chaadster

The Mavic PR material says it's rim profile, bead material, bead diameter, and bead stiffness along with tight manufacturing tolerances. Sure, another company could do all that on their own, but they haven't (just as they haven't addressed the rim tape issue, because you can't unless you control for the other design parameters as well), and I don't see what advantage would be gained by either doing so or ignoring the 800lbs-gorilla-in-the-room which is Mavic.

Mavic are going to get tire manufacturers on board simply by virtue of their OEM presence, so it's only a question of how rim manufacturers get in the game.

bonz50

only way that happens is if they are going to deliver this as an OEM application. frankly I don't see that happening on anything but the high end wonderbikes. even then its still a 'maybe'.

RJM

Yep, mounting is a pain in the ass but that isn't even the biggest hassle which is taking the tire off the rim when you need to.


I wound up cutting a Schwalbe one off a rim with an razor blade and much swearing; it was basically a new tire but I just couldn't get it off the rim because it was so tight...and I worked on that thing for a week. They are just on there way too tight because of the pressures involved.


Turned me off the entire thing and I've gone back to tubes. If I wanted that much of an issue with road tires I would have just gone tubular and dealt with the gluing. Better ride too.

chaadster

Yes, good point; it's not a given that tubeless will be an OEM spec, but with the ease of use issue largely addressed, I certainly think it could be. Manufacturers could book some savings by not spec'ing tubes I reckon, and I think offering the latest and greatest tech would be an appealing selling point for manufacturers.

gsa103

Nope. OEM bikes are all shipped with tubes, even all the mountain bikes. Dealing with sealant is pain for bikes that sit on the shop floor.
The shop may convert to tubeless after the sale, but everything comes with tubes.

DrIsotope

Not for me. My tires have seated the first time every time, and I'm pretty sure I've logged more road tubeless miles than anyone posting in this thread. My #1 complaint by a wide margin is a marketplace full of $80 tires that last 1000 miles. We don't need more race-ready tubeless tires. What we need more than anything are the big hitters like Continental, Kenda, and CST to start offering road tubeless. There would be a mass tubed exodus if Conti put out a tubeless-ready GP 4000S II-- hell, even I would try them, and my trust level for Contis is perilously low.

And my complaint is certainly a top reason people don't even give it a try-- $150-200 to get started in road tubeless (tires, tape, valves, sealant) is a tough pill to swallow for people used to getting their Contis for 35 bucks a pop.

WhyFi

Giants with SLR-1 wheels are shipped tubeless, afaik.

chaadster

The MTB case is interesting, and I don't know why they're not setup tubeless on the showroom floor, but if a tubeless system sets up easily, holds air for a decent length of time without sealant, and easily re-inflates from flat with a simple floor pump, I don't understand the case for fitting tubes beyond a cautious concern for consumer expectations. If all bikes at a certain pricepoint can be showroom tubeless now, I also see the potential for consumer expectation shifting.

I'm not ITB, so I don't know the state of the industry with regards to how they're thinking about tubeless, but Mavics entry into the technology suggests the forecast is for general adoption.

Marcus_Ti

Sealant has a life inside a tire of maybe 6 months. And even then, the wheels need spun to keep the tires sealed. That is why tubes are the default. Sell a bike 6mo-1year after installing tubeless, and you get a solid booger in the bottom of the tire and tires that don't hold air.

A tire takes say 2+oz of sealant. A 32oz bottle of sealant is maybe $30USD....so every time you put sealant in a bike it costs $4USD+ out of pocket.

Chandne

Their UST standard was fantastic in the MTB world. Looking forward to seeing their rim/tire products. Hopefully, it will be easy to take the tires off if needed mid-ride.

Masque

What Mavic has done is make a fantastic and inexpensive alternative to tubulars.

chaadster

My point was that if USTRoad will seal up and hold air for a decent length of time, and reinflate with standard floor pumps, there is no need to add sealant prior to sale (on the showroom floor).

alcjphil

I am using Campagnolo Shamal 2way fit wheels with Hutchinson Fusion 5 tubeless tires. Even without sealant they hold air almost as well as a standard inner tube. I haven't ridden the bike in a couple of weeks and the tires are still holding air.
Just checked with my pump. After sitting for 2 weeks both tires were still at 60 psi, no sealant

Kapusta

Is Mavic claiming that this sytem does not need sealant?

alcjphil

Don't know about Mavic, but my Shamals have been ridden both with and without sealant

chaadster

I've not seen such a claim, but I think it's reasonable to speculate, given the talk of precise bead/rim design tolerance and floor pump inflating, that the system does not need sealant to hold air.

Whether any particular Mavic tire model for the system is more or less air permeable is a question to be answered, as is how long any particular Mavic tire model will hold air and whether that period of time is acceptable for bike shop showroom needs. Some tubeless tires (e.g. IRC Roadlite) have an impermeable lining, and hold air like a tubed system (provided good bead/rim interface), whereas others do not and depend on sealant for acceptable air retention.

So there are the sealing questions (rim/bead, carcass) but also the practical question of the sensibility of running without sealant for puncturing sealing, and I'm sure Mavic is assuming sealant should be used for the latter purpose as there is really no good reason not to.

garciawork

Meh, Fulcrum wheels still have the easiest tubeless system I have used, and the "non tubeless" HED rims I just set up were incredibly easy as well. I don't seem to have the same issues others on here do, and I am also never going to buy a Mavic "wheel system". I am interested in the new open pro, as that seems like a good option for wheel builders, although I am not in the market for wheels right now.

Psimet2001 

Dumpster fire.

TOo little too late.

Tubeless is not a "build a standard and they will come" thing. It's a build product that simply works and works better than any other thing out there on the market and maybe other manufacturers will THINK about using your standard if it's open license. Otherwise they will simply change enough to be legal and claim theirs is better and try to market their way in. Net result - more differeing standards and products.

End of the day - tubes work and are available in every bike shop in the world.

Those of you living in crappy areas with real tire killing obstacles - have fun with your tubeless. The rest of us will simply be riding....on the metric **** tons of product that is already out there and will be coming out that still works with tubes and we won't be giving it a second thought.

Here is it 2017 and the promised wave of tire options has never materialized and simply won't. It didn't take that long with mtb. Why? huge tire volume. Not really that hard to do.

Psimet2001 

The "new open pros" are being delayed once again.

Keep in mind this is also from a company that point blank told me at Interbike in 2010 or so, "We will be eliminating single rims from our lineup. We have decided to no longer support independent wheel builders. We are much more focused on producing our own full wheel systems."

chaadster

As far as "build it and they will come," to hear Hahn of Continental NoAm tell it, when he says Conti is just waiting for someone do road tubeless to their high standards, it sounds exactly like if it's built, they would come. Bend in the Road: Tire makers still split on tubeless - BikeRadar USA

Given that Mavic's UST is ERTRO compliant and EN legal for complete bikes sold in the EU, it would seem that Mavic has the experience and lead-out here to position UST Road in the same way, which is a major incentive for Conti and Michelin, the only two major road tubeless holdouts, to get on board. I mean, both do UST tires, so why not USTR?

Psimet2001 

The dumpster fire was in regard to Mavic/Amer/ENVE - where you work. Rumblings in the industry aren't good and word is coming out from your inside office that things are a bit of a sinking ship.

chaadster

You apparently have me confused with someone else, as I do not work at Mavic/Amer/ENVE nor have any inkling as to what you're talking about. I'm not even in the business/industry at all.

Psimet2001 

You're not Chad Moore - the guy from Amer/Mavic who was posting everything in the bikerumor article? https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/06/21...line/#comments

Pretty sure that most of your posts on here were just regurgitations of company line unless I missed something. If I did I apologize - you just sound exactly like him and have the same name.

chaadster

Details are not your thing, eh? We do not share the same name at all, and not having read him, I'm not "regurgitating" either, although it is hard to imagine how a guy like me would inside knowledge or first-hand experience with product that is not in the market yet, so yeah, I've read a couple of articles about the tech and posited an idea based on the info available.

You have a lot of ideas about stuff, and you may turn out to be either right or wrong, but I am, being honest, reading more resentment and bitterness in your comments than considered insight, but if you want to address any of the issues I raised, I'd be happy to read them, because I think, as a wheelbuilder, you might have an interesting perspective on the issues.

jack pot 

>>> these may prove to be fantastic but i don't think these will be inexpensive