# Your Tubeless Road Experience



## bholwell

I'm interested in hearing about your experience with Tubeless Road tires. What tires and rims did you use? Was tire installation a PITA? How was the performance and feel of the tires? What kind of mileage did you get out of your tires? Did you encounter any issues?

Any information you can share is greatly appreciated.

TIA! :thumbsup:


----------



## corky

Tonight I just mounted some Hutchinson fusion 2 tubeless on some Fulcrum racing zero 2-way fits (god what a mouthful...). So I gave the new tyres a tug under my foot to stretch 'em a tad.

Next, I cleaned the rim bead and brake surface so I didn't drag any residual road dirt into the rim bed. I then applied a soapy water solution to the rim bead and the tyre bead and mounted one bead onto the rim without fuss, carefully remembering to align the tyre logo with the valve.

Next I mounted 5/6ths of the other bead leaving a small gap to insert a small funnel so that I could pour in a cup of Stan's sealant. I then rotated the wheel so that the latex moved round the tyre away from the gap and attempted to thumb on the last1/6th of the tyre, I gave up and resorted to using a (plastic) tyre lever which was eventually successful I then span the wheel a few times to (hopefully) distribute the sealant evenly inside the tyre.

Finally I inflated the tyres using a track/floor pump to 130 PSI and have left them to ferment overnight.

Tomorrow I shall ride them after dropping the pressure to 90 PSI and maybe subsequently modifying the pressure up or down depending upon my findings.

Hopefully they will give me the ride of which I have been hearing


----------



## bholwell

Thanks for the info, Corky. It doesn't sound like they were too difficult to mount.

Please let me know what you think of the ride.


----------



## -dustin

Have mounted tubeless to many wheels, tubeless and non-tubeless specific.

Ride quality is unparalleled. 

Mileage...eh...not the greatest... noticeable wear around 1000mi but not back enough to trash. at about 1300 now. 

only issue was with my 1.1s...needed 2 layers of Stans tape.


----------



## bholwell

-dustin said:


> Have mounted tubeless to many wheels, tubeless and non-tubeless specific.
> 
> Ride quality is unparalleled.


Nice. It sounds like your Stan's conversions have been relatively painless. So you estimate you're getting about 2-3k miles out of the rear tire?

Also, you can tell a difference in ride quality? What's your weight (if you don't mind me asking) and your tire pressure?


----------



## corky

So I rode my tubeless today for the first time, 20 miles or so.....

Well I deflated the tires to 95psi and off I went,
The ride is definately an improvement...not earth shattering but all the liitle cracks in the black-top, all the joints in the concrete and all the wooden slats in the bridges all seemed to dissapear. This was a godsend as I've had RSI in my left-wrist for a while and every little bump would jar the left wrist, but not so much now. Feel is very....well supple really.

It was only as I was approaching home that I realized that I could notice an improvement in rolling resistance, on a stretch of smooth asphalt I noticed the bike seemed to go faster for a given effort than it has in the past.... wether this is some kind of 'new kit' syndrome, I'm not sure....

Anyways I am glad to have them and they're staying on. Longevity issues notwithstanding I think they're a success, maybe not as good as a good tubular but not so far off either. 

NB Obviously I am unsure of the performance of the Stan's sealant(maybe it's already worked?) but I have high hopes, but carry a tube with me anyway.

2 thumbs from me.


----------



## JayZee

I've run the Fusion 2 tires on Easton Rims for almost a year and have been very happy. Set up is pretty easy, just watch the video at no-tubes. My only real problem is with the lack of selection of tires. The Fusion 2 tires wear quickly and are pretty expensive. Especially watch the rear, one day it will look fine, next day you are down to the threads. The tire also gets cut pretty easily. With a better quality tire I think it would be near perfect. I wish a few other manufacturers would step up.

My only problem I have had with sealing holes is if there is a piece of debris caught in the hole. You generally have to get the glass or metal out of there before it will seal, which sometimes can be a pain. I always carry a tube just in case.


----------



## CWILK

I've done three sets of wheels using Stan's conversion kits. The first set was a little slow in the learning stage. Follow the instructions at www.notubes.com I am very happy with the ride quality. I put one set on my wife's bike and she noticed the difference. They do wear a bit faster than some other tires. The trade off in a smoother ride is worth it to me.


----------



## smcnees

I just mounted up a set last week on Mavic Ksyrium SSC wheels (no rim tape required). Mounting was super easy as was getting the bead set. After about 100 miles I got my 1st puncture. My wife, drafting behind me, got sprayed with sealant until the hole was sealed. After that we put in a little more air and completed the ride. While loading the bike I noticed a pretty good cut in the same tire. I emailed Stan's asking about warranty given the few miles on the tires to no avail. I did an experiment and gobbed some Shoe Goo on the cut. Went out and rode 58 miles today and it worked great. I have another tire ordered but this temp fix will definitely get me by until it arrives. 

Speaking of ordering, I found the tires for $57 each and bought some more sealant from Stan's. I think if you shop around you can do better than the $150 Stan's is getting for the road tubeless 'bundle'.


----------



## 88 rex

corky said:


> Tonight I just mounted some Hutchinson fusion 2 tubeless on some Fulcrum racing zero 2-way fits (god what a mouthful...). So I gave the new tyres a tug under my foot to stretch 'em a tad.
> 
> Next, I cleaned the rim bead and brake surface so I didn't drag any residual road dirt into the rim bed. I then applied a soapy water solution to the rim bead and the tyre bead and mounted one bead onto the rim without fuss, carefully remembering to align the tyre logo with the valve.
> 
> Next I mounted 5/6ths of the other bead leaving a small gap to insert a small funnel so that I could pour in a cup of Stan's sealant. I then rotated the wheel so that the latex moved round the tyre away from the gap and attempted to thumb on the last1/6th of the tyre, I gave up and resorted to using a (plastic) tyre lever which was eventually successful I then span the wheel a few times to (hopefully) distribute the sealant evenly inside the tyre.
> 
> Finally I inflated the tyres using a track/floor pump to 130 PSI and have left them to ferment overnight.
> 
> Tomorrow I shall ride them after dropping the pressure to 90 PSI and maybe subsequently modifying the pressure up or down depending upon my findings.
> 
> Hopefully they will give me the ride of which I have been hearing


I'm not familiar with your rim, but if you have something with a removable core for the valve stem it makes it a whole lot easier to inject the stans into the tire. Just pump it up until the bead pops into place and then let the air out. Remove core, and add stans. Pump back up and enjoy the ride. 

You may know this already but if not, it sure beats messing with funnels and tire levers. Whole lot cleaner too. 

If it's a Stan's valve stem then it should have a removable core.


----------



## SwiftSolo

I bought the Shimano 7801s when they first came out and have run them with fusion 2 from the beginning (now run them on r-sys premiums as well).

In the beginning I ran the 7801s without stans but would lose about 15 lbs of pressure in 24 hours so I now use 2 oz in each tire. The tires inflate and seal real easy on the 7801s with a floor pump but not very easy on the Mavics (I have to use a compressor or a couple co2 cartridges).

I get well over 2000 miles out of rear fusion 2s and quite a bit more out of the fronts. I've had one flat while riding more than 8000 miles. The flat came after I had noticed about 10 miles into a 65 mile ride that the rear tire had worn through to the threads. I decided to go on and made it to about the 58 miles mark before the tire started spewing stans out of the threads in the bare spot.

I mostly do a lot of climbing which likely accounts for the quick wear on the rear tires.

In summary, I'd never consider going back to the endless flats that I had been getting on a variety of tubed tires. These ride well and are more puncture proof than anything that I have tried. A blow-out in a sharp curve that knocked me senseless and broke my helmet is what convinced me to convert.


----------



## dekindy

I have Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless tires mounted on Shimano 7850-SL's, Shimano's newest road tubeless wheel.

Installation was not anymore difficult than a normal clincher. I moistened the sidewall as directed to help insure a tight seal. The Stan's sealant is optional and a lot of guys do not to use it and have had good results. Maximum puncture resistance is what I want so I installed it. It was a little messy for me since it was difficult for me to install the tire without putting pressure on the sidewall and allowing some of the Stan's to leak out. My hands are small and not that strong so this should not be a difficulty for someone with average or larger hands and stronger hand grip. You can also get the Stan's valve stem with a core that can be removed to make the sealant install easier. I am not certain how well it works on the road tubeless rim and if you are doing a conversion beware that the current stem will not fit deeper rims like my Velocity Deep V's for instance. This is straight from Stan's so verify your specific rim before purchasing.

IMHO all the road tubeless claims that you can run with lesser tire pressure, lesser rolling resistance, better traction and puncture resistance are valid. Dura-Ace wheels can't be beat for the price and road tubeless is icing on the cake.

I am pleased with this product and believe it will become much more widely used in the next few years. My LBS manager covets mine and would like to have a set to race on. He is a CAT III.

I purchased mine after a riding buddy with years of experience and lots of cycling knowledge rode the 7801-SL's, the original road tubeless wheel, for a year.

I am a 200+ pound rider and have noticed no premature wear or squaring of the rear tire in almost a thousand miles. Some report this but I have also seen several reports of heavier riders getting better than average mileage compared to normal racing oriented clinchers like the Pro3 and GP4000's.


----------



## WinstonSmith

dekindy said:


> I have Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless tires mounted on Shimano 7850-SL's, Shimano's newest road tubeless wheel.
> 
> Installation was not anymore difficult than a normal clincher. I moistened the sidewall as directed to help insure a tight seal. The Stan's sealant is optional and a lot of guys do not to use it and have had good results. Maximum puncture resistance is what I want so I installed it. It was a little messy for me since it was difficult for me to install the tire without putting pressure on the sidewall and allowing some of the Stan's to leak out. My hands are small and not that strong so this should not be a difficulty for someone with average or larger hands and stronger hand grip. You can also get the Stan's valve stem with a core that can be removed to make the sealant install easier. I am not certain how well it works on the road tubeless rim and if you are doing a conversion beware that the current stem will not fit deeper rims like my Velocity Deep V's for instance. This is straight from Stan's so verify your specific rim before purchasing.
> 
> IMHO all the road tubeless claims that you can run with lesser tire pressure, lesser rolling resistance, better traction and puncture resistance are valid. Dura-Ace wheels can't be beat for the price and road tubeless is icing on the cake.
> 
> I am pleased with this product and believe it will become much more widely used in the next few years. My LBS manager covets mine and would like to have a set to race on. He is a CAT III.
> 
> I purchased mine after a riding buddy with years of experience and lots of cycling knowledge rode the 7801-SL's, the original road tubeless wheel, for a year.
> 
> I am a 200+ pound rider and have noticed no premature wear or squaring of the rear tire in almost a thousand miles. Some report this but I have also seen several reports of heavier riders getting better than average mileage compared to normal racing oriented clinchers like the Pro3 and GP4000's.


Excellent post – very informative. 

I have the same setup - 7850-SL, Fusion.

Have been running this for a couple of months and I really like it. I use about 2oz of Stans per tire just to be safe and get almost no loss of PSI. 

The ride is awesome, with the cracks and bumps being buffeted much more than with my old tubed setup. Acceleration seems very quick and I swear I now go faster downhill relative to other people maybe due to less rolling resistance.

Overall, I'm very happy and am convinced road tubeless is the future. We just need some selection of tires other than Hutch but I'm sure this is coming. I've heard some big name tire companies are very closing to releasing some tubeless tires.


----------



## preacherman

I recently built a new bike with the DA 7850SLs and the Fusions 2 setup. I've been hesitant to put sealent in the tires due to an article I recently read in which Shimano specifically warned against using any sealant from any manufacturer because it will cause corrosion of the rim. I've looked for the article again, but I can't find it. Has anyone else run across the same article? I think Leonard Zinn wrote it?? Without sealent the tires will lose 10-15 psi over the course of a two hour ride. I'd like to add sealent so I don't have to worry about the pressure loss, but I don't want to do damage to my rims. Any thoughts?


----------



## WinstonSmith

preacherman said:


> I recently built a new bike with the DA 7850SLs and the Fusions 2 setup. I've been hesitant to put sealent in the tires due to an article I recently read in which Shimano specifically warned against using any sealant from any manufacturer because it will cause corrosion of the rim. I've looked for the article again, but I can't find it. Has anyone else run across the same article? I think Leonard Zinn wrote it?? Without sealent the tires will lose 10-15 psi over the course of a two hour ride. I'd like to add sealent so I don't have to worry about the pressure loss, but I don't want to do damage to my rims. Any thoughts?


I have been using Stan's sealant in MTB tires for 4 years and have never seen a corrosion issue. I use it in my 7850's but have only had them for a few months.

If you go to Stan's site you'll see that they say there is no basis to the statement that their sealant corrodes anything. 

I think the benefit of using an ounce or two of Stans in tubeless road tires makes it worth it. Maybe over 10 years, you'd eventually get some kind of corrosion but I have no evidence of that so its worth it for me.


----------



## preacherman

I finally found the article I was referring to if anyone cares to take a look:
http://www.velonews.com/article/89375/lennard-zinn-tire-sealant-corrosion-disc-brake-spoking


----------



## teleguy57

*23 mm tubeless vs 25 mm standard setup?*

Curious if anyone can provide a ride comparison between a 25 mm good quality standard setup and a 23 mm tubeless setup with all other variables being equal? Also assuming a standard width clincher rim (vs a wider Hed Ardennes-type rim) and use of the Stan's conversion kit vs a tubeless-specific rim.

Thanks!


----------



## SwiftSolo

teleguy57 said:


> Curious if anyone can provide a ride comparison between a 25 mm good quality standard setup and a 23 mm tubeless setup with all other variables being equal? Also assuming a standard width clincher rim (vs a wider Hed Ardennes-type rim) and use of the Stan's conversion kit vs a tubeless-specific rim.
> 
> Thanks!


One of the things I've found is that my Shimano 7801 tubeless wheels are no hassle to pump up with qa standard pump when you change tires or if you should get that very rare flat. My Mavics with the conversion kit are a bit of a hassle and you may need several co2 cartridges before you get a seal and actually inflate the tire.


----------



## WinstonSmith

preacherman said:


> I finally found the article I was referring to if anyone cares to take a look:
> http://www.velonews.com/article/89375/lennard-zinn-tire-sealant-corrosion-disc-brake-spoking


Interesting article for sure. All I can say is I've been using latex based sealant on MTB rims for several years and there has been no corrosion. 

I will be checking my rims periodically though.


----------



## smcnees

smcnees said:


> I just mounted up a set last week on Mavic Ksyrium SSC wheels (no rim tape required). Mounting was super easy as was getting the bead set. After about 100 miles I got my 1st puncture. My wife, drafting behind me, got sprayed with sealant until the hole was sealed. After that we put in a little more air and completed the ride. While loading the bike I noticed a pretty good cut in the same tire. I emailed Stan's asking about warranty given the few miles on the tires to no avail. I did an experiment and gobbed some Shoe Goo on the cut. Went out and rode 58 miles today and it worked great. I have another tire ordered but this temp fix will definitely get me by until it arrives.


FOLLOW UP: I just did a double century on Saturday using the 'Shoe Goo' repaired tire and it held up wonderfully.


----------



## pyewacket

*Love the ride; a bit harder to manage than clinchers*



preacherman said:


> I recently built a new bike with the DA 7850SLs and the Fusions 2 setup. I've been hesitant to put sealent in the tires due to an article I recently read in which Shimano specifically warned against using any sealant from any manufacturer because it will cause corrosion of the rim. I've looked for the article again, but I can't find it. Has anyone else run across the same article? I think Leonard Zinn wrote it?? Without sealent the tires will lose 10-15 psi over the course of a two hour ride. I'd like to add sealent so I don't have to worry about the pressure loss, but I don't want to do damage to my rims. Any thoughts?


I also have 7850's and spoke to Shimano. They said absolutely no way no sealant. Stans of course says there's no problem. It's all a bit confusing because people have been running Stans in MTB wheels for years without any wheel failure pandemic. 

There is some sealant called Caffeelate or something that purports to be wheel friendly (no amonia).

As far as my experience goes with the wheels - I love them. The ride quality is far superior to standard clinchers (I ride at about 95psi, sometimes lower in the front) and I'm 165lbs.

My only complaint is they can be a bit finicky to get mounted. The beads are TIGHT. the guy at the shop did it with his bare hands, but he's more man than me: I had to use a lever (use the round ones so you don't damage the bead). 

My front went on with the first try and sealed up perfectly -- it hold air pressure the same as a standard clincher. The rear however has been a challenge - I just can't get it to seal perfectly, so it leaks down about 20psi over night. I also had to go the the gas station to use the air compressor to get the bead to seat. I'd take it off to try again but it was a bit of a chore to get mounted. I've considered putting in some sealant to solve the problem, but Shimano says not to.


----------



## JayZee

In my opinion if you can't use sealant than what is the point of running tubeless. It is a little better ride quality, but it is the sealant that will prevent the flats from the inevitable puncture. If you ask me, Shimano is just doing a typical CYA on the corrosion issue, but who knows. The other sealant is Caffelatex and I have good reviews, but haven't tried myself yet.

As for removing tires as long as you make sure the bead you are not trying to move is in the center of the rim (the deepest part) then it shouldn't be too hard. Same goes for getting the tire on the rim.


----------



## WinstonSmith

pyewacket said:


> ...
> My only complaint is they can be a bit finicky to get mounted. The beads are TIGHT. the guy at the shop did it with his bare hands, but he's more man than me: I had to use a lever (use the round ones so you don't damage the bead).
> 
> My front went on with the first try and sealed up perfectly -- it hold air pressure the same as a standard clincher. The rear however has been a challenge - I just can't get it to seal perfectly, so it leaks down about 20psi over night. I also had to go the the gas station to use the air compressor to get the bead to seat. I'd take it off to try again but it was a bit of a chore to get mounted. I've considered putting in some sealant to solve the problem, but Shimano says not to.


You should not need to use sealant to get it to seal. It is really only a backup in case of a puncture. Are you using very soapy water and following all the other best practices for mounting tubeless tires? I always use a compressor but it's possible with a fast floor pump. Consider investing in a cheap little compressor.

My Fusions were tight but mountable without levers. I'm very glad they are tight.


----------



## mattfatlander

I'll chime in here. As others have stated, the ride is truly, tangibly different and better. Road buzz is noticeably decreased...I'm about 195 lbs and run about 105 rear and just under 100 front. I have noticed no "slowdown" feel or any such. I have the 7801's with Fusion 2's. Tread cuts have been a minor issue (had one tire take a HUGE cut out in the rain once, had to replace, too big to patch/seal), but the ride quality increase far outweighs any concerns. I have Bonty Super Juice, just a tad, in the rear, and just used the "Fas'air" junk in the front after getting a slow puncture last weekend. I am needless to say very interested in how the Hutch "fixaflat" stuff works in the short and long-term.

I have planned to try the Specialized Tubeless tires, but I'd imagine that they're pretty much the same as the Hutch Fusion 2's since I think (?) that Hutchinson is still the only mfr making road tubeless....


----------



## Jon3234

mattfatlander said:


> I'll chime in here. As others have stated, the ride is truly, tangibly different and better. Road buzz is noticeably decreased...I'm about 195 lbs and run about 105 rear and just under 100 front. I have noticed no "slowdown" feel or any such. I have the 7801's with Fusion 2's. Tread cuts have been a minor issue (had one tire take a HUGE cut out in the rain once, had to replace, too big to patch/seal), but the ride quality increase far outweighs any concerns. I have Bonty Super Juice, just a tad, in the rear, and just used the "Fas'air" junk in the front after getting a slow puncture last weekend. I am needless to say very interested in how the Hutch "fixaflat" stuff works in the short and long-term.
> 
> I have planned to try the Specialized Tubeless tires, but I'd imagine that they're pretty much the same as the Hutch Fusion 2's since I think (?) that Hutchinson is still the only mfr making road tubeless....


The hutchinson tires are great but their sealant tires are crap. I initially tried to use fast air and it was a mess. I then decided to use protect'air and got a minor flat and it couldn't even seal it. So, I dumped the hutchinson sealant and put in stans and no problems at all. It also hold air longer.


----------



## California L33

WinstonSmith said:


> You should not need to use sealant to get it to seal. It is really only a backup in case of a puncture. Are you using very soapy water and following all the other best practices for mounting tubeless tires? I always use a compressor but it's possible with a fast floor pump. Consider investing in a cheap little compressor.
> 
> My Fusions were tight but mountable without levers. I'm very glad they are tight.


So, how big a saddle bag do you need for one of them battery powered compressors?


----------



## Gtti

Hey guys,

Where can i get the Stan sealant? The LBS here don't seems to carry them.

Thanks!!


----------



## SwiftSolo

WinstonSmith said:


> Excellent post – very informative.
> 
> I have the same setup - 7850-SL, Fusion.
> 
> Have been running this for a couple of months and I really like it. I use about 2oz of Stans per tire just to be safe and get almost no loss of PSI.
> 
> The ride is awesome, with the cracks and bumps being buffeted much more than with my old tubed setup. Acceleration seems very quick and I swear I now go faster downhill relative to other people maybe due to less rolling resistance.
> 
> Overall, I'm very happy and am convinced road tubeless is the future. We just need some selection of tires other than Hutch but I'm sure this is coming. I've heard some big name tire companies are very closing to releasing some tubeless tires.


Just a note about Stan's that some may not be aware of. On the rare occasion where you do get a puncture--keep riding. The stuff will spew out for a long while before sealing back up but typically will leave you with enough air to get back home.


----------



## thunderbolt413

HI Gtti, you should find anything you need at stan's website.

My setup is Industry 9 ego wheelset and fusion 2. I have to add sealant or the air comes out so easily that I can hear hissing sound when riding. But now both rims are properly sealed and I enjoy every minute on my half aluminum cannondale bike. Going tubeless makes a huge difference.


----------



## Gtti

thunderbolt413 said:


> HI Gtti, you should find anything you need at stan's website.
> 
> My setup is Industry 9 ego wheelset and fusion 2. I have to add sealant or the air comes out so easily that I can hear hissing sound when riding. But now both rims are properly sealed and I enjoy every minute on my half aluminum cannondale bike. Going tubeless makes a huge difference.



Hi Thunderbolt, really keen to convert my clincher to tubeless too, may i have the full wehsite address? Thanks!!


----------



## thunderbolt413

Hi Gtti,

Here you are: http://www.notubes.com/home.php


----------



## rruff

thunderbolt413 said:


> Going tubeless makes a huge difference.


Hi there... just noticing a lot of praise that sounds like the marketing hype, but I'm sceptical. Rolling resistance is actually a bit higher with tubeless (it's been tested), and you will get the same "ride" benefits by running bigger tires and /or lowering pressure in normal clinchers. So... the only place they might have an advantage is if you run into goatheads a lot or other puncturing stuff. Then you can put sealant in them and they will self-seal most of the time. For that benefit you pay for very limited tire choices and mounting/inflating hassles... and you still need to carry a couple tubes and a patch kit if you want to be sure to make it home.

Have I missed anything?


----------



## Gtti

thanks ya!!


----------



## WinstonSmith

rruff said:


> Hi there... just noticing a lot of praise that sounds like the marketing hype, but I'm sceptical. Rolling resistance is actually a bit higher with tubeless (it's been tested), and you will get the same "ride" benefits by running bigger tires and /or lowering pressure in normal clinchers. So... the only place they might have an advantage is if you run into goatheads a lot or other puncturing stuff. Then you can put sealant in them and they will self-seal most of the time. For that benefit you pay for very limited tire choices and mounting/inflating hassles... and you still need to carry a couple tubes and a patch kit if you want to be sure to make it home.
> 
> Have I missed anything?


Personally, I've never seen a test that indicated rolling resistance is higher with tubeless. My understanding is that it is the opposite due to zero tire/tube friction but I never fully trust those rolling resistance tests anyway.

For me, the ride quality is noticeably better with tubeless - faster acceleration and smoother ride. You also eliminate all the flat related problems tubes cause of course. There is a reason they stopped using tubes in car tires years ago. Tubes are just not necessary because of today’s tubeless technology.

I do agree that the selection of rims and tires is currently a big problem with road tubeless.


----------



## pmt

I found it to be easy as pie to mount and run Fusion2's on both Neuvation and Bontrager wheelsets. I watched the Stan's video three times, and then followed it precisely. I thought "Well, he makes it look easy; it won't be that easy for me." but it was! No trouble at all to tape and mount, and they hold air nicely. Easy to inflate with a Zefal DoubleShot pump.

Also found that it's super simple to patch them on the side of the road if a flat occurs.

At this point, I think it's crazy to run tires with tubes in them. Those are too much trouble compared to the easy, simple Road Tubeless.


----------



## WinstonSmith

pmt said:


> ...
> Also found that it's super simple to patch them on the side of the road if a flat occurs.
> 
> At this point, I think it's crazy to run tires with tubes in them. Those are too much trouble compared to the easy, simple Road Tubeless.


Yeah, I agree with your last point. 

However, I basically just bring a tube a use that instead of patching the tire but would be interested in hearing your technique for patching a tubeless tire on the road. Are you using a specific patch kit for tubeless? I’ve never viewed an in the field repair of either MTB tubeless or road tubeless an easy task.


----------



## pmt

I just unmount most of one side of the bead; enough to access the inside of the tire folded up. Then use a plain generic patch kit with the tube of vulcanizing glue; put the glue on, let it dry, then stick the patch on and press it down really well. Then I make sure it it stuck all the way around, and remount the bead.

Then just hit it with CO2 and be on the way. Obviously you have to find and remove the glass/rock/tack etc first.

The self-stick patches do NOT work though. You must use the kind with the tube of glue.

I've done ~1000k as of this morning on the last one I patched. No leakage or trouble.


----------



## natbrown

OK, just to confirm- 

If you get a puncture with road tubless, the sealant will prevent air from escaping after a short length of time? Will this then be a permanent fix? 
If you get a bigger puncture (eg nail, big bit of glass etc) you may need to either stop and put a tube in or patch the inside of the tyre? 
If you removed the tyre from the rim to install a patch when out on the road, you would need to use a CO2 cartridge to get the air in fast enough to make a seal? 

Please excuse my ignorance!


----------



## pmt

natbrown said:


> If you get a puncture with road tubeless, the sealant will prevent air from escaping after a short length of time? Will this then be a permanent fix? !


If it's a tiny puncture, like a Michelin wire, yes it's a permanent fix.



natbrown said:


> If you get a bigger puncture (eg nail, big bit of glass etc) you may need to either stop and put a tube in or patch the inside of the tyre? !


Yes indeed. Be sure you have a couple acetone wipes to clean off the sealant from the patch site before patching.



natbrown said:


> If you removed the tyre from the rim to install a patch when out on the road, you would need to use a CO2 cartridge to get the air in fast enough to make a seal?


Certainly. I don't know of a compact pump that would do it, but would love to find out about one.


----------



## natbrown

thanks for the reply mate. I have a few more questions- 

Is patching the tube when out on the road an easy enough exercise, or is it best to take a tube with you? What is the consensus? 
In real world experience- how much air is lost before the sealant works? Do you need to stop and pump the tyre? 
Are people still taking a spare tube, puncture kit, pump etc with them when riding with tubeless? 

Thanks in advance for any replies, this is unknown territory for me as I've never used MTB tubeless either.


----------



## pmt

natbrown said:


> Is patching the tube when out on the road an easy enough exercise, or is it best to take a tube with you?


Easy as pie. You just unmount half of one of the beads, flip up the area that needs patching, clean with acetone, rub some of the patch kit goop on there and let it dry, then stick the patch on. Remount tire, hit with CO2 and ride!



natbrown said:


> In real world experience- how much air is lost before the sealant works? Do you need to stop and pump the tyre?


That's going to vary based on the puncture. No way to predict it.



natbrown said:


> Are people still taking a spare tube, puncture kit, pump etc with them when riding with tubeless?


I take a patch kit and CO2 on most rides, but also take a tube on longer rides (over maybe 60k).


----------



## SwiftSolo

In the past 3 months I've seen and had more tubeless flats than in the previous 2 years combined.
I fear that they've taken the Kevlar out of the tire. In looking at their site, I found no mention of Kevlar--the product of their rightful claim to superior puncture resistance from the beginning. 

If true, I will be reluctantly switching back to tubes soon. It will have been a mistake of major significance to cycling unless someone else picks up the ball. Again, I have yet to cut apart one of their newer tires to verify or refute the removal of Kevlar. It is only suspicion at this point.


----------



## pmt

SwiftSolo said:


> In the past 3 months I've seen and had more tubeless flats than in the previous 2 years combined.


That's an unfortunate run of bad luck.



SwiftSolo said:


> I fear that they've taken the Kevlar out of the tire. In looking at their site, I found no mention of Kevlar--the product of their rightful claim to superior puncture resistance from the beginning.


Hutchinson has three Road Tubeless tires; Atom, paper-thin for racing, Fusion2, the most common race/road tire, and Intensive, strong enough that FDJeux rode them in Paris-Roubaix this year.

I've flatted on Fusion2, but no more than usual. I've never flatted on my wheelset with Intensive; it's a tougher tire.

Some other manufacturers are starting to make Road Tubeless including Specialized. Perhaps you could switch to the Intensive tires, or a tire from one of the other makers.


----------



## Jon3234

I have given up on using sealant. Stans seems to seal tiny punctures but anything bigger stans just spews crap all over the bike and expensive wheelset. I'm convinced that Stans works with mountain bikes because there is only 30-40 psi in the tires but when you're talking about 90-110 psi, that's a lot more pressure that stans can't seal.

Ride tubless for the ride quality and just tube up when you have a flat. BTW, right now I'm on the fusions, but will switch over to the intensive when my fusions wear out.

J

PS - if I'm by myself, I'll patch the tire which doesn't take long.


----------



## Dr_John

> Some other manufacturers are starting to make Road Tubeless including Specialized.


Specialized isn't making them. They're made by Hutchinson. Fusion2's MSRP is way too high, but fortunately you can find them for reasonable prices online. This won't be the case with the Specialized tubeless road tire. $80? I'll pass.


----------



## SwiftSolo

pmt said:


> That's an unfortunate run of bad luck.
> 
> 
> 
> Hutchinson has three Road Tubeless tires; Atom, paper-thin for racing, Fusion2, the most common race/road tire, and Intensive, strong enough that FDJeux rode them in Paris-Roubaix this year.
> 
> I've flatted on Fusion2, but no more than usual. I've never flatted on my wheelset with Intensive; it's a tougher tire.
> 
> Some other manufacturers are starting to make Road Tubeless including Specialized. Perhaps you could switch to the Intensive tires, or a tire from one of the other makers.


I may do that (switch). The fusion 2 originally had a kevlar veil over the entire surface. Arimid (Kevlar) is the key to puncture resistance in a light tire. I hope I find that I am wrong and indeed simply had a run of bad luck. If they did remove the Kevlar, it speaks to their desire to sell more tires in the short run at the expense of their future. Not sure that even the Intensive has a kevlar vail?


----------



## Metz

*Tufo Sealant*

I've never used Stan's but have some Tufo sealant - does anyone know if the Tufo sealant will work OK with tubeless? I'm guessing it's very similar to Stan's?


----------



## pyewacket

I spoke to Shimano and they say no-way no-how should you use any sealant from any vendor. It will void the warranty. With the mess of sealant it's just as easy to carry a spare tube.

That being said, people have been running Stan's in MTB wheels forever. If it was a huge problem everyone would know about it.

You can also go to Cantitoe Road. They have one that purports to be friendly, but Shimano says not.


----------



## pmt

Metz said:


> I've never used Stan's but have some Tufo sealant - does anyone know if the Tufo sealant will work OK with tubeless? I'm guessing it's very similar to Stan's?


That would probably be ok. Stan's seems to work better, but either would likely be acceptable.



pyewacket said:


> I spoke to Shimano and they say no-way no-how should you use any sealant from any vendor. It will void the warranty.


Sure, that way they can sell their overpriced sealant. Of course, that's only if you use Shimano wheels; there are lots of people using other brands of wheels with Road Tubeless.



pyewacket said:


> With the mess of sealant it's just as easy to carry a spare tube.


Not if you know how to fix it correctly.



pyewacket said:


> That being said, people have been running Stan's in MTB wheels forever. If it was a huge problem everyone would know about it.


Absolutely correct.


----------



## Jon3234

Quote:
Originally Posted by pyewacket
That being said, people have been running Stan's in MTB wheels forever. If it was a huge problem everyone would know about it.

Absolutely correct.

-----
Road tubeless is not the same, due to the much higher pressure that road tires need.

Since the pressure inside a road tire is so much more, I think it's much more difficult to seal than an mtb tire. I've run stans in my MTB tires for a couple years and have had great luck, but only run the tires at 30 psi.


----------



## pmt

Jon3234 said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by pyewacket
> That being said, people have been running Stan's in MTB wheels forever. If it was a huge problem everyone would know about it.
> 
> Absolutely correct.
> 
> -----
> Road tubeless is not the same, due to the much higher pressure that road tires need.
> 
> Since the pressure inside a road tire is so much more, I think it's much more difficult to seal than an mtb tire. I've run stans in my MTB tires for a couple years and have had great luck, but only run the tires at 30 psi.


I think the context about a "problem" was whether or not Stan's would chemically damage the metal of the rims; the Stan's folks say they've never seen any evidence of that.


----------



## Jon3234

yeah I don't think it will damage the rims. In my experience though, sealant doesn't work very well for road tubeless.


----------



## Keith A

pmt said:


> I think the context about a "problem" was whether or not Stan's would chemically damage the metal of the rims; the Stan's folks say they've never seen any evidence of that.


The same question can be asked of Hutchinson's Fast'air which also uses a chemical sealant.


----------



## j.king

bholwell said:


> I'm interested in hearing about your experience with Tubeless Road tires. What tires and rims did you use? Was tire installation a PITA? How was the performance and feel of the tires? What kind of mileage did you get out of your tires? Did you encounter any issues?
> 
> Any information you can share is greatly appreciated.
> 
> TIA! :thumbsup:



I've been using the new 2010 Shimano Ultegra 6700 wheels with Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless at 90 psi. The ride quality is in my opinion, amazing. No sealant. For me road tubeless has been one of the better innovations in the last few years in the cycling industry.

My 2nd favorite setup next to road tubeless is a pair of 25c GP4000's at about 100psi. The ride between both setups is close, with the tubeless taking the win for better ride quality if I had to pick a winner.

The problems I have with road tubeless have been industry support and follow through. There are at the moment quite a decent amount of wheel manufacturers out there offering wheels yet only about two manufacturers making tires. I've ridden the IRC tubeless tire but don't know if you can actually get them anywhere. The Hutchinson tires I think are crap. They ride nice but don't last very long. Not to mention that they are ridiculously expensive. I'm just disappointed really. The ride is so amazing yet the rest of the industry hasn't embraced it yet and from what I saw at Eurobike it's still not very accepted, at least not for 2010. I was hoping to see additional tires from some of the big manufacturers like Conti and Vittoria but nothing.

When it comes to my bike, I'm still going to ride road tubeless and hope that sometime in the future there are more tire choices available. I'm going to try the Intensive 25c tubeless tires next. Just looking for a little long ride life out of a set of tires.


----------



## Metz

j.king said:


> I've been using the new 2010 Shimano Ultegra 6700 wheels with Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless at 90 psi. The ride quality is in my opinion, amazing. No sealant. For me road tubeless has been one of the better innovations in the last few years in the cycling industry.
> 
> My 2nd favorite setup next to road tubeless is a pair of 25c GP4000's at about 100psi. The ride between both setups is close, with the tubeless taking the win for better ride quality if I had to pick a winner.
> 
> The problems I have with road tubeless have been industry support and follow through. There are at the moment quite a decent amount of wheel manufacturers out there offering wheels yet only about two manufacturers making tires. I've ridden the IRC tubeless tire but don't know if you can actually get them anywhere. The Hutchinson tires I think are crap. They ride nice but don't last very long. Not to mention that they are ridiculously expensive. I'm just disappointed really. The ride is so amazing yet the rest of the industry hasn't embraced it yet and from what I saw at Eurobike it's still not very accepted, at least not for 2010. I was hoping to see additional tires from some of the big manufacturers like Conti and Vittoria but nothing.
> 
> When it comes to my bike, I'm still going to ride road tubeless and hope that sometime in the future there are more tire choices available. I'm going to try the Intensive 25c tubeless tires next. Just looking for a little long ride life out of a set of tires.


I'm looking forward to getting my tubeless wheels later this week but I agree about the dearth of tire manufacturer support. The guys I ride/race with all ride on Contis or Michelens, and I don't know anyone who has used the 4000s' that doesn't rave about them. I'm guessing a 4000s tubeless would be fantastic. I used Fusion clinchers briefly because I was given a set and wasn't impressed at all (performance and flat resistance), but I ordered the tubeless versions for my new wheels as they seem like the only viable option right now.


----------



## pmt

Patching note: when choosing acetone wipes to clean the inside of the tire, be sure to get some that are plain acetone, without glycerin in them. If you get the ones with glycerin, the patch will fall off, and then you'll put your tube in and use your last CO2 cart.


----------



## pyewacket

pmt said:


> I think the context about a "problem" was whether or not Stan's would chemically damage the metal of the rims; the Stan's folks say they've never seen any evidence of that.


I spoke to Stan's and got their side of the story then called Shimano and spoke to them (twice -- once about Stan's and once about Caffe Latex). Shimano's response was unequivocal -- any use of sealant voids the warranty. I'm glad I haven't been using it because I had to warranty my rear wheel.

My wheels -- without sealant -- are holding air better than my regluar clinchers now. I'm glad I haven't used sealant because it would have covered up i) my rim defect, which was very minor but enough to not get a good seal on the bead, and ii) one of my Fusion2 tires was leaking through the sidewall, another defect that would have been covered up. These symptoms would have been really easy to dismiss as an imperfect seal.

So after some grief I have a perfect setup with no leaking. I was VERY tempted to put sealant in. I carry a spare tube anyway just in case, and so sealant might prevent a little inconvenience one day, but there are downsides as well.


----------



## pyewacket

bholwell said:


> I'm interested in hearing about your experience with Tubeless Road tires. What tires and rims did you use? Was tire installation a PITA? How was the performance and feel of the tires? What kind of mileage did you get out of your tires? Did you encounter any issues?
> 
> Any information you can share is greatly appreciated.
> 
> TIA! :thumbsup:


The installation is definitely a little tougher because of the carbon bead. There was no way I was going to get them on without a lever. Just use the right type of lever and some soapy water so the bead slips over the rim and into the channel. I've been able to get them off without a lever, but it took a Herculean effort.

I also found putting a little soapy water on the wheel after they were mounted to look for any tiny leaks was worth the extra step.


----------



## Zachariah

Guy recommend going tubeless with Continental GP 4000s converted?


----------



## bisk

SwiftSolo said:


> In the past 3 months I've seen and had more tubeless flats than in the previous 2 years combined.
> I fear that they've taken the Kevlar out of the tire. In looking at their site, I found no mention of Kevlar--the product of their rightful claim to superior puncture resistance from the beginning.
> 
> If true, I will be reluctantly switching back to tubes soon. It will have been a mistake of major significance to cycling unless someone else picks up the ball. Again, I have yet to cut apart one of their newer tires to verify or refute the removal of Kevlar. It is only suspicion at this point.


It seems that Hutchinson will soon have a new Fusion tubeless tire out with the Kevlar Protech. Just noticed it on a French shopping site, where it's available for pre-order.


----------



## eric_syd

Zachariah said:


> Guy recommend going tubeless with Continental GP 4000s converted?


Any feedback on that ?
I have used tubeless many non-tubeless tyres on my mountain bike and am looking at building a road wheelset.
Has anyone tried the GP4000 tubeless with a sealant ? What maximum pressure can you run ?


----------



## pmt

eric_syd said:


> I have used tubeless many non-tubeless tyres on my mountain bike and am looking at building a road wheelset.
> Has anyone tried the GP4000 tubeless with a sealant ? What maximum pressure can you run ?


Zero. Unless the tires are specifically Road Tubeless, they will blow off the rim.

Referenced here by Leonard Zinn- http://www.velonews.com/article/81035/technical-qa-with-lennard-zinn---tire-talk


----------



## eric_syd

pmt said:


> Zero. Unless the tires are specifically Road Tubeless, they will blow off the rim.
> 
> Referenced here by Leonard Zinn- http://www.velonews.com/article/81035/technical-qa-with-lennard-zinn---tire-talk


Leonard Zinn is a very knowledgeable and opinionated person. 
In another forum, there were examples of tubed tyres blowing off front wheels (and it was not nice).... A few other swearing than any non UST tyre mounted tubeless would eventually burp.
Still thousands of happy users are now running tubeless normal tyres with Stan's or other sealant on almost any brand of rims (except a few)
So I wouldn't mind to hear more experiences before i form an opinion..:wink5:


----------



## pmt

eric_syd said:


> Still thousands of happy users are now running tubeless normal tyres with Stan's or other sealant on almost any brand of rims (except a few)
> So I wouldn't mind to hear more experiences before i form an opinion..:wink5:


Yes, thousands of *mountain* bike users, with lower pressure tires. At the far higher pressures of road tires, they will blow off the rim. Not worth your life.

You're free to go ahead and test a bunch for us if you like.


----------



## eric_syd

pmt said:


> Yes, thousands of *mountain* bike users, with lower pressure tires. At the far higher pressures of road tires, they will blow off the rim. Not worth your life.
> 
> You're free to go ahead and test a bunch for us if you like.


Look, I'm not going to say I'm sure it works and that's why I'm asking for experience here. But most of tyre burping in MTB seem to come from people running way lower pressure than they would with tubes and the tyre deforming while cornering.
There is probably some mechanical reasons why stronger sidewalls (and/or beads) would hold better and I would be happy to hear about it but the simple explanation that the high pressure makes the tyre blow off the rim could be applied to the same tyre with a tube at the same pressure !
Whether there is a tube or not inbetween, the internal pressure will push the tyre bead against the rim with the same force. Same bead, same rim, same force, why a different outcome ?
I'll give it a try with touring 32mm tyres at 70-80 psi first and let you know :thumbsup:


----------



## pmt

eric_syd said:


> There is probably some mechanical reasons why stronger sidewalls (and/or beads) would hold better and I would be happy to hear about it but the simple explanation that the high pressure makes the tyre blow off the rim could be applied to the same tyre with a tube at the same pressure !


Yes, you're right. The inflated tube pinches the beads of the tire against the rim, holding them in place. Without a tube, the beads are no longer pinched, and free to expand over the edge. Air pressure alone isn't enough to hold the beads of a regular tire against the hooks.


----------



## C5000

I went for my first ride on my new DA 7850 scandium clinchers and Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless tires. The wheels replaced DA 7700 / Mavic Open Pro handbuilts. The ride quallity is awesome! The wheels are laterally stiffer, yet seem to smooth out the bumps better. They roll much faster than they weigh, only about 1/4 pound per wheel lighter, but more aero. Very happy with them. 

The tires are as difficult to mount as the toughest clinchers I've worked with. You have to make sure that the beads rest in the center of the rim, or else they aren't going on period. This way, you can work them on with your hands. Easier to roll them on rather than push/pull on the bead. When you are ready to inflate, go around the wheel and seat the beads in the rim slots. I was able to inflate them with a floor pump this way. If you use the Fast Air w/o seating the beads, it will go everywhere. I didn't use the sealant, because I could only get one can. 

Rode 105 rear, 100 front. I weigh 210 on a heavy day. 

I personally prefer these to my wife's Mavic Ksyrium SLs. The Mavics are stiffer, they catch a little more crosswind, and don't seem to roll as smoothly.


----------



## Jon3234

*road tubeless experience*

Yeah the ride is great. I'm on the fulcrums and they are a very tough tire to mount.

I also don't mess with sealant any more. The few times I get flats, I can either put a tube in or patch the tire. Plus, sealant never worked very well for me.


----------



## SwiftSolo

Jon3234 said:


> Yeah the ride is great. I'm on the fulcrums and they are a very tough tire to mount.
> 
> I also don't mess with sealant any more. The few times I get flats, I can either put a tube in or patch the tire. Plus, sealant never worked very well for me.


Jon,
I've found the Fusion 2s a little tough to reinflate after a flat and a patch. The patch area tends to be a bit stiff and keeps the tire from seating very well for reinflation. I've also found tubeless tires lose far less air over time with stans.

Stans is pretty amazing. If you get a puncture, you simply keep riding. You'll see the sealant spewing out of the puncture for several revolutions and then it will stop. I'm currently riding on a fusion 2 on the front that I punctured 900 miles ago and have had no problems with it at all (no patch). I use 2oz in each tire. Buy it in bulk if you decide to go that way and only use Stans. 

I converted to tubeless when they first came out for road bikes.


----------



## Jon3234

SwiftSolo said:


> Stans is pretty amazing. If you get a puncture, you simply keep riding. You'll see the sealant spewing out of the puncture for several revolutions and then it will stop. I'm currently riding on a fusion 2 on the front that I punctured 900 miles ago and have had no problems with it at all (no patch). I use 2oz in each tire. Buy it in bulk if you decide to go that way and only use Stans.


Thanks, my luck hasn't been so great with Stans. I used Stans on my MTB with great luck. However, I used Stans for about 3 months with the fusions and 80% of the time I got a puncture stans couldn't seal it. Not only did it not seal it, Stans shot all over my frame, drivetrain, and brake calipers and was a pain to clean up. My theory is that Stans wont work as well on skinny tires is because the pressure is so much higher. Sure stans can seal 30lbs in a mtb tire but 90lbs in a road tire is a lot more pressure for stans to cut off.

Glad it works for you but its not for me... However, I do love road tubeless still.


----------



## pmt

SwiftSolo said:


> I've found the Fusion 2s a little tough to reinflate after a flat and a patch. The patch area tends to be a bit stiff and keeps the tire from seating very well for reinflation.


Really? I haven't had that issue at all. My rear Fusion2 has three patches and seats instantly. Now that it's well-broken-in, I almost think I could inflate it with a little hand pump.

I find that the Stan's sealant seems to dry out within a few weeks, so I have to deflate and renew it. That's no trouble at all really; it just takes a minute. Every so often I might unmount the tire and clean out the dried-up Stan's as well.


----------



## SwiftSolo

pmt said:


> Really? I haven't had that issue at all. My rear Fusion2 has three patches and seats instantly. Now that it's well-broken-in, I almost think I could inflate it with a little hand pump.
> 
> I find that the Stan's sealant seems to dry out within a few weeks, so I have to deflate and renew it. That's no trouble at all really; it just takes a minute. Every so often I might unmount the tire and clean out the dried-up Stan's as well.


I've never had the stans dry up between tire replacement (about once a year). I wonder if the climate makes a difference. I live in the NW and do most of my riding in the mountains (fairly cool temperatures most of the time). Are you in a hot area of the country?


----------



## pmt

SwiftSolo said:


> I've never had the stans dry up between tire replacement (about once a year). I wonder if the climate makes a difference. I live in the NW and do most of my riding in the mountains (fairly cool temperatures most of the time). Are you in a hot area of the country?


Nope, Maryland, though it's been a hot summer. Perhaps now that it's cooler, it will last longer. I do only put about 10mL in each time. How much are you putting in?

Or maybe I'm getting so many little tiny flats, the Stan's is being used up when it seals them all.


----------



## SwiftSolo

pmt said:


> Nope, Maryland, though it's been a hot summer. Perhaps now that it's cooler, it will last longer. I do only put about 10mL in each time. How much are you putting in?
> 
> Or maybe I'm getting so many little tiny flats, the Stan's is being used up when it seals them all.


I'm using 30ml in each tire.


----------



## moabbiker

I've converted from GP4000s to Hutch's Intensive with stans. Mounting was straightforward without issues. Pleased with performance, ride quality absorbs so much more bumps I could swear they freshly paved the same roads. Didn't notice anything different in rolling resistance, about the same as before. Tires feel less squirly in tight cornering so that's a plus too. The intensive is a beefy tire weighing a bit more net grams so weight weenies will balk but at least I'll be riding on bad roads while the same will be on the side of the road fixing their flat.


----------



## mpk1996

I have enjoyed my tubeless tire/wheel combo. I run the shimano dura ace 7850's. I have run both the fusion 2 and currently have the new atom on there. they are very nice tires indeed. I have also used pro race 3s and vittoria corsa and rubinos on the same wheels with tubes. I will say that the atoms roll the nicest with the fusion and corsas a close second. the benifit of the atom is that with the same percieved effort, i can run lower psi and have a more comfortable ride. i found this true with the fusion 2s. thats the best thing about the tubeless, same rolling resistance with less psi than the tube tires. 

as far as flats go, well if you ride in a group like i do (you flat, you are on your own) - at least on the fast rides, you want to change it in a hurry to take a few short cuts and meet back up with them. so, I carry a spare tube, just like before and some tire levers. these are very hard to get on or off the wheel (much tighter fit for the tubeless). so, i put the tube in, then i don't have to worry about the bead sealing on mult co2s. then when i get home i can patch it if it can be patched. just don't forget the tire levers.


----------



## QQUIKM3

*You are the first correct post on topic. . .*



rruff said:


> Hi there... just noticing a lot of praise that sounds like the marketing hype, but I'm sceptical. Rolling resistance is actually a bit higher with tubeless (it's been tested), and you will get the same "ride" benefits by running bigger tires and /or lowering pressure in normal clinchers.


Tubeless is an (IMO and many others) a stupid, silly, fab and will go the way of disco. There are no advantages to a tube-less tire only disadvantages as you're pointed out. There is no better combo than a Veloflex tire with Michelin latex tubes.


----------



## Wheelman55

Good to hear that you like the Atom's. I'm looking forward to finally wearing out my Fusion 2's so I can run some Atom's next season. What would you say the difference between the Atoms and Fusion 2's is?

Also...are you running the 7850 SL's or the 7850 C24 TL's?


----------



## Jon3234

My fusions wear out way too fast for the road I'm on. They also flat too often and Stans never worked for me. I'm currently running vittoria rubinos with tubes on my fulcrums now. the ride isn't as good but it's not bad. I ordered some GP4000s and will post how they ride compared to the fusions. I mounted some intensive tires and they wouldn't hold air (without stans) so I'm sending them back.

For the time being, I've given up on tubeless...the cons out way the pros for me.


----------



## pmt

Jon3234 said:


> My fusions wear out way too fast for the road I'm on. They also flat too often and Stans never worked for me. I'm currently running vittoria rubinos with tubes on my fulcrums now. the ride isn't as good but it's not bad. I ordered some GP4000s and will post how they ride compared to the fusions. I mounted some intensive tires and they wouldn't hold air (without stans) so I'm sending them back.


Just like anything, YMMV. My Fusion2s have almost 6000k on them and still going strong; the rear has three patches inside. The Stan's has saved the day a couple times.

What rims were you using them on? Maybe some rims don't work as well as others.


----------



## Jon3234

I'm using them on Fulcrum Racing Zero 2 Way fit. It's not the rims.

IMO, the true benefits for tubeless have nothing to do with flats or maintenance, but more ride quality. I've had more flats/maintenance on tubeless than with tubes. Admitingly, the ride quality is nice.


----------



## SwiftSolo

Jon3234 said:


> I'm using them on Fulcrum Racing Zero 2 Way fit. It's not the rims.
> 
> IMO, the true benefits for tubeless have nothing to do with flats or maintenance, but more ride quality. I've had more flats/maintenance on tubeless than with tubes. Admitingly, the ride quality is nice.


Jon,
I'm a little miffed. Your experience is very different from mine. 

The rate of riding flats with my tubeless fusion 2's is 1 in 8000 miles (I didn't check the tire until halfway through the ride when I found that it was worn through to the casing--still got 40 more miles out of it before it let go). Before tubeless, I was lucky to get 500 miles between flats. Our troads have a lot of glass on tge shoulders.

I did have a puncture on my current set of fusion 2's about 700 miles ago. The stan's spewed out for several revolutions and stopped. I was able to finish the ride back to the campsite (about 12 miles) where I checked the pressure. It was down to 80 lbs. The stans wipped off the bike with no trouble at all and I continue to ride that punctured tire to this day without problems 

Everyone using stans should be aware that it is critical that you keep riding if you get a puncture (a bit slower is all). The stans will not work by putting the puncture down while stopped. For some reason, the stans will simply spew out until the tire is flat. Obviously, a major tear/puncture will not allow continued riding as the tire will be flat within a couple of revolutions anyway.


----------



## nick kitchen

2009 Easton EC90 Aero 56mm carbon tubular with Conti sprinter tires. I taped them since I dont crit race them. Mounting was easy. I stretched the tire for a couple hrs and then put them on. I let them sit over night and the next day I roll them on the bike to see if there are any high spots. If they have any high spots I let the air out and zip ty the tire to teh rim and let them sit over night. 

The sprinters last about the same as a race oriented clincher. I ride them all the time and love the way they feel over a clincher. They give much more precise feedback and they feel faster prob since I run them at 140psi. Repairing them takes more effort than a clincher but overall the pros out way the cons.


----------



## j.king

nick kitchen said:


> 2009 Easton EC90 Aero 56mm carbon tubular with Conti sprinter tires. I taped them since I dont crit race them. Mounting was easy. I stretched the tire for a couple hrs and then put them on. I let them sit over night and the next day I roll them on the bike to see if there are any high spots. If they have any high spots I let the air out and zip ty the tire to teh rim and let them sit over night.
> 
> The sprinters last about the same as a race oriented clincher. I ride them all the time and love the way they feel over a clincher. They give much more precise feedback and they feel faster prob since I run them at 140psi. Repairing them takes more effort than a clincher but overall the pros out way the cons.


Sounds like a nice setup. Tubulars which are what you are using have a tube in them, it's just sewn inside the tire. In this thread we were discussing a new tire/rim combo that has no tube like what they've been using on mountain bikes for a few years now.

Check it out at Roadtubeless


----------



## nick kitchen

j.king said:


> Sounds like a nice setup. Tubulars which are what you are using have a tube in them, it's just sewn inside the tire. In this thread we were discussing a new tire/rim combo that has no tube like what they've been using on mountain bikes for a few years now.
> 
> Check it out at Roadtubeless



I did not realize....:mad2: 

Im new......So can I blame the fact that I misread the topic on that? Nothing to see here folks move along.


FWIW.. I have two sets of tubeless wheels for the mtn bike. I have found that the slime seal works better than stans. Also if you dont have access to a compressor you can take a ratchet strap and put it around the tire. It will squeeze the bead down to the wheel and will allow you to get enough air in to seat the bead.

Alright Im just going to sneak out of here before anyone sees me.


----------



## j.king

nick kitchen said:


> I did not realize....:mad2:
> 
> Im new......So can I blame the fact that I misread the topic on that? Nothing to see here folks move along.
> 
> 
> FWIW.. I have two sets of tubeless wheels for the mtn bike. I have found that the slime seal works better than stans. Also if you dont have access to a compressor you can take a ratchet strap and put it around the tire. It will squeeze the bead down to the wheel and will allow you to get enough air in to seat the bead.
> 
> Alright Im just going to sneak out of here before anyone sees me.



LOL...no worries. We're all friends here. A spray bottle of soapy water works great on tubeless tires as well, mountain or road. That is if one is having issues with the tire seating properly.


----------



## sheep

I love it. Factory mechanics for Francaise des Jeux, a Pro-Tour team sponsored by Shimano putting sealant into D/A 7850's. Here's the link: 

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech...ech/features/paris_roubaix109/P-R_FDJ_sealant

So what gives? Shimano says they'll void the warranty. And here we have factory mechanics making sure that the pro's don't have to worry about flats. Warranty on wheels are touchy one way or another. What I don't want is corroded rims, but can't see in any condition a tubeless bicycle system without a sealant in place. Heck, now I worry about converting my current XTR Lefty`s over to tubeless. The rims are both scandium.

Any one out there with ruined rims or is it too soon to tell?

For those using DA 7850 with sealant, did you utilize an aftermarket valve with a removeable core? If so, which one worked? If you didn't fire it through the valve what worked for you? 

Sincerely, 

On the fence between Michelin Pro Service Course tires and Hutchinson Fusion Tubeless.


----------



## California L33

sheep said:


> I love it. Factory mechanics for Francaise des Jeux, a Pro-Tour team sponsored by Shimano putting sealant into D/A 7850's. Here's the link:
> 
> http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech...ech/features/paris_roubaix109/P-R_FDJ_sealant
> 
> So what gives? Shimano says they'll void the warranty. And here we have factory mechanics making sure that the pro's don't have to worry about flats. Warranty on wheels are touchy one way or another. What I don't want is corroded rims, but can't see in any condition a tubeless bicycle system without a sealant in place. Heck, now I worry about converting my current XTR Lefty`s over to tubeless. The rims are both scandium.
> 
> Any one out there with ruined rims or is it too soon to tell?
> 
> For those using DA 7850 with sealant, did you utilize an aftermarket valve with a removeable core? If so, which one worked? If you didn't fire it through the valve what worked for you?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> On the fence between Michelin Pro Service Course tires and Hutchinson Fusion Tubeless.


The pros aren't worried about voiding warranties. They are worried about flats. For them it's a no brainer.


----------



## Wheelman55

sheep said:


> I love it. Factory mechanics for Francaise des Jeux, a Pro-Tour team sponsored by Shimano putting sealant into D/A 7850's. Here's the link:
> 
> http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech...ech/features/paris_roubaix109/P-R_FDJ_sealant
> 
> So what gives? Shimano says they'll void the warranty. And here we have factory mechanics making sure that the pro's don't have to worry about flats. Warranty on wheels are touchy one way or another. What I don't want is corroded rims, but can't see in any condition a tubeless bicycle system without a sealant in place. Heck, now I worry about converting my current XTR Lefty`s over to tubeless. The rims are both scandium.
> 
> Any one out there with ruined rims or is it too soon to tell?
> 
> For those using DA 7850 with sealant, did you utilize an aftermarket valve with a removeable core? If so, which one worked? If you didn't fire it through the valve what worked for you?


The Shimano tech rep that I spoke to said that Caffe Latex is what they (Shimano) are using in their demo wheels as it does not contain any corrosive chemicals. He said to steer away from the sealants that have ammonia in them as the ammonia is what corrodes the rims. I got a weird puncuture in the side wall on my 7850 SL's within in the first 15 miles. I put a small amount of Caffe Latex into the tire which sealed the pinhole. I've got over 1,000 miles on the tire now with no issues.


----------



## SwiftSolo

sheep said:


> I love it. Factory mechanics for Francaise des Jeux, a Pro-Tour team sponsored by Shimano putting sealant into D/A 7850's. Here's the link:
> 
> http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech...ech/features/paris_roubaix109/P-R_FDJ_sealant
> 
> So what gives? Shimano says they'll void the warranty. And here we have factory mechanics making sure that the pro's don't have to worry about flats. Warranty on wheels are touchy one way or another. What I don't want is corroded rims, but can't see in any condition a tubeless bicycle system without a sealant in place. Heck, now I worry about converting my current XTR Lefty`s over to tubeless. The rims are both scandium.
> 
> Any one out there with ruined rims or is it too soon to tell?
> 
> For those using DA 7850 with sealant, did you utilize an aftermarket valve with a removeable core? If so, which one worked? If you didn't fire it through the valve what worked for you?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> On the fence between Michelin Pro Service Course tires and Hutchinson Fusion Tubeless.


This is all nonsense on the grandest scale. I've been running tubeless since they first hit the market in scandium 7801's (3 or 4 years now). For most of that time I've been using stan's. There are absolutely no issues surfacing, and with 5 minutes of cleaning, Shimano would not be able to tell that I'd ever used Stan's (perhaps they could by sending them to a lab for residue testing).

Incidentally, Shimanos tubeless are bulletproof and much easier to deal with than a non-tubeless conversion (like mavic) using Stans. This is especially true when re-inflating a tire.


----------



## pmt

SwiftSolo said:


> This is all nonsense on the grandest scale. I've been running tubeless since they first hit the market in scandium 7801's (3 or 4 years now). For most of that time I've been using stan's. There are absolutely no issues surfacing, and with 5 minutes of cleaning, Shimano would not be able to tell that I'd ever used Stan's (perhaps they could by sending them to a lab for residue testing).
> 
> Incidentally, Shimanos tubeless are bulletproof and much easier to deal with than a non-tubeless conversion (like mavic) using Stans. This is especially true when re-inflating a tire.


Yep. Though I find my converted Neuvation and Bontrager rims are so easy to inflate I can almost do it just by sneezing on them.

Shimano just wants to sell their sealant, so they scare people off other kinds.


----------



## sheep

Sorry PMT, Shimano doesn't make a sealant otherwise my previous post would have been moot. 

But once more I ask those using Dura Ace wheels, best method for putting in sealant? Aftermarket tubeless valve - don't know what one will work with my 7850's or FDJ style and make a mess.

Also with regards to Caffelatex, who's tried this? Who's distributing this stuff in Canada? What method did you use to get it into 7850's?


----------



## pmt

sheep said:


> Sorry PMT, Shimano doesn't make a sealant otherwise my previous post would have been moot.


Oh, duh, I was thinking of Hutchinson Fast'Air. Apparently, Shimano does allow the use of the Hutchinson sealant, though I cannot find a direct link corroborating that. Anybody got anything on it? Couldn't find it on the Shimano site.

Not that it really matters. All you have to do is clean the wheel and they'd never know.


----------



## sheep

Ah, I was hoping someone was going to mention that Hutchinson says to use Fast Air to set up their tires for the first time! Thanks PMT. I also recall something along the lines of the Fusions and the 7850's were meant to be run as a team > so do you follow Hutchinson's advice or Shimano's advice? Didn't these two companies co-design this stuff? Something about the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing or something...

So here I am wanting to blow some Fast Air into my wheels. Can you blow this stuff through the standard Shimano (non-removable core) tubeless valve? Anyone try this? Did it work for you?


----------



## pmt

sheep said:


> Ah, I was hoping someone was going to mention that Hutchinson says to use Fast Air to set up their tires for the first time! Thanks PMT. I also recall something along the lines of the Fusions and the 7850's were meant to be run as a team > so do you follow Hutchinson's advice or Shimano's advice? Didn't these two companies co-design this stuff? Something about the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing or something...
> 
> So here I am wanting to blow some Fast Air into my wheels. Can you blow this stuff through the standard Shimano (non-removable core) tubeless valve? Anyone try this? Did it work for you?


My understanding is that you can send it right through the valve.

Since Stan's sealant is non-pressurized, I don't install it through the valve. I hang the wheel on a hook (so it's not sitting flat on the ground) and then just push the side of the tire inwards to see the rim, and put it in with a syringe. It would be easy enough to just pour it in there with a small pouring device. No big deal. No need to add it through the valve if it's not under pressure. A little might drip out of the bottom, but it's not significant.

Though with my wheels, I don't *need* Stan's with either the Neuvation or the Bontrager wheels. I did need it with the Velocity Aerohead rim.


----------



## AM999

*Top Secret IRC Tubeless Crr Data*

http://biketechreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2636


----------



## MWT

AM999 said:


> http://biketechreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2636



It appears the test was done at 120 psi. Am I reading that correctly? If so, the results are suspect since tubeless should be run in the 85 - 90 psi range (give or take).


----------



## AM999

MWT said:


> It appears the test was done at 120 psi. Am I reading that correctly? If so, the results are suspect since tubeless should be run in the 85 - 90 psi range (give or take).


Yes - I run all my Crr tests at 120 psig to permit direct comparison from tire to tire. The pressure range spec on the IRC tubeless tires is 90 - 115 psig. By chance I did run a test at ~ 85 psig due to a leaky valve stem seal. The Crr was much higher ~ 0.00340. The tests are done on smooth rollers and the data corrected to a flat surface. A summary of tire tests done through ~ 1 year ago is linked on the BTR home page for comparisons to other tires. Not sure where the 85 - 90 psig recommendation comes from ??


----------



## MWT

AM999 said:


> Yes - I run all my Crr tests at 120 psig to permit direct comparison from tire to tire. The pressure range spec on the IRC tubeless tires is 90 - 115 psig. By chance I did run a test at ~ 85 psig due to a leaky valve stem seal. The Crr was much higher ~ 0.00340. The tests are done on smooth rollers and the data corrected to a flat surface. A summary of tire tests done through ~ 1 year ago is linked on the BTR home page for comparisons to other tires. Not sure where the 85 - 90 psig recommendation comes from ??


85 - 90 psi is a very common recommendation for the Hutchinson Fusion Tubeless, so I assumed the IRC would be in the same ballpark. Running a tubeless tire at 120 psi seems pointless. Lower pressure without the risk of pinch flats yields more comfort and better traction. And, if Hutchinson is to be believed, it also means lower rolling resistance.


----------



## AM999

MWT said:


> 85 - 90 psi is a very common recommendation for the Hutchinson Fusion Tubeless, so I assumed the IRC would be in the same ballpark. Running a tubeless tire at 120 psi seems pointless. Lower pressure without the risk of pinch flats yields more comfort and better traction. And, if Hutchinson is to be believe, it also means lower rolling resistance.


All bicycle tires will roll faster at higher pressures on a smooth surface, i.e. Crr increases as Tire Pressure decreases. On a real road with a "bumpy" surface an optimum pressure will be reached where the Crr begins to rise due to bouncing of the tire on the small surface irregularities. I've seen data on indicating that for a bike and rider total weight of ~ 185 lbs the optimum tire pressure on a very good asphalt surface is ~ 125 psig. I happen to have a brand new Hutchinson Fusion 2 tire in its packaging. The pressure guideline is:

Rider Weight, Tire Pressure

< 130 lbs, 87 - 101 psig

140 - 165 lbs, 95 - 109 psig

> 175 lbs, 116 - 125 psig

Curious about the weight gaps - I guess if you weigh 135 lbs you aren't allowed to ride Hutchinson tubeless.  

Running at low pressures would be more comfortable and have a larger contact area but the tires won't roll as well. In the case of the IRC Top Secret the difference in Crr between 85 and 120 psig will be roughly equivalent to 12 watts on a real road (~ 45 sec in a 40 km TT).


----------



## dasetton

I have had my 7801-SLs and Fusion2s for about 1.5 years, maybe 4k miles. I don't think I had a flat for the first year and I was running without any sealant. The ride is great, the wheels are bullet proof, and my first set of Fusions lasted about 2k miles on the rear, which I though was pretty good. All was great until I got my first flat. 
I used Fast'Air out on the road to fix my first flat, which was a big mess, but it got the tire inflated eventually, and I made it home. The next day the tire was flat, so the sealant didn't really seal the hole, so I pulled the tire and wiped up the mess of still-liquid sealant. BIG MISTAKE! 
If you look at the 7801 rim (and I believe the 7850 rim as well) there is a what looks like silicone seal painted or placed over where the rim is welded together. The solvent that keeps the sealant liquid (ammonia in some sealants, unknown in Fast'Air) dissolved the silicone seal enough, and along with the wiping action, the seal came off the rim. I was unable to get the rim to hold air after that.
I sent the rim back to Shimano; they claimed the leak was caused by a bad valve stem, which they replaced. They did not want to replace the rim because they said sealant would void the warranty. However, there is no documentation on their website nor included with the wheels that states sealant will void the warranty, so eventually they did replace the rim. When this occurred, there was only one tubeless rim and one tubeless tire on the market, and Hutchinson, along with all the internet retailers, were pushing the Fast'Air sealant. Hutchinson is still pushing sealant, and there is still no documentation from Shimano saying not to use it. 
Clearly plenty of people have been using sealant with 7801/7850 tubeless rims, as well as other Shimano tubeless MTB rims, so I'm guessing what happened to my rim is a rare event. 
Like another poster, I have had a rash of flats in the last 6 months using the Fusion2s. They definitely seem to be less flat resistant than when I first started using them. I have been using tubes when I get a flat, but it is difficult to get the beads to seat using a mini-pump, and I end up riding on a wobbly-tire for the rest of the ride; it kind of sucks. I suppose I could use a CO2, but I prefer to carry a pump.
Despite the issue I had with the sealant, I am considering using it again. I've been riding my Easton/Velomax Circuits, and while they are nice wheels, they are no comparison to the Dura-Ace + tubeless set up. But a flat every other ride is was driving me crazy!

Has anyone else had a similar problem with the sealant and this seal on the rim? Is one sealant better than the other?


----------



## Dr_John

> Rider Weight, Tire Pressure
> 
> < 130 lbs, 87 - 101 psig
> 
> 140 - 165 lbs, 95 - 109 psig
> 
> > 175 lbs, 116 - 125 psig


We've been through this before on this site. That's a mislabel. Look at the pressure in bars, and convert:

< 130 lbs, 6-6.5 bar => 87-95 psi
140 - 165 lbs, 6.5-7 bar => 95-102 psi
> 175 lbs, 7-7.5 bar => 102-109 psi

While higher than most ride at, a bit more reasonable. As others have pointed out, I fail to see the value of running a tubeless at 120 psi.

I really don't get the negativity towards tubeless. It's not 'either/or.' I have 7850SLs. I really like the wheels a lot. I can run them tubeless or clincher. No big deal. I like tubeless a lot. However, if it entirely disappeared tomorrow, I still have a fine wheelset I can ride clincher.

As for sealant, in my experience, not worth bothering with. I used it at first, but don't bother now. A flat? I just tube up, as I would with a clincher. The majority of the punctures I was getting were to big to seal. I've probably done 10,000+ miles on road tubeless. Sealant is not required. Hutchinson 'recommends it' so you buy their $12 can of sealant. If it were a requirement, Shimano would mention it as such.


----------



## AM999

Dr_John said:


> We've been through this before on this site. That's a mislabel. Look at the pressure in bars, and convert:
> 
> < 130 lbs, 6-6.5 bar => 87-95 psi
> 140 - 165 lbs, 6.5-7 bar => 95-102 psi
> > 175 lbs, 7-7.5 bar => 102-109 psi
> 
> While higher than most ride at, a bit more reasonable. As others have pointed out, I fail to see the value of running a tubeless at 120 psi.
> 
> I really don't get the negativity towards tubeless. It's not 'either/or.' I have 7850SLs. I really like the wheels a lot. I can run them tubeless or clincher. No big deal. I like tubeless a lot. However, if it entirely disappeared tomorrow, I still have a fine wheelset I can ride clincher.
> 
> As for sealant, in my experience, not worth bothering with. I used it at first, but don't bother now. A flat? I just tube up, as I would with a clincher. The majority of the punctures I was getting were to big to seal. I've probably done 10,000+ miles on road tubeless. Sealant is not required. Hutchinson 'recommends it' so you buy their $12 can of sealant. If it were a requirement, Shimano would mention it as such.


This is from the Hutchinson Website:

ROAD TUBELESS

< 60 kg / 130 lb = 5,5 bars / 80 psi
65 - 75 kg / 140 - 165 lb = 6 - 7 bars / 87 - 101 psi
> 80 kg / 185 lb = 7,5 bars / 108 psi

Different from the packaging as well.

The value of running at 120 psig is lower rolling resistance. Lower pressure may be more comfortable and better cornering. It's up to the individual to decide what is more important.


----------



## pmt

Dr_John said:


> I really don't get the negativity towards tubeless.


It happens with every new technology. Clipless pedals, time trial bars, indexed shifting, and STIs all had their naysayers.




Dr_John said:


> As for sealant, in my experience, not worth bothering with. I used it at first, but don't bother now. A flat? I just tube up, as I would with a clincher. The majority of the punctures I was getting were to big to seal. I've probably done 10,000+ miles on road tubeless. Sealant is not required. Hutchinson 'recommends it' so you buy their $12 can of sealant. If it were a requirement, Shimano would mention it as such.


I use inexpensive Stan's sealant, and find it certainly helps on rather small punctures. Generally I wouldn't put a tube in a larger puncture, as I now know how to patch just as fast as putting in a tube.


----------



## hyperborea

dasetton said:


> ....
> Like another poster, I have had a rash of flats in the last 6 months using the Fusion2s. They definitely seem to be less flat resistant than when I first started using them. I have been using tubes when I get a flat, but it is difficult to get the beads to seat using a mini-pump, and I end up riding on a wobbly-tire for the rest of the ride; it kind of sucks. I suppose I could use a CO2, but I prefer to carry a pump.
> Despite the issue I had with the sealant, I am considering using it again. I've been riding my Easton/Velomax Circuits, and while they are nice wheels, they are no comparison to the Dura-Ace + tubeless set up. But a flat every other ride is was driving me crazy!
> 
> Has anyone else had a similar problem with the sealant and this seal on the rim? Is one sealant better than the other?


I use Stan's with this setup and have not had any issues and no flats in a year of riding.

The fact that you are getting so many flats seems very odd to me. Fusions have a tougher casing than non-tubeless tires so you should be getting a lot fewer flats.

Myself and a huge portion of the mountain bike community have been running tubeless conversions with Stans on all types of rims for many years and there are no statistically significant reports of damage due to sealant. 

Maybe, it’s the Fast Air sealant that caused the problem. I would recommend Stan’s instead. I have experimented with many different types of sealants including various ghetto mixes and nothing works like Stan’s (unfortunately).


----------



## Dr_John

> The value of running at 120 psig is lower rolling resistance.


My point was if you're going to run at that pressure, don't bother using tubeless. Kind of defeating the purpose.


----------



## Jon3234

dasetton said:


> I have had my 7801-SLs and Fusion2s for about 1.5 years, maybe 4k miles. I don't think I had a flat for the first year and I was running without any sealant. The ride is great, the wheels are bullet proof, and my first set of Fusions lasted about 2k miles on the rear, which I though was pretty good. All was great until I got my first flat.
> I used Fast'Air out on the road to fix my first flat, which was a big mess, but it got the tire inflated eventually, and I made it home. The next day the tire was flat, so the sealant didn't really seal the hole, so I pulled the tire and wiped up the mess of still-liquid sealant. BIG MISTAKE!
> If you look at the 7801 rim (and I believe the 7850 rim as well) there is a what looks like silicone seal painted or placed over where the rim is welded together. The solvent that keeps the sealant liquid (ammonia in some sealants, unknown in Fast'Air) dissolved the silicone seal enough, and along with the wiping action, the seal came off the rim. I was unable to get the rim to hold air after that.
> I sent the rim back to Shimano; they claimed the leak was caused by a bad valve stem, which they replaced. They did not want to replace the rim because they said sealant would void the warranty. However, there is no documentation on their website nor included with the wheels that states sealant will void the warranty, so eventually they did replace the rim. When this occurred, there was only one tubeless rim and one tubeless tire on the market, and Hutchinson, along with all the internet retailers, were pushing the Fast'Air sealant. Hutchinson is still pushing sealant, and there is still no documentation from Shimano saying not to use it.
> Clearly plenty of people have been using sealant with 7801/7850 tubeless rims, as well as other Shimano tubeless MTB rims, so I'm guessing what happened to my rim is a rare event.
> Like another poster, I have had a rash of flats in the last 6 months using the Fusion2s. They definitely seem to be less flat resistant than when I first started using them. I have been using tubes when I get a flat, but it is difficult to get the beads to seat using a mini-pump, and I end up riding on a wobbly-tire for the rest of the ride; it kind of sucks. I suppose I could use a CO2, but I prefer to carry a pump.
> Despite the issue I had with the sealant, I am considering using it again. I've been riding my Easton/Velomax Circuits, and while they are nice wheels, they are no comparison to the Dura-Ace + tubeless set up. But a flat every other ride is was driving me crazy!
> 
> Has anyone else had a similar problem with the sealant and this seal on the rim? Is one sealant better than the other?


As mentioned in a previous post, I have Fulcrum racing zeros 2 way fit. The ride on the fusions was great. But once you had a flat, it is a major pain in the butt. In my experience, the sealant only works with very small punctures, like a needle or pin prick. Anything larger, the sealant spews all over the $1k wheelset and $3k carbon fiber frame. Yeah you can wipe it off, but it's still a pain. I am really convinced that sealant, no matter who's it is (stans, hutch, caffe), can not seal punctures as easily on a road tubeless system because the pressure is so much higher than mtb tubeless systems. MTB tubeless systems seem to work better because there is usually about 30PSI in the tires so the tires are not blowing the sealant out as fast. Please correct me if this assumption is wrong.

Also, the fusions, are brutal to mount. At least on my rims. I have broken numerous tire levers, scratched the decals to death and been very frustrated by something that should be easy. Fortunately the rims are aluminum and super durable.

After deciding to give the regular clincher tires a try, I threw on the Rubino Pro Slicks with tubes and they felt ok. not as good as the fusion tubeless ride but by no means bad.

I then decided to give a nicer tire a try. I purchased some Conti 4000s and ran them around 100 psi. To me the ride was just as good as tubeless. Tubeless might be marginally better but by no means worth the hassle. I might revisit tubeless in a year or so but for now, I'm loving my conti 4000s ride.


----------



## AM999

Dr_John said:


> My point was if you're going to run at that pressure, don't bother using tubeless. Kind of defeating the purpose.


I've pinch flatted clinchers at ~ 120 psig so I think there would definitely be an interest in an easy rolling tubeless tire which wouldn't be susceptible to pinch flats at both high and low pressures. A friend who road races at a high domestic level tried the Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless but then abandoned them when she heard of the high rolling resistance. She is now actively trying to obtain a set of the much faster IRC Top Secret tubeless tires to race on.

So our "disagreement" (if you could call it that) is rooted in personal requirements. I'm looking for the fastest rolling tire (high tire pressure) that won't pinch flat and you are looking for improved road grip and comfort (low tire pressure) that won't pinch flat. In either case the IRC Top Secret tubeless tire with natural rubber inner lining will have a lower Crr than other tubless tires with butyl rubber inner lining.


----------



## bholwell

AM999 said:


> A friend who road races at a high domestic level tried the Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless but then abandoned them when she heard of the high rolling resistance.


High rolling resistance? Do you have a link to any rolling resistance testing done with tubeless road tires?

TIA!


----------



## Jon3234

bholwell said:


> High rolling resistance? Do you have a link to any rolling resistance testing done with tubeless road tires?
> 
> TIA!


Yeah either way, I would like to see some legit tests that prove tubeless has more or less rolling resistance.


----------



## AM999

bholwell said:


> High rolling resistance? Do you have a link to any rolling resistance testing done with tubeless road tires?
> 
> TIA!


Look about 5 days ago in this thread - I've got a post (with some subsequent discussion) with a link to a thread on Bike Tech Review. Testing was done on smooth rollers and the results corrected to a flat surface. There is also another thread on tubeless just started by Ron in the discussion forum.


----------



## bholwell

AM999 said:


> Look about 5 days ago in this thread - I've got a post (with some subsequent discussion) with a link to a thread on Bike Tech Review. Testing was done on smooth rollers and the results corrected to a flat surface. There is also another thread on tubeless just started by Ron in the discussion forum.


Thanks for your reply. I am mainly concerned about the rolling resistance of tubeless road tires in general compared to the fastest clinchers / open tubulars. 

I've found data online that report a Crr of 0.0039 for the Vitoria Open Corsa Evo CX (generally considered to be one of the fastest clinchers.) Compared to your link's data which reports Crr's of 0.0033 and 0.0026 for the Fusion 2 and IRC Top Secret, repectively, it seems that even the Fusion 2 fairs well against the fastest clinchers.

Am I missing anything?

Also, I wasn't able to find Ron's thread. Link?


----------



## AM999

bholwell said:


> Thanks for your reply. I am mainly concerned about the rolling resistance of tubeless road tires in general compared to the fastest clinchers / open tubulars.
> 
> I've found data online that report a Crr of 0.0039 for the Vitoria Open Corsa Evo CX (generally considered to be one of the fastest clinchers.) Compared to your link's data which reports Crr's of 0.0033 and 0.0026 for the Fusion 2 and IRC Top Secret, repectively, it seems that even the Fusion 2 fairs well against the fastest clinchers.
> 
> Am I missing anything?
> 
> Also, I wasn't able to find Ron's thread. Link?


It's difficult to compare Crr from different sources because the tire pressures, temperatures, speeds, tube material, etc. are not the same. I did a comparison a few years ago trying to compare my results with those of the Tour magazine (Germany) and came up with ~ + or - 15% depending on whether they corrected for a flat surface or not. When I tested the Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX (23) with a latex tube at 120 psig I got ~ 0.00260. Here is a link to the BTR Home Page - scroll down and look to the left and click on the "roller Crr data" link. The forum link is at the top where Ron's thread is as well as many others including a lot of recent Crr tests not yet in the overall list.

http://www.biketechreview.com/


----------



## muscleendurance

ummm chicken


----------



## jiggs

*will AmClassic 420's work tubeless? I guess the valve*

would have to be longer, and yes I would use stan's sealant just to seal up without having to take it apart and try to get the stem out and put in a tube.


----------



## Americano

*Road Tubeless 1st flat, almost 1 year*

Well I've been on Hutchinson Fusion 2 tires since Dec 2008. Yesterday I got my first flat on these tires. I ran over something sharp and metallic and the tire deflated in about 1 sec, this would have flatted any tire I think. The hole is about 1cm long and radial from the hub. The big problem is that it went almost all the way to the bead of the tire. Putting in a tube didn't help, and I couldn't boot it. I must remember to put duct tape in my bag. So my wife had to come and get me.

I don't think I've ever gone a whole year without a flat before. All in all I've been pretty happy with these tires, so I ordered a replacement of the same type today. I kinda wanted to try the 25mm wide Hutch Intensive, but didn't feel like buying two tires given that my front Fusion 2 probably has at least another year of life in it (or until I run over something sharp again).


----------



## youngt2

*Dur-ace 7801-SL's convertable with Hutch'n Fusion2 2 yrs.*

These guys were on a Scott CR1 I bougt USED from a guy who had tubes & contis - Nice bike but what the heck I tracked down the only tubless roadies that Shimano would refer to 2 yrs ago ( Michlin in N. Carloina almost got into the market in North Am. but never did distribute) Any way bought the tires on line & they slipped on no problem blew right up with a standard floor pump ( soapy water around the bead helps to seal @ first) For the typical weekend warrior the difference is not striking but to ignore basic physics & run em about 100 - 105 lbs instead of 120 - 130 lbs. for good tubies- They are VERY PLEASENT. I weigh 175 lbs & ride 2.5 - 3.5 hrs. 2-3 times a week. Winter & summer . The dude below who indicated they are also hassle prone is right as you can spill air around the bead or the valve stem can work loose over time & air can seep out through that hole too. I've walked home on my road tubless & my mountain bike tubless a few times just because I put so much faith in Stans slime ( the green stuff didn't work for me) that when the stuff hardens up after a year or so and stops moving around inside leaks will form. But all that being said I have1 set of roady 2blss & 2 sets of Mavic Crossmax 2bless for trails & always carry tubes now. All my cars have tubless tires so whats that say ?? I won't bore with desciptions of BLISTERS from walkin in ridin shoes WHERE"S THAT THREAD ??BTW find a SUBARU dealership & ask em to put NITROGEN in your bike tires makes no difference @ all but kind cool to say you have it. All this after ridin' em for 2yrs. & won't stop.


----------



## MWT

AM999 said:


> Look about 5 days ago in this thread - I've got a post (with some subsequent discussion) with a link to a thread on Bike Tech Review. Testing was done on smooth rollers and the results corrected to a flat surface. There is also another thread on tubeless just started by Ron in the discussion forum.


With all due respect, testing the Hutchinson tires at 120 psi seems like a mistake since that's well above the recommended pressure. They may or may not have better results, but at least you'd be testing what most people are actually riding. The bottom line is there isn't much sense in riding tubeless as the same pressure as regular clinchers. It defeats the purpose.


----------



## AM999

MWT said:


> With all due respect, testing the Hutchinson tires at 120 psi seems like a mistake since that's well above the recommended pressure. They may or may not have better results, but at least you'd be testing what most people are actually riding. The bottom line is there isn't much sense in riding tubeless as the same pressure as regular clinchers. It defeats the purpose.


Our definition of the purpose of tubeless tires is different. Please excuse my putting words in your mouth but ... (From a previous post) I'm looking for a fast rolling tire (high tire pressure) that won't pinch flat and you are looking for improved road grip and comfort (low tire pressure) that won't pinch flat ?? I put ~ 40 miles on the IRC Top Secret tire (back wheel only) at 120 psig and the ride and handling was very similar to the Vred and Michelin clinchers that I usually ride. I inadvertantly did get a data point at ~ 80 psig due to a loose valve lock nut - Crr ~ 0.00340 vs Crr ~ 0.00260 at 120 psig. The trend of Crr with pressure is fairly linear for that pressure range so you can scale to estimate Crr at different pressures.


----------



## FTR

Interesting thread and I think it has helped me to come to the conclusion that tubeless is not worth it for me.
Love tubeles on my MTB using Stans rims and just about any tyre that I can think of.
Can see no point at all in tubeless and less than a handful of tyre options.
This harks back to the early days of MTB where Mavic had the monopoly on the market. That monopoly is now dead and the idea of having to use heavier UST tyres to achieve tubeless is almost dead.


----------



## bholwell

FTR said:


> Interesting thread and I think it has helped me to come to the conclusion that tubeless is not worth it for me.
> Love tubeles on my MTB using Stans rims and just about any tyre that I can think of.
> Can see no point at all in tubeless and less than a handful of tyre options.
> This harks back to the early days of MTB where Mavic had the monopoly on the market. That monopoly is now dead and the idea of having to use heavier UST tyres to achieve tubeless is almost dead.


To each their own, but I personally believe you're missing out. Before tubeless road I don't think I've ever gone more than a month without a flat. Since I've gone tubeless (roughly 5 months ago) I haven't had a single one. And the feel is better than any clincher I've tried. 

Yes, the number of choices are limited at the moment, but I think you'll see more in the future. Both Kenda and Maxxis showed tubeless road prototypes at Interbike.


----------



## FTR

bholwell said:


> To each their own, but I personally believe you're missing out. Before tubeless road I don't think I've ever gone more than a month without a flat. Since I've gone tubeless (roughly 5 months ago) I haven't had a single one. And the feel is better than any clincher I've tried.
> 
> Yes, the number of choices are limited at the moment, but I think you'll see more in the future. Both Kenda and Maxxis showed tubeless road prototypes at Interbike.


Sorry but you having tubeless will not stop you getting flats, especially without Stans or some other kind of sealant.
If you have to put in a tube after flatting tubeless then you are saving nothing IMO.

From my reading, the jury seems out on the "feel" being better as is the suggestion that lower pressure is better or worse for road applications. I have read threads on here where it is suggested that lower pressures are better with tubes too but have seen other negative comments on this topic.


----------



## bholwell

FTR said:


> Sorry but you having tubeless will not stop you getting flats, especially without Stans or some other kind of sealant.


I never said it would. But because the construction of a tubeless road tire is more substantial than a regular clincher, it stands to reason that the frequency of flatting would be greatly reduced. Sealant might also add an extra level of protection from small punctures.




FTR said:


> If you have to put in a tube after flatting tubeless then you are saving nothing IMO.


I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make here.




FTR said:


> From my reading, the jury seems out on the "feel" being better as is the suggestion that lower pressure is better or worse for road applications. I have read threads on here where it is suggested that lower pressures are better with tubes too but have seen other negative comments on this topic.


Of course "feel" is a subjective thing, so this is best left up to each to make their own decision. FWIW, I only run 5-10 psi less in my tubeless road tires.


----------



## Jon3234

bholwell said:


> I never said it would. But because the construction of a tubeless road tire is more substantial than a regular clincher, it stands to reason that the frequency of flatting would be greatly reduced. Sealant might also add an extra level of protection from small punctures.
> 
> I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make here.
> 
> 
> Of course "feel" is a subjective thing, so this is best left up to each to make their own decision. FWIW, I only run 5-10 psi less in my tubeless road tires.


I have gotten more flats using Hutchinson fusion tubeless than any other tires. Compared to my Vittoria Rubinos and Conti Grand Prix 4000s, the Fusions are so soft and get nicked up twice as fast, thus increasing the frequency of flats. 

The ride is a bit smoother on tubeless. But I don't see any scientific proof that Tubeless has less rolling resistance that tubes. All the marketers claim that but I'd like to see something that actually proves it.


----------



## pmt

Jon3234 said:


> I have gotten more flats using Hutchinson fusion tubeless than any other tires. Compared to my Vittoria Rubinos and Conti Grand Prix 4000s, the Fusions are so soft and get nicked up twice as fast, thus increasing the frequency of flats.


Weird. I've had far less flats with Road Tubeless, but I use Stan's, which may have just automatically fixed some of the tiny punctures without my knowing it.


----------



## bholwell

Jon3234 said:


> I have gotten more flats using Hutchinson fusion tubeless than any other tires. Compared to my Vittoria Rubinos and Conti Grand Prix 4000s, the Fusions are so soft and get nicked up twice as fast, thus increasing the frequency of flats.


That's unfortunate. I should've said that I have been riding Maxxis prototypes. My comments about durability only apply to these tires.



Jon3234 said:


> The ride is a bit smoother on tubeless. But I don't see any scientific proof that Tubeless has less rolling resistance that tubes. All the marketers claim that but I'd like to see something that actually proves it.


I agree about the ride quality. And I don't race on the road so rolling resistance doesn't matter to me as much, but it should matter to those who do. I know Maxxis is planning to conduct RR testing using a third party.


----------



## Jon3234

Oh, I've used Stans and I don't have any more luck with that. In fact, it just doesn't seal my punctures. Stans works awesome on my MTB. I just don't think it works well for Road.


----------



## a_avery007

lets try to clear up a few points here.

first, rolling resistence is lower without tubes. think- why do most racer's go with tubulars??

second, lower pressure means lower crr, i will try to find the study (Tri study Slow Twitch Forum), but it basically showed data that lower pressures mean faster on anything but a perfectly smooth track surface.

third, from my subjective experience, roads here in norcal are just plain terrible, and i have not had a flat in over 2 years where the flat did not seal with stan's. so, you have to put in a tube for the ride back home, no big deal, and just patch the cut tire and ride it again.

the research basically stated that if you err on the side of pressure, better to go low than high. the optimum was around 105-110psi for clinchers (obviously rider weight has to be considered). the crr for lower pressures and a little bit higher pressures than than those mentioned as optimal-that the crr was higher. but, what would you rather have? fast and smooth or teeth rattling and the exact same crr? easy choice for me..


----------



## randyharris

a_avery007 said:


> lets try to clear up a few points here.
> 
> first, rolling resistence is lower without tubes. think- why do most racer's go with tubulars??


Tubular tires absolutely have a tube, they are sewn up inside the tire.


----------



## a_avery007

i should have stated that the tubulars have two edges of the tire which are "sewn" around the tire which makes for a lower crr...


----------



## fallzboater

a_avery007 said:


> i should have stated that the tubulars have two edges of the tire which are "sewn" around the tire which makes for a lower crr...


This makes no sense to me, why do you think it matters whether the tire casing has two beads which contact the rim, or the casing is sewn together (and glued to the rim)? Assume that the casing and tube have similar construction.


----------



## AM999

a_avery007 said:


> lets try to clear up a few points here.
> 
> first, rolling resistence is lower without tubes. think- why do most racer's go with tubulars??
> 
> second, lower pressure means lower crr, i will try to find the study (Tri study Slow Twitch Forum), but it basically showed data that lower pressures mean faster on anything but a perfectly smooth track surface.
> 
> third, from my subjective experience, roads here in norcal are just plain terrible, and i have not had a flat in over 2 years where the flat did not seal with stan's. so, you have to put in a tube for the ride back home, no big deal, and just patch the cut tire and ride it again.
> 
> the research basically stated that if you err on the side of pressure, better to go low than high. the optimum was around 105-110psi for clinchers (obviously rider weight has to be considered). the crr for lower pressures and a little bit higher pressures than than those mentioned as optimal-that the crr was higher. but, what would you rather have? fast and smooth or teeth rattling and the exact same crr? easy choice for me..


I'm happy that you are having good luck and enjoying your tubeless tires. But you've pretty much got everything else wrong in your comments except that a tubeless tire rolls better than the same tire with a tube in it. 

You might want to review some of the previous posts in this thread and search for Tom Anhalt's post on Slow Twitch documenting his tests on Crr as a function of tire pressure. To summarize for a bike and rider weight of ~ 185 lbs on very good asphalt the optimum pressure is ~ 125 psig. It's better to be a little low than a little high as the Crr gradiant is much steeper (Crr increases with both increasing and decreasing pressure from that optimum pressure).

Pro's use tubulars due to weight savings, safety after flatting, and tradition. Your comment on the two tire edges sewn to make a tubular makes no sense ?? There are both fast tubulars and fast clinchers to choose from. Outside of the Top Secret IRC tire which uses a latex inner pressure containment layer the tubeless tires I've tested don't roll very well.


----------



## a_avery007

*r-e-a-d sloooooooooooowly*

i said $h*te roads mate!!!

not smooth like a track.

i ride in the real world, with less than ideal roads, which are getting worse every year.

here is what the author said "One quick “takeaway” from the above plot is that if one hasn't identified the "optimal" pressure for their particular setup, then it is far better to "err" on the side of too little pressure, than to "err" on the side of too much! Also plotted on that chart is the Crr vs. pressure for the exact same set of tires on a smooth roller setup. As you can see, below the "breakpoint pressure" the curves of both the roller test and the road test follow the same basic shape. It's only once the inflation pressure increases to the point that energy is unduly transmitted through the tire and into the rest of the system that the "resistance to forward motion" increases rapidly. 

A good starting point for tire pressures is to follow the recommendations of the tire manufacturers. Most will give both a recommended pressure that's less than the maximum pressure, and some give fairly detailed recommendations based on rider weight and conditions. Zipp has an excellent chart for it's Tangente tires (made for them by Vittoria) that's a good one to follow even if your tires aren't Tangentes. For riders in the 125-175 lb range, that would mean tire pressures from 110-120 psi. Personally, I prefer to run ~5-10 psi less than that, especially if there's some amount of roughness to the road conditions. As stated above, being slightly underinflated for the conditions is less of a detriment than being slight overinflated. "


so, i stand by my assertion that all things being equal (including weight of rider), i will err on the side of lower than optimal pressure than higher, if my pump does not get it right...


here are a couple of links to help out:
http://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/What_s_in_a_tube__1034.html

http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/0/02/72/10/clincher-specs.html

with regards to my second comment i will just leave it alone...


----------



## AM999

a_avery007 said:


> so, i stand by my assertion that all things being equal, i will err on the side of lower than optimal pressure than higher, if my pump does not get it right...
> 
> 
> fast tubulars are faster than fast clinchers. simple physics....think weight...


Maybe you should take your own advice and read slowly - based on Tom's results it's better to be a slightly under pressure than over pressure which is what I said in my post. As the roughness of the road increases the optimum pressure goes down or as the smoothness of the road increases the optimum pressure goes up.

For equal Crr and aerodynamics the smaller total weight will roll faster:

Rolling losses = Crr X Weight X Speed

Not much riding in Nor Cal for the past and next few days - lots of rain and wind.


----------



## a_avery007

*no worries*



AM999 said:


> Maybe you should take your own advice and read slowly - based on Tom's results it's better to be a slightly under pressure than over pressure which is what I said in my post. As the roughness of the road increases the optimum pressure goes down or as the smoothness of the road increases the optimum pressure goes up.
> 
> For equal Crr and aerodynamics the smaller total weight will roll faster:
> 
> Rolling losses = Crr X Weight X Speed
> 
> Not much riding in Nor Cal for the past and next few days - lots of rain and wind.


i stated the first time this exact idea, maybe less than clear, but lets just agree to ride in the rain with softer pressures under less than optimal conditions, because afterall we will be faster and more comfortable...
cheers


----------



## AM999

a_avery007 said:


> i stated the first time this exact idea, maybe less than clear, but lets just agree to ride in the rain with softer pressures under less than optimal conditions, because afterall we will be faster and more comfortable...
> cheers


Sounds good although not today - it's even worse down here in San Jose. I took it from your first post that you were saying that Crr decreases as pressure decreases which isn't true when the pressure is below what Tom calls the "break point."

Take care and stay dry


----------



## MichaelB

*Back to Tubeless experiences ...*

Hiya all,

New to the forum here, and thought I'd share my experiences.

Switched to tubeless as a result of a warranty claim on my rear WH-7801 wheel that cracked at the drive side spokes. Shimano were nice enough to replace them with a pair of WH-7850-SL's. So, when in Rome ....

Purchased some Fusion 2's, Stans and off I went. No major dramas mounting them (except learning to be careful after the Stans was put in  ), and am really happy with the ride.

Proved the usefulness in a recent ride where I suffered a puncture midway down a decent hill going into a LH corner. Noticed a large pffft noise, saw some sealant spray out for about 2 revs, and then kept on finishing the 100 mile ride. *Just that one event sold me.*:thumbsup: 

I'm waiting on some Stans valves to convert my 'training' wheelset to tubeless using the Intensive tyres

Previously was running 28C tyres, and the ride is still pretty bloody good.

It sucks there isn't more tyres to choose from out there, but that's life at the moment.


re the issue of corrosion from the sealant, there is a long running thread on a MTB forum with all sorts of homeade recipes that seem to work better

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=406115

Cheers

Michael B


----------



## youngt2

bholwell said:


> I'm interested in hearing about your experience with Tubeless Road tires. What tires and rims did you use? Was tire installation a PITA? How was the performance and feel of the tires? What kind of mileage did you get out of your tires? Did you encounter any issues?
> 
> Any information you can share is greatly appreciated.
> 
> TIA! :thumbsup:


Just flatted the rear of a fusion 2 after about 1500 km's ( we're canadian) Wear lines right down the center strip & the threads just let go @ about 100 lbs pressure. It seems to me that there is no clear advantage of the tubless system over tubes as there are as many hassles with one as the other - just of a different nature. I've used Stans Slime for 3 years now in both MTB & Fusions with no coreosion issues to rubber or rims but the stuff does harden after time & is a bi___ch to scrap off to start over with a clean tight seal around the rim. If my tubless roads ever got stolen I would go back to tubes with little regret. Almost no variety of product for road wheels to date. * It"s a better concept for mountain bikes I've decided after 3-4 years of both. Out on the road when you have to fix the things you'd better have a tube handy & a patch for the tire or a cel phone.


----------



## pmt

How much pressure do you use? I've put over 6000k on Fusion2 before deciding that it was worn out.


----------



## MichaelB

I've got 2,500km on my Fusion 2's, and whilst they have a few small cuts, they are nowhere near worn out yet.

The fronts still have a tiny trace of the central mould join !!!


----------



## youngt2

*2nd thoughts on my last comments 6 months later June 2010*

Ok It's 6 months later another 1500 kms on the fusion2's & they've worn through. $90 cdn to replace then EACH & they recommend new valve stems too. Still only one manufacturer & too pricey for me. I like the dura-ace wheels but I'm going to put tubes back in em to avoid hassles when flatting on the long rides. I'm tired of blowing them up with CO2 cartridges as well. Biking is supposed to be a simple sport after all. In my experience 3 yrs the concept is better than the technology. For mountain bikes much better results ,variety & cost.


----------



## MichaelB

youngt2 said:


> Ok It's 6 months later another 1500 kms on the fusion2's & they've worn through. $90 cdn to replace then EACH & they recommend new valve stems too. .


Only 1,500km ?? What are your roads like ?  Maybe the Intensives may be a better option.

If you look at online retailers like Wiggle, they do the range for about AUS$56 each (dpending on exchnage rate) - from a local bike shop, they are way to exxy.

Don't think you need new valve stems each time you replace a tyre either.

Here is the Wiggle link (note prices are in Aus$ and make sure you get the Tubeless version.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/m/cycle/7/Hutchinson/

I'm still sold on them  

Agree with the lack of choice though, but reckon it's slowly chnaging with Specilized getting on board with Hutchinson as well.


----------



## FTR

Well touch wood but I reckon it has been 12 months since I last had a puncture.
I still use tubes and still cannot see any benefit whatsoever from tubeless.
No choices, expensive, manufacturer recommendation not to use sealant (so if you have a puncture you need a tube anyway).
Pro = you can run lower pressures. 
Well I can run down to 90psi with tubes so that is a wash anyway.

I actually bought a set of the DA tubeless wheels and sold them again before riding them.


----------



## pmt

Seems that with Road Tubeless, you either "get it" or you don't. Not much middle ground. Those who don't understand probably never will, and those of us who do will enjoy the benefits. 

Indexed shifting, clipless pedals, and aero bars went through the same misunderstandings.


----------



## MichaelB

FTR said:


> Well touch wood but I reckon it has been 12 months since I last had a puncture.
> I still use tubes and still cannot see any benefit whatsoever from tubeless.
> No choices, expensive, manufacturer recommendation not to use sealant (so if you have a puncture you need a tube anyway).
> Pro = you can run lower pressures.
> Well I can run down to 90psi with tubes so that is a wash anyway.
> 
> I actually bought a set of the DA tubeless wheels and sold them again before riding them.


Disagree, but then again, your choice for your reasons.

I was like you, hadn't had a puncture (on tubes) for about 18 months. Ended up going tubeless because of DA warranty wheel replacement.

40km into a 160km sportive ride earlier this year, I got a puncture whilst heading downhill at 50km/hr on a bend with armco railing on the other side of the road. TWO wheel revolutions later, puncture was sealed and completed the rest of the ride.

Shopping smartly reduces the cost to something very close to a GP4000 or similar (still more expensive though).

Choice is limited, yes, but it's growing.

Shimano recommend against the sealant, although many have not had a problem, and a few have. Me, no issues so far.

I'm sold so far, and think I will be for a while.

Yes it is a bit more of a hassle for some instances, but I'll accept that for self healing punctures. :thumbsup:


----------



## FTR

So let me get this straight.
You are happy to have 1 tyre choice and are comfortable with the fact that you have voided your warranty through use of sealant despite the fact that any potential warranty issue may not actually have been caused by that sealant??
Sounds great.
Where do I sign up??

And choice is growing??
Well yes, Sometime longer than a whole year ago there was no tubeless options.
A year ago there was 1 choice.
Progress for sure.

And I do use tubeless on my MTB when racing.


----------



## bholwell

It seems you have an ax to grind- I don't understand where your negativity comes from otherwise. I realize tubeless is not for _you_, but for others it could be a legitamit, even ideal, choice. If I could go 12 months without a puncture, I likely wouldn't have swtched to tubeless tires either.

The last time I checked, Hutchinson was offering 3 tire models and Specialized 1 (albeit a Hutchinson-made one). Maxxis will likely begin selling its tubeless tire this year, and Kenda and possibly Innova won't be far behind.

BTW, Rory Sutherland has been on the tubeless tire from Maxxis for over a year now. He doesn't want to train on anything else. That endorsement speaks volumes for me.

I guess there will always be naysayers and antagonists; I just don't lend them any credibility unless they've actually ridden the tire.



FTR said:


> So let me get this straight.
> You are happy to have 1 tyre choice and are comfortable with the fact that you have voided your warranty through use of sealant despite the fact that any potential warranty issue may not actually have been caused by that sealant??
> Sounds great.
> Where do I sign up??
> 
> And choice is growing??
> Well yes, Sometime longer than a whole year ago there was no tubeless options.
> A year ago there was 1 choice.
> Progress for sure.
> 
> And I do use tubeless on my MTB when racing.


----------



## SwiftSolo

FTR said:


> So let me get this straight.
> You are happy to have 1 tyre choice and are comfortable with the fact that you have voided your warranty through use of sealant despite the fact that any potential warranty issue may not actually have been caused by that sealant??
> Sounds great.
> Where do I sign up??
> 
> And choice is growing??
> Well yes, Sometime longer than a whole year ago there was no tubeless options.
> A year ago there was 1 choice.
> Progress for sure.
> 
> And I do use tubeless on my MTB when racing.


I'm interested! Let me know who has had their warranty voided by using sealant. I've been using tubeless on my road bike since the first 7801's hit the market. Short of sending them to a lab for residue analysis, their is no way that I'm aware of to tell that they've ever had sealant in them (assuming I wipe them down before I send them in).

I'm guessing that I have 18,000 miles on tubeless and the only flat I've had on the road was because I had not notice that I was riding on the thread on the back tire. I discovered this about 10 miles into a long ride and made all but the last 7 miles before it flatted (about 40 to 60 miles on threads). That tire was old at the time of this incident.

I'm not suggesting that you switch since you are getting 2 or 3 times as many miles out of your tubes and tires between flats than I ever did. My point in posting is simply to provide those who are interested in switching over some information based on my personal experience.


----------



## Quattro_Assi_07

bholwell said:


> The last time I checked, Hutchinson was offering 3 tire models and *Specialized* 1 (albeit a Hutchinson-made one). Maxxis will likely begin selling its tubeless tire this year, and Kenda and possibly Innova won't be far behind.QUOTE]
> 
> Just mounted a pair of the Specialized tubeless S-Works Turbos. First ride (~20 miles) and the ride is noticeably smoother than my usual Conti clinchers but not as smooth as their tubular tires. Kind of in between the two in feel. I am not running any sealant at this time but might use some down the road.


----------



## MichaelB

Well FTR, you do what you are happy with, and I'll stick with what I am doing.

Hutchinson doe 4 models of tubeless road - Atom, Fusion 2, Intensive and now Fusion 3. Sepcialized have entered the market with a Hutchinson casing, but their spec top tread.
I believe that Michelin also do some, but not sure.

Re voiding warranty ? Dunno until it comes to claim on it, but from my incident described a few posts above, I didn't crash and cause god knows what sort of injuries and bike damage, so if a set of wheels is stuffed after 10,000km PURELY DUE TO CORROSION (unlikley) , then I'll live with it.

I'll also live with the mess and minor hassle when installing a new tyre.

I'm sold on the system, and happy to boot.


----------



## rruff

bholwell said:


> If I could go 12 months without a puncture, I likely wouldn't have swtched to tubeless tires either.


If you get a lot of flats due to *punctures*, then tubeless with goop in the tires will certainly help.

But a lighter, faster (tires with lower Crr), solution to a lot of flats is to use latex tubes. A couple weeks ago I slammed into a pothole hard enough to dent both rims, but the tubes were fine. No pinch flat worries. This morning I heard a tick tick sound and stopped to see what was going on. Turns out I had a staple stuck deep into the tire. I pulled it out... but didn't here any hissing sound, so kept riding it. 10 hrs later there is no evidence of a leak. 

Latex... it's not just for prophylactics...


----------



## bholwell

rruff said:


> Latex... it's not just for prophylactics...


Yes, they are nice (except for the high air permeation rate), but I've never pinchflatted on my road bike (running about 100 psi rear, 165 lbs). Part of my commute is on fairly busy 4 lane roads, and there's a lot of debris on the shoulders. I simply can't spot or swerve around all of it.

MTB, different story. I did the Snake Creek Gap TT early this year, rocky course- 3 pinchflats! I'll definitely be running tubeless next year.


----------



## youngt2

*Tubless discussion continued*

Thanx for your rebuttal . I have yet to run into anyone around here that has tubless roads to compare impressions. The Stns. slime has hardened on the rims after 3 years or so both @ the bead line & around the stem hole. Even steel wool doesn't take it off sufficiently to smooth the seal .As a result the 2nd set of fusions (3) is seaping air even with new slime inside.The seap around the valve stem is particularly frustrating. Nice ride no question. Neat concept for sure but the gimmick cool factor has worn off for me. I've just discovered AIRLESS tires to try out next. Signed 'more $ then brains"


----------



## shotojs78

today I had a race, and my specialized s-works turbo tubeless exploded on rear... I dont know why, on the side, the cut is about 1/2 ''.... I had about 2000 miles on it...


----------



## _Marty_

rruff said:


> Hi there... just noticing a lot of praise that sounds like the marketing hype, but I'm sceptical. Rolling resistance is actually a bit higher with tubeless (it's been tested), and you will get the same "ride" benefits by running bigger tires and /or lowering pressure in normal clinchers. So... the only place they might have an advantage is if you run into goatheads a lot or other puncturing stuff. Then you can put sealant in them and they will self-seal most of the time. For that benefit you pay for very limited tire choices and mounting/inflating hassles... and you still need to carry a couple tubes and a patch kit if you want to be sure to make it home.
> 
> Have I missed anything?



the increase in rolling resistance does NOT take into account the friction caused by tire/tube as you roll down the road.. its purely a static meassurment in this case.. the dynamic meassurment of the loaded wheel/tire assbmelies show you'll expend less energy going the same distance.. but the biggest advantage you'll feel.. is the ride


----------



## AM999

_Marty_ said:


> the increase in rolling resistance does NOT take into account the friction caused by tire/tube as you roll down the road.. its purely a static meassurment in this case.. the dynamic meassurment of the loaded wheel/tire assbmelies show you'll expend less energy going the same distance.. but the biggest advantage you'll feel.. is the ride


Look at the rolling resitance tests over on Bike Tech Review. These are done on rollers and the results then converted to a flat surface. The tubeless tires tested with the exception of the IRC Top Secret model do not roll very well because they use a butyl rubber inner layer which provides the pressure containment. The Top Secret tire uses a natural rubber (latex) inner layer. Also the tubeless tires tend to all run larger than the nominal size, i.e. a size 23 tire actually measures 24 or 25 mm in width. This also leads to a comfortable ride at low pressure but you could get the same with a large clincher with a latex or butyl tube. In the end it's personal preference - clincher, tubeless, tubular - they all have pros and cons.


----------



## pmt

Too bad there's not some way to mount tires on a vehicle of some kind and drive them down a typical paved asphalt-based concrete road, and objectively measure rolling resistance. Doing it in a lab and "converting to a flat surface" simply can't match running them on a real road.


----------



## fallzboater

pmt said:


> Too bad there's not some way to mount tires on a vehicle of some kind and drive them down a typical paved asphalt-based concrete road, and objectively measure rolling resistance.


Sure there is. All you'd need to do is a series of coast-down tests, or tow a weighted rig behind a car with a load cell (or even a good spring scale). If the differences can't be measured with careful application of these types of methods, they're probably small enough to be insignificant.


----------



## agbagel

*Hutchinson Atom tubeless*

I converted my Rolf Vigor RS wheels to tubeless this Spring to have a go. Firstly, they were the easiest of all conversions (ie. Mtb, Cx) to install. After taping and stem placement, the tire pumped right up with a floor pump. The Atom is a funny bird. When I first inflated it, it had the appearance of a 19mm tire, but changed with riding over the next few weeks. It actually kept growing to full potential at 23mm. The down side, it was holding pressure for only a few days until it stopped "growing." The front has been able to hold pressure for a week at a time, but the rear lasts for only 2-3 days. 

Ride quality was noticeably better right away. I've never tried tubulars, but these were definitely better than my tubed clinchers. I accidentally rode them for a day at 70 psi with a bunch of climbing and descending and never felt uncomfortable. If this had happened with my tubed tires, I would have definitely felt the sloshing around on the descent corners. So, I was impressed. 

I had a day when the rear tire was slightly low on a fast descent and I locked my rear wheel turning into gravel. Had a bit of slide, the tire burped, but never came off the rim. Just stopped and added pressure by CO2 and continued with my ride.

Wear. After around 500 miles of riding, the front tire has done great and still appears round. The rear has squared up quite a bit. I think this may be due to fewer plys to make it lighter, so I bought another tire (Hutchinson Funsion 2) to replace when it squares out too much. It's only slightly heavier with 3 ply protection. I'm hoping this will get it to last longer. 

Last, I did get a ragged sidewall cut that wouldn't seal under high pressure on the back tire. It's 5mm long and jagged by a large cut granite stone fro gravel. I threw in a tube to finish the ride and I'm sure I could repair it with shoo-Goo or a patch. Right now, I'm just waiting for the tire to wear out and I'll simply replace it.

What do I think?..... I like gadgets and tech and enjoy working on the bike. So all these issues don't bother me. For my friends who don't work on their bikes and bring it to me, I tell them to just fill tubes with whatever sealant product they like and keep their tubes and clinchers. Super simple and cheap.

BTW, I like to use Stan's sealant. It's done great on my MTB tires.

Ari


----------



## AM999

pmt said:


> Too bad there's not some way to mount tires on a vehicle of some kind and drive them down a typical paved asphalt-based concrete road, and objectively measure rolling resistance. Doing it in a lab and "converting to a flat surface" simply can't match running them on a real road.


A couple of guys have done field testing using regression and virtual elevation (Chung) testing. Their results have have matched what I get on smooth rollers offset by a percentage (~ 20%) due to the roughness of the real road surface. Very limited field data but it does compare well with the smooth roller data. The relative rolling performance of tires on rollers will be the same on a real road. The absoulute magnitude will increase as roughness increases.


----------



## rruff

fallzboater said:


> Sure there is. All you'd need to do is a series of coast-down tests


It is possible, but the wind variation and the difficulty of maintaining the exact same rider position makes it very difficult in practice. Of course, gathering a huge amount of data can help remove random variations. So, if you are willing to spend literally all day on a proverbial "windless day" (which means low wind) then it would be possible with a good protocol to measure the *difference* in Crr between two tires pretty accurately. AFAIK, nobody cares enough to do this... which is why we don't see the data. 

Pulling a rig down the road might work... but I don't recall anyone trying that. How would you propose measuring the resistance accurately? Sounds like another good research/thesis project for an aspiring engineer.

EDIT: Oh ya... the Chung testing seems to work pretty decently if the wind is very low.


----------



## AM999

fallzboater said:


> Sure there is. All you'd need to do is a series of coast-down tests, or tow a weighted rig behind a car with a load cell (or even a good spring scale). If the differences can't be measured with careful application of these types of methods, they're probably small enough to be insignificant.


The issue with the field testing that you describe is accounting for aero drag. Changes in wind speed of +/- 1 mph which is undetectable by a human sensor will result in large error bands on the data. BQ did some testing using a coast down technique a few years ago. They didn't apply any error bands to the data. For changes in wind direction of +/- mph the error bands will completely cover the differences in the data. The data can be used to make decisions but it's not conclusive.


----------



## fallzboater

rruff said:


> It is possible, but the wind variation and the difficulty of maintaining the exact same rider position makes it very difficult in practice. Of course, gathering a huge amount of data can help remove random variations. So, if you are willing to spend literally all day on a proverbial "windless day" (which means low wind) then it would be possible with a good protocol to measure the *difference* in Crr between two tires pretty accurately. AFAIK, nobody cares enough to do this... which is why we don't see the data.
> 
> Pulling a rig down the road might work... but I don't recall anyone trying that. How would you propose measuring the resistance accurately? Sounds like another good research/thesis project for an aspiring engineer.
> 
> EDIT: Oh ya... the Chung testing seems to work pretty decently if the wind is very low.


I used to do towing tank testing of submarine and ship models at a Navy research lab, which has probably been done for close to 100 years (not by me, heh), now. It's roughly equivalent to wind-tunnel testing, although you're towing the models through a long basin of still water (or one that has a wave-maker on one end). For ships, you're measuring drag, heave, and sway forces, and roll, pitch, and yaw moments. It's quite low tech. 

For a simple towing drag test, maybe the most difficult part would be controlling the speed of the towing vehicle, but as long as you can measure the speed accurately (like with a GPS or standard bike computer on the test wheel), you can account for that. You need to tow the weighted cart (or bike, if you rig it so it won't flop over) from a strain-gaged load cell of some sort, maybe even one of those electronic bicycle scales. Very simple, really. You'd need a control wheel/tire, and enough repeat testing to validate the results. Some sort of data-collection system would be nice, but not totally necessary. Someone that's interested enough (probably not me, unless I was being paid) could do a nice test in a day or two.

Coast-down testing would also need enough repeats and a control for validation. If the differences can't be measured with that, they probably are insignificant, which is also good information (but doesn't make for good marketing). Do it indoors, if possible, and record the speeds as you coast across two lines a sufficient distance apart. Repeat many times.


----------



## AM999

fallzboater said:


> I used to do towing tank testing of submarine and ship models at a Navy research lab, which has probably been done for close to 100 years (not by me, heh), now. It's roughly equivalent to wind-tunnel testing, although you're towing the models through a long basin of still water (or one that has a wave-maker on one end). For ships, you're measuring drag, heave, and sway forces, and roll, pitch, and yaw moments. It's quite low tech.
> 
> For a simple towing drag test, maybe the most difficult part would be controlling the speed of the towing vehicle, but as long as you can measure the speed accurately (like with a GPS or standard bike computer on the test wheel), you can account for that. You need to tow the weighted cart (or bike, if you rig it so it won't flop over) from a strain-gaged load cell of some sort, maybe even one of those electronic bicycle scales. Very simple, really. You'd need a control wheel/tire, and enough repeat testing to validate the results. Some sort of data-collection system would be nice, but not totally necessary. Someone that's interested enough (probably not me, unless I was being paid) could do a nice test in a day or two.
> 
> Coast-down testing would also need enough repeats and a control for validation. If the differences can't be measured with that, they probably are insignificant, which is also good information (but doesn't make for good marketing). Do it indoors, if possible, and record the speeds as you coast across two lines a sufficient distance apart. Repeat many times.


The drag on a ship/sub comes all from the friction between ship and water. For a bike you have the aero losses due to friction between the test hardware and air as well as the rolling resistance of the tire so you would need to do a regression on speed to determine the Crr. Also wind resistance would need to be known or controlled as there is a difference in ground speed vs. air speed. Cees Beers designed and built a similar test vehicle a few years ago but I've never heard of any results from his work ??

The advantage of roller testing is that it amplifies the differences in Crr from tire to tire due to the greater deflection of the tire on the roller. A few watts difference due to better Crr is very important to time trialers where races are frequently lost/won by less than 5 sec over 40 km.


----------



## rruff

We are getting way off topic, but I agree with Al that even 1/2 W difference between tires is significant to a competitive rider but this is really hard to separate via a field test... it's pretty hard to do that accurately via any method.

I kinda like the idea of having an outdoor towed test rig, but I think you underestimate how sophisticated it would need to be. For starters, it needs to be tested on real roads at normal speeds (else we can just use rollers)... so you need to account for speed and gradient as well as aero drag. Speed can be done and you can use an iBike to get a precise grade map for your course. Maybe a trailer that will take a 700mm wheel, with an aero fairing over the whole thing. How hard would it be to separate the longitudinal force from the other forces?


----------



## maxima

*No Way*

The Tubeless will roll better with MUTE OUT Road Noise + Comfort,
.
I've been leaving my Tubless Shamal Ultra out for 1 week, riding a full week on my Zipp 404 that have just been rebuild. I cannot imagine I riding anything else.........except for tubless. The Vittoria Evo Tubular with Latex Tubes, doesn't ride any better than teh Shamal on Tubeless Fusion. The most appaprent difference beside the ride quality is the MUTE road noise -> absolute no noise from bad roads!!!!:thumbsup: 



teleguy57 said:


> Curious if anyone can provide a ride comparison between a 25 mm good quality standard setup and a 23 mm tubeless setup with all other variables being equal? Also assuming a standard width clincher rim (vs a wider Hed Ardennes-type rim) and use of the Stan's conversion kit vs a tubeless-specific rim.
> 
> Thanks!


----------



## dwt

After riding tubeless off-road for the past 2 years and LOVING riding at lower pressure, I decided last fall to convert American Classic rims using Stans tape, sealant, and Fusion 2's. I've got about 700 miles on them riding at 85 psi (I weigh 175 lbs). No flats so far. Like the feel, especially descending and cornering. Nice to have less or no road vibration when hitting 50+ mph. Liked 'em so much I mounted Intensives on my wife's bike and she's equally happy.

Here's my $0.02 on sealants from off-road experience:

Latex sealants like Stans and Cafelatex are primarily designed to seat and seal BEADS to converted rims, which is why you don't "need" sealant to mount any UST tire to any UST rim. 

What about punctures? IME, Stan's latex alone is little use sealing holes bigger than a pinprick. Every time I had a puncture off-road, the stuff leaked like a sieve. If it doesn't seal a mtb tire at 25 psi, what is it supposed to do on a road tire @ 85+ psi? YMMV, but read the FAQ on all of Slime's products, including the new latex based Slime Pro for bicycle tubeless, to see what I'm getting at.
http://www.slime.com/faq.html#answer_5171

Auto tire sealants are a different mix, using antifreeze and what all, plus particles of various materials and sizes, designed to clog puncture holes. They are NOT simply liquid latex. Nobody taking a motor vehicle off road would ever consider using just latex to guard against punctures. So why would you use latex alone on a bike?

So I now mix latex sealant and auto sealant "hoping" for the best of both worlds. I know the bead sealing works because the tires on all 5 of the various converted road and off-road bikes in our house are aired up and holding pressure. So far - knock on wood - we have not had to test the puncture repair idea - no punctures. But the day will come. 

Also note that just like an auto tire, sealant is only a temporary fix to get you home. Another emergency trail-side puncture repair solvent I have used successfully is good old superglue, BTW. But once you do get home after a puncture, you should actually repair the tire with some vulcanizing system, unless you like risk. 

Finally, if you get huge cut or hole, or if you tear your sidewall, you are SOL whatever tire (tube or tubeless or tubular) you have, and for tubeless, whatever brew you have mixed for sealant. So no matter what, especially if you are riding solo, you always carry tubes, pump, CO2, whatever - for the worst case scenario.


----------



## pkcrew

*Dura-Ace 7850 corrosion with Hutchinson sealant*

Howdy All. I'm opening up this thread again to chronicle my misadventures with Hutchinson sealants. I've now had a year of experience with the Shimano 7850 carbon/scandium wheels mounted with Fusion 2s. Handling, ride quality and overall feel are exemplary. However, I have been bitten by the corrosion monster after using Hutchinson FastAir and ProtectAir sealants.

I initially mounted the tires without sealant and had no difficulties. In preparation for several longer rides, I partially deflated the tires and re-inflated them using FastAir sealant. Again, no problems but after not riding the bike for several weeks while on vacation, I returned to find both tires flat with their beads no longer seated on the rims. Because I was unable to re-inflate the tires, I dismounted them whereupon I discovered generalized corrosion involving the entire inner surface of each wheel out to the level of the rim edges. I took the wheels to my LBS who confirmed the corrosion but who felt that the wheels were still usable. I remounted the tires with ProtectAir Max this time and road them for another 600 miles or so before I experienced two episodes of the ProtectAir fluid spraying out from the rear tire while on lower speed climbing rides of less than 30 miles. There was no puncture to be found and I can only assume that the sealant was escaping via the bead somewhere. Took the tire off and noted even more corrosion than previously, now with pitting and irregularity of the rim edge where it contacts the bead.

I'm now getting ready to mount some new Fusion 3s to the wheels but am afraid they may be too corroded to be safe for use. Have a call out to Shimano and Hutchinson but haven't heard back as yet; I suspect I'm up a creek since Shimano advises against use of any sealant with their wheelsets. Hutchinson recommends it course of hand, however. Anyone else out there have a situation similar to mine?

BTW, I have a friend with the same setup who has been using Stan's all along and his wheels are still pristine.... go figure.


----------



## bholwell

pkcrew said:


> I'm now getting ready to mount some new Fusion 3s to the wheels but am afraid they may be too corroded to be safe for use.


That stinks. I, for one, would really like to see photos of the rims.

And please let us know how Hutchinson responds.


----------



## orange_julius

pkcrew said:


> Howdy All. I'm opening up this thread again to chronicle my misadventures with Hutchinson sealants. I've now had a year of experience with the Shimano 7850 carbon/scandium wheels mounted with Fusion 2s. Handling, ride quality and overall feel are exemplary. However, I have been bitten by the corrosion monster after using Hutchinson FastAir and ProtectAir sealants.


PKcrew, that sucks, I'm really sorry to hear about the problems. I too use Hutchinson FastAir, on a Campag Shamal wheelset and Fusion 3 tires. 

Does Shimano recommend for or against a particular brand of sealants? Campag doesn't say anything about sealants in their manual. 

Your corrosion issue and comparison with your friend's use of Stan's is surprising given the many posts complaining of Stan's use of ammonia in the mix.


----------



## MichaelB

Have now completed approx 3,200km using DA WH-7850-SL Tubless wheels with Fusion2's.

The back tyre is now worn out and needs replacing. I have only used Stan's sealant, and the one time that I had to remove the tyre (to place an internal patch on a large cut), I saw no trace of corrosion at all.

Tyres have been fitted for approx 11 months now.

I will have a closer look when I remove the tyre to fit the new one, and drop a line in here with what I find.

Cheers

Michael B


----------



## pkcrew

Thanks all for your comments. I spoke with one of the techs at my LBS who has worked with a number of the DA 7850 tubeless wheelsets and I brought in one of my wheels and tires for his evaluation. He had never seen as extensive an example of corrosion as that present on my wheel. His thought was that I may have received a bad set of wheels that had not undergone the anodized coating process properly. In his experience, the typical location where corrosion had been found was around the valve stem orifice rather than involving the entire rim as in my case. He will be contacting Shimano tomorrow to see what they have to say about it.

In Lennard Zinn's response to the Shimano admonition against the use of sealant, mention was made of avoiding alkaline sealants particularly which would appear to single out the presence of ammonia which I had understood wasn't present in the Hutchinson products (although I really don't know how to tell which sealants are more or less alkaline so it seems a moot point).

Here is that link again if you're interested:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...on-disc-brake-spoking-patterns-and-more_89375

When I get the wheel back, I'll take some pics and get them posted so you can see an example of my corrosivus maximus.... :yikes:

Thanks again,
pkcrew


----------



## stubek

I have been riding Reynolds 2008 KOM wheels (1,040 grams for the pair) for two years. They are my every day wheels and I even raced on them for 6 road races (32 miles to 67 miles each), 5 crits, and some hill climbs. The wheels are great for climbing and accelerating. Braking is CRAP and they do have enough flex to make descending scary.

For tires, I started with Vitoria Corsa, but they don't hold air and you have to inflate them every two days because the butyl inner tubes are so thin. When I finally punctured my rear after more than 1,000 miles, I switched to continental supper sports which are what I run on my HED3 wheels.


----------



## MichaelB

stubek said:


> I have been riding Reynolds 2008 KOM wheels (1,040 grams for the pair) for two years. They are my every day wheels and I even raced on them for 6 road races (32 miles to 67 miles each), 5 crits, and some hill climbs. The wheels are great for climbing and accelerating. Braking is CRAP and they do have enough flex to make descending scary.
> 
> For tires, I started with Vitoria Corsa, but they don't hold air and you have to inflate them every two days because the butyl inner tubes are so thin. When I finally punctured my rear after more than 1,000 miles, I switched to continental supper sports which are what I run on my HED3 wheels.


This thread is about *Road TUBELESS,* not tubular.


----------



## rollin nolan

Do Road Tubeless tires used with Tubeless wheels bleed air like butyl tubes?


----------



## MichaelB

Not really. I find they need 10 psi extra top up every 3 - 5 days. Just part of pre ride check. Normally one or two pumps on a floor pump.

No experience of butyl tubes though


----------



## Brazos

I bought some Shimano 6700 tubeless wheels back in June along with Atom tubeless tires. It is awsome. I see no reason for tubes. I don't know why clincher tubless systems have not caught on better. I have run with and w/o Stan's sealant. In fact my front tire has it right now and the rear does not. No flats to date. I am curious after reading some of the above comments about how people called Shimano and asked if running sealant would void their warranty. I bought new Shimano tubeless wheels and NOWHERE in there literature does it say you can use sealant. It have many items they caution against but nothing about the use of sealant. Therefore I would expect my warranty to remain in tact. It makes me wonder why you would even call Shimano and ask? I can understand though if I were a manufacturer and somebody called me up and asked if they modified my product if it would void the warranty I would say yes. Why in the world would a manufacturer take a chance with all the home brew sealants people are using. Point is if you have Shimano tubeless wheels go ahead and use sealant. If you wind up needing your warranty and the use of sealant becaomes and issue tell them to stick it and show you where in there product liturature that came with your wheels where it said not to.


----------



## rollin nolan

Butyl tubes are the regular black rubber tubes that are used in most clinchers. The only alternative I know is latex and i hear that they bleed air even more. I don't really mind that my clinchers bleed some air. Pumping up the tires ever day or two is no big deal and is part of the pre-ride ritual. It seams like tubeless would hold air better, but I have no reasoning behind that.  







MichaelB said:


> Not really. I find they need 10 psi extra top up every 3 - 5 days. Just part of pre ride check. Normally one or two pumps on a floor pump.
> 
> No experience of butyl tubes though


----------



## MichaelB

MichaelB said:


> Have now completed approx 3,200km using DA WH-7850-SL Tubless wheels with Fusion2's.
> 
> The back tyre is now worn out and needs replacing. I have only used Stan's sealant, and the one time that I had to remove the tyre (to place an internal patch on a large cut), I saw no trace of corrosion at all.
> 
> Tyres have been fitted for approx 11 months now.
> 
> I will have a closer look when I remove the tyre to fit the new one, and drop a line in here with what I find.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Michael B


Changed the tyres last weekend, and no sign whatsoever of any corrosion at all


----------



## natedg200202

smcnees said:


> FOLLOW UP: I just did a double century on Saturday using the 'Shoe Goo' repaired tire and it held up wonderfully.


Glad it is working OK. I had a major cut in my Fusion 3's at 300 miles. The sealant held at 40psi and I finished the ride. Afterwards, I couldn't get the tire to stay at 80psi and I had to do something in addition to sealant. 

You can fix the cut with a regular patch on the inside of the tire, which is what I did. This will make a permanent repair (instead of shoe goo). Follow the instructions in the link below and it will make a great permanent fix. Mine is working great 1000 miles later. 

http://www.notubes.com/support_patching.php


----------



## masterofnone

I've converted many rims and tires on several mtb's, I've never even heard of any corrosion issues before. Is the aluminum alloys used in road rims that different than mtb? I've also used tires that were supposedly "no no's" with sealant that have been flawless. Yeah, it sounds like a cya policy.


----------



## pkcrew

Just a quick follow-up to my Shimano 7850 corrosion dilemma. I had my LBS send the rims and tires back to Shimano and they agreed that the corrosion was unusual and the implication by the LBS was that the rims had not had the appropriate coating applied at the factory to their internal surfaces to prevent the corrosion issue. No official word from Shimano, however.

In any event, Shimano sent me back two brand new wheels to replace the ruined ones so many props to them for their response! As it happens, I had already purchased two new wheels after I sent in the corroded ones so I could continue my training; I had my LBS install two new Specialized S-Works Turbo tires on the rims and they used Stan's as is their custom. So far no problems although I haven't as yet popped the tires off to check the rims...


----------



## natedg200202

masterofnone said:


> I've converted many rims and tires on several mtb's, I've never even heard of any corrosion issues before. Is the aluminum alloys used in road rims that different than mtb? I've also used tires that were supposedly "no no's" with sealant that have been flawless. Yeah, it sounds like a cya policy.


Try a tubeless road conversion with a non-tubeless approved tire and get back to us. I bet you're not calling it CYA then. It just doesn't work with road tires.


----------



## Dave Leddon

I have two questions:
I mounted Hutchinson Intensive tires on a set of Dura Ace tubeless rims without sealant about three weeks ago and in that time they've only lost 10 psi. Given the controversy concerning the efficacy of the Hutchinson sealants in this thread, I think I'll just do without for now and rely on a spare tube to fix any flats. Somebody in this forum mentioned that they were unable to get the bead to seat properly in a tubeless rim when using an tube. Why wouldn't the forces against the sidewalls be the same with and without a tube?

The other question is what is the difference between Hutchinson's Protect' Air and Protect' Air Max? I notice that all of the impressive demonstrations on YouTube, particularly the guy with the icepick, are using Protect' Air Max. Is one product designed for MTB tires and the other for road tires?


----------



## blantonator

I just picked up a pair of dura-ace wheels and slapped on an a Hutchinson atom. Feels like a pretty good tire so far, but it's definitely undersized. My Michelin pro 3's measure 25mm, and the atoms measure between 21.5-22mm depending on my air pressure.


----------



## Dave Leddon

Interesting. My Hutchinson Intensive tires are listed as being 25 mm but actually measure slightly less that 23 mm.


----------



## dirkfh

natedg200202 said:


> Try a tubeless road conversion with a non-tubeless approved tire and get back to us. I bet you're not calling it CYA then. It just doesn't work with road tires.


Has anybody tried this and why?? Too many very small holes?

Thanks


----------



## pmt

dirkfh said:


> Has anybody tried this and why?? Too many very small holes?
> 
> Thanks


The tire will blow off the rim. Road Tubeless tires are designed such that the bead cannot stretch over the rim and come off.

Part of what keeps a regular tire on is the inflated tube pinching the tire between the tube and the rim. Without that pinch, a regular tire can come off.


----------



## mudge

dirkfh said:


> Has anybody tried this and why?? Too many very small holes?
> 
> Thanks


Non-tubeless road tires won't work 'cause the beads aren't designed to handle the pressures seen in road tires. For mtb tires, the pressures aren't so high and therefore the bead isn't as critical. 

With the right rim, you can run darn near any mtb tire tubeless. Try running a non-tubeless road tire that way and you're going turf surfing sooner or later.


----------



## Weav

I've had great results with my Fusion 3's. No flats, comfortable ride at 95psi, great rolling resistance, no sealant either. Using Dura Ace 7850 SL wheels. Am not going back to tubes!


----------



## mudge

AM999 said:


> Our definition of the purpose of tubeless tires is different. Please excuse my putting words in your mouth but ... (From a previous post) I'm looking for a fast rolling tire (high tire pressure) that won't pinch flat and you are looking for improved road grip and comfort (low tire pressure) that won't pinch flat ?? I put ~ 40 miles on the IRC Top Secret tire (back wheel only) at 120 psig and the ride and handling was very similar to the Vred and Michelin clinchers that I usually ride. I inadvertantly did get a data point at ~ 80 psig due to a loose valve lock nut - Crr ~ 0.00340 vs Crr ~ 0.00260 at 120 psig. The trend of Crr with pressure is fairly linear for that pressure range so you can scale to estimate Crr at different pressures.


I think I found the root of your problem, you're looking for a low rolling resistance tire at high pressure. Gotta get past the defunct myth that high pressure is good, and accept that if you take a quality tubeless tire and run it around 10-15 psi lower than you're used to, you'll find the low rolling resistance you're looking for. As an added benefit, you'll also get more comfort and better traction in the deal.

High pressure, in and of itself, isn't something to strive for. The proper pressure to maximize tire performance is key, IMO. With tubeless, proper pressure is lower than what many can bring themselves to accept.


----------



## rruff

I think Al knows what he is talking about... you may get comfort and slightly better grip with lower pressure, but on most surfaces you are faster with 110-120psi. And... the IRC he tested is the *only* tubeless tire that has Crr that is in the "good" range.


----------



## mudge

rruff said:


> I think Al knows what he is talking about... you may get comfort and slightly better grip with lower pressure, but on most surfaces you are faster with 110-120psi. And... the IRC he tested is the *only* tubeless tire that has Crr that is in the "good" range.


I don't know Al from Adam's housecat and he may know a lot, but if he thinks high pressure = fast rolling, I'm taking what he says with a grain of salt.


----------



## AM999

mudge said:


> I think I found the root of your problem, you're looking for a low rolling resistance tire at high pressure. Gotta get past the defunct myth that high pressure is good, and accept that if you take a quality tubeless tire and run it around 10-15 psi lower than you're used to, you'll find the low rolling resistance you're looking for. As an added benefit, you'll also get more comfort and better traction in the deal.
> 
> High pressure, in and of itself, isn't something to strive for. The proper pressure to maximize tire performance is key, IMO. With tubeless, proper pressure is lower than what many can bring themselves to accept.


On very smooth surfaces all tires regardless of construction will have lower rolling resistance at higher pressures. On a real road with the inherent irregularities there is an optimum pressure above which the Crr will increase due to "bouncing" but below which the Crr will also increase due to increased flexing of the tire casing and tread. Why would you conclude that a tubeless tire would have a lower rolling resistance (Crr) at lower pressures ?? Do you have data to back up your assertion ?? You may choose to use a low pressure for your tubless tire set up due to increased comfort and handling but the rolling resistance will be increased at the lower pressure. There is nothing wrong with that if that is your priority. As Ron mentioned the only tubeless tire I've tested that has a Crr on the "first page" is the IRC "Top Secret" model which uses a natural rubber "latex" inner liner for the pressure containment. All the other tubeless tires that I'm aware of use a relatively thick layer of butyl rubber resulting in relatively high Crr. Last time I checked the IRC "Top Secret" was only available in Japan but could be ordered via the internet.


----------



## mudge

AM999 said:


> On very smooth surfaces all tires regardless of construction will have lower rolling resistance at higher pressures. On a real road with the inherent irregularities there is an optimum pressure above which the Crr will increase due to "bouncing" but below which the Crr will also increase due to increased flexing of the tire casing and tread. Why would you conclude that a tubeless tire would have a lower rolling resistance (Crr) at lower pressures ?? Do you have data to back up your assertion ?? You may choose to use a low pressure for your tubless tire set up due to increased comfort and handling but the rolling resistance will be increased at the lower pressure. There is nothing wrong with that if that is your priority. As Ron mentioned the only tubeless tire I've tested that has a Crr on the "first page" is the IRC "Top Secret" model which uses a natural rubber "latex" inner liner for the pressure containment. All the other tubeless tires that I'm aware of use a relatively thick layer of butyl rubber resulting in relatively high Crr. Last time I checked the IRC "Top Secret" was only available in Japan but could be ordered via the internet.


My experience is that for tubed clinchers, the optimum pressure for maximizing rolling resistance, traction, and comfort is low enough that pinch flatting becomes a real concern. Tubeless fixes that. I'm not suggesting super low pressures for tubeless setups, although you could do that if you wanted. What I am suggesting is that tubeless at about 10psi lower than tubed is a better way to go.


----------



## AM999

mudge said:


> My experience is that for tubed clinchers, the optimum pressure for maximizing rolling resistance, traction, and comfort is low enough that pinch flatting becomes a real concern. Tubeless fixes that. I'm not suggesting super low pressures for tubeless setups, although you could do that if you wanted. What I am suggesting is that tubeless at about 10psi lower than tubed is a better way to go.


Traction and comfort are somewhat subjective. The only testing that I know of on traction was done by Tour Magazine which compared different tires at the same pressure IIRC. Have you ever ridden on say a set of Bontrager RXL Pro 23 clinchers with latex tubes ?? A set of those will require ~ 10 watts less to roll at ~ 20 mph on a real road compared to a Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless 23 both at 120 psig. Drop the pressure in the Hutchy's by 10 psig and the wattage difference will be slightly increased.


----------



## mudge

AM999 said:


> Traction and comfort are somewhat subjective. The only testing that I know of on traction was done by Tour Magazine which compared different tires at the same pressure IIRC. Have you ever ridden on say a set of Bontrager RXL Pro 23 clinchers with latex tubes ?? A set of those will require ~ 10 watts less to roll at ~ 20 mph on a real road compared to a Hutchinson Fusion 2 Tubeless 23 both at 120 psig. Drop the pressure in the Hutchy's by 10 psig and the wattage difference will be slightly increased.


As a matter of fact, no I have not ridden that tire/tube combo, not that it matters. The thing you're not taking into account, not that you could 'cause you don't know enough about me, is that IF I were to ride a 23mm wide tire at 120psi, I'd very likely pinch flat it. With the exception of my recently purchased SWorks Turbo tubeless, I haven't ridden a 23mm wide tire in over a decade.


----------



## AM999

mudge said:


> As a matter of fact, no I have not ridden that tire/tube combo, not that it matters. The thing you're not taking into account, not that you could 'cause you don't know enough about me, is that IF I were to ride a 23mm wide tire at 120psi, I'd very likely pinch flat it. With the exception of my recently purchased SWorks Turbo tubeless, I haven't ridden a 23mm wide tire in over a decade.


Whatever works for you and makes you comfortable is what you should use. We aren't talking about differences that really mean much to anybody but perhaps time trialers and triathletes who race against the clock. Hutchinson makes the Specialized tubeless IIRC.


----------



## DCE

Weav said:


> I've had great results with my Fusion 3's. No flats, comfortable ride at 95psi, great rolling resistance, no sealant either. Using Dura Ace 7850 SL wheels. Am not going back to tubes!


Hi Weav, I have DA 7850 CL and have had a heck of a time getting the Fusion 3 tubeless on the rim without using tire levers. And even with the levers it is hard, to the point that I am worried about damaging the bead. I have read countless how to's and watched the videos, but still having problems. Any suggestions?


----------



## blantonator

use a plastic tire lever.


----------



## dekindy

DCE said:


> Hi Weav, I have DA 7850 CL and have had a heck of a time getting the Fusion 3 tubeless on the rim without using tire levers. And even with the levers it is hard, to the point that I am worried about damaging the bead. I have read countless how to's and watched the videos, but still having problems. Any suggestions?


Call and e-mail Hutchinson and Shimano. I purchased some Fusion 3's from a Serotta forum member that had purchased two sets but because he had so much difficulty installing the first set did not want the second set. I thought since it was his first try at tubeless that he had gotten discouraged too easily. Now I wonder if there is an issue. I would be interested in what you find out.


----------



## Weav

DCE said:


> Hi Weav, I have DA 7850 CL and have had a heck of a time getting the Fusion 3 tubeless on the rim without using tire levers. And even with the levers it is hard, to the point that I am worried about damaging the bead. I have read countless how to's and watched the videos, but still having problems. Any suggestions?



You will need to use a plastic tire lever. I had such a hard time getting them on I took them down to a local shop and they put them on for me, they had to muscle them on for the last 6 inches, didn't affect the bead. He pumped them up with his compressor and they seated nicely. I read a tip from someone to put the tire in the dryer for about 10 minutes which makes the rubber more pliable and it was stated that they go on nicely after that... worth a try, 10 minutes in the dryer isn't going to hurt the tire.


----------



## DCE

dekindy said:


> Call and e-mail Hutchinson and Shimano. I purchased some Fusion 3's from a Serotta forum member that had purchased two sets but because he had so much difficulty installing the first set did not want the second set. I thought since it was his first try at tubeless that he had gotten discouraged too easily. Now I wonder if there is an issue. I would be interested in what you find out.


I couldn't find the US contact number for Hutchinson, but I did speak to Shimano. 

The guy at shimano told me that he personally has the DA 7850 24 TL, like mine and installs them without tire levers. He was not able to offer me anything more than what I have already tried (make sure both beads are down in the channel, use some soapy water). He also told me not to use tire levers because the aluminum is very thin on these rims. Pretty frustrating.


----------



## Roadrider22

10 minutes in the dryer works wonders. Also, I put on a pair of leather work gloves which helps keep the skin on my thumbs as I roll the bead on. I have good success with this and don't have to resort to the mess of soapy water.


----------



## floxy

I've read a good majority of this thread and don't see many people converting deep dish carbon clinchers tubeless. Any reason? Id like to convert a set of Reynolds Assaults with the Atom tire. I run tubeless on all my MTBs and a big fan.


----------



## crank1979

I've had my tubeless set up for about 6 months now.

Hutchinson Fusion 3 tyres on Ultegra 6700 wheels. Stans sealant because punctures are a signifcant problem and it has worked well so far with 2 punctures, neither requiring me to stop but the first needed a patch on the inside when I got home. I'm running 100psi front and rear and have about 1500km on the tyres. The front isn;t showing any signs of wear and the rear is starting to get the flat top on it.

The problem I'm having is both tyres are splitting all the way around at each "join" in the tyre. They are splitting where the bead meets the sidewall, where the sidewall meets the tread and where the tread joins in the centre of the tyre. They aren't deep cuts but are going all the way around the circumference of the tyres.

Has anyone else had this happen?


----------



## Doba

I've been running my 6700 wheels tubed with some Bontrager tires for a while now. Got my Fusion 3s in the mail today. Got them mounted with just a little struggle. Reverted to plastic tire levers. Having a problem getting the bead to seat. Even with a CO2 cartridge I can't get it to get that initial flush of air to seat the bead. Gotta take it to the LBS tomorrow and see if they can hit it with the compressor.


----------



## Wheelman55

crank1979 said:


> I've had my tubeless set up for about 6 months now.
> 
> Hutchinson Fusion 3 tyres on Ultegra 6700 wheels. Stans sealant because punctures are a signifcant problem and it has worked well so far with 2 punctures, neither requiring me to stop but the first needed a patch on the inside when I got home. I'm running 100psi front and rear and have about 1500km on the tyres. The front isn;t showing any signs of wear and the rear is starting to get the flat top on it.
> 
> The problem I'm having is both tyres are splitting all the way around at each "join" in the tyre. They are splitting where the bead meets the sidewall, where the sidewall meets the tread and where the tread joins in the centre of the tyre. They aren't deep cuts but are going all the way around the circumference of the tyres.
> 
> Has anyone else had this happen?



The splitting sounds like a defect in the tire. I had one with splits that ran somewhat parallel with the bead. Send it back as it will likely not hold air at all at some point.

Unless you are over 200 pounds try using lower tire pressure like 90 front and 95 rear. You'll get even better mileage out of the tires that way. At those pressures I have gotten 3,000 miles out of a rear tire and I weigh 190 pounds.


----------



## Wheelman55

Doba said:


> I've been running my 6700 wheels tubed with some Bontrager tires for a while now. Got my Fusion 3s in the mail today. Got them mounted with just a little struggle. Reverted to plastic tire levers. Having a problem getting the bead to seat. Even with a CO2 cartridge I can't get it to get that initial flush of air to seat the bead. Gotta take it to the LBS tomorrow and see if they can hit it with the compressor.


Doba...had the non seat issue happen to me...I discovered that the tire was not seated correctly at the valve...meaning that the bead was hung up a bit. Once I seated the bead the tire inflated with a hand pump.


----------



## Weav

They should be able to seat with a hand pump. Wheelman55 may be onto something. If the compressor doesn't force it to seat then I'd have a look at the valve area.


----------



## pmt

Doba said:


> I've been running my 6700 wheels tubed with some Bontrager tires for a while now. Got my Fusion 3s in the mail today. Got them mounted with just a little struggle. Reverted to plastic tire levers. Having a problem getting the bead to seat. Even with a CO2 cartridge I can't get it to get that initial flush of air to seat the bead. Gotta take it to the LBS tomorrow and see if they can hit it with the compressor.


Yeah, I did find that the new Fusion 3 did require compressor air to get it seated; once it "broke in", then it was no trouble to seat with the floor pump.


----------



## orange_julius

Wheelman55 said:


> Doba...had the non seat issue happen to me...I discovered that the tire was not seated correctly at the valve...meaning that the bead was hung up a bit. Once I seated the bead the tire inflated with a hand pump.


I also had a similar problem, but couldn't find any signs of the beads not sitting correctly. I ended up putting some Fas'Air and that solved the problem.


----------



## Doba

Had my first ride on the tubeless setup. Nice 20 mile ride with about 1000ft of climbing in the middle. It's my favorite climb up to a big church on the mountain side. I haven't done that climb in almost a month and my lungs felt it. 

Tubeless impressions. I upgraded from some Shimano RS10 wheels and Bontrager Race Lite X tires. The new setup is 6700 wheels and Fusion 3 tires. Right out the gate I could feel the difference. So many of the imperfections in the road are now unnoticeable. I started at 105psi for my first ride and will have to work to find my happy medium with this new setup. Climbing did not feel any different. The descent was a lot different. The road was a bit wet and I was playing it cautious, but cornering downhill felt great and peppy. 

Overall I'm happy with the change in wheels and tubeless so far. I'll get about 1000 miles on them before I make a real verdict.


----------



## pmt

A reminder to new Road Tubeless riders: please be sure to practice fixing flats in the garage and NOT out on the road. Which ever method you choose for fixing flats, practice it a few times in the comfort of your own domain.

There are differences from regular clinchers, and you don't want to learn them out in the field.


----------



## Weav

yeah I agree. For me though I flat so infrequently that my method of fixing flats is to call my wife and have her pick me up.


----------



## MichaelB

All the punctures I have had have either not made a difference, and kept on riding the intended route (two), or left sufficient air to head home (one) without a fuss.

Yay for Road Tubeless & Sealant !!!


----------



## crank1979

*Tubeless and fluid trainers?*

Has anyone used their tubeless wheels/tyres with a trainer? Does the heat build up cause any issues with the tyre or sealant?


----------



## pmt

crank1979 said:


> Has anyone used their tubeless wheels/tyres with a trainer? Does the heat build up cause any issues with the tyre or sealant?


Nope, no problem.

*

In other Road Tubeless news, I just finished a 235k ride a few hours ago. Right in the last 10k I noticed my front tire was a little soft, but just kept on going. Sealant saved the day, so I could just continue on to the finish (and you can darned well bet by that point I was tired and just wanted to be done) and not bother stopping to fix it.


----------



## DCE

*Dura Ace WH-7850-C24-TL Rim Corrosion*

I used Palmolive dish soap to seat the bead onto the rim while mounting Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless tires on my seven month old Dura Ace WH-7850-C24-TL wheels.

After about 4 weeks the rear tire was losing a bit of air and when I took off the tire, I found the rim was completely pitted from corrosion.

I didn't use any sealant. 

Turns out the Palmolive dish soap had ammonia in it (which wasn't stated on the label). Ammonia is very corrosive to aluminum. Even anodized aluminum.

The wheels went back to Shimano and after they confirmed no sealant was used, they graciously replaced them.

So, if you use soap to mount your tubeless tires, make sure it does not contain ammonia.


----------



## vincemacmillan

floxy said:


> I've read a good majority of this thread and don't see many people converting deep dish carbon clinchers tubeless. Any reason?


Carbon clinchers already have issues with regular tire beads loosening and coming out on long descents from the heat build-up (see L. Zinn, most recent Velonews). Probably not a good idea to throw the "ghetto" tubeless conversion kit into this mix, as the entire conversion is dependent on the integrity of that bead set. That said, I am a big fan of Stan's/Hutchinson ghetto conversion for _aluminum _clinchers (Hutchinson Intensives mounted on Neuvation M28 Aeros), which I rode for about 10,000 comfortable miles with only one flat (big perpendicular cut). I finally saved up the cash to buy a proper Campy two-way fit setup and am stoked.


----------



## Lu-Max

Most soap products tend to be basic (as opposed to acidic) which anodizing may not tolerate very well depending on the quality of the anodizing process.

The solution I found (my GF suggested it actually) is to put a bit of KY liquid on the outside of the rim to help get the last bit of tire over the rim lip. Works like a charm unless you get it on your fingers, then your hands will be to slippery to grip the tire. It is not acidic or basic, neutral PH and rinses away easily as opposed to soap. I also warm up the tire first by either letting it sit out in the sun for a while, or else use the old clothes dryer technique. Works for me but YMMV.


----------



## edscueth

I have the 7850 SL's, haven't had a chance to ride them as its still winter here. I was able to mount the front wheel and get it to seat with a floor pump, it was so easy I wondered why so many had troubled. Then came the rear wheel, after a week of trying and blisters like you wouldn't believe, I finally gave up and took it into the LBS. Its funny how easy they made it look, however the tire did seat but it has a slow leak. Since Shimano recommends not using sealant I am not, the LBS said after riding it for a bit the slow leak might disappear - any truth to that?


----------



## Lu-Max

I too was concerned when I discovered that Shimano would void my rim warranty if I used sealant. Initial natural latex based sealants contained a significant amount of ammonia which would damage the rim if the anodizing was thin or damaged due to scratches or wear.

I personally spoke with representatives at Shimano USA, Stan's NoTubes and at Hutchinson Tire USA. The newer version of Stan's sealant contains less than 1/10 of 1% of ammonia and will not damage a tubeless rim. Shimano agrees with this. Hutchinson Protect'Air Max (the white version, the green is for MTB tires) contains no ammonia. In fact when I spoke with the Rep at Hutchinson I gave them the Shimano USA contact info and they sent some of their product to Shimano for testing. FWIW I am using the Hutchinson product, it lasts longer and does not dry out as quickly as Stan's does according to the research I did.

A quick video about Protect'Air Max


----------



## lml1x

I found that upping the ratio of soap to water really helped. That and alternating pushing on the tire w/ my palm on each side of the valve.


----------



## JSWhaler

Well after struggling for a week. I gave in and took my wheels to lbs. I was able to mount tires (fusion 3) to my wheels (DA 7850), but had difficulty getting them seated and air was leaking. The head mechanic was finally able to get them on and ready with a compressor. He also found that the Stan's valves were causing a leak because they wouldn't seat as well as shimano.


----------



## jhamlin38

Running eurus 2 way and Fusion 3's. I really like 'em. NOT worrying about snakebite anymore is nice. 
so far i'm thrilled with the new wheels, and the comfy ride.


----------



## Waxbytes

I'm curious as to how much of the ride improvement is due to no inner tube and how much is due to the Fusions being lighter with no kelvar flat protection and softer rubber as shown by the quick wear? It's been common wisdom that lghter and more flexible clinchers feel better than heavier and stiffer long wearing clinchers since way before tubeless was available. In other words are we comparing apples to apples or to oranges?


----------



## Dave Leddon

vincemacmillan said:


> Carbon clinchers already have issues with regular tire beads loosening and coming out on long descents from the heat build-up (see L. Zinn, most recent Velonews). Probably not a good idea to throw the "ghetto" tubeless conversion kit into this mix, as the entire conversion is dependent on the integrity of that bead set. That said, I am a big fan of Stan's/Hutchinson ghetto conversion for _aluminum _clinchers (Hutchinson Intensives mounted on Neuvation M28 Aeros), which I rode for about 10,000 comfortable miles with only one flat (big perpendicular cut). I finally saved up the cash to buy a proper Campy two-way fit setup and am stoked.


Did you mean to say that you got 10,000 miles on a single set of Hutchinson Intensives? I've got 1300 miles on a set of these and the wear rate seems to be about the same as Gatorskins which would normally last about 3000 miles. I would be happy with that but 10,000 miles would be great.


----------



## macming

DCE said:


> I used Palmolive dish soap to seat the bead onto the rim while mounting Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless tires on my seven month old Dura Ace WH-7850-C24-TL wheels.
> 
> After about 4 weeks the rear tire was losing a bit of air and when I took off the tire, I found the rim was completely pitted from corrosion.
> 
> I didn't use any sealant.
> 
> Turns out the Palmolive dish soap had ammonia in it (which wasn't stated on the label). Ammonia is very corrosive to aluminum. Even anodized aluminum.
> 
> The wheels went back to Shimano and after they confirmed no sealant was used, they graciously replaced them.
> 
> So, if you use soap to mount your tubeless tires, make sure it does not contain ammonia.


I use a high water to car wash soap mix to seat the UST beads on my MTN tires. I got a set of I9s, and some tubeless gear coming! Can't wait


----------



## FlatlandRoller

*where is my 2 1/2 mm??*

Just picked up my Hutchison Intensive tire today, ran home to install on my velocity aerohead rear wheel. Pulled off the rim strip, two laps of stans 22mm yellow tape, cut the valve out of the old tube (not gonna need it anyway, right?), mounted the tire by hand, couple of pumps and it caught. Removed one bead, put in 30g of stans sealant, put the bead back on, brushed some soapy water along both bead, the rim, tire, got it good and sudsy. Pumped up to 100psi and there it sits....in all of it's 22.3mm wide glory. Hell this was easier than on the mtb! 

But man, it looks narrow. I'm coming off of those handmade Challenge 27mm clinchers (measures 29mm on my rims) and 22.3mm looks freaking narrow. The Challenge tires were comfy and rolled well but I got flats every time it was damp, hoping to be able to run the tubeless tires right down to the threads w/o any punctures.

Joe


----------



## jsedlak

I ride tubeless on a set of DA full alum. wheels with Hutchinson Fusions.

The rear is always a PITA to get on, but the front is easy enough. Just got some removable core valves to make the sealant application easier. I also use a co2 to seat them.

No issues and ride quality is fantastic. They don't flat like Pro3's and roll really well.

I weigh 185# and run 95-100psi.


----------



## MichaelB

FlatlandRoller said:


> .... and 22.3mm looks freaking narrow. The Challenge tires were comfy and rolled well but I got flats every time it was damp, hoping to be able to run the tubeless tires right down to the threads w/o any punctures.
> 
> Joe


Yep, the 25C Intensives are more like 23's.

No probs here with over 10,000km experience  

Not on the one set mind you ....


----------



## FlatlandRoller

Got out for 10 miles last night, felt pretty good for such a narrow tire. I've got a couple of questions...

Are heavier-ish guys riding these tires a long ways? I'm 190#'s and like to do the occasional 200K brevet, am looking for a fast and reliable tire (so..not a 140# euro pro but not a bonafide clyde either). Been using fat clinchers for comfort (challenge) but the punctures are killing my times. 

and

Using tubeless tires on "regular" rims...they stay on, right? Anybody have one blow off? I'm running mine on the rear but would like to have a front as well...not totally excited about buying another whole front wheel if my regular wheel will be OK. On the other hand, losing my front wheel on a fast corner, that would be pretty much horrible.

Thanks guys


----------



## FlatlandRoller

My picture is upside down...freaky...it's right side up on the desktop...??


----------



## worthcycle

I have only had trouble mounting the Intensive tires to wider rims like the Hed C2...

Fusion 3 and 2 Tubeless mount perfectly to the C2 or any other rim I have tried. I think that the stiffer lower thread count on the Intensive makes it a bit harder to inflate on a wider rim bed.


----------



## MichaelB

worthcycle said:


> I have only had trouble mounting the Intensive tires to wider rims like the Hed C2...


Have used the Intensives on Shimano WH-7850SL's, Mavic Open Pro and the Velocity A23 rims.

On the A23 rims, the tyres are noticeably wider than when mounted on the other rims.

Haven't noticed any issues on any of them.

I'm around the same weight as you Flatlandroller (a bit heavier) and run 90 - 100psi without any issues . With various tyres (Fusion 2 and Intensives) , I've had distances totalling over 4,000+km on the 7850's, 3,500 on the Open pros and over 5,000km on the A23's without blowouts, burps etc.


----------



## FlatlandRoller

MichaelB said:


> Have used the Intensives on Shimano WH-7850SL's, Mavic Open Pro and the Velocity A23 rims.
> 
> On the A23 rims, the tyres are noticeably wider than when mounted on the other rims.
> 
> Haven't noticed any issues on any of them.
> 
> I'm around the same weight as you Flatlandroller (a bit heavier) and run 90 - 100psi without any issues . With various tyres (Fusion 2 and Intensives) , I've had distances totalling over 4,000+km on the 7850's, 3,500 on the Open pros and over 5,000km on the A23's without blowouts, burps etc.


OK, sounds good, thanks for the info


----------



## JSWhaler

Well here's my update... at 1,300 miles I was loving my Fusion 3's and have not had any issues, but then I got my first flat. The front tire self sealed and I was able to keep riding. Within the next 2 miles my rear flatted, but sealed. I was able to ride home. At home I saw the small punctures, inspected and added more sealant (cleaned up my bike and the tire area). The sealant made a mess. Next day out 20 miles into my ride my rear flats again, but I'm able to continue riding. I decide on turning home and my front flats. Two days 4 flats, all in different spots. I go through the same process again cleaning, adding sealants etc. Day 3, out for another ride and this time I get a major flat in the rear and it spits out sealant and will no longer hold air. I am forced to stop and put in a tube. I make it home and remove the tire for inspection. 
My results- 3 days 5 flats. I have now gone back to my tried and true conti 4000S tires and have put over 300 miles on them without a flat. For the first 1,000 miles I was a believer in road tubeless (great ride comfort), but cannot afford to replace tires every 1,000 miles. I do believe if you are a lightweight rider (190lb here) these would last much longer.


----------



## natedg200202

Whaler, do you realize you can apply a patch to the inside of your tubeless tire to fix them?


----------



## pmt

natedg200202 said:


> Whaler, do you realize you can apply a patch to the inside of your tubeless tire to fix them?


He probably does if he's read this thread, but if he's getting that many punctures, maybe he needs a tougher tire. I can't imagine that GP4000s would be any better though.

JSWhaler, are you riding over goatheads all the time? Have you found the specific items causing the flats? It's always a different spot on the tire?


----------



## FlatlandRoller

Hopefully we'll have some fat options in the future, some 28's or at least an honest 25 would be just fabulous!


----------



## martinrjensen

OK, that's either a strange coincidence or you have turned into a glass magnet. No way should you get that many flats and there are way way too many people riding the same setup who don't flat for your experience to be anything but an anomaly.You have to realize that your situation is rare. Also as has been pointed out, if you have a big hole, just patch it, then go back to running tubeless, don't toss the tire.


JSWhaler said:


> Well here's my update... at 1,300 miles I was loving my Fusion 3's and have not had any issues, but then I got my first flat. The front tire self sealed and I was able to keep riding. Within the next 2 miles my rear flatted, but sealed. I was able to ride home. At home I saw the small punctures, inspected and added more sealant (cleaned up my bike and the tire area). The sealant made a mess. Next day out 20 miles into my ride my rear flats again, but I'm able to continue riding. I decide on turning home and my front flats. Two days 4 flats, all in different spots. I go through the same process again cleaning, adding sealants etc. Day 3, out for another ride and this time I get a major flat in the rear and it spits out sealant and will no longer hold air. I am forced to stop and put in a tube. I make it home and remove the tire for inspection.
> My results- 3 days 5 flats. I have now gone back to my tried and true conti 4000S tires and have put over 300 miles on them without a flat. For the first 1,000 miles I was a believer in road tubeless (great ride comfort), but cannot afford to replace tires every 1,000 miles. I do believe if you are a lightweight rider (190lb here) these would last much longer.


----------



## VQuick

I've been riding Fusion 3s on DA 7850 SLs for about one year. No flats over 1500-2000 miles. This season I've gotten a couple of small cuts which have sealed quickly and allowed me to ride home without problems. Definitely a benefit! However, the rear has worn quickly (seems like soft rubber) and even after adding more sealant it's no longer holding air. After my most recent ride (about 1 hour on the bike) I came home and measured the pressure. It had dropped from 110 to 50 psi in that hour. Today I decided to try to fit a tube inside the rear but couldn't get the tube in due to the tight carbon beads. So I switched to a new Conti GP4000S. Later I realized I was putting a 700x28 tube (I think—it looked the same size but had a much wider area of thick rubber around the valve base) so perhaps an 18-23 would have fit. It's a shame to hang up the Fusion 3 which probably has more life in it, but I don't want to waste time troubleshooting the leakage problem.

There are several things that frustrate me about tubeless currently:

1. Never noticed much difference in ride quality. Even at 80-90 psi these don't feel significantly better than a regular tube/clincher. However, I did switch wheels at the same time I went tubeless, so I couldn't make a proper comparison.

2. Getting the Fusion 3s mounted to the 7850 SLs was a huge, huge pain. I did not use soap (and glad after reading about corrosion issues), but just wrestled and wrestled. Finally bought a fancy $10 bike lever which helped. No problem at all seating the beads with a manual floor pump.

3. The supposed weight/friction advantage seems non existent. My Fusion 3s plus Shimano valve stem weigh 335 (after 1500 miles, so surely closer to 350 new). Conti GP4000S is 217 g + 95 g tube = 312 g. When you add in the sealant with the tubeless setup, the regular clincher setup wins the weight battle handily.

4. Sealant is a pain to put in, and makes a mess.

5. Even though it never happened, I was always worrying that I would get a complete flat and would have to spend hours on the side of the road trying to pull off the tire, patch, and reinstall.

BTW the sealant I use is Caffe Latex, and the inside of the rims looks perfect after 1 year with sealant, no evidence of corrosion.


----------



## jet sanchEz

I wonder if anyone has seen a 32 hole tubeless rim? I am building up an old Merckx and want to keep the classic look.


----------



## ergott

jet sanchEz said:


> I wonder if anyone has seen a 32 hole tubeless rim? I am building up an old Merckx and want to keep the classic look.



Stan's notubes 29er rims.

Classic enough for you?



















-Eric


----------



## ergott

Crap, I just looked and they say they are out of production. I'll have to call them and see why.

The Stan's Alpha isn't the same shape, but available in 32.

-Eric


----------



## purdyd

VQuick said:


> 2. Getting the Fusion 3s mounted to the 7850 SLs was a huge, huge pain. I did not use soap (and glad after reading about corrosion issues), but just wrestled and wrestled. Finally bought a fancy $10 bike lever which helped. No problem at all seating the beads with a manual floor pump.
> 
> 3. The supposed weight/friction advantage seems non existent. My Fusion 3s plus Shimano valve stem weigh 335 (after 1500 miles, so surely closer to 350 new). Conti GP4000S is 217 g + 95 g tube = 312 g. When you add in the sealant with the tubeless setup, the regular clincher setup wins the weight battle handily.
> 
> 4. Sealant is a pain to put in, and makes a mess.
> 
> 5. Even though it never happened, I was always worrying that I would get a complete flat and would have to spend hours on the side of the road trying to pull off the tire, patch, and reinstall.
> .


if the pressure is dropping that fast, you probably have a hole in the tire that isn't sealing, in fact you maybe surprised to find out how many holes you actually have in the tire that have been sealed

i snuck on some tubeless tires on to my wife's bike and she told me she could feel the difference right away

the fusion 3 is coming in around 305 grams new for me, the atoms are about 25 grams lighter - the fusion 3 seems to settle in more like a 24mm tire in the shimano rims and is closer to 25mm on the Stan's alph rims

there is supposedly a new IRC formula pro light tire coming out that will be 240 grams, we will see

i use about 20 grams of sealant, you can probably get away with 10 grams pretty easily - just make sure you check out your tire every three months or so to make sure it isn't all dried out

the hot ticket is to get a valve stem with a removable core, it makes adding sealant much less messy - stan's has a nice one that will work with the 7850 rim

yes, first mounting can be a pain, it helps to put the tire out in the sun or clothes dryer for 10 minutes and at least for me, a couple of plastic tire irons are a must for the 7850 rims

i can actually wrestle a fusion 3 onto a stans alpha rim by hand

the soap is for helping the tire seal, not for making it easier to get on

at this point i don't even bother with soap anymore, if a tire is giving me issues sealing, i pull out the core and fire up the compressor

number one culprit is not getting the tire bead clear of the valve but sometimes a tire just doesn't want to cooperate

the Stan's alpha rims seem much easier to seal, so far, knock on wood, a hand pump has been sufficient

the one thing that no one seems to point out about the Stan's rims is that the bead doesn't really lock like the shimano rims - so while the bead will remain locked with no pressure on the Shimano, it won't on the Stan's

once mounted and ridden, they tend to be easier to remount, more like a hard clincher, so a road side complete failure is not really that bad

i usually just throw a tube in rather than patch

best to let the sealant pool in the bottom of the tire rather than trying to dump it out

fortunately, it doesn't happen very often

to me tubeless has been a god send 

the problem with tubes on long rides is once you get one flat, your chances for a second go up pretty signifcantly for a variety of reasons

to me the real problem with tubeless is simply the lack of choices in tires


----------



## MichaelB

jet sanchEz said:


> I wonder if anyone has seen a 32 hole tubeless rim? I am building up an old Merckx and want to keep the classic look.


Just use the tape and separate valve.

That is what I have done (Mavic Open pro's on one set and Velocity A23's on another).


----------



## FlatlandRoller

ergott said:


> Stan's notubes 29er rims.
> 
> -Eric


Which rim are you using? Some of those 29r rims have low max pressure ratings. And the alphas....they're too light, aren't they?


----------



## macming

FlatlandRoller said:


> Which rim are you using? Some of those 29r rims have low max pressure ratings. And the alphas....they're too light, aren't they?


I have a set of Alphas, 32H. They've been great to me in the past 2 months.


----------



## FlatlandRoller

macming said:


> I have a set of Alphas, 32H. They've been great to me in the past 2 months.


Yeah but you might be 140#'s and it's only been 2 months, right?

OK, I wanna know weight, miles, roads...the works man! 380 grams seems really light for a metal road rim.


----------



## macming

FlatlandRoller said:


> Yeah but you might be 140#'s and it's only been 2 months, right?
> 
> OK, I wanna know weight, miles, roads...the works man! 380 grams seems really light for a metal road rim.



haha I'm 210 pounds. Roads around here aren't that rough, but I bottomed out the front tire on a road gap HARD once. The wheels are still holding up fine. They are also plenty stiff in corners/climbing, so I do not regret getting them.

I spoke to the tech person at Stan's before I ordered the rims, and he assured me that the 32 hole version will hold up to my weight just fine.

I haven't put that many miles on the Alpha wheelset. They will go on my financee's bike when it comes in. I've been riding my Industry 9 carbon tubs this season :aureola:


----------



## FlatlandRoller

macming said:


> haha I'm 210 pounds. Roads around here aren't that rough, but I bottomed out the front tire on a road gap HARD once. The wheels are still holding up fine. They are also plenty stiff in corners/climbing, so I do not regret getting them.
> 
> I spoke to the tech person at Stan's before I ordered the rims, and he assured me that the 32 hole version will hold up to my weight just fine.
> 
> I haven't put that many miles on the Alpha wheelset. They will go on my financee's bike when it comes in. I've been riding my Industry 9 carbon tubs this season :aureola:



Good to know. Your opinion carries a lot of weight 

Thanks man!


----------



## ergott

FlatlandRoller said:


> Which rim are you using? Some of those 29r rims have low max pressure ratings. And the alphas....they're too light, aren't they?


I'm using the 29er rims. I checked in with notubes first and I've ridden with road tires up to 90-95psi with no problems at all. They are also the only rims I've used on the 'cross bike.

It looks like they still make the 29er in white.

-Eric


----------



## FlatlandRoller

ergott said:


> I'm using the 29er rims. I checked in with notubes first and I've ridden with road tires up to 90-95psi with no problems at all. They are also the only rims I've used on the 'cross bike.
> 
> It looks like they still make the 29er in white.
> 
> -Eric


No kidding??....I have a set of Arch 29's just sitting in the basement right now....thanks Man!


----------



## martinrjensen

So you taped the spoke holes with Stan's kit and ran Open Pro rims tubeless? Interesting. I have a set and that's the only set of wheels that Stan's does not recommend converting to tubeless.


MichaelB said:


> Just use the tape and separate valve.
> 
> That is what I have done (Mavic Open pro's on one set and Velocity A23's on another).


----------



## b-rad2

I've got probably 1200 miles on my Hutchinson Fusion 3's, mounted on Kyseriums ES's, and they still look great. I know they also make Specialized's tires for them as well.

I had a ~ sidewall nail puncture on a double century that really sucked, but with a glue patch it was repaired and I put a drop of Krazy glue on the outer puncture and all that's held for probably 800 miles.


----------



## crank1979

I received my IRC Formula Pro X-Guard tyres last night. They feel a lot more rubbery than the Hutchinson Fusion 3s, possibly with a stiffer sidewall. I'll compare the sidewall when I take the F3s off and the weather has eased up a bit. They look like a decent tyre, coming in nice packaging and with fitment lotion.

I'm hoping they won't have any problem using Stans sealant either.


----------



## AM999

crank1979 said:


> I received my IRC Formula Pro X-Guard tyres last night. They feel a lot more rubbery than the Hutchinson Fusion 3s, possibly with a stiffer sidewall. I'll compare the sidewall when I take the F3s off and the weather has eased up a bit. They look like a decent tyre, coming in nice packaging and with fitment lotion.
> 
> I'm hoping they won't have any problem using Stans sealant either.


Where did you get them from ??

BTW, the Top Secret model rolls much better due to it's use of a latex inner layer to form the pressure barrier. The other models use butyl rubber which doesn't roll quite as well.


----------



## roadwarrior57

I am confused at the continued use of tubular tires by professional road cyclists, especially during the Spring Classics in Europe. It puzzles me that road cycling seems so far behind the basic technology that automobiles use. When is the last time anyone saw a tubular car tire? It seems odd that Formula 1 racing uses tubeless tires but not professional road cycling. 



I have several sets of very expensive tubular road wheels, but I rarely use them. Why? Because I feel more secure riding my 2way fit wheels mounted with tubeless tires, which (even without sealant) never flat. In fact, I don’t even bring an inner-tube with me in case I flat, just some foam sealant which over the past two years, I’ve never had to use. The other benefit is that they can be inflated at lower pressures, which roll smoother (and I bet faster) than my tubular tires. Also, on descents, tubular tires often melt the glue that attaches the tire to the wheel or over-heat the inner-tube which can also cause a flat. Tubular tires never have this problem. Lastly, one can’t argue any longer that tubular wheel sets are lighter. Carbon clincher wheels are being built by many companies now. Take a look at Lightweight’s clinchers which can easily be used for tubeless tires without rim tape. Can anyone explain this conundrum?


----------



## terrain

I will be riding 7850,s later in the week as spec equipment my new Roubaix. I also have several sets of tubular carbon wheels and look forward to the feel wothout all of the hassle. One of the drawbacks I see now is the limited tire selection and cost.


----------



## AM999

roadwarrior57 said:


> I am confused at the continued use of tubular tires by professional road cyclists, especially during the Spring Classics in Europe. It puzzles me that road cycling seems so far behind the basic technology that automobiles use. When is the last time anyone saw a tubular car tire? It seems odd that Formula 1 racing uses tubeless tires but not professional road cycling.
> 
> 
> 
> I have several sets of very expensive tubular road wheels, but I rarely use them. Why? Because I feel more secure riding my 2way fit wheels mounted with tubeless tires, which (even without sealant) never flat. In fact, I don’t even bring an inner-tube with me in case I flat, just some foam sealant which over the past two years, I’ve never had to use. The other benefit is that they can be inflated at lower pressures, which roll smoother (and I bet faster) than my tubular tires. Also, on descents, tubular tires often melt the glue that attaches the tire to the wheel or over-heat the inner-tube which can also cause a flat. Tubular tires never have this problem. Lastly, one can’t argue any longer that tubular wheel sets are lighter. Carbon clincher wheels are being built by many companies now. Take a look at Lightweight’s clinchers which can easily be used for tubeless tires without rim tape. Can anyone explain this conundrum?


Yes, tubeless tires with the exception of the IRC Top Secret tire have very high rolling resistance plus there is a very limited selection of tubeless compatible wheels (no deep section wheels which are more aerodynamic that I know of).


----------



## rruff

roadwarrior57 said:


> I have several sets of very expensive tubular road wheels, but I rarely use them. Why? Because I feel more secure riding my 2way fit wheels mounted with tubeless tires, which (even without sealant) never flat.


You certainly are confused. A clincher (and that includes tubeless) is more likely to be subject to damage from hitting stuff like cobble stones (or potholes) and they will be much heavier than tubulars... and the available tire offerings have much more rolling resistance than either tubular or clincher+latex offerings. 

I'll put your lack of flats down to pure luck. Can you think of any reason why a tubeless tire without sealant would resist flats better than a clincher tire with a latex tube... let alone a tubular? Maybe it is the heavy high resistance casing.


----------



## purdyd

rruff said:


> You certainly are confused. A clincher (and that includes tubeless) is more likely to be subject to damage from hitting stuff like cobble stones (or potholes) and they will be much heavier than tubulars... and the available tire offerings have much more rolling resistance than either tubular or clincher+latex offerings.
> 
> I'll put your lack of flats down to pure luck. Can you think of any reason why a tubeless tire without sealant would resist flats better than a clincher tire with a latex tube... let alone a tubular? Maybe it is the heavy high resistance casing.


have you seen this test?

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

fusion 2 does pretty good in rolling resistance and clinchers in general beat tubulars - according to hutchinson, the fusion 3 should have less rolling resistance

according to IRC and hutchinson, their tubeless offerings have less rolling resistance than their tubed offering

it would be interesting to see what a GP4000S tubeless tire would be like

yes, tubeless tires have more material in the tire and sidewall as they don't have material in tube pushing against the rim that does nothing to protect the tire

they also don't pinch flat - two reasons i can think of why they would be less prone to flats on cobbles

i think you will see a lot of 28mm and 30mm tubular tires in the cobbles - i don't think weight is the major concern anyway for those races

i think there are some good points being made but it takes time for the technology and manufacturing processes to catch up - tubeless car tires didn't happen overnight

but things are coming together

advances in clincher tire technology 
lightweight clincher rims
reliable road tubeless tires
tubeless in mountain bikes and cyclocross
allowing disc brakes in cyclocross at the elite racing level


----------



## rruff

I put more faith in Al's testing on BikeTechReview. And you can get better clincher tires than any of those in the Tour test.

Tubeless tires make a lot more sense on cars... because it is simpler and easier to install. Slap the tire on a cheap cast rim and you're done. Saves money. Easier to plug a hole too. Did they ever use latex tubes in car tires? Or tubular car tires? The fact that bike wheels have spokes that penetrate the rim is a significant factor. 

Tubleless makes more sense on MTBs too, because the pinch flats and thorns are more commonly encountered. 

And then there is the weight issue where tubulars will always excel.


----------



## crank1979

AM999 said:


> Where did you get them from ??
> 
> BTW, the Top Secret model rolls much better due to it's use of a latex inner layer to form the pressure barrier. The other models use butyl rubber which doesn't roll quite as well.


I bought them from alexcycle.com. I want to give the X-Guard version a try because the local roads a pretty bad. If they hold up well enough I might try a lighter tyre.


----------



## purdyd

rruff said:


> I put more faith in Al's testing on BikeTechReview. And you can get better clincher tires than any of those in the Tour test.
> 
> Tubeless tires make a lot more sense on cars... because it is simpler and easier to install. Slap the tire on a cheap cast rim and you're done. Saves money. Easier to plug a hole too. Did they ever use latex tubes in car tires? Or tubular car tires? The fact that bike wheels have spokes that penetrate the rim is a significant factor.
> 
> Tubleless makes more sense on MTBs too, because the pinch flats and thorns are more commonly encountered.
> 
> And then there is the weight issue where tubulars will always excel.


i guess you can believe what you want to believe about Crr tests. There does seem to be quite a variation in results from different sources.

what does seem consistent is that companies with regular clincher that make the same tire tubeless shows less rolling resistance

there are also other better tubleless tires not in the tour test

automobiles did have spokes for wheels at one time

there are bike wheels with spokes that don't penetrate the rim - mad fiber, lightweight et al

spokes penetrating the rim are another possible failure point for tubes

thorns and pinch flatting is also an issue on roads

tubulars are just regular tires with a tube inside - in general they are about the same weight as clincher - of course you don't have the weight of the bead

the really lightweight tubulars and clinchers are very thin

the rims are definitely lighter for tubular - although lightweight seems to be able to produce a pretty light clincher rim - at a cost

i recently read this article on the new automobile tubeless tires, in a 1950 popular mechanics, it took 50 years and good year to make the tubeless tire practical and the change didn't happen over night

i guess we will see if tubeless lives up to the potential in bikes or will forever remain a niche


----------



## AM999

crank1979 said:


> I bought them from alexcycle.com. I want to give the X-Guard version a try because the local roads a pretty bad. If they hold up well enough I might try a lighter tyre.


Thanks - direct from Japan. Hopefully they will make it over here soon. It would be interesting to try the Top Secret at some point. They do roll a lot better which may or may not be important to you.

I had some trouble getting the IRC tire inflated initially (even with a compressor) and ended up using a butyl tube to stretch out the tire initially - no problems after that. The little soap spray bottles that come with each tire are a nice touch - don't skimp on using the solution which might have been part of my problem. I did a get some data on how much the butyl tube adds to the Crr. Kickin' myself for not doing the same using a latex tube but was afraid of losing a $15 tube due the latex sneaking under the bead.

Good luck with the tires.


----------



## RedWhiteSteel

*R4 Tubeless*

Quite a long running thread! Just thought I'd chime in with my experience. I have the Shimano 7850 SL wheels, and finally upgraded to tubeless tires, the new Bontrager R4 Tubeless, one month ago. The R4 tires are made by Hutchinson, but are a bit cheaper and cleaner looking. My take so far:
-Tires are tough to mount, but not much more so than any other tire on these rims.
-Crank Bros. Speed Lever makes mounting and unmounting easier.
-I haven't used any sealant, but might when I get my first flat.
-No problem inflating with a Silca floor pump.
-Tires lose around 10+ pounds of air in 24 hours, so need to inflate every day.


----------



## purdyd

RedWhiteSteel said:


> finally upgraded to tubeless tires, the new Bontrager R4 Tubeless, one month ago. The R4 tires are made by Hutchinson, but are a bit cheaper and cleaner looking. .


cheaper? what did you pay for them? I looked at some the other day and it was $75 and fusion 3's can be had for $65 or less with specials

and the R4 looked just like a fusion 3 to me, albeit different graphics

it was interesting to me that the package had a weight of 220 grams listed - no way the tire is that light


----------



## Lu-Max

I have now logged 876 miles on my first pair of Hutchinson Fusion 3 tubeless tires, running them on Dura Ace WH-7900-C24-TL rims. They have performed flawlessly and are wearing very well. Zero flats so far. I weigh 160 pounds and use Hutchinson Protect'Air Max sealant. I ride mostly in the CO foothills near Denver and on the many bike paths in the area. Although there are a few nicks and tiny cuts on each tire I couldn't be happier with them. I just ordered a second pair.


----------



## RedWhiteSteel

purdyd said:


> cheaper? what did you pay for them? I looked at some the other day and it was $75 and fusion 3's can be had for $65 or less with specials
> 
> and the R4 looked just like a fusion 3 to me, albeit different graphics
> 
> it was interesting to me that the package had a weight of 220 grams listed - no way the tire is that light


Retail price on the R4 was $80 vs $85 for the Hutch F3. LBS had a 20% off sale, so I got them for $64. The shop owner said that they were the same tire as the F3, and he's been running Fusions for a couple years. I liked the minimal graphics on the R4, but whatever.

I need to look at the package for what I bought, but the Bontrager web site lists 290 g for the tire.


----------



## Bnystrom

FlatlandRoller said:


> I'm 190#'s and like to do the occasional 200K brevet, am looking for a fast and reliable tire (so..not a 140# euro pro but not a bonafide clyde either). Been using fat clinchers for comfort (challenge) but the punctures are killing my times.


The simple solution is to run sealant in your tubes. Stan's works great for that. Going that route will allow you to run the tires you *want *to use, rather than settling for *what's available* in tubeless. I was considering building up a set of wheels with Stan's rims, but the lack of tire options turned me off toward that idea.


----------



## Bnystrom

roadwarrior57 said:


> I am confused at the continued use of tubular tires by professional road cyclists, especially during the Spring Classics in Europe.


The biggest reasons are:
- Tubulars are safer, as a properly glued tire will stay on the rim after going flat, giving the rider a reasonable chance of braking, cornering and keeping the bike "rubber side down".

- Special tires in the 27mm+ size range are used in these races, which allows for lower tire pressures, more "suspension" from the tires and a smoother ride that reduces rider fatigue. 



> I have several sets of very expensive tubular road wheels, but I rarely use them. Why? Because I feel more secure riding my 2way fit wheels mounted with tubeless tires, which (even without sealant) never flat. In fact, I don’t even bring an inner-tube with me in case I flat, just some foam sealant which over the past two years, I’ve never had to use.


I fail to see the point in pressing your luck this way. How ridiculous will you feel when you get a flat that the sealant can't handle and you're stuck out on the road with no tube, no pump and nothing to boot the tire with? It's not wise to tempt fate, as it will surely come back to bite you in the derriere.



> The other benefit is that they can be inflated at lower pressures, which roll smoother (and I bet faster) than my tubular tires.


Tubulars can be run at as low - or lower - pressures than tubeless tires. For example, I weight 175# and run my tubulars at 90/100 psi front/rear. Sometimes I'll even drop them to 85/95. I have to laugh when I see people running tubulars at 120+PSI in a misguided attempt to lower rolling resistance, as they're doing exactly the opposite (unless you're racing on a track) and they're losing out on one of the primary benefits of tubulars.



> Also, on descents, tubular tires often melt the glue that attaches the tire to the wheel or over-heat the inner-tube which can also cause a flat.


While glue melting is _possible_, it takes a long hill with a lot of braking to create a problem. I've never experienced it in 37 years of riding tubulars, including a couple of rides *down *Mt. Washington (7.8 miles at an average 11% grade, riding the brakes almost the entire way), back when that was permitted and tire glue technology was in the stone age. I have *never *heard of heat-related flats with tubulars, but I have with clinchers (I think you're confused on this point). Again, it takes a long hill with a lot of braking for this to become an issue. 



> Lastly, one can’t argue any longer that tubular wheel sets are lighter.


Really? Please show me even *one *example of clincher rim that isn't heavier than an equivalent tubular rim.



> Carbon clincher wheels are being built by many companies now.


Sure, and they're both heavier and more expensive than comparable tubulars.



> Take a look at Lightweight’s clinchers which can easily be used for tubeless tires without rim tape.


And how many people can afford Lightweight's wheels? How practical would they be for regular use, even in races? Even the pros only use wheels that light for specific applications - such as mountaintop finishes - and many don't use them for that.

Despite advances in clincher/tubeless technology, tubulars are actually becoming *more *popular these day. They have made a huge resurgence in cyclocross, which is arguably more akin to the cobbled classics than traditional road racing is. Tubulars are also very popular among elite MTB racers now too, despite the fact that MTB tubeless technology is quite mature and a huge selection of tires and rims is available, while the available tubular rims and tires are few, hard to find and _hideously _expensive. The main reasons for the popularity of tubulars in these two disciplines are that compared clinchers/tubeless, tubulars are much lighter weight, suffer fewer flats (no pinch flats or "air-outs", respectively) and are much less prone to rim damage when run at very low pressures that provide huge benefits in traction and ride comfort. If you doubt this, try riding 'cross clinchers or tubeless MTB tires at 25 PSI or less sometime and see how well they hold up. 

While road tubeless _does _show serious promise and may even achieve the level of popularity of MTB tubeless someday, it's probable that tubulars will remain the choice at the highest levels of road, 'cross and MTB racing well into the future.

BTW, if you really have no use for your tubulars, tell me what you have and what you want for them and I may take them off your hands...


----------



## FlatlandRoller

Bnystrom said:


> The simple solution is to run sealant in your tubes. Stan's works great for that. Going that route will allow you to run the tires you *want *to use, rather than settling for *what's available* in tubeless. I was considering building up a set of wheels with Stan's rims, but the lack of tire options turned me off toward that idea.



I used a "Slime Lite" tube, appropriately sized, and still got a flat. Think stans in the tube would work better? I'd be willing to try as my tubeless tires are freakishly narrow (23 intensive rear and 22mm fusion 3 front). I think it's easier for the sealants to plug a hole in firm, thick tire rubber than thin floppy inner tube rubber....but if you think it would work maybe I could give it a go. Loved those fat handmade clinchers for sure!

Joe


----------



## pmt

FlatlandRoller said:


> I used a "Slime Lite" tube, appropriately sized, and still got a flat. Think stans in the tube would work better? I'd be willing to try as my tubeless tires are freakishly narrow (23 intensive rear and 22mm fusion 3 front). I think it's easier for the sealants to plug a hole in firm, thick tire rubber than thin floppy inner tube rubber....but if you think it would work maybe I could give it a go. Loved those fat handmade clinchers for sure!
> 
> Joe


Well, while many people have had some success with sealant in tubes, it's generally considered that it won't work well. The problem is that the tube is stretchy and moves around; as soon as the sealant seals, then when the tire starts rolling and hitting bumps the tube stretches and rips the sealant out of the hole.

I *have* personally successfully used a Slime tube a long, long time ago, but it was only a Michelin wire puncture, which is so small as to be easy to seal.


----------



## FlatlandRoller

pmt said:


> I *have* personally successfully used a Slime tube a long, long time ago, but it was only a Michelin wire puncture, which is so small as to be easy to seal.


That's just the type of punctures I get in the rain...maybe I should have gone with the "full strength" version instead of the "lite" LOL


----------



## mattotoole

Waxbytes said:


> I'm curious as to how much of the ride improvement is due to no inner tube and how much is due to the Fusions being lighter with no kelvar flat protection and softer rubber as shown by the quick wear? It's been common wisdom that lghter and more flexible clinchers feel better than heavier and stiffer long wearing clinchers since way before tubeless was available. In other words are we comparing apples to apples or to oranges?


I'll go with no flat protection belt and an otherwise more flexible casing, including softer rubber.


----------



## bigwaves

*F3 have been good*

I am still in the fence with the F3 - have about 1K miles on them and they are holding up well. Might switch back to tubes and tire next time around.


----------



## dragon

hi, are there any new TUBELESS TIRES coming in 2012 ? or still only hutchinson (heavy, low tpi and slow) ? what about vittoria ! want a 320 tpi tubeless Cx tire!


----------



## Local Hero

Old thread? 


I've been running Fusion 3's on my scandium dura ace wheels. Installing the front was a piece of cake. The rear was much more difficult. 

I've put about 100 miles on the tires. They performed well. 

Unfortunately, I broke a spoke on the rear wheel and the front wheel developed a creak in the hub. So that wheelset is out of commission and I'm using my mavic ksyriums right now. The DA spoke has been ordered and the hub is in line for a rebuild at the shop. Hopefully I'll get the DA's back on my crit crusher before the weekend. 


I'm also considering carbon tubulars (for my roadie and track bikes). Mainly, I'm interested in the lighter weight and aerodynamics.


----------



## Lu-Max

2000 miles on my front Fusion 3 tubeless, my rear has almost 1000 (I replaced the first rear Fusion 3 with a new one at ~1000 miles after it got a big cut (no flat) from a piece of glass). Zero flats on these tires riding throughout the front range in CO this season. 

I did experience two punctures that were quickly sealed by the tire sealant. Once the tire dropped to about 70 psi, the other time I only lost about 10 psi. I normally run between 90-100 psi on them.


----------



## Weav

dragon said:


> hi, are there any new TUBELESS TIRES coming in 2012 ? or still only hutchinson (heavy, low tpi and slow) ? what about vittoria ! want a 320 tpi tubeless Cx tire!


I think Specialized and Bontrager have one out on the market but I think they are probably made for them by Hutchinson.


----------



## AM999

dragon said:


> hi, are there any new TUBELESS TIRES coming in 2012 ? or still only hutchinson (heavy, low tpi and slow) ? what about vittoria ! want a 320 tpi tubeless Cx tire!


Look at the rolling resitance tests over on Bike Tech Review. These are done on rollers and the results then converted to a flat surface. The tubeless tires tested with the exception of the IRC Top Secret model do not roll very well because they use a butyl rubber inner layer which provides the pressure containment. The Top Secret tire uses a natural rubber (latex) inner layer and has a Crr comparable to the Vittoria 320 tpi CX 23 with latex tube. Not sure how easy it is to purchase the Top Secret tires - a few months ago nobody in the US was stocking them to my knowledge.


----------



## dragon

what about the IRC tubeless top secret. nothing usable ? crr is awesome..?!


----------



## Lu-Max

You can order the "IRC Formula Pro Tubeless Top Secret" tires HERE, ¥9450 ($121 USD) per tire, yikes! 

A bit cheaper HERE, $93.60 CAD plus shipping ($95 USD plus shipping) per tire. 

I have not yet found a US retailer.


----------



## jsedlak

Road on a slow-leaking tubeless rear tyre for 75 miles the other day. Was stuck around 70psi (guesstimate) for most of the ride.

Was the most comfortable ride I've ever had, and plenty fast.


----------



## vincemacmillan

Weav said:


> . . . .I think they are probably made for them by Hutchinson.


I saw evidence of this the other day when wiping down my Hutchinson Intensives: I could actually see that "S-Works" had been painted on the sidewall and removed at some point in the manufacturing process. The Hutchinson branded version of these tubeless tires is probably $40 cheaper for the same product. Cheaper to skip the middle man. And I will never go back to tubed tires again, BTW. Also, please post here if you know of anyone making 28c versions.


----------



## MichaelB

vincemacmillan said:


> ....., BTW. Also, please post here if you know of anyone making 28c versions.


+1 please


----------



## malbecman

Lennard Zinn over at VeloNews has an article with a very positive review of tubeless tires by a racer (yes, the guys team is sponsored by Stan's this year but he is saying that's the reason he made the switch and loved them.....)

I can't post the link yet as I only have 5 posts (who made that rule?) but if you go over to VeloNews and look at Lennard's article, you'll see it.


----------



## RedWhiteSteel

I've now got around 1,000 miles on my Bontrager R4 tires on DA7950 wheels. Zero flats or other problems. May swap back and front to even out the wear, but the wear and tear appears similar to the Michelin Pro Race and Continentals that I was running before. I will likely experiment with adding a bit of Stan's to each tire to combat the slow loss (20+ pounds overnight) I've experienced all along. YMMV.


----------



## Wheelman55

RedWhiteSteel said:


> I've now got around 1,000 miles on my Bontrager R4 tires on DA7950 wheels. Zero flats or other problems. May swap back and front to even out the wear, but the wear and tear appears similar to the Michelin Pro Race and Continentals that I was running before. I will likely experiment with adding a bit of Stan's to each tire to combat the slow loss (20+ pounds overnight) I've experienced all along. YMMV.


You still need the pump even with the sealant. Is the new stans ammonia free? The old stuff, while effecdtive to stop the leaks, causes corrosion of the rims...mostly around the valve.


----------



## Lu-Max

I switched from Stan's to Hutchinson Protect'Air Max and am very happy with it. It has no ammonia and has plugged punctures in both my mountain and road tires. The current Stan's formula only contains a very small amount of ammonia which should not corrode alloy rims.


----------



## ddimick

Good price ($50.50) on Hutchinson Fusion 3 Tubeless below. My newb post count isn't high enough to include the link, so take out the spaces. Their web site looks like it was designed twenty years ago and does not instill confidence, but I bought mine from them and had no problems and will buy from them again when it's time.

h t t p : / / w w w . w o r l d c l a s s c y c l e s . c o m /mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=WCC&Product_Code=HUFU3TL&Category_Code=

I am running Fulcrum Racing 3 2-way with the above tires and Stan's sealant. Only a few hundred miles so far but no flats or cuts. I only lose about 2-3psi overnight, this was the same both before and after I put sealant in.


----------



## jetvagabond

The more I ride tubeless the more impressed I am. Mostly because of flat prevention. I've put many miles now on Fusion twos and threes on Fulcrum racing ones and zeroes and I haven't had a single flat on roads that used to pop my high end Vittorias and Continentals on a monthly basis. I use the Hutchinson Fast Air for a sealant. Sure the set up is a little heavy with sealant and three hundred gram tires but they are for training after all. The ride quality is superlative. Did I mention I haven't had a single flat since swapping out?


----------



## BillyWayne

I ride tubeless on my 29er mtb using UST Shimano XT wheels. I would like to go tubeless on my road bike. What would be a good wheelset?


----------



## bholwell

BillyWayne said:


> I ride tubeless on my 29er mtb using UST Shimano XT wheels. I would like to go tubeless on my road bike. What would be a good wheelset?


I've ridden Dura-Ace 7850's, Stan's Alpha laced to ZTR hubs (32H 3x) and Campy Zonda's.

The DA's are very nice- extremely high quality. The neg. is the whole propietary spoke/nipple thing- usually not a big issue unless you're hard on equipment.

The Alpha rims are very nice too. One issue is that spoke tension drops when tubeless tires are mounted & inflated. I simply added more spoke tension after inflating my tires. These rims are very wide, and they add volume and comfort to any tire.

The Zonda's are just so-so in quality. IMO, unless you get a great deal on them, pass.

If on a budget, I'd look at the Ultegra 6700's. I haven't ridden these, but with Ultegra you usually get 90% of the performance of DA, but at a much better price.


----------



## BillyWayne

Thanks bholwell. I have been eyeing the Shimanos. I have also been looking at Stan's Alphas with Ultergra or Dura Ace hubs. I do not know if these would be better than the full Shimano or not but seem to be a bit less money. Does Maxxis make a tubeless road tire?


----------



## macming

BillyWayne said:


> Thanks bholwell. I have been eyeing the Shimanos. I have also been looking at Stan's Alphas with Ultergra or Dura Ace hubs. I do not know if these would be better than the full Shimano or not but seem to be a bit less money. Does Maxxis make a tubeless road tire?


I have a set of Alpha 340s laced to Chris King hubs. If I were to do it again, I'd probably get the DAs.

The Alpha rims are fragile and don't take high tension very well. My builder also said they were so so quality wise while lacing up.

Most importantly, I don't like the tubeless system as much with Stan's rims. The Shimanos look like a true UST setup, where the tire stays on the bead even after deflating. The Stan's rims do not hold the tire after you lose pressure.


----------



## bholwell

BillyWayne said:


> Thanks bholwell. I have been eyeing the Shimanos. I have also been looking at Stan's Alphas with Ultergra or Dura Ace hubs. I do not know if these would be better than the full Shimano or not but seem to be a bit less money. Does Maxxis make a tubeless road tire?


No problem. I really like my Alpha rims, and can feel the added comfort over the Dura-Aces. But there is the spoke tension issue, and I don't feel like these rims will last as long as the DA's.

And yes, Maxxis makes the Padrone tubeless road tire. It's a little more expensive ($76 was the cheapest online price I could find), but I think it's a superb tire. If this means anything, Rory Sutherland won't train on anything else.


----------



## bholwell

macming said:


> Most importantly, I don't like the tubeless system as much with Stan's rims. The Shimanos look like a true UST setup, where the tire stays on the bead even after deflating. The Stan's rims do not hold the tire after you lose pressure.


Correct. The tubeless road standard is very similar to UST, in that a square-shaped bead is retained in a specfic rim shape, and an inner bead lip in the rim keeps the bead in place on the bead shelf in the event of air pressure loss. After deflating a tubeless tire, the bead has to be forcibly pushed off of the bead shelf and down into the center channel to remove the tire. This, imo, makes for a very reliable setup. I even had one test rider flat on a worn tubeless road tire. But since he was only a mile from home, he decided to ride home on his flat. The beads remained locked in place, and no damage was done to his rim. Crazy.

The Alpha rim, on the otherhand, is similar in design to the other NoTubes rims. There is no inner bead lip, and when air pressure is released from the tire, the beads fall back down into the center channel on their own accord. They do feel nice, though, and my Comp wheelset is lighter than my DA.


----------



## Wheelman55

BillyWayne said:


> I ride tubeless on my 29er mtb using UST Shimano XT wheels. I would like to go tubeless on my road bike. What would be a good wheelset?


Another vote for Shimano road tubeless. The DA tubeless are simply amazing...smooth, quick, plenty stiff...in mtn bike terms they would be XTR. I've heard good reports on the Ultegra TL as well which is more XT in a road version.

Personal experience is several thousand miles on DA TL with nothing but good experiences. Using Fusion 2's...I got two sets and have yet to wear them out...I thought that I would only get 1,000 miles or so per rear tire however they are lasting a lot longer. I'm 175 pounds and run 90 psi rear and 85 psi front.

Best of luck with your decision.


----------



## goldsbar

I'm starting to go to the negative side on road tubeless after being a big fan. I've been with them since near the beginning on Ksyriums. I think the system has some decent benefits - I only flatted once on the road - but some serious downsides as well. The tire quality sucks IME and I've had several of them. The Hutchinsons develop lots of cracks and my latest pair split down the middle for several inches in a couple of spots when almost new. Mounting is a huge PITA compared to MTB tubeless tires. If you flat on the road, you better have levers. Even with levers, getting the tire off isn't easy with sealant pouring on your hands. The list price is also really expensive (yes, cheap deals available online).

I'm off the wagon for now until another manufacturer starts making these.


----------



## pmt

Flats are easy to handle; I got one today on a 200k ride. Well, one of the guys noticed that my rear tire (Fusion3) looked low. I ignored it for about 50k, but finally had to do something about it as it got lower. Sealant handled it for a while but the cut was just a little too big.

I simply found the cut, unmounted most of the bead on that side, quickly cleaned the inside of the tire with acetone, then stuck on a glueless patch. Snapped the bead back on, CO2, and down the road. No follow-up will be needed. 

Fixing flats is easy, IF you understand how to do it AND you have practiced it a bit, just like anything else.


----------



## moosehead

Sorry if this has been covered in this monster thread, but I come from MTB tubeless experience and it seemed the breakthrough there was as much disc brakes as much as rubber, sealant, and rim technology. 

Do the heat and friction from rim brakes make tubeless any less suitable for road rims? Thanks.


----------



## Lu-Max

Personally I've been down some pretty huge descents on mine (i.e. LOTS of hard braking) and have not had any issues.


----------



## Yamabushi

Lu-Max said:


> Personally I've been down some pretty huge descents on mine (i.e. LOTS of hard braking) and have not had any issues.


Same for me.


----------



## ddimick

moosehead said:


> Do the heat and friction from rim brakes make tubeless any less suitable for road rims? Thanks.


I believe this is only an issue with tubular tires due to the glue they use between tire and rim. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.


----------



## royd

I have a pair of Kinlin rims 30mm deep, 20f/24r. Would I be able to safely convert these rims to tubeless using Stan's methods?


----------



## fradog

Been riding Eurus with Hutchinson fusion 2's and 3's over a year, approx 100 miles a week on average.

Best features are cornering and smoothness: support of sidewall gives excellent lateral stability, contributes to smoother ride as well by allowing slightly lower pressure. 

Also big safety factor in that if tire does go suddenly it will still sit up on that sidewall enough to keep the rim off the road and the tire stays in place by its firm lock in the bead.

Lack of friction between a tube and inside of tire seems noticeable. 

Running with 110 psi at pump gauge. Guess after removal of pump pressure drops to about 100psi

Blew a rear up once on very hot day (>100 F) climbing a nasty stinger after inflating to 120 at pump. 

Punctures are more rare than with tube clinchers, but happen. Fix on the road by installing a tube, at home patch tire from inside with normal patch. Works well if scuffed thoroughly to enhance adhesion. 

Never used a sealant. Don't want the mess, new stems are a pita to get. Haven't really needed it.

Biggest problem (beside $80 tire prices): Used soapy water solution as per instructions to help mount tires. Soap dries inside tire between rim and bead, evidence now of corrosion where this residue sat. This caused a slow leak (60psi / hr) by etching rim slightly, and together with the residue created a rough surface that the bead couldn't quite seal.

Solved by cleaning off residue and light wet sanding with 600 to smooth surface. No More Soap!

Tires are actually very mountable by hand when completely dry and clean. Takes some thumb and wrist muscle but works. Carefully pushing bead into rim then seats well enough to get an initial seal and pumping started. 

This usually results in good seal which holds until next reason to dismount the tire. 

None of my buddies have converted yet, I don't get it. Need more people go tubeless to get tire prices down.

Hope this is useful.

Fradog


----------



## tombba

Great reveiw Fratdog.I"m about ready to pull the trigger on a set of shamal ultra 2way"s and Hutch Fusion 3"s.Was going to use a sealant but now I"m thinking twice as the sealant will void the warranty.Sure would be nice to have no puntures though.One question,how hard is it to wrestle the tire on and off the rim if you have a flat on the open road and will a portable carry tire pump do the job re-inflating on the road?


----------



## Lu-Max

For the zillionth time, Hutchinson Protect'Air Max contains NO ammonia, it will not corrode your alloy rims. I recently changed my Fusion3 tires for new ones, the inside of both of my WH-7900-C24-TL rims was pristine. >3000 miles, zero flats.


----------



## orange_julius

Lu-Max said:


> For the zillionth time, Hutchinson Protect'Air Max contains NO ammonia, it will not corrode your alloy rims. I recently changed my Fusion3 tires for new ones, the inside of both of my WH-7900-C24-TL rims was pristine. >3000 miles, zero flats.


Yep, Protect'Air Max has NO ammonia and works really well. I had a cut on a tire that the Fast'Air won't seal, but was not a problem for Protect'Air Max. I have been riding on the same tire for a further 500 miles now!


----------



## fradog

tombba said:


> Great reveiw Fratdog.I"m about ready to pull the trigger on a set of shamal ultra 2way"s and Hutch Fusion 3"s.Was going to use a sealant but now I"m thinking twice as the sealant will void the warranty.Sure would be nice to have no puntures though.One question,how hard is it to wrestle the tire on and off the rim if you have a flat on the open road and will a portable carry tire pump do the job re-inflating on the road?


When I get a flat on the road it depends on my mental state as to how hard the ordeal is: group waiting, group left me, alone in a hurry, etc. I use plastic levers to get the bead off, then remove the valve and throw a tube in. 
Make sure not to lose the valve, put it in your bag right away before it rolls off somewhere.
Then when remounting the bead I start opposite the valve and work the tire pretty hard inch by inch to stretch the bead and give me as much slack at the last 6 inches as I can get. Then just keep pushing and rolling the tire until it finally goes over. It's enough work that, not to slight the ladies but I doubt there are many gals that could get it done. But I've had clinchers that are harder. I think the warm tire is easier than a cold one so that's in your favor. 

I use a hand pump and get up to about 80 psi with that. Fine to continue a ride and get home.

Recently a guy on the road let me borrow his pump which had a two stage function: Ist stage was high volume, then 2nd stage high pressure. Clever pump design, light, compact. Sorry didn't catch the brand. I'd get one but I'm a little odd. I'll spend 160 on a set of tires but wont spend 30 to replace the old Blackburn.


----------



## gschacht

*Update - Stans eating the rims*

I use Fulcrum Racing 4 wheels - sold on EBay as Specialized road bike take offs/made for Specialized - they are a hybrid of a modified Fulcrum Racing 3 wheel with more spokes - 20/24 - with the less expensive and heavier Racing 5 hubs - wheels weigh 1700 grams without skewers. They are a sealed rim except for a 1/16 hole opposite the stem. I seal the hole and the welded area with Permatex brand black silicone adhesive sealant. I found that Stans tubeless road stems work, but you can pull them through the rim if you over tighten them. A better solution is to use Easton Haven UST stems. I also use Stans sealant. I run Hutchinson Intensive Tubeless Road Tires. Not too difficult to mount, but the Easton stems require an air compressor while Stans Road stems do not. I run at 90/95psi. front/rear. 

I have another identical set of the Fulcrum Racing 4's ($250 on EBay-new take off) that I have mounted Continental 700 X 25 Grand Prix 4000S and run at 95/100 front/rear to avoid pinch flatting - I have pinch flatted at 95 in rear. I weigh about 180 lbs.

The bike is a 2011 Cannondale Synapse Apex.

Trick: Mount the tires starting opposite the stem and as approaching the stem push it towards the tire to move it away from the tire bead until the tire is fully mounted on the rim. I do use nylon Quik Stik brand tire levers as they will not damage the tire bead. Then push on the tire and pull the stem towards the center of the wheel, then screw the valve stem nut firmly with your hand - no tools!

I assume you wet the tire bead before mounting with a solution of 50% water and 50% liquid soap. I use a foam paint brush to apply the solution. I next add Stan's sealant - you can use the 2 oz Stan's bottle with a small piece of tubing attached and get it into the tire/wheel interface. I next apply the solution all around the wheel/tire interface on both sides as Stan's recommends (see his install video). I hold the wheel off the ground, pump air into the stem with my Makita air compressor (set at 125PSI) while pushing down on the tire at the stem to get a stem seal - fill to 100psi, rotate to coat the sealant inside the tire and set the final pressure to 95 psi the next day. Not as complex as it sounds, can be done in very little time. 

The Continentals ride a bit better and stick better, but I like not dealing with pinch flats or any flats period. These are training wheels/tires. The ghetto tubeless work fine and are way cheaper than buying Fulcrum Racing 3 tubeless wheels - yes they are 1580 grams, but way to delicate for a 180 lbs rider on the streets of Portland, Oregon.

UPDATE:
I have been running the above described tubeless conversion for about 1 year and 9 months with no flats. I decided to remove one of the Hutchinson Intensive tubeless tires as it was showing a small bubble or blister in the sidewall. To my surprise I found the rim severely attacked by the Stans - chalky white residue that when removed showed etching/pitting of the aluminum rim. I use Stan's in Haven wheels and had used it in Mavic 819's for years with no attack of the rim. I have concluded that the anodizing of these rims is what protected them and noted that the Fulcrum 4's are only painted. I sanded down and cleaned the attacked areas around the inside of the rim, washed with soapy water and rinsed the rim. I then cleaned the rim with alcohol and applied a single layer of Stans rim tape. I am going to use Continentals tire sealant and a new Intense tire and see how things go.

NOTE: Through trial and error I found that the best stem to use with this conversion is a DT tubeless rim stem with a removable core. It fits the inner rim profile the best.


----------



## jsedlak

One thing I don't much care for is when the tyre refuses to latch to the rim. Only thing that will fix it is a compressor... ughf.


----------



## orange_julius

gschacht said:


> I use Fulcrum Racing 4 wheels
> 
> * snip*
> 
> I run Hutchinson Intensive Tubeless Road Tires. Not too difficult to mount, but the Easton stems require an air compressor while Stans Road stems do not. I run at 90/95psi. front/rear.
> 
> I have another identical set of the Fulcrum Racing 4's ($250 on EBay-new take off) that I have mounted Continental 700 X 25 Grand Prix 4000S and run at 95/100 front/rear to avoid pinch flatting - I have pinch flatted at 95 in rear. I weigh about 180 lbs.
> 
> The bike is a 2011 Cannondale Synapse Apex.


Care to share your impression on tubeless vs. high-end clinchers on identical wheels? ;-)


----------



## AM999

jsedlak said:


> One thing I don't much care for is when the tyre refuses to latch to the rim. Only thing that will fix it is a compressor... ughf.


If you have a "stubborn to mount" tubeless tire try installing it first with a butyl tube. I had success doing that. The tubeless tire will stretch out a bit and the bead will be forced into the rim hook. No problem pumping up with a floor pump after that.


----------



## foot hill

AM999 said:


> If you have a "stubborn to mount" tubeless tire try installing it first with a butyl tube. I had success doing that. The tubeless tire will stretch out a bit and the bead will be forced into the rim hook. No problem pumping up with a floor pump after that.


This does help (first installing tube) but the most useful tip I can say is to remove the valve core when inflating. 

After four years (of flat free tubeless on road and Mtb bike) this is now something I do every time I remount a tubeless tire.
Removing the valve core from stem allows much more air volume into the tire. Once seated I just remove air chuck ( i do use air compressor) and replace core then air up to final pressure. 

Also, I have never seen any form of corrosion on rim from Stans solution, even after sanding off lots of the anodizing prepping wheels for yellow sealing tape.


----------



## crank1979

50km so far on IRC Formula Pro tubeless with X-Guard. These are the puncture resistant model. Road feel is much better than the Hutchinson Fusion 3. I'm running the IRC tyres on 7900 C24 TL wheels and they feel every bit as good as Conti GP4000S tyres did on my 7800 C24 CL, better than Michelin Pro3 Race tyres on the C24 CLs. The IRCs feel nice and supple at 100psi, the same pressure that I run the Fusion 3s. Grip feels good but I haven't really pushed them yet. No punctures yet so that's good, and they've only been on poor quality Australian rural roads.

I've put the Ultegra wheelset with Fusion 3s on the wifes bike but I'll get another set of Fusion 3s to put on the 7850 C24 TL wheelset I have for the old bike and be able to compare how much difference the wheelset makes compared to the tyres.


----------



## imiller

Anyone try it on Edge rims. I'm going to build up a pair and am trying to decide between tubeless or tubular. I have also used stan's for the past 3 years on my mtn bike and never had any corrosion issues. I'm still using the original tape also. And the sealant also has less or no ammonia in it so its eco friendly and better for the tires and rims.

Thanks


----------



## mattsavage

Dead Thread revival... Oh well...

I've been running Fusions and Intensives on Corsa Concepts 1.2ACR's for over a year now. Zero flats, except when I picked up a sheet metal screw that went all the way into the rim.

Out of curiosity, I had an extra set of Intensives, so I taped up a set of Deep V's I had laying around and have been using those as my winter wheels. They're pretty awesome! They slid right on with my bare hands and sealed right up with a floor pump.

Weird thing is, I used them as my pit wheels for CX and tried to mount Bulldogs on there which was physically impossible, but the Intensives slipped on no problem. I wonder what the difference is with the beads? So, instead of BD's I used Clement PDX's with a rim strip, which was a bombproof training wheel.

Tubeless all the way! Now, I just need to find out how to get my hands on some of those new IRC's... I'm not paying $120 each plus shipping from Japan.


----------



## Yamabushi

Ouch, that's nasty!


----------



## carlislegeorge

i am so glad i go slow enough to avoid those things


----------



## foot hill

You mean, the Stan's didn't seal that? How disappointing 😉


----------



## CABGPatchKid

I’ve been riding tubeless for 8 months now.
I bought a Shimano Dura Ace 7850 SL wheel set online from the UK, at a close out so I got a decent price.
I am using the Hutchison Fusion 3 tires and so far I’ve had no flats, I’ve got 1900 miles on them so far. Yes they do cut easily, but nothing major yet, and the rear is showing wear. I have a set of Vredestein Fortezza SE’s on my Ultegra wheel set and the rear (was on the front) has 5600 miles and I swear it shows less wear than the Fusion3. 
I use the Tube Less wheel set on the weekends for my longer rides, usually 50 miles on Saturday, 25 to 30 or so on Sundays.
I still ride my Ultegra 6650 wheel set during the week for my after work rides, 15 miles roundtrip on the bike trail to Seal Beach and back.

I was just looking for something new and it sounded like tubeless had a very nice ride quality.
I did have a lot of trouble getting the tires on the rims initially. I probably should not have even been trying to do this because it was only out of the hospital for maybe 5 weeks after having open heart surgery, so I can’t really say it was that bad, but I did have to resort to using tire levers.
I was able to use a floor pump to get them seated and I was surprised that I was able to do this considering.
I did use the cafe latex sealant. I am going to take the tires off soon and clean the rims so I’ll get to see if there are any corrosion issues.

I did not have an issue with flats, I have not flatted in years. In the last several years I have had several slow leaks that I noticed the next day at home (on the tubed tires), and just patched the tube. I do clean my tires after every ride and If I see a small cut I deflate the tire and if there is something in the tire I use a pin and dig it out carefully, the seal it with Gel Super Glue. 

So I did not try this thinking this would solve my flat issue. And yes, I have taken the tire off at home to test if I could fix a flat on the road. I can now take the Fusion 3’s off and on with no tire levers. I do carry 2 spare tubes, I feel that if I were to run into a bad patch of glass etc. I have 2 tires, so I need 2 tubes.

My first thought was that I was faster, but I doubt that there is much difference, and the computer seems to agree with that.
I absolutely love the way they ride, very smooth. I am looking at the Maxis or the IRC tires for my next set, if I see one of these come down in price I’ll give them a try.

I absolutely do not recommend that people try this; I feel that if anyone wants to try road tubeless that is up to them. If someone wants some help and advice, cool, but they need to make that decision on their own.

As for me, at this time, I am 100% satisfied; I knew the issues going in and accepted them.


----------



## promountainoutfitters

Over a year and no issues, I have always carried a tube and a patch kit as a spare and I have yet to use it.


----------



## Dancer

I just got some Fulcrum Racing 3, 2 way wheels. I mounted Hutchinson Fusion 3 tubeless tires on them. I did have to use tire levers to get them on and was puzzled by a leaking front tire. At first I thought the bead hadn't properly seated, but upon looking at it carefully in the bathroom sink, I noticed tiny bubbles actually emerging from the sidewall. I used some Stan's sealkant ad that cured it. I had no issues with the other tire. 

The first time I tried them out, I was pleased with the ride: it feels as if there is less road buzz. 

You hear every now and then about someone calling their spouse to rescue them out on the road after a bad flat, but on my first day out, it was my wife who called me: she had locked her keys in her car and I had to ride across town on the new wheels to rescue her!

Dancer


----------



## lawr

*Shimano 7900 C24 TL*

I have more than 3,000 Km's on these tubeless wheels with Huthinson Fusion 3's. Switched from the Shimano Dura Ace clincher after a crash. Love the wheels and the tires. Great ride and road feel - a big reduction of harshness from the road. I use them with Hutchinson Protect Air. I had one rear flat - a small sharp metal object. Gave the tire a few shots with a CO2 - rode home 25 Km's - all was fine. I love the setup.


----------



## jtompilot

I've using tubeless for 3 years now. My first set-up was Stans/ghetto coversion of Easton Assent 2's. I had one flat after wearing out the tire and on a wet ride a small stone stuck to the tire and flated. It was then that I realized the rear tire was total worn out.

I loved the Fusion 2 so much I purchased the Campy Shamal 2-way. I ran the Fusion 3 without sealant this summer. I'm now waiting on my new Zonda 2-way for my other bike. Thinking about trying the IRC tubeless tires for the Zonda's. Now I can sell the Assent's.


----------



## castofone

Hi. My setup :- Fulcrum Racing 3 Two Way Fit and Hutchie Intensives.
I've been riding them since March and they will tick over 12,000 km this week.
I think the rear is close to finished but it's hard to say for sure.

In that time I've had one puncture that I'm aware of. Something punched a big hole low in the sidewall. Stans sealant did it's magic after losing a lot of air. I topped the air up with a mini pump and continued on my way. The next day I put a bit more air in with a floor pump and blew the seal out so I took the tyre off and glued a patch on.

I've whacked into a few pot holes hard enough to pinch flat a tube (you know when you hear the rim clang) but the Intensives took it in their stride, err roll.

The Intensives are an excellent training, commuting general purpose tyre. The ride is excellent but the grip is only 'good enough'. They are a tiny bit heavier than the typical GP4000 + butyl tube and a bit heavier again when you pour sealant into them.

I like them lot and will continue to use them but I'm putting together a set of light weight clinchers and I may or may not run them tubeless. I'd like to give the IRC tubeless a run because they are extremely light but they are hard to find.


----------



## Lu-Max

After one year of using Hutchinson Protect'Air Max in my wheels I just removed the tires and inspected the rims. Absolutely no sign of corrosion whatsoever.


----------



## roadwarrior57

Tubless tires along with disk brakes and electronic drive systems are the future of road cycling. No question about it.


----------



## CABGPatchKid

I removed my tires yesterday, the threads were starting to show on the rear after 2,800 miles, Hutchinson Fusion 3's. 
After 10 months using Cafe Latex, the front wheel had no corrosion, but there is corrosion in the rear wheel, small spots in about 6 places - DA 7850 SLs


----------



## hotwheels22

thanks for a nice thread.


----------



## hotwheels22

thanks.


----------



## hotwheels22

thanks for the post


----------



## vincemacmillan

Here is my anecdote to add to the pile:

I cleaned and put new tires on a set of Campy Shamal Ultra 2-way wheels the other day which, since new (2 years/15k miles), have only been used with Hutchinson tubeless and Stan's sealant. The serial numbers that had been "etched" through the finish (anodization?) were a bit corroded. 

I have regularly topped off the sealant every few months (I live in the desert) and cleaned them three or four times over those two years and this is the first bit of corrosion I have noticed. Didn't strike me as a structural issue so I gave the area a bit of a rub with a Scotchbrite pad. And though I plan to continue the same setup, I imagine I voided the warranty. For me, that was worth two years of no flats (well, one totally sliced tire but no punctures!). Plus, it sounds like maybe the Stan's formula has changed to be less corrosive recently? Maybe someone can confirm that. 
Cheers


----------



## Lu-Max

One more update from me.
When I pulled my tubeless tires off to get my bike ready for spring, I noticed that some of the Hutchinson Protect'Air Max had solidified on the tired beads. It was easy to remove simply by peeling it off. It had the consistency of latex rubber bands. Although there was still plenty of liquid sealant in the tire, some additional sealant had adhered to the inside of the tires. I simply used a green kitchen scrubby-sponge and some dish washing liquid to scrub that residue off. My tires looked brand new when I was done. Also cleaned any residue off of the rims using water and a sponge. Put everything back together, added fresh Protect'Air Max and back in business for another season.
Total weight of the 'rubber bands' was ~5g.


----------



## orange_julius

Lu-Max said:


> One more update from me.
> When I pulled my tubeless tires off to get my bike ready for spring, I noticed that some of the Hutchinson Protect'Air Max had solidified on the tired beads. It was easy to remove simply by peeling it off. It had the consistency of latex rubber bands. Although there was still plenty of liquid sealant in the tire, some additional sealant had adhered to the inside of the tires. I simply used a green kitchen scrubby-sponge and some dish washing liquid to scrub that residue off. My tires looked brand new when I was done. Also cleaned any residue off of the rims using water and a sponge. Put everything back together, added fresh Protect'Air Max and back in business for another season.
> Total weight of the 'rubber bands' was ~5g.


Thanks for sharing. It's been the same experience with me.

One quick addition though: some household dish soap have a small amount of ammonia in it. So if I use some to clean my tire or rim, I always make sure to rinse it off.


----------



## CABGPatchKid

I contacted Effettomariposa re: the corrosion on my 7850 SL rear wheel.

They say it is oxidation and not corrosion caused by the water in Caffélatex.

Quote from an Effettomariposa email:

“Although not corrosive compared to natural latex sealants (with a certain percentage of ammonia), the water content of Caffélatex might accelerate oxydation in the aluminum areas where the anodizing isn't properly done (aluminum not perfectly clean when put in the anodizing bath) or micro-cracked. 
The piece of info above is currently not present in our website and we will surely add it.
The good thing is, aluminum oxyde isn't porous and will therefore prevent further oxydation if not exposed to corrosive agents (Caffélatex is safe from that standpoint)... so the damage is essentially cosmetic.”

Quote from another Effettomariposa email:

Treating these oxidated areas locally with black paint for metals would protect them from further oxydation and smoothen their surface (preventing 'rubbing issues' in case an inner tube is needed).
I'm confident that would fix your wheel inner surface for good.

So I am going to sand the affected areas and touch them up with paint. At this time the wheel is sealed and holding air just fine.
I am sitting on the fence about using sealant going forward.


----------



## dlighthall

*More feedback: F3s vs R4s on C24 wheelset*

After 18 months, I have accumulated enough experience to weigh in on tubeless in general and the two main tire brands. Using the D-A C24 wheels from LBS at great price ($1,100 and included the tires--thanks Rich at Rubber Soul in Fresno!), I started with the Bontrager R4s, which went great for 12 months with no sealant, then flatted the front tire. Managed to seal it but it would not hold air pressure when I rode, but would hold when stationary. Not enough sealant? What do you think?. LBS tried to seal to no avail. I ended up buying a Hutchinson F3 at reduced price. Unfortunately the ride quality got noticeably less smooth, apparently due to less compliance from the F3--it does have a different, narrower profile. 

Next, got large staple in rear tire (R4) at 38 mph--tubeless tire seemed very stable on the rim as the air quickly escaped and I made an easy controlled stop. Appears to be another possible advantage of tubeless, their firmer seat on the bead. Inserted sealant (Stans) and used air cartridge but hole too large. Installed tube and made it home. Told LBS and he have me a new R4 for free. Anyway, despite sealing problem with the first Bontrager R4, I found that these tires really best complemented the soft ride of the C24s. Maybe mixing the tires is a factor that leads to harsher ride? (I love the C24s BTW, rock solid, so smooth)


----------



## crank1979

dlighthall said:


> After 18 months, I have accumulated enough experience to weigh in on tubeless in general and the two main tire brands. Using the D-A C24 wheels from LBS at great price ($1,100 and included the tires--thanks Rich at Rubber Soul in Fresno!), I started with the Bontrager R4s, which went great for 12 months with no sealant, then flatted the front tire. Managed to seal it but it would not hold air pressure when I rode, but would hold when stationary. Not enough sealant? What do you think?. LBS tried to seal to no avail. I ended up buying a Hutchinson F3 at reduced price. Unfortunately the ride quality got noticeably less smooth, apparently due to less compliance from the F3--it does have a different, narrower profile.
> 
> Next, got large staple in rear tire (R4) at 38 mph--tubeless tire seemed very stable on the rim as the air quickly escaped and I made an easy controlled stop. Appears to be another possible advantage of tubeless, their firmer seat on the bead. Inserted sealant (Stans) and used air cartridge but hole too large. Installed tube and made it home. Told LBS and he have me a new R4 for free. Anyway, despite sealing problem with the first Bontrager R4, I found that these tires really best complemented the soft ride of the C24s. Maybe mixing the tires is a factor that leads to harsher ride? (I love the C24s BTW, rock solid, so smooth)


The C24s are fantastic wheels. I run the 7850 version on my BMC and the 7900 version on my Moots.

How many kilometers did you get out of the R4 tyres and did you rotate them front to back at regular intervals? What pressure do you run the R4s and F3s at? I quite like the ride quality of the F3s at 100psi, coming from 130psi on other tyres.

I also like the way the tyre stays mounted if you get a fast leak/puncture. It's very confidence inspiring for rough descents, and we have some crap roads around here.

Using the air cartridge probably froze your sealant and that could be why it didn't work.


----------



## purdyd

*E*

I can only say, I wish I could ride somewhere here you only get one flat per year

If you do get a puncture in a tire and don't have sealant it is harder to plug the hole 

Also there are two kinds of sealants; latex based and particle based

Stan's will plug small holes faster but caffee latex will make the repair more permanent

The latex is also messier, you get the rubber bands

If you ride enough you WILL get a flat tire, even with sealant

You need to check the sealant on a quarterly basis, it can dry out, especially if warm, and you may not realize it but you might have lost some when it fixed some punctures

Installing a tube is no big deal, always carry a mister toughie or equivalent for those big cuts

The shimanos are great rims and lock the bead

Stan's alphas are great rims, lighter much easier to mount tires too and do not lock the bead

Stan's will add 1 mm or more to the width

Do not be afraid of 90 psi

If you use the shimanos and sealant, go get the Stan's removable core valves and an injector, now!

The specialized and bontrager tubeless tires are essentially rebadged hutchinson's

The IRc tires are hard to get but are an interesting alternative

The new irc road light is 240 grams, on my scale, and softer rubber than the fusions

I have not tried the maxxis padrones


----------



## dlighthall

*More feedback: F3s vs R4s on C24 wheelset*

Great feedback from both posts above. I like 90lbs, totally agree. You lose the advantage of tubeless it would seem to go much higher but I weigh 160lbs. I think there was a profile difference in the first R4 compared to the F3 Hutch but I agree, the new R4 I have looks exactly the same, which negates my observation above.

Interesting that you had the same experience with a flat, confirms my claim. 

Regardng mileage on the R4s, they wear pretty well. I really don't pay much attention to mileage but wear is similar to Michelin Pro 4 or 3, longer than Contis in my experience.

I am going to look for the IRCs--that would be a significant reduction in rotational mass. Also great tip on the Stan's valves--I was wondering if there was an aftermarket option for the Shimanos--especially what I say below on flat prevention strategy--or the lack thereof. 

Here is the deal folks, I do not put in sealant until I get a leak, which is probably stupid on a certain level but I just don't like the stuff adding weight and creating possible imbalance. When installing, I just put sealant on the bead surfaces. Having those Stan's valves would really help out. And be more careful with the air cartridge. I usually have a pump and only had a cartridge in order to blow out the bead, given that I had to break it to add the sealant, again the Stan's valves would be great.

Can the cartridges be used after the hole has had some sealant present for a minute or so?


----------



## purdyd

dlighthall said:


> Great feedback from both posts above. I like 90lbs, totally agree. You lose the advantage of tubeless it would seem to go much higher but I weigh 160lbs. I think there was a profile difference in the first R4 compared to the F3 Hutch but I agree, the new R4 I have looks exactly the same, which negates my observation above.
> 
> Interesting that you had the same experience with a flat, confirms my claim.
> 
> Regardng mileage on the R4s, they wear pretty well. I really don't pay much attention to mileage but wear is similar to Michelin Pro 4 or 3, longer than Contis in my experience.
> 
> I am going to look for the IRCs--that would be a significant reduction in rotational mass. Also great tip on the Stan's valves--I was wondering if there was an aftermarket option for the Shimanos--especially what I say below on flat prevention strategy--or the lack thereof.
> 
> Here is the deal folks, I do not put in sealant until I get a leak, which is probably stupid on a certain level but I just don't like the stuff adding weight and creating possible imbalance. When installing, I just put sealant on the bead surfaces. Having those Stan's valves would really help out. And be more careful with the air cartridge. I usually have a pump and only had a cartridge in order to blow out the bead, given that I had to break it to add the sealant, again the Stan's valves would be great.
> 
> Can the cartridges be used after the hole has had some sealant present for a minute or so?


Sealant wll not imbalance the wheel

25 grams of sealant is not a huge amount of weight

I can understand not wanting to deal with the mess


----------



## mando54

I rode DA C24's with Hutchinson's for a couple years. Loved the experience. I'd let the tires sit in the sun for an hour or so and then just roll them on to the rim. No problems at all. Hardest part was getting the bead set around the stem. I could do both in 15 minutes. As for performance, I didn't notice any difference between the tubes and tubeless. The tires lasted well, flatted less and I noticed that the flats were typically more slow leaks as opposed to blow outs. Because of that, I could typically get to a safe place to stop without ruining my wheels.


----------



## HEV

I run the newer Schwalbe Ultremo ZX road tubeless and could not be happier. They remind me a lot of the Conti GP4000s but with more compliance. I run them on my Giant PSLR1 wheels with the Hutchinson Protect Air Max sealant. Have not flatted yet. About 1000 miles. Like all road tubeless, they are a little hard to mount, but at least with the Schwalbe's, they can be inflated and seated with a standard floor pump.


----------



## Lu-Max

Forgot about this thread.
After only riding my road bicycle for just a few short rides last season (due to a serious neck injury), I finally tuned my bicycle up to get it ready for this season. I pulled the tires off of the rims to find absolutely no corrosion whatsoever after having left the Hutchinson Protect Air Max latex in there since 2012. It was even dried out, but it was very thick like paint. I cleaned the rims and tires out thoroughly, remounted with new latex and I am ready to ride. Yes, my neck is healed so I am good to go now.


----------



## samh

*ultremo zx Tubeless*



HEV said:


> I run the newer Schwalbe Ultremo ZX road tubeless and could not be happier. They remind me a lot of the Conti GP4000s but with more compliance. I run them on my Giant PSLR1 wheels with the Hutchinson Protect Air Max sealant. Have not flatted yet. About 1000 miles. Like all road tubeless, they are a little hard to mount, but at least with the Schwalbe's, they can be inflated and seated with a standard floor pump.


Do they measure true 23mm, or 22mm? Does air pressure hold overnight?


----------



## samh

(everyone) My Shimano tubeless wheel made "popping sound" (locking beads) when inflated. Do other Tubeless rims/wheels do this? 
Pacenti, Velocity A23, etc. My DT did not.


----------



## HEV

samh said:


> Do they measure true 23mm, or 22mm? Does air pressure hold overnight?


Just measured them. On my cheap plastic calipers they measure around 24mm. I double checked them with an electronic caliper and they measured between 23.5 and 23.9 depending on my application of the caliper. In any case, they are 23mm plus. So far, the best tires I have ever owned. I'm selling these wheels to a friend (tires included) and will replace with some Dura-Ace C24 tubeless and the updated Schwalbe One tire. According to the tech rep, they are identical with a slightly different compound. I sure hope so... They lose around a pound per night. I use sealant.


----------



## tednugent

samh said:


> (everyone) My Shimano tubeless wheel made "popping sound" (locking beads) when inflated. Do other Tubeless rims/wheels do this?
> Pacenti, Velocity A23, etc. My DT did not.


My Stan's notubes do tubeless ready or not


----------



## samh

Thanks. do you know where they sell Schawlbe One? (preferrably 25mm or 28mm)


----------



## samh

are these tires inflatable with a mini pump, on the road? or co2 necessary?


----------



## HEV

My wheels, made by DT Swiss, make the popping sound when the beads seat on both tubeless and tubed tires.


----------



## HEV

samh said:


> Thanks. do you know where they sell Schawlbe One? (preferrably 25mm or 28mm)


I bought them online on Ebay.


----------



## Chris Morris

samh said:


> Thanks. do you know where they sell Schawlbe One? (preferrably 25mm or 28mm)


World Class Cycles:
Clincher tires only


----------



## samh

*dt*



HEV said:


> My wheels, made by DT Swiss, make the popping sound when the beads seat on both tubeless and tubed tires.


I did not use soapy liquid, should I use hand soap or dishwashing soap?


----------



## dwt

dlighthall said:


> Next, got large staple in rear tire (R4) at 38 mph--tubeless tire seemed very stable on the rim as the air quickly escaped and I made an easy controlled stop. Appears to be another possible advantage of tubeless, their firmer seat on the bead. Inserted sealant (Stans) and used air cartridge but hole too large. Installed tube and made it home. Told LBS and he have me a new R4 for free. Anyway, despite sealing problem with the first Bontrager R4, I found that these tires really best complemented the soft ride of the C24s. Maybe mixing the tires is a factor that leads to harsher ride? (I love the C24s BTW, rock solid, so smooth)


 The last flat I got was in a cold rain storm last spring. Common
knowledge that you're more likely to flat in the rain, whatever you are running, due to road smutz sticking to the tire. I was riding Hutchinson Intensive tires at 90 psi. Whatever I picked up put enough of a hole in the tread to let latex sealant start squirting. So I was facing the highly unpleasant task of tubing up in the cold rain, but for a trick I learned from mountain biking. It sounds lame but totally works IME: superglue. A dab of glue directly on the puncture from the outside is all it takes. This seals a small puncture from the outside enough that together with latex coagulating on the inside, your good to go. Once back home you can patch the tire properly. I've resorted to this trick twice on the road
this one in the rain and another when it was dry. The wheel stays in the drops,the tire stays on the rim. Plus both times I rode more than 20 miles using this hack, without incident and enough to get back to car or home. 
Now I'm riding 28mm Secteurs front&'rear. These fatties corner
With a grip unlike anything I've ridden (never used tubulars) also give completely vibrationless descending, which is awesome especially in the 50+ mph range


----------



## 007david

I've got a half-way experience. I bought the Stan's kit with the tubeless Fusion 2s, tape, sealant, and valves. I was the head mechanic at my shop, and even with that and all of the tubeless set up my and others' mountain bikes I followed the directions to the jot and tittle. I mounted them on a set of Kinlin XR200s, and everything seemed just fine.

I rode them initially at the same pressure as my GP4ks (80f, 85r--I'm 120lbs), then reduced a bit, but I couldn't feel a huge difference in comfort. I didn't feel as confident cornering at first, and even after a few months the tires felt looser and about to break traction at speeds or lean angles I wouldn't have thought twice about with the contis. Now, that could just be the tire choice; maybe the Maxxis, IRD, Schwalbe, or others have a rubber compound that works better for me.

However, where it takes a turn is when I was out riding solo, heading down a slight incline (maybe 4%), when my front tire blew the entire left bead off. I dismounted, checked the bead--looked fine, checked the rim--looked great, and proceeded to put my spare tube in and keep going. But, with Stan's all over the rim and tire, compounded with the carbon bead, my hands and lever kept slipping. Eventually I broke the tire lever (a Pedro's, no less), and called my wife for the rescue. She took the fastest route and showed up a bit over an hour later, and I went home.

So, should I have checked my tires before I rode? Probably, but I almost never do if they're not lower than expected from between rides. Was it a defective tire? Not that I could find in the least, and if it were it seems like it would've blown sooner. Could it have been the installation? Always a possibility, but I wasn't new to tubeless, and I took the same care as I did on customer bikes.

The last remaining reasonable variable is that I wasn't using a tubeless rim. The fit was really tight, so I thought I might be okay, but without that flat shelf, bead barb, or however you want to call it, I suppose there's still a chance of it coming loose. When I built up new wheels I used the Alpha 340s, so when my current contis die, I may give it another go to see whether that makes a difference.


----------



## HEV

samh said:


> are these tires inflatable with a mini pump, on the road? or co2 necessary?


If the tires are low they can be filled by a mini pump. If you broke the bead seal then you will need to re-seat with a floor pump, compressor, or CO2. But, if you broke the bead, you probably had a catastrophic failure such as a huge cut, at which point you would likely have to boot it, tube it, and refill it with any of the above methods. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## samh

007david said:


> I've got a half-way experience. I bought the Stan's kit with the tubeless Fusion 2s, tape, sealant, and valves. I was the head mechanic at my shop, and even with that and all of the tubeless set up my and others' mountain bikes I followed the directions to the jot and tittle. I mounted them on a set of Kinlin XR200s, and everything seemed just fine.
> 
> I rode them initially at the same pressure as my GP4ks (80f, 85r--I'm 120lbs), then reduced a bit, but I couldn't feel a huge difference in comfort. I didn't feel as confident cornering at first, and even after a few months the tires felt looser and about to break traction at speeds or lean angles I wouldn't have thought twice about with the contis. Now, that could just be the tire choice; maybe the Maxxis, IRD, Schwalbe, or others have a rubber compound that works better for me.


1. At your weight you can put 60-70psi in this. 
2. Try Shimano "TL" Ultegra tubeless wheel. Don't use conversions. 
This 60-70psi doesn't work in my other wheel.
3. The hutchinson tire seems to be more 4 comfort than performance


----------



## samh

dwt said:


> . So I was facing the highly unpleasant task of tubing up in the cold rain, but for a trick I learned from mountain biking. It sounds lame but totally works IME: superglue. A dab of glue directly on the puncture from the outside is all it takes. This seals a small puncture from the outside enough that together with latex coagulating on the inside, your good to go. Once back home you can patch the tire properly.


Do you put crazyglue at 0psi, or when inflated? Did you have to dry out the tire first? How long before you can inflate it?


----------



## samh

HEV said:


> If the tires are low they can be filled by a mini pump. If you broke the bead seal then you will need to re-seat with a floor pump, compressor, or CO2. But, if you broke the bead, you probably had a catastrophic failure such as a huge cut, at which point you would likely have to boot it, tube it, and refill it with any of the above methods. Hope that makes sense.


Could frame pump inflation re-seat the bead? Do I need a "tubeless specific" tire boot, or clincher boot is OK?


----------



## tednugent

samh said:


> Could frame pump inflation re-seat the bead? Do I need a "tubeless specific" tire boot, or clincher boot is OK?


bring a tube as a backup. So that in a pinch you can throw in a tube and finish your ride (or ride to the closest bike shop that is open)


----------



## dwt

samh said:


> Do you put crazyglue at 0psi, or when inflated? Did you have to dry out the tire first? How long before you can inflate it?


Glue applied either at 0 or as inflated as the tire might be after the puncture as long as escaping air pressure not too high. Damp OK, if it's raining what are you going to do? Superglue dries fast, so inflate as soon as it sets


----------



## HEV

samh said:


> Could frame pump inflation re-seat the bead? Do I need a "tubeless specific" tire boot, or clincher boot is OK?


Let me clarify. If you were out riding and had a large cut or puncture, you would remove the tire, fashion some sort of boot (dollar bill, empty Gu package, or a Park boot), install a tube, and inflate with your mini pump or CO2 cartridge, and either finish your ride or get back home to do a proper repair. You will want to boot the cut or hole so that when you install a tube, it won't blow out through the the cut or hole when it is inflated. Yes, a standard clincher boot would work fine since a tubeless tire is basically a clincher without a tube. If the puncture isn't too large, you can patch your tire from the inside when you get back home. If the damage is to the sidewall, or if it is a bad cut, I'd discard the tire and replace.


----------



## 007david

samh said:


> 1. At your weight you can put 60-70psi in this.
> 2. Try Shimano "TL" Ultegra tubeless wheel. Don't use conversions.
> This 60-70psi doesn't work in my other wheel.
> 3. The hutchinson tire seems to be more 4 comfort than performance


1) Well, like I said, I started at those pressures, but I eventually settled on 70-75 after some experimenting.
2) I also said that I had a half-way experience since it was a converted rim. Once I need new tires I'm definitely going to give it another chance, but as of now that's the data I've got. I had similar experience on the mountain bike where a converted rim couldn't handle less than 20lbs without burping, but on a ZTR Crest and AC 101 things I could ride pretty much as low as I wanted (had to half a lap flat at Mellow Johnny's last year, actually).
3) I went with the Fusions because after talking with the Hutchinson rep what I came away with was Atom -> racing, low puncture protection, Fusion -> all rounder, Intensive -> all-weather, beater. I could be wrong or have misinterpreted, but in either case I think what I was having trouble with was not necessarily the suppleness of the tire (pretty with the lower pressures it's pretty much a wash if it were), but rather the rubber compound. I've found this true when comparing my go-to contis with other tires as well. That's partly why my next tubeless trial is going to most likely be on Maxxis or Schwalbes; on the MTB side they're the only two brands I've tried whose rubber performs like the contis (though on that side I prefer their treads patterns over conti. Loves me some Ikon).


----------



## samh

*tubeless*



007david said:


> 3) I went with the Fusions because after talking with the Hutchinson rep what I came away with was Atom -> racing, low puncture protection, Fusion -> all rounder, Intensive -> all-weather, beater. I could be wrong or have misinterpreted, but in either case I think what I was having trouble with was not necessarily the suppleness of the tire (pretty with the lower pressures it's pretty much a wash if it were), but rather the rubber compound.


Don't getAtom- I've tried. From what i read, any other brand (that is not a re-branded) is good. They will have other rubber. Hutchinson = straight line only. My Fusion1s leaked air& I had to trash.


----------



## dwt

samh said:


> Could frame pump inflation re-seat the bead? Do I need a "tubeless specific" tire boot, or clincher boot is OK?


No hope of re-seating bead with frame pump. Never tried CO2 to reseat. Reinflate, yes. 

I mentioned superglue hack. But I always carry spare tube and tire boot for worst case scenario. Can't be too cautious. One total fail is all you need to prove that.


----------



## temoore

dwt said:


> Now I'm riding 28mm Secteurs front&'rear. These fatties corner With a grip unlike anything I've ridden (never used tubulars) also give completely vibrationless descending, which is awesome especially in the 50+ mph range


I am curious how your experience with the Secteurs is going. I have been riding tubeless for 5 or 6 years, the last few with Hutchinson Intensives. It had been a couple of years since I had a flat with them (luck). I put some Secteurs on my commute bike (Gunnar Sport) and had three flats in about 6 weeks. I loved the tire, but the compound / casing seems like it cuts easily. Anyone else with Secteur experience?


----------



## dgaddis1

temoore said:


> I loved the tire, but the compound / casing seems like it cuts easily. Anyone else with Secteur experience?


I've got ~1500 miles on mine and have only flatted once, and that was taking the tire somewhere it really didn't belong, down a long, very steep, gravel descent with big chunky sharp edge gravel. Got a cut in the tread and Stan's couldn't seal it. I was on the brakes and still doing about 35mph down the hill, ended up flat spotting a rim because I bottomed it out hard enough before I could get stopped. That hill is sketchy on a MTB...the roadie had no place there.

You are using a sealant, right?

I patched the tire once home and haven't had any other flats. The roads are pretty good around here though. But yeah, they do seem a bit suspectible to cuts. 

Even with all the miles I've got on mine, they're still in good shape. No squaring off at all.



Some pics from Saturday's 80 mile ride, on the Secteurs. They work just fine on dirt and mild gravel, just avoid the chunky stuff and high speed.


----------



## temoore

dgaddis1 said:


> I've got ~1500 miles on mine and have only flatted once, and that was taking the tire somewhere it really didn't belong, down a long, very steep, gravel descent with big chunky sharp edge gravel. Got a cut in the tread and Stan's couldn't seal it. I was on the brakes and still doing about 35mph down the hill, ended up flat spotting a rim because I bottomed it out hard enough before I could get stopped. That hill is sketchy on a MTB...the roadie had no place there.
> 
> You are using a sealant, right?
> 
> I patched the tire once home and haven't had any other flats. The roads are pretty good around here though. But yeah, they do seem a bit suspectible to cuts.
> 
> Even with all the miles I've got on mine, they're still in good shape. No squaring off at all.


I do use Stan's sealant. It could have been bad luck, but I had several years without a flat with Intensives. When I removed the Secteurs, they just felt soft. Anyway, back to Intensives for a while, still have 1 new Secteur, so my try them again next tire replacement. Thanks.


----------



## NoahD

I've been riding tubeless on all my bikes for quite a few years, even before it was popular. I found with road and cross (at higher pressures), you really need a tubeless specific rim and tire combo; I've experienced quite a number of blow-offs. Right now I'm running Atoms on AC Road Tubeless wheels. I run 70/75 psi and have had great luck with traction and ride quality. Flats with tubeless are a total PITA and the tires are exremely hard to get off the rims and back on without pinching your tube, especially with the sealant getting all over everything. I've had variable luck with sealant working (I mostly use Stans) having some larger punctures seal permanently and some pinholes that just don't. I also have a set of Secteurs on a differnt bike. I've been running them around 50/55 psi and they are super plush. Don't have enough miles to say much more than that, though the Atoms have held up well for over 1500 miles (I've only added sealant once). 
IMHO, I don't know that the road tubless systems offer quite the benefits that they do with MTB (and for cross it is revolutionary). Between the limited tire selection, learning curve for tubeless and difficulty with flats I would probably stick with tubes if I wasn't so invested.


----------



## cooskull

*Schwalbe One experience*

Just finished off my first rear 23c Schwalbe One tire and here are my impressions:

Pros:
-Easy mount and inflate, didn't need levers and inflated with a floor pump
-These tires are fast rollers! I don't have any hard eveidence to back this up, but these are tires feel by far the fastest ones I've ever ridden.
-Good grip on dry pavement, I'd say on par with Conti GP 4000S. Little/no experience on wet tarmac with these.
-Relatively cheap by tubeless standards- can be found for under $60 USD

Cons:
-Very susceptible to cuts and nicks. A large slice is what finally did mine in and in general my tire looked like it got in a fight with a razor blade (and lost).
-Poor durability, I only got ~1200 miles in the rear. I could have maybe gotten another 100-200 miles if I patched my cut and then wore the tire down to cords but why bother?

Overall I have mixed opinions on his tire. It is very fast tire for sure but the poor durability left me disapointed- maybe winter riding conditions played a part in reducing the life span. They would be awesome for racing, but I'm more of a century type guy and value dependability. In 1200 miles I had 2 sizable cuts which required the sealant to kick in and fortunately seal, so these certainly didn't leave me with any warm fuzzy feelings. I will probably give these tires another chance when the 25c tires become available someday after umpteen scheduled release dates come and go, but for now it's back to my trusty Maxxis Padrones.


----------



## crank1979

I've managed to set up some Schwalbe Durano Plus tyres ghetto tubeless on my commuter with xm719 rims at 80psi. I'm hoping they overcome my problem with truck tyre belt wire punctures, which I got 2 of in one ride the other week.


----------



## thatdrewguy

*How to fix tubeless?*



dwt said:


> I was riding Hutchinson Intensive tires at 90 psi.... A dab of glue directly on the puncture from the outside is all it takes. This seals a small puncture from the outside enough that together with latex coagulating on the inside, your good to go. Once back home you can patch the tire properly.





dwt said:


> Glue applied either at 0 or as inflated as the tire might be after the puncture as long as escaping air pressure not too high. Damp OK, if it's raining what are you going to do? Superglue dries fast, so inflate as soon as it sets


Couple years riding Fusions tubeless and never got a flat. Second ride on the Intensives and got a clean rear puncture that splattered Stans out for a few rotations and then sealed up. I lost a bit of air but was still able to ride home. I had bought super glue after reading this thread a few weeks back but I didn't have it with me on this ride. I also didn't trust that the Stans would stay plugged if I added more air into the tire so I just rode home carefully with an underinflated tire.

Question really is how to fix the tubeless tire. Can I get away with cleaning out the Stans and just putting superglue on the inside of the tire or is it better to use an inner tube patch kit where it punctured? Will that even stay bonded with tire sealant in there too?


----------



## pmt

thatdrewguy said:


> Question really is how to fix the tubeless tire. Can I get away with cleaning out the Stans and just putting superglue on the inside of the tire or is it better to use an inner tube patch kit where it punctured? Will that even stay bonded with tire sealant in there too?


Just patch it with a standard patch kit. Rema is far better than the generics.

You do have to *clean* the surface first; use acetone or similar. I've done it out on the road.


----------



## thatdrewguy

pmt said:


> Just patch it with a standard patch kit. Rema is far better than the generics.
> 
> You do have to *clean* the surface first; use acetone or similar. I've done it out on the road.


OK it looks like I will have to take off the tire, patch and then put sealant back in. I was hoping not having to do that.

In regards to patching out on the road, you actually do this rather than installing an inner tube?


----------



## pmt

thatdrewguy said:


> OK it looks like I will have to take off the tire, patch and then put sealant back in. I was hoping not having to do that.
> 
> In regards to patching out on the road, you actually do this rather than installing an inner tube?


Sure. I carry some acetone in a Visine bottle and a little piece of cloth. Unmount part of the bead, clean with acetone and cloth, slap on a self-stick patch, remount and CO2.

Now later on back at the service-course, I'll go ahead and properly patch with a Rema kit, but on the road a self-stick is easier.


----------



## dgaddis1

I'd just put a tube in road-side. Glue in patch once you get home. I've used regular glue-in tube patches to patch tires with great success, both road and MTB. They may wear out/come loose eventually, but so far I've worn the tires out before the patch came loose.

I've never had any luck with a stick on tube patch, I wouldn't bother trying one on a tubeless tire with sealant in it. And I don't want to carry acetone around with me either.


----------



## thatdrewguy

Maybe a dumb question but for those that run tubeless and get a flat and the sealant does a decent job of sealing the leak. Do you just go on riding with a somewhat soft tire, pump the tire back up (hoping the sealant holds) or do a patch or tube insertion?

If you are putting in a tube or doing a roadside patch is it because the sealant didn't do it's job of stopping the leak?


----------



## tednugent

thatdrewguy said:


> Maybe a dumb question but for those that run tubeless and get a flat and the sealant does a decent job of sealing the leak. Do you just go on riding with a somewhat soft tire, pump the tire back up (hoping the sealant holds) or do a patch or tube insertion?
> 
> If you are putting in a tube or doing a roadside patch is it because the sealant didn't do it's job of stopping the leak?


Unless the puncture is too large for the sealant to seal, it doesn't necessarily go flat.

For example, if you have the "Path of Death", it would seal automatically...





If it's the say, nail is still stuck, it would seal around it until you take it the cause out, then you spin the wheel and the residual pressure would seal it with minimal loss of pressure.

Another example video is the carpet tack sabotage video recreating the Tour de France incident


----------



## bayAreaDude

thatdrewguy said:


> Maybe a dumb question but for those that run tubeless and get a flat and the sealant does a decent job of sealing the leak. Do you just go on riding with a somewhat soft tire, pump the tire back up (hoping the sealant holds) or do a patch or tube insertion?
> 
> If you are putting in a tube or doing a roadside patch is it because the sealant didn't do it's job of stopping the leak?


This has only happened to me a handful of times. If the tire feels like it lost enough air for me to be able to tell a difference, I just use a little C02. Never have I done a patch or tube insertion, though I do carry those with me in case the sealant doesn't do it's job or the puncture is too bad.


----------



## dwt

Permanent tubeless tire repair plug patch as used by motorcyclists:











http://www.jpcycles.com/product/217-145#!


----------



## bill105

First impression - just rode 2 short rides with new tubeless wheels and tires. Stans 340 front and 400 rear with Fusion 3's at 90 PSI. I can tell a definate improvement in ride quality. Road imperfections and bumps that I would feel on regular routes are diminished and smoothed out. The ride quality and less chance of flats are the pros. The cons would be about a quarter pound additional rotational weight, the cost and the learning curve of installing/maintaining them versus clinchers. The extra weight versus the same wheels, light slicks and ultra lite tubes i was running doesnt feel like an issue at about 15mph and higher, only when spinning up from slower speeds.


----------



## CliffordK

dwt said:


> Permanent tubeless tire repair plug patch as used by motorcyclists:
> 
> 
> View attachment 297280
> 
> 
> 
> Stop & Go Replacement Patch and Plug Kit | 217-145 | J&P Cycles!



Those thumb tacks look just wicked. Do you stick them into your tires?

A motorcycle tire is much thicker than a bicycle tire, especially a road bike tire. Patches that work for one may not work for the other. If you run low on air, those could probably hit your rim, and either knock themselves loose, or damage the rim.


----------



## triumph3banger

I got a new set of Mavic Ksyrium SL's acouple of years ago, to replace the 14 year old Heliums, and slapped a set of Fusion 3's on there, and haven't looked back. The ride comfort, and flat repair on the go, can't be beat. 2 oz of Stan's sealant in each tire, 80F 85 R, and I'm good to go. No more tubes for me!


----------



## tednugent

CliffordK said:


> Those thumb tacks look just wicked. Do you stick them into your tires?
> 
> A motorcycle tire is much thicker than a bicycle tire, especially a road bike tire. Patches that work for one may not work for the other. If you run low on air, those could probably hit your rim, and either knock themselves loose, or damage the rim.


Looks like a glorified patch kit. You're going to have to remove that tack someone regardless of bike or motorcycle


----------



## triumph3banger

I think those tacks are for ice riding!


----------



## dwt

CliffordK said:


> Those thumb tacks look just wicked. Do you stick them into your tires?


Through the puncture from the inside. The metal guides rubber through the puncture The rubber plugs it; then the metal gets cut off.

Given them a try; they work


----------



## gaz230474

Hi Guys, new to this forum stuff and noticed you guys are discussing Giant PSLR1 tyres/wheels.
I recently purchased a giant propel advanced with the PSLR1 rims/tyres on and was wondering are these tubeless or not? If I puncture what options do i have? Cheers


----------



## Bnystrom

gaz230474 said:


> Hi Guys, new to this forum stuff and noticed you guys are discussing Giant PSLR1 tyres/wheels.
> I recently purchased a giant propel advanced with the PSLR1 rims/tyres on and was wondering are these tubeless or not? If I puncture what options do i have? Cheers


It's a simple matter to pop one of the beads inward and check for a tube. It there isn't one, guess what?

As for flats, your first line of defense is to install a good sealant. Second, always carry a tube and something that can serve as a tire boot, just as you would for regular clinchers. If you get a flat that the sealant can't handle, remove the valve from the rim an install the tube. If the cut is that bad, you may need the tire boot, too.


----------



## 92gli

I mounted bontrager R2s on No tubes grail rims. Tires popped on with a floor pump and they barely lose any pressure in between rides.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead

gaz230474 said:


> Hi Guys, new to this forum stuff and noticed you guys are discussing Giant PSLR1 tyres/wheels.
> I recently purchased a giant propel advanced with the PSLR1 rims/tyres on and was wondering are these tubeless or not? If I puncture what options do i have? Cheers


The P slr1 tires are not tubeless. They are almost certainly mounted with a tube.


----------



## Rogus

Blue CheeseHead said:


> The P slr1 tires are not tubeless. They are almost certainly mounted with a tube.


Not almost.


----------



## VQuick

I doubt any production bike from a major manufacturer comes with stock tires set up tubeless. Even for mountain bikes that would be rare.


----------



## gaz230474

Cheers for the reply much appreciated. I normally carry spare tubes with 90mm valves, how easy is it to remove the valve from the wheel? Is there a specific tool required to do this? Cheers


----------



## VQuick

No, just a threaded nut you unscrew from the outside (spoke side). Takes 5 seconds.


----------



## gaz230474

So I just unscrew the nut and and the valve will unscrew off the wheel leaving a clear route for the valve of the tube to be put through?


----------



## VQuick

Yeah, after removing the nut the valve slides right out. If you have sealant it will be a bit messy but it is easy to pop a tube in.


----------



## gaz230474

I have removed these nuts from my propel as I have a set of Zipp 404s on a Cannondale [winter bike]to stop the valves rattling against carbon, should I not be doing this?


----------



## Blue CheeseHead

gaz230474 said:


> I have removed these nuts from my propel as I have a set of Zipp 404s on a Cannondale [winter bike]to stop the valves rattling against carbon, should I not be doing this?


If I understand you correctly, you MUST have the nut on the valve stem on a tubeless setup. With a tubeless you must rely on the nut to provide pressure to pull the rubber gasket portion of the stem tight against the rim to create a seal.


----------



## VQuick

Blue CheeseHead said:


> If I understand you correctly, you MUST have the nut on the valve stem on a tubeless setup. With a tubeless you must rely on the nut to provide pressure to pull the rubber gasket portion of the stem tight against the rim to create a seal.


Yes, exactly.

But it sounds like this person is still talking about their stock Giant Propel with tubes. The nut is not important on the valve stem of a tube, and in fact many tubes come without them.


----------



## dwt

Bnystrom said:


> It's a simple matter to pop one of the beads inward and check for a tube. It there isn't one, guess what?
> 
> As for flats, your first line of defense is to install a good sealant. Second, always carry a tube and something that can serve as a tire boot, just as you would for regular clinchers. If you get a flat that the sealant can't handle, remove the valve from the rim an install the tube. If the cut is that bad, you may need the tire boot, too.


I have a cautionary tale of woe. Punctured my rear tire Sunday. I DID carry superglue & 2 C02 cartridges. Forgot spare tube & hand pump. Sealant started spewing from the puncture hole and did not seal. I applied superglue from the outside as I've done before, and it looked like a good seal. But the C02 pressure blew the hole open and the tire did not inflate. I applied more glue, but then found out the 2nd cartridge was a dud. Without a hand pump at that point, I was SOL. Called the wife on cell for rescue, being only about 5 miles from home. Once home, I added more sealant, as a precaution in case I lost too much with the puncture, and aired up with compressor and floor pump. Repair held at 100 psi and is still holding. 
But, no more rides without hand pump and also tube and boot for backup.


----------

