# What is the pros and cons of tubeless tires?



## Jason rides (Jul 6, 2012)

I believe it started with mountain bikes and now the tubeless tire is now available for road bikes. What do you see is the pro and cons in going in this direction compared to the tire/tube setup?


----------



## Cyclin Dan (Sep 24, 2011)

I can't think of a pro, but a con would be fixing a flat roadside...pretty sure that would be much more challenging.


----------



## simonaway427 (Jul 12, 2010)

Cyclin Dan said:


> I can't think of a pro, but a con would be fixing a flat roadside...pretty sure that would be much more challenging.


No more challenging than replacing a tube in a clincher tire....if you want to call that challenging at all.

Pros - 

Puncture resistance by using sealant
Ability to run lower pressures without the worry of pinch flats
Smoother ride due to lower pressures

Cons - 

Dealing with sealant can be messy depending on your mechanical ability
Certain sealants can cause corrosion on certain rims
Limited tire and rim choice (unless you experiment with conversions)
Conversions may not be as robust as true tubeless or tubeless ready combos
Difficulty with seating the bead - depending on your mechanical ability


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

I would only listen to people who have owned them. 

Pros: 
- pinch flats eliminated
- increased puncture resistance with sealant
- subjectively more comfortable if you like lower pressure

Cons:
- not as many tires and rims available, but this con is going away. Schwalbe has a tire coming out in Sept that is supposed to be cheaper, bontrager just came out with a bunch of rims, etc.

I wouldn't do a conversion. Ultegra are cheap, high quality, can take a standard clincher, and are easy to mount. Hutchinson fusion 3 are expensive, but great and very durable and to me feel and perform like GP 4000S, which was my preferred clincher. Their durability justifies the price.


----------



## Lick Skillet (Aug 21, 2011)

Pro - there is a search function for this question
Con - same question asked for the 100th time


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

The real big pro is no more punctures. 
the real big con is that you have basically no tire choices, and they're really expensive.


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

*tubeless*



Jason rides said:


> I believe it started with mountain bikes and now the tubeless tire is now available for road bikes. What do you see is the pro and cons in going in this direction compared to the tire/tube setup?


OK, I think I can answer for you.

Cons:

1.I got new new DT tubeless wheel (tricon) and Hutchinson tubeless tire. Very Very tight, I couldn't install it. I will age this tire 1 year in hi heat to soften it up. 

2.You have to use "their" brand of tire. ~<$100 per tire.
3. You need tubeless specific wheel or rim. I tried "tubeless conversion" with stans tape but didn't work.

3.Despite what people tell you, they still will get flats,
in which case you have to: install a tube or (possibly tubeless only) patch

4.(Older) Hutchinson tubeless tires had defects. Air leak through pores in sidewall. Didn't hold air at all. Which is the purpose of the tire. 

These are all real cons. Good clincher tire+ good tube is probably cheaper solution. If you use Shimano tubeless wheels, they install very easily but wheel is very fragile (rim dents). I spent over $1000 to find this answer for you.


----------



## Newnan3 (Jul 8, 2011)

My experience on my mtb has been that the valve can clog and require replacement after a season. I also managed to over tighten the valve stem which meant I was unable to unscrew the valve with bare fingers when I had a sidewall cut out on the trail. 

I still prefer the tubeless setup.....on my mtb.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

Other than tire selection, I really don't see any disadvantages. It has a much better ride quality than a standard tubed setup. Additionally, they are far less prone to flats when setup with the right sealant. I guess the only real disadvantage is that you usually have to use an air compressor upon initial setup.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

TomH said:


> The real big pro is no more punctures.
> the real big con is that you have basically no tire choices, and they're really expensive.


Sorry but that is a myth.You can still puncture just as easily as you can with a tube.
But it may seal if you are using sealant.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Other than tire selection, I really don't see any disadvantages. It has a much better ride quality than a standard tubed setup. Additionally, they are far less prone to flats when setup with the right sealant. I guess the only real disadvantage is that you usually have to use an air compressor upon initial setup.


Less prone than what?
I had my first flat while riding in probably 3 years last Friday.
The previous flat was due to a massive bolt that actually pierced the tyre AND rim so would have destroyed my tyre regardless of whether I was running tubes or tubeless.
That is 2 flats in maybe 4 years.


----------



## ddimick (Aug 9, 2011)

As far as tire choices go, the Hutchinson Fusion 3 tubeless are probably the most widely used and can be had for about $55 if you hunt around. Hutch also makes two other road tubeless models, one in 700x25 for an even cushier ride. IRC makes three or four models at or near the $75 mark, although they are hard to source in the US at present. I had to buy mine online. Maxxis makes one and I believe two other manufacturers are releasing road tubeless models in the near future. Road tubeless wheels choices are also increasing every year. It appears to have hit the critical mass needed for wider support within the industry.


----------



## purdyd (Jun 18, 2010)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Other than tire selection,
> 
> I guess the only real disadvantage is that you usually have to use an air compressor upon initial setup.


yes, tire selection is probably the only disadvantage - at least compared with tubed tires

depending upon the rim and tire, you may not have to use an air compressor

for example, with stan's alpha rims, i have never had to use an air compressor to mount with fusion 3's or IRC tires

with the shimano wh-7850 it is a crap shoot and about every third tire out comes the compressor

i have some enve 3.4's that have been converted to tubeless and i could never get my irc tires to mount on the rear whell, in spite of some heroic efforts and yet, the fusion 3's i can get on with a hand pump

some people seem to find a CO2 cartridge works fine in place of a compressor

i think what this thread and numerous other pro/con threads point out is that there is a learning curve with switching to tubeless from tubed tires


----------



## crank1979 (Sep 9, 2007)

steel515 said:


> Cons:
> 
> 1.I got new new DT tubeless wheel (tricon) and Hutchinson tubeless tire. Very Very tight, I couldn't install it. I will age this tire 1 year in hi heat to soften it up.
> 
> ...


1. The technique for installing a tyre might be a bit more important for tubeless but with a bit of practise you should be able to mount them without levers 4 out of 5 times.

2. You should be able to find tyres for much cheaper than $100.

4. I haven't experienced this, but I have always run sealant.

I think you're confusing soft DT rims with better quality Shimano rims/wheels.



FTR said:


> Sorry but that is a myth.You can still puncture just as easily as you can with a tube.
> But it may seal if you are using sealant.


I've found Hutchinson Fusion 3s to be more puncture resistant than Maxxis Re-fuse tyres. They will still puncture but less often for me and sealant seems to work 9 out of 10 times. If the sealant hasn't worked it's been easy enough to fit a tube and then patch the tyre at home to get it running tubeless again.


----------



## purdyd (Jun 18, 2010)

crank1979 said:


> 1. The technique for installing a tyre might be a bit more important for tubeless but with a bit of practise you should be able to mount them without levers 4 out of 5 times.
> 
> 2. You should be able to find tyres for much cheaper than $100.
> 
> ...


There are a lot of variables in mounting tires, rims, tire, and hand strength

There are some tubed clinchers that can be very difficult to mount

Personally, I just use a couple of plastic tire irons and a little patience and can mount difficult tires quite quickly

I would say your estimate on flats and sealant is correct and you will get about a tenth of the flats with tubeless and sealant vice tubed tires


----------



## Dersnap (Mar 28, 2012)

Although I like the tubeless options, as they ride better I will say I am less than impressed with Hutchinson's service. In another thread I mentioned I was running them on my Hybrid and one of the tire beads blew out. Luckily I was sitting at work when this happened as it could have been extremely dangerous on the down hills I do. 

Anyways after trying to get Hutchinson to acknowledge and replace the tire on their Facebook page because their customer contact information is hidden Rich Goodwin got in contact with me via PM. 
To this date 4 months (at least) later I still have no replacement. Front tire is running fine though and we took extreme care in placing the tires on. 

To be fair Rich gave me good hotel advice for Paris and seems like a nice enough guy. But still facts are facts and I would not recommend these tires based on this experience.

First time I did tubeless was also with the Hutchinson Intensives and after about 1K they started to crack. They went back as defective also.

Funny thing I am back on clinchers from Schwable Ultremo DD and they are over 4K KM and fine. Down side is running them at low PSI like a tubeless is going to get pinch flats.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

steel515 said:


> OK, I think I can answer for you.
> 
> Cons:
> 
> ...


Just because you didn't know what you were doing means these are legit cons. 1, 2, 3, and 3 again are all your fault. 4 is true and was fixed although they could be run fine with sealant. Hutchinson replaced those tires if users didn't want to run sealant or just wanted a replacement.


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

I only use a floor pump for my Ultegras which have no dents and are as true as can be.


----------



## drjdan (Aug 15, 2012)

When have a small hole and the sealant patches the hole, will you have any air loss or is the sealant instant?

Can the sealant serve as a permanent patch?


----------



## triumph3banger (Jun 13, 2012)

I finally got a flat after over 600 miles, on the glass filled streets of a Mass. city. I heard the sealant filling the hole, and stopped to check. The cut was on the tread area, and was almost 1/4 inch. The cut was bubbling a bit, but still had probably 85 lbs of pressure. Good enough to ride. I may have been able to continue the last day of our 240+ mile trip, as it was holding air, but it was at the end of a 75 mile day, and I had brought a new Fusion 3 along. I swapped the tires and sealant out in about 5 minutes without levers. I'm loving Tubeless!


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

drjdan said:


> When have a small hole and the sealant patches the hole, will you have any air loss or is the sealant instant?
> 
> Can the sealant serve as a permanent patch?


If your sealant is good and it's not a huge tear then you might lose 5-10 psi.

Yes if it seals then it doesn't need to be patched. You can ride it until you replace the tires.


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

simonaway427 said:


> No more challenging than replacing a tube in a clincher tire....if you want to call that challenging at all.
> 
> Pros -
> 
> ...


Add to Cons:

The rolling resistance of the typical tubeless tire is much worse that a racing type tire such as the GP4000S or Michelin Pro 4 or Vittoria CX. This may or not matter depending on the preferences of the rider. The only exception to this that I know is the IRC Top Secret tubeless tire which uses a latex inner casing pressure barrier layer. They are pricey and hard to get last time I checked. If you are struggling to hang on a hard group ride with say a GP4000S with latex tubes you will be most likely off the back with tubeless. No problem however with the Top Secret which actually rolls better than the GP4000S.


----------



## ms6073 (Jul 7, 2005)

simonaway427 said:


> Cons -
> Dealing with sealant can be messy depending on your mechanical ability


Yes, experience has proven that inattention and/or poor technique can result in temprorary hearing loss and definitely will result in you, your friends/coworkers, and much of your shop/workspace covered in sealant.


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

AM999 said:


> Add to Cons:
> 
> The rolling resistance of the typical tubeless tire is much worse that a racing type tire such as the GP4000S or Michelin Pro 4 or Vittoria CX. This may or not matter depending on the preferences of the rider. The only exception to this that I know is the IRC Top Secret tubeless tire which uses a latex inner casing pressure barrier layer. They are pricey and hard to get last time I checked. If you are struggling to hang on a hard group ride with say a GP4000S with latex tubes you will be most likely off the back with tubeless. No problem however with the Top Secret which actually rolls better than the GP4000S.


As far as I'm aware, the data to support any rolling resistance claims particularly for comparison across manufacturers isn't exactly reliable due to the lack of any standard protocol and controls for Crr measurement. Then to further draw a conclusion based on that data that the difference in your time over a course would be so great that you'd be off the back because of it seems a stretch to me. The best clinchers with latex tubes have been found to roll faster than the best tubulars, and I would speculate that if that also meant such a significant reduction in speed, tubulars wouldn't be the standard for racing - Technical Q&A with Lennard Zinn – Rolling resistance . 

Schwalbe reports that their new tubless tire has 25% less rolling resistance than their tubulars with latex tubes - New tires from Schwalbe for 2012 - Slowtwitch.com .

Myself and many others run tubeless at a lower pressure than clinchers because it's impossible to pinch flat and the pressure difference is also going to affect rolling resistance. I run either GP4000S clinchers or Fusion 3 tubeless and can't tell any difference in my speed or ability to hang, if that anecdotal evidence counts for anything.


----------



## triumph3banger (Jun 13, 2012)

I'm sometimes off the back, but it has nothing to do with which type of tires I'm using!


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

bayAreaDude said:


> As far as I'm aware, the data to support any rolling resistance claims particularly for comparison across manufacturers isn't exactly reliable due to the lack of any standard protocol and controls for Crr measurement. Then to further draw a conclusion based on that data that the difference in your time over a course would be so great that you'd be off the back because of it seems a stretch to me. The best clinchers with latex tubes have been found to roll faster than the best tubulars, and I would speculate that if that also meant such a significant reduction in speed, tubulars wouldn't be the standard for racing - Technical Q&A with Lennard Zinn – Rolling resistance .
> 
> Schwalbe reports that their new tubless tire has 25% less rolling resistance than their tubulars with latex tubes - New tires from Schwalbe for 2012 - Slowtwitch.com .
> 
> Myself and many others run tubeless at a lower pressure than clinchers because it's impossible to pinch flat and the pressure difference is also going to affect rolling resistance. I run either GP4000S clinchers or Fusion 3 tubeless and can't tell any difference in my speed or ability to hang, if that anecdotal evidence counts for anything.


I don't know the construction details of the new Schwalbe tubeless tires. If they indeed have a latex inner coating on the casing they could be that much faster rolling. I tested a set of four prototype Schwalbe tubulars which had latex inner tubes a few years ago. They had decent but not the best Crr. I use the same protocol for all my testing plus a control tire to ensure that everything is working OK.

The differences in Crr will not result in huge perceived differences but will affect time trailing performance and possibly the difference between hanging on and being dropped if you've blown up in a crit or something similar. I can definitely measure the speed difference between a fast clincher with latex tube and a robust all weather tire with Performance thorn proof butyl tube on the same bike. But watts are watts and for training, speed is irrelevant.

There are equally fast clinchers with latex tubes and tubulars with latex tubes. Your preference dictates choice and sometimes wheel availability in either clincher or tubular.

SF Bay Area ??


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

triumph3banger said:


> I'm sometimes off the back, but it has nothing to do with which type of tires I'm using!


That's a more fundamental problem of which I'm very familiar.


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

AM999 said:


> I don't know the construction details of the new Schwalbe tubeless tires. If they indeed have a latex inner coating on the casing they could be that much faster rolling. I tested a set of four prototype Schwalbe tubulars which had latex inner tubes a few years ago. They had decent but not the best Crr. I use the same protocol for all my testing plus a control tire to ensure that everything is working OK.
> 
> The differences in Crr will not result in huge perceived differences but will affect time trailing performance and possibly the difference between hanging on and being dropped if you've blown up in a crit or something similar. I can definitely measure the speed difference between a fast clincher with latex tube and a robust all weather tire with Performance thorn proof butyl tube on the same bike. But watts are watts and for training, speed is irrelevant.
> 
> ...


Yup, SF. How do you maintain an identical speed, surface, and ambient temp for testing? Shcwalbe claims a Vectran puncture strip is the key to improving their new tire's Crr.


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

bayAreaDude said:


> Yup, SF. How do you maintain an identical speed, surface, and ambient temp for testing? Shcwalbe claims a Vectran puncture strip is the key to improving their new tire's Crr.


Me too - San Jose.

Rollers in the garage. I actually correct for ambient temp which varies between 60 - 70 F.

No idea on the Vectran unless the tubular had a much stiffer material.


----------



## Kristatos (Jan 10, 2008)

I can affirm that fixing a flat is not a "con". Had my first sidewall tear today and just let sealant drain out the cut, then installed tube like I normally would with any other clincher. No big deal. 

Regarding the rolling resistance claim, not sure how anyone can honestly say that is a "con". It is pretty obvious to me after a few months of training and racing that the tubeless setup has significantly lower rolling resistance than the tube/clincher setups I had before. Add to that better cornering. I'm never going back to tubes that's for sure. Tubulars could still be superior - haven't run those in years, hoping tubeless keeps on keeping on...


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

Kristatos said:


> I can affirm that fixing a flat is not a "con". Had my first sidewall tear today and just let sealant drain out the cut, then installed tube like I normally would with any other clincher. No big deal.
> 
> Regarding the rolling resistance claim, not sure how anyone can honestly say that is a "con". It is pretty obvious to me after a few months of training and racing that the tubeless setup has significantly lower rolling resistance than the tube/clincher setups I had before. Add to that better cornering. I'm never going back to tubes that's for sure. Tubulars could still be superior - haven't run those in years, hoping tubeless keeps on keeping on...


I can honestly say it because I've measured it. What tubeless tires are you using ?? And what were you using previously - both tire and tube.


----------



## purdyd (Jun 18, 2010)

bayAreaDude said:


> As far as I'm aware, the data to support any rolling resistance claims particularly for comparison across manufacturers isn't exactly reliable due to the lack of any standard protocol and controls for Crr measurement. Then to further draw a conclusion based on that data that the difference in your time over a course would be so great that you'd be off the back because of it seems a stretch to me. The best clinchers with latex tubes have been found to roll faster than the best tubulars, and I would speculate that if that also meant such a significant reduction in speed, tubulars wouldn't be the standard for racing - Technical Q&A with Lennard Zinn – Rolling resistance .
> 
> Schwalbe reports that their new tubless tire has 25% less rolling resistance than their tubulars with latex tubes - New tires from Schwalbe for 2012 - Slowtwitch.com .
> 
> Myself and many others run tubeless at a lower pressure than clinchers because it's impossible to pinch flat and the pressure difference is also going to affect rolling resistance. I run either GP4000S clinchers or Fusion 3 tubeless and can't tell any difference in my speed or ability to hang, if that anecdotal evidence counts for anything.


I would agree that I have seen enough variance in the measured data to suggest it would be difficult to make claims across manufacturers products

As for roller resistance measurements, it is not clear if they directly correlate to real world rolling resistance

For example this test says the rolling resistance of the fusion 2 and conti 4000 are the same

http://www.conti-online.com/generat...al/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

purdyd said:


> I would agree that I have seen enough variance in the measured data to suggest it would be difficult to make claims across manufacturers products
> 
> As for roller resistance measurements, it is not clear if they directly correlate to real world rolling resistance
> 
> ...


Yes but the GP4000S was tested with a butyl tube. With a michelin latex 23/23 tube the rolling resistance of the GP4000S is ~ 10% less per my testing. The difference in rolling resisitance between a latex and butyl tube is ~ 10% depending on the tube used. Applying this factor brings the two tires together with respect to rolling resistance. There has been some testing done by others comparing the roller tests to real pavement and the factor is between 10 and 50% depending on the roughness of the pavement.


----------



## ddimick (Aug 9, 2011)

AM999 said:


> I don't know the construction details of the new Schwalbe tubeless tires. If they indeed have a latex inner coating on the casing they could be that much faster rolling.


I understand why latex tubes could make a difference with standard clinchers and tubulars, but what performance difference could a sprayed latex liner make with tubeless?


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

ddimick said:


> I understand why latex tubes could make a difference with standard clinchers and tubulars, but what performance difference could a sprayed latex liner make with tubeless?


It's the same principle. In a clincher tire you have a tread bonded to a casing with an inner tube to hold pressure. A latex is a inner tube yields a a lower Crr. In a tubeless tire you have the same basic construction but a pressure "holding" layer is applied to the inner surface of the casing. My theory is that this layer has to be overall thicker than a tube to ensure that all areas are adequately covered - any slight "miss" would be a hole in the "inner tube." Thick butyl tubes increase Crr while my testing shows that thick latex tubes have very little if any affect.


----------



## Jason rides (Jul 6, 2012)

After reading this article, I think I am sticking to tires with tubes. Problems With Tubeless Bicycle Tires | LIVESTRONG.COM

I see the advantage of tubeless tires, but there appear some cons that don't appeal to me. 
1. Cost more
2. Weight is more
3. Installation is more difficult than tires with tubes.
4. Here is the big one: Conventional bike pumps dont' work. You need some sort of compressor to infalte the tire. NO THANK YOU
5. Sealant can be messy and not all sealants are compatiabiel with all tires.
6. You will carry a spare tube when traveling.........just in case.


----------



## morgan1819 (Nov 22, 2005)

AM999 said:


> It's the same principle. In a clincher tire you have a tread bonded to a casing with an inner tube to hold pressure. A latex is a inner tube yields a a lower Crr. In a tubeless tire you have the same basic construction but a pressure "holding" layer is applied to the inner surface of the casing. My theory is that this layer has to be overall thicker than a tube to ensure that all areas are adequately covered - any slight "miss" would be a hole in the "inner tube."


I do agree that the rolling resistance is no better than a high end racing tire and a latex tube. But, when you spend the money on latex tubes and high end tires (Pro4, Vitt Open Corsa, etc), you are spending just as much as a you would on a tubeless tire (and potentially more $ if you are flatting latex tubes :mad2: ) 

What do I like about tubeless? My bike 'feels' a little zippier when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. Not sure why, but it does. I also like the cornering feel ... maybe due to the lower pressure and firmer sidewall? It just has a nice feel.

Did not enjoy installing them. My thumbs were a little sore for the next day or so.

Definitely wouldn't go tubeless if you are strictly looking for gains in rolling resistance and are already running high end racing tires. 

I do feel the Fusion 3's are rolling much smoother and faster after about 300-400 miles than they did when new. Maybe someone can enlighten me on that one...


----------



## morgan1819 (Nov 22, 2005)

Jason rides said:


> After reading this article, I think I am sticking to tires with tubes. Problems With Tubeless Bicycle Tires | LIVESTRONG.COM
> 
> I see the advantage of tubeless tires, but there appear some cons that don't appeal to me.
> 1. Cost more
> ...


1. Compare the cost of a latex tube and racing tire vs. tubeless tire. It's quite similar.
2. Weight of tire and tube vs. tubeless tire is quite similar.
3. With proper technique, installation isn't that bad. It does require some man strength though.
4. Conventional bike pump works fine on mine (6700's/Fusion3's). 
5. I don't use any sealant ... holds air better than my tubed tires.
6. You will carry a spare tube anyway. 


Not trying to be a contrarian ... 

I don't think tubeless is any better or any worse than running a standard clincher. It's just another option for those who want to try something different, which can be one of the enjoyable aspects of our hobby.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

Jason rides said:


> After reading this article, I think I am sticking to tires with tubes. Problems With Tubeless Bicycle Tires | LIVESTRONG.COM
> 
> I see the advantage of tubeless tires, but there appear some cons that don't appeal to me.
> 1. Cost more
> ...


Regular bike pumps work. Plenty of people will attest to that. I use Topeak's floor pumps, never had to use a compressor. For sealants, just use Hutchinson's Protect Air Max. Hutchinson makes more than half of all tubeless tires today, so it's guaranteed to work.

The claim that sealants had to be specific was because the old version of Stan's had a bit of ammonia in them, which discolors some rims. Why is (6) a disadvantage? One should either carry a spare tube or spare tubular unless you have a team car following you.


----------



## Kristatos (Jan 10, 2008)

AM999 said:


> I can honestly say it because I've measured it. What tubeless tires are you using ?? And what were you using previously - both tire and tube.


I've run so many tire/tube combinations over the years it would require a lot of time, thought and brain cells long since deceased to remember it all. 

I don't doubt your treadmill measurements, but to me they are not really meaningful. They are interesting, and I am sure there are tire/tube combos that can beat current tubeless tires for rolling resistance depending on various factors. I'm sure the Specialized clinchers that cost Tony Martin a couple important races this summer rolled great before they flatted on him, and one of those flats was a "pinch". 

Since there's only really a couple tubeless options currently and myriad "tubed" combinations it's probably possible to find a conventional setup with tires and tubes specific to any situation or surface. When I say tubeless has shown for me to roll better than conventional tires with tubes I am drawing on my real world training rides and races which occur on different surfaces and at different running pressures. Bottom line for me is I can run the tubeless tires at more optimal pressures for the surfaces I ride/race on, and I can tell they roll faster and handle better. As an example I did a training race last night on my conventional wheels and was struggling like everyone else in the fast corners to maintain speed, on the tubeless wheels I have no problem maintaining faster speed or taking a more aggressive line than the other riders around me.


----------



## mtor (Mar 1, 2007)

Lick Skillet said:


> Pro - there is a search function for this question
> Con - same question asked for the 100th time


LMAO end of thread


----------



## AM999 (Jan 22, 2007)

morgan1819 said:


> I do agree that the rolling resistance is no better than a high end racing tire and a latex tube. But, when you spend the money on latex tubes and high end tires (Pro4, Vitt Open Corsa, etc), you are spending just as much as a you would on a tubeless tire (and potentially more $ if you are flatting latex tubes :mad2: )
> 
> What do I like about tubeless? My bike 'feels' a little zippier when sprinting and climbing out of the saddle. Not sure why, but it does. I also like the cornering feel ... maybe due to the lower pressure and firmer sidewall? It just has a nice feel.
> 
> ...


I've seen the Crr of some tire models improve with miles. The really fast and flexible roll well out of the box but usually the more robust and stiffer tires improve after some miles due possibly to the flexing of the tire casing and tread and breaking of any adhesions in the construction ??


----------



## morgan1819 (Nov 22, 2005)

AM999 said:


> I've seen the Crr of some tire models improve with miles. The really fast and flexible roll well out of the box but usually the more robust and stiffer tires improve after some miles due possibly to the flexing of the tire casing and tread and breaking of any adhesions in the construction ??


That is what I was thinking. It would be interesting to see how a 'slightly used' Fusion3, Atom, etc., tubeless would test out on the Crr meter.

I've noticed the change more with this tire (Fusion3) than with any tire I've ever ridden.


----------



## dekindy (Jul 7, 2006)

You do not have to use an air compressor to inflate tubeless tires. Make sure the tire is sealed around the stem and both sides of the rest of the tire are pushed into the center channel of the rim and not touching the flange. Tire will inflate the first time and very easily. Just requires the proper technique. Also these tires are no more difficult to install than regular clinchers if the proper procedure is followed.

The biggest advantage that I see is the stiffer sidewall and security of hooking into the rim flange so that the tire is much less likely to come loose from the rim and cause an accident in the event of a flat. Also sealant increases deflation time on a normal flat. I like this safety factor that is a characteristic tubeless has in common with tubulars.


----------



## Lemond04 (May 21, 2012)

I have been running them for about a year and have had no drawbacks....till now. I must say though, I'm not sure all other tires would have stood up to this. Somehow my back tire picked up a large razor blade and it stuck to the tire. As it came up to the brake caliper, the blade was forced down into the tire and it slit it from side to side. Needless to say, even Stans fluid couldn't fix the problem and my wife had to come get me. Despite this freak accident, I will still be running tubeless on the road.


----------

