubeless ready rims and tyres don't even need sealant to hold air, on a road setup an ounce or two is all that's required, not really an issue to pour out if one needs to use a tube.

Older sealants such as Stans needs to be replaced, better sealants such as GreenSlime don't dry out.

I have seated all my tubeless tyres with a floor pump, another myth dispelled.

All the anti-tube comments are from "experts" that have never ridden or set up tubeless, wouldn't be BikeForum without these types. Ride a thornproof tube with sealant, ugg, that's one notch from solid tyres....

dr_lha

If you're running low pressure, say for gravel or cross, you're likely going to pinch a snakebite in your a tube and even with sealant, you're not guaranteed that the seal will work perfectly, so the likelihood of a flat is still higher than with tubeless, as with tubeless, there's no pinch flat, because there's no tube to pinch.

SkyDog75

Tubeless does have its benefits. Fewer flats being the obvious one, but also things like the ability to run lower pressures without worrying about pinch flats. It's just a matter of whether those benefits outweigh a bit of cost and hassle. For some people, they do. For me personally, the benefits aren't compelling enough for me to switch. Not at this point, at least. Almost all of my riding is on pavement and I don't need to run low pressures. I seldom get flats and when I do, it takes maybe 5-10 minutes to swap a tube and I'm back on my way. I probably spend less time and money fixing flats than I'd spend preventing them with a tubeless system. For me personally, tubeless is a solution to problems I don't have. Your mileage may vary.

Kopsis

Tubeless should be thought of as a "System". That system includes tubeless-compatible rims, tubeless-compatible tires, and sealant. Try to do without one of the three and the results will be unpredictable (that doesn't mean bad, it just means you can't generalize pros/cons).

Given that, the pros of a complete tubeless System are:

* Better ride and lower weight than a conventional system with a *similar level* of flat resistance.
* Better flat resistance than a conventional system with similar weight and ride quality.
* Better flat resistance than a conventional system when run at low pressures (though if you bring latex tubes into the picture, the advantage is pretty small) or heavy loads.
* Reduced risk of sudden pressure loss on punctures.

The cons:

* Compatibility between system components (rims, tires, sealant) is not always known or even predictable.
* Ease/difficulty of tire mounting varies significantly for different rim/tire combinations. Difficult combinations may need special tools/techniques.
* Escaping sealant on puncture events can make a mess of you and/or your bike.
* Field repairs have to deal with "mess" of liquid sealant coating inside of tire casing.
* Periodic maintenance (sealant refreshing) is needed.

For some, the pros outweigh the cons. For some they don't.

gsa103

Except there's no reason why you'd ever want to reset a tubeless tire away from home. The beads stay locked in when the tire is flat, you have to forcible remove them. If the hole doesn't seal, you'd be installing tube.

My experience is that tubeless tires are inherently more flat resistant. Since switching my flat frequency has gone down dramatically, despite not using sealant. I wore out an entire set of Schwalbe One's and the first flat was when the cords were showing. The nature of tubeless tires, means that many punctures are very slow leaks (flat the next morning), rather than rapid deflation as the tube pulls away from the tire and hole expands. I rode for 3 weeks with a thorn in the tire, and it wasn't until I removed it that the tire went flat (even then it still took an hour). It's possible that the heavier tubeless tire construction is more tolerant of micro-punctures, or that structure offers better flat protection in a supple tire than a clincher design.

Tubeless is a bit more of maintenance hassle, dealing with topping up sealant, etc. But this is maintenance, ie you set where and when, rather than emergency repairs. It works best for frequent riders who will get more miles before needing to top up sealant. It's less well suited to someone who just wants to join the Saturday club ride and let the bike sit the rest of the week.

Leebo

If the hole doesn't seal, use super glue or a tubeless tire repair kit. Both work well. Takes maybe 3 minutes.

cyccommute 

I doubt the claims of better ride quality, lower rolling resistance and lighter weight. If sealant is used, the lighter weight argument goes out the window. If a tube is used in a tubeless tire does it's rolling resistance automatically increase to intolerable levels...or at all? As for ride quality, that's subjective and is more related to weight then anything that can actually be measured.

The sealant is the only reason that tubeless are more flat resistant than traditional tubed tires. Without sealant, they are just tires that can be punctured just as easily as any other tire and are harder to repair in the field. If I have to carry around a tube anyway, I might as well carry a second one.

As for just pouring out the sealant, there are problems with that. First there's the issue of "just pouring out the sealant". While the sealant isn't a huge volume, it does contain materials that are could be considered pollutants. "Just pouring it out" is irresponsible.

The sealant doesn't "just pour out" as well. There is going to be a significant amount of it remaining in the tire unless you have something to wipe the sealant out..which means carrying more stuff to deal with a flat. And you probably need something to clean you up after handling it. According to the MSDS for the product

More stuff to carry for fixing a flat.


Which "GreenSlime" product are you talking about? SlimePro says the following in their FAQs

I can't find any other product named "GreenSlime". Sure sounds like it dries out and has to be replaced just like Stan's.

I think you meant "anti-tubeless" but I would agree that a thornproof tube with sealant gives about the worst ride possible. But modern tires with protection belts or tire liners used in nonbelted tires do a good job of flat prevention without too much added weight or excess hassle. Tubeless will not keep you 100% safe from flats even with sealant nor will sealant in a tube keep you 100% safe from flats. Nor, for that matter, will belted tires or tire liners keep you 100% safe from flats.

Solid tire will keep you 100% safe from flats but the cure is worse than the disease.

cyccommute 

I've been riding on- and off-road since I purchased my "good" road bike in 1983 and my first mountain bike in 1984. The only time I've had a snakebite flat is when I haven't pumped up my tires to the proper pressure and even those instances are extremely rare.

I have never seen any advantage to running low pressure in my (tubed) tires to the point of risking a pinch flat in the first place nor do I see any advantage to running low pressure in a tubeless system. The tire is there to not only to provide traction but also to protect the rim from damage. If you are running your tires low enough to risk a pinch flat, you are risking damage to the rim. With a tubeless tire, you can run pressure low enough to damage the rim without knowing it because the tire doesn't pinch flat. Ruining a rim because you bottom it out on a rock or pothole just isn't worth the marginal traction you might gain.

gsa103

Rolling resistance is pretty well confirmed. Tubeless tires are on par with top quality clinchers & tubulars (with latex tubes). Clinchers with butyl tubes are consistently higher rolling resistance.
Road Bike Tires Rolling Resistance Reviews
Every single rolling resistance test I've ever seen has basically come to the same conclusion.


Better ride quality is highly correlated with rolling resistance. The more flexible and supple a tire is, the lower the rolling resistance will be (in general). Also, you can run tubeless at lower pressure. If you're comparing tubeless to tubular or latex tubes, it's going to be personal preference, but it will beat most tires with butyl tubes.

Weight is the one minor downside. It's coming down some with "Tubeless Ready" tires, which are comparable to clincher, and the sealant+stem is roughly equal to a tube. The earlier generations of tubeless tires were on par with clinchers until you add 20-40g of sealant.

Mr IGH

One reason tubeless is lighter because it takes 20~30gms of sealant in a road tyre, a tube weights 110gms. My tubeless ready tyres weigh an extra 20gms over my former tyres. Net savings 70gms of rotating weight.

Even with tubeless ready rims and tubes you're still better off, tubeless ready rims are stronger or lighter and don't cost extra to produce other than the design and tooling costs. That's why you're seeing the plethora of TR rims and wheelsets.

Don't forget the better ride quality and lower rolling resistance. Tubeless is going to become very popular, some folks stick with 5 speed freewheels and friction shifter, the word is luddite

jyl

The fastest flat repair is a tubular. Pull the flatted one off, put the preglued one on, inflate, ride. And you can put sealant in a tubular too.

The problem is the second flat of the day.

Marcus_Ti

And then get to deal with a gooey mess on the side of the road...

dr_lha

Missing the whole point of tubeless, meaning you can inflate to lower pressure than what you consider "proper".

"I've never run tubeless and therefore consider it pointless."

This must be why tubeless is so popular in the mountain biking world. They hate their rims.

RubeRad

This was also a surprise to me, as I worked hard to learn how to convert my wife's & my new 29ers from tubeless-ready-with-tubes to tubeless, and was looking forward to never touching those 4 tires again (except for occasional pump-up) until they wore out. About 3mo later I found my front tire totally flat, no liquid sealant remaining. Had to add another 'shot' of the juice. 2 weeks later, the rear tire. So now I'm good for the next few months, I expect my wife's tires to turn up dried out any time.

You can save money and make your own homebrew sealant with liquid latex, rv antifreeze (or similar) and a few other easy-to-find ingredients. A few bucks per gallon vs $15-20 or more per liter.

But I think it is a good compromise to put sealant into tubes. You can even do it if you have presta valves that are 'not-removable'

cyccommute 

Tubeless tires are on a par with "top quality clinchers" because they tend to be top quality tires. There really aren't that many cheap tubeless tires out there. If you compare them to tires of equal quality, the differences aren't all that great. Your link shows the many of the tubed tires are as good as the tubeless tires, some are better and some are worse. There's no indication of error in the measurement so it is difficult to know if 1 or 2 watts of rolling resistant is significant or not.

Yup. And that is what I see in the comparison in your link. There is also no indication of what kind of tube is used so I can't tell if butyl tubes case more rolling resistance than tubeless or latex. You can't draw conclusions in the absence of data.


The recommendations I see for road tires is 2 oz of sealant which is close to 60 g of sealant. For mountain bikes, the recommendation is 4 oz of sealant which is about 110g of sealant. If you go to Weight Weenies, there are lots and lots of listing for tubes...even mountain bike tubes...that are less than 100g. There are even many tubes that weigh less than 60g...all road...and many of those are butyl tubes. Perhaps you just didn't choose wisely on your previous tires. Or maybe you're just making up numbers to prove your point.

Let's consider something else about the sealant "drying" up. Where is it going? Propylene glycol has nearly zero vapor pressure. It doesn't "evaporate" very well. Since it's the main liquid in the sealant, it's going somewhere and that somewhere is into the tire. Some of it may get to the outside of the tire tread where it get ablated off with the rubber of the tread but most of it is going to remain inside the tire casing where it is just dissolved in the rubber. I have no idea what the saturation point for the glycol is in the tire but I doubt that it's 60g. That means that each time you have to refresh the sealant, you are dissolving more propylene glycol into the tire and adding more weight to the tire. How much propylene glycol can dissolve in the tire? I don't know. But I suspect that it could easily be more than one or two volumes of sealant.

Which are they? Stronger or lighter? I see a whole range of weights and strengths just like you see with clincher rims.

And now it comes down to insults. Classy. To clarify, I am far from a "luddite". I was an early adopter of front suspension...rear took a bit longer mostly because rear suspension was awful in the early days. I was an early adopter of clipless pedals. I was an early adopter of threadless forks and cartridge bearing bottom brakets, ISIS bottom brackets and external bottom brackets. I was an early adopter of aluminum frames.

But that doesn't mean that I adopt every new idea coming down the pike. I've been burned enough that I wait out somethings to see if they are true improvements or just another fad. Even after some new idea has been around for a while, I pick and choose based on my own criteria. Tubeless tires just don't meet my criteria for a good product.