Racing Dan

That is not an industry standard. Its a Mavic standard and only Mavic wheels and tyres are road UST, unless they licensed it since last I looked. There is zero guarantee any other combination of tyre and rim than Mavic/Mavic will perform as intended.

dmanthree

I ride Conti GP 4000s II and get very few flats (one of two a season). For me the difference is how easy it is to deal with a flat using tubed versus the complete pain in the ass that a flatted tubeless tire presents. To each his own, I guess but I think there's a reason road tubeless is still a niche market and the three major bike tire makers, Vittoria, Conti, and Michelin don't even offer a road tubeless.

WhyFi

I can't try every combo, obv, but the vast majority of the time, mounting problems come down to user error - neglecting to ensure than the bead is in the central rim channel as the tire is worked around and on to the rim.

As far as the current, non-tubeless state of affairs - I regularly see bead jacks recommend, and these recommendations predate tubeless ready rims by a long, long time. I have never had to use a tool to mount a tire, tubed or tubeless, so I'm just lucky with my tire/rim combos, or I've got big, strong hands... or I use proper technique.

WhyFi

Vittoria has tubeless offerings.

Racing Dan

This is just deflection. No real arguments for or against what I said. Users not knowing how to mount a tyre doesnt make rims or tyres any more or less standardised. Neither does bead jacks. The facts remain. There is no industry wide standard for road tubeless and the result is a lot of non standard products creating (more) problems for users of both tubeless AND clincer/tube.

WhyFi

No, it's not just deflection, and it's not as if you've mounted some unassailable argument against the tubeless state of affairs - you've stated that it's a trainwreck, but that's hyperbole at best, FUD at worst.

chaadster

I think it is exactly the same in the sense that some clincher tires/rims mount with difficulty, some with ease, and some tubeless tires/rims mount with difficulty, some with ease. There is no difference in that regard.

You talk about “tolerance” of less than ideal fit, and yes of course that is true because the tubeless tire has to do more precise work than a tubed clincher tire. I don’t agree with you that the inconsistency of clincher fitment is due to the manufacturers bridging the gap between the formats; I’ve been road cycling since the mid-‘80s, way before tubeless was around, and the problem of hard to mount clinchers has been around since then.

I also wouldn’t characterize the situation as “a train wreck,” because while the tubeless format presents challenges distinct from tubed clinchers, it still works. I’d venture to say that it’s virtually impossible to buy a tubeless rim/tire combo which does not work. Sure, some will be hard to mount, some will require sealant to hold air, but once they’re set up, they work.

Tubeless is definitely not at the idiot-proof stage yet— though I think Road UST is the pathway there— and it takes time, effort, understanding, and maybe some luck, in order to get the perfect tire/wheel combo for anyone’s given needs. If those needs include not investing time, effort, or understanding (a.k.a. a learning curve), then be well-advised to steer clear of tubeless...or any tire format you’re unfamiliar with, like probably tubular.

Racing Dan

What I said was:

"If "they" could just come up with an industry standard for rims and tyres, then I might try tubeless. As is, Im very reluctant to support non-standard or even proprietary designs."

"Getting tyres that fit the rim should not be trial and error and getting tyres on and off and seat on said rim should not require an effort out of the ordinary. There is just too many variables to go wrong and we see the results in post after post, ppl having all sorts of issues."

"Sure some tyres might be tight, but normal clincher tyres with tubes are much more tolerant to less than ideal fit. If anything the issues with clincher are to a large degree created by wheel and tyre companies, trying to bridge the gap between tubeless and clincher, making halfway products marketed as "tubeless ready", "two way fit" ect, creating problems for everybody, not just the tubeless crowd, in the process. Look, I have nothing against tubless, but the current situation is a train wreck."

"That (Mavic road UST) is not an industry standard. Its a Mavic standard and only Mavic wheels and tyres are road UST, unless they licensed it since last I looked. There is zero guarantee any other combination of tyre and rim than Mavic/Mavic will perform as intended."

"There is no industry wide standard for road tubeless and the result is a lot of non standard products creating (more) problems for users of both tubeless AND clincer/tube."

I stand by every word and I challenge you to find fault outside of nitpicking

WhyFi

It's pretty easy to find fault - get your hands on some wheels/tires and use them.

chaadster

Nothing is an industry standard until the industry adopts it. Mavic invented Road UST, but it is a free license for other manufacturers, unlike the original UST for MTB, which was launched requiring a licensing fee yet has still emerged as the preeminent standard in that side of the industry (UST is an ETRTO standard), used by many manufacturers. I don't see why RUST should fail to be adopted in the same way

Bryan C. 

One of the biggest differences to mounting a tubeless tire is that you finish installing the bead at the valve stem as opposed to starting at the stem with conventional tires/tubes. Big help.

Tire levers to remove or install tires of any type are accepted as standard operating procedures to just about every cyclist. Why is this such a big deal to have to use a tool? They really aren't that much harder to install.

The tire and wheel companies will get the standard settled soon enough. And most of the fit problems will resolve themselves then.

I think that there is a simple fact of life that some people are better able to work with their hands than others. Some people get frustrated easily, others work through problems easily to find a solution.

New tasks and procedures take time to work through and refine. If you only mounted one set of tubeless tires and had problems, fine. This doesn't mean everyone did, maybe they didn't. What if the 2nd time went perfect now that they got it figured out? Life requires some practice along the way. Lol.

I can only speak about my experiences, as should you. I have nothing but good things to say about my experience with tubeless tires. Less time fixing flats and more time riding is a no brainer.

Racing Dan

Exactly the same in regard to that one particular issue you happened to high light. As if just getting the tyres on the rim is the only issue with tubeless in its current state. Your answer is the definition of false equivalence.

Why even argue when you acknowledge that there are in fact lots of issues.

Racing Dan

OK, show me a non Mavic road UST tyre and rim combo?

Racing Dan

Will they? As far as I can see the bike industry is moving in the other direction, making everything as proprietary as they can get away with.

chaadster

I'm not arguing there aren't issues, I'm arguing that they are not of the scope or magnitude you make them out to be. You draw a different conclusion from the presence of issues than I do.

chaadster

You're not great on details, which is probably the reason tubeless is a real stumper for you. RUST was launched what, five months ago? I suspect that in time, there will be other brands. Probably Hutchinson first, if I were a betting man. Regardless, as I pointed out in a post above, I do not see any reason for RUST not to be standardised just as UST is for MTB.

Bryan C. 

Zipp has a great video on mounting tubeless tires.

https://zipp.com/accessories/detail.php?ID=30086

chaadster

You're conflating branding and compatibility.

jitteringjr

I see that Giant Gavia tires are UST. Their website just plain sucks when it comes to finding out technical information, but I did come across a page saying the tires were UST.

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/owners-manuals

Click on the 2017 wheel systems manual:

"Certain Giant WheelSystems were designed for compatibility with UST* (Universal System Tubeless) tubeless tires or with tires designed specifically for use in a tubeless system.

Use only tubeless valves and tires designed specifically for use without an inner tube and mount these according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. GIANT tubeless valves can be purchased from your bicycle retailer. (UST* tires are special tires suitable for the use without inner tubes. *UST is a trademark of Mavic Inc. France)"

Now if Conti would just get on the train and give us some tubeless GP4000's in UST...

WalksOn2Wheels

I, for one, would like to thank the OP for putting the month and year in the thread title. That way, in 7 years when someone has a bad day with a tubeless tire and digs up this thread to rant, we'll have a little warning.

Racing Dan

Im perfectly fine with details. Im just pointing out that what you propose does not exist. If any company outside of Mavic has promised to make tyres and/or rims to RUST spec Im not aware of any such promise. Neither are you, I suspect. If industry adopts RUST, it wold be great, because it would likely go a long way mitigating the issues users of tubeless tend to experience. I do how ever have a hard time seeing how a industry wide adoption of RUST is a knock against anything I wrote. In fact the opposite. I just underlines the need for a standard we currently do not have.

WhyFi

Just so we're all on the same page, what's the extent of your practical experience with road tubeless?

I'll be frank with my own experience - I don't work at a bike shop or anything, so my experience is limited to three unique wheelsets and four unique tires mounted in six unique pairings. I don't think that it's any coincidence that my first two mountings (which happened more or less simultaneously) were, by a large margin, the most difficult. I don't think that it's any coincidence that every mounting since has been easier than the one previous. The interesting thing is that I've revisited those first two combinations (with new tires, not ones that have been stretched in use) expecting a fight... and they were out like a lamb.

jitteringjr

You can delete this post once you've read my previous reply to you.

chaadster

You are evidently quite poor on details, because I neither said nor suggested another manufacurer was on RUST nor did I say or suggest there was a promise by another manufacturer to build with RUST certification. That’s two strikes...

RUST is important to the discussion because it speaks to each of the issues you’ve raised, and illuminates the scope and magnitude of those issues. As I said before we are not in disagreement there are tubeless issues, nor that a standard would be beneficial for users, but there is the matter of which issues and their consequence, and we are not in agreement on those for the large part.

chaadster

That reads like a general statement, not specific to Gavia. And to be clear, UST and Road UST (RUST) are different systems, generally differentiated, as I understand it, in that UST is not suitable for high tire pressure.