WhyFi

We're talking about the rolling resistance of tubed vs tubeless tires - not losing three quarters of a pound from your wheelset.

Seattle Forrest

I don't think you're delusional either. I think you're a human, and I think you have roughly the same capabilities as any other human. I think you can get the difference between 50F and 70F, but I think you can't feel the difference between 50F and 50.5F. I have no trouble believing you can feel the difference between a sprint and a recovery ride, and I wouldn't be surprised if you can feel the difference between your old wheels and tires with tubes and higher pressure vs your new wheels with probably better tires, no tubes, and lower pressure. But if you hold everything constant except for tubes vs no tubes, the difference exists but it's too small to perceive.

Seattle Forrest

I know I can't tell a difference of 3w average by looking at my Garmin.

What I meant about placebos is you can be faster on better gear because you think you're faster, so you're putting more into the bike. If you're measuring subjectively, it's really hard to do that especially against a memory, so it's easy to chalk it up to equipment.

And to be clear, none of us are saying tubeless is bad. Or even that it isn't faster, just how much it matters. Like you said earlier, if you're on an aero frame and wheels, you've nailed your position down, have shoe covers and slippery clothes, etc, it's a no brainier to ditch the tubes too. But if you just take the tubes out and expect to get a bunch of KOMs because of it...

DrIsotope

The 3W figure is a bit of a red herring, though-- very, very few people are going from a $$$ tubed tire to a $$$ just for the fun of it. I was living the abject misery of Gator Hardshells to avoid a flat every other day, and jumped right into the deep end going to Schwalbe Ones. Was there a perceptible difference? Only if "night" and "day" are dissimilar. Once you're bitten by that, It's all but impossible to go back to tubes.

But yeah-- in terms of tires in the same category, say One vs. Padrone vs. Gavia Race, etc, they all feel about the same. There might be a couple of watts one way or the other between 'em, but not that I could ever notice. I buy whatever's cheap...er.

shelbyfv

My only experience with tubeless is with 42mm tires. The tubes for those seemed really heavy vs 2 oz of sealant. I can't tell a difference in how the bike rides but wouldn't really expect to with semi knobbies. I don't know but a couple of people who have tried tubeless with normal 25mm-28mm road tires and least least one guy has switched back to tubes. It's not really new technology at this point but it seems there is more consensus as to the benefits with fatter tires.

noodle soup

You like Mavic wheelsets, so I’m with WhyFi.

fried bake

comfort and the perception of speed is a thing. In fact, it forms the basis for Zipps claims of increased speed in its new tubeless system.

“The idea is to measure whole body vibration, then reduce it. With the current 2020 Zipp 303 wheels’ 21mm internal width, you have a narrower tire volume with higher pressure and rough terrain would transmit basically everything to the rider. As if to state the obvious, spreading that same tire size out and reducing the pressure reduces how much of that vibration makes it to the rider. Thus there’s less power lost to vibration, the more comfortable the rider is, and the faster they can go.”

https://bikerumor.com/2020/05/05/new...ess-expensive/

bruce19

I have been talking about the difference between my Ksyrium Elite clinchers and my Kysrium Elite USTs. That's all I've been saying. The USTs are lighter, roll easier and are more comfortable. That's all I have ever said. And, for you to say I can't feel a difference and calling it a placebo effect is BS. You have no idea what I have experienced.

bruce19

Fair enough. I am not the one who is trying to convince you that your experience is invalid.

bruce19

I don't think I've ever mentioned an aero frame. Maybe someone else? I'm not looking for KOMs. But, I do know the difference that mods make to a bike. If there was no discernible difference... why are we all buying lighter wheels? I would like someone to answer that question. Why is it that someone who spends $2K on CF wheels gaining a perceptible advantage for a 300gr/ weight loss when my same weight savings using USTs is a placebo?

WhyFi

The thread is about TIRES. You quoted me, and attempted to rebut, when I recommended against switching TIRES for the main purpose of reducing rolling resistance. That's the context. Anyone that can states that they can feel the ~3w difference between top end tubed TIRES and top end tubeless TIRES is delusional.

I'm done with you. Have fun.

noodle soup

Your opinion is not invalid, it's just a very small sample size.

bruce19

Now I understand the disconnect. You have forgotten the original post.

"Currently ride vittoria pro slick inner tube tyres. Is it worth the cost of going tubeless if I need to change the wheelsets too? Are they that much faster for the average amateur or is it something only the pros would see the benefit on?

If I spent 600-800GBP on wheels I want to make sure they can take me a long way and want tubeless if they have a significantly higher ceiling than inner tubes.

Welcome any thoughts on this."

bruce19

Thank you. I was just reacting to someone saying that I could not tell a difference between my clinchers and my USTs.

WhyFi

:facepalm:

No, no I haven't.

justonwo

I think you guys have made your point. No use in insulting forum members.

I've been riding tubeless on my Roubaix since last summer and have had mostly positive experiences. I did get a hole in my GP5000 a few weeks back that the sealant wouldn't seal. I just converted my tubed Canyon to tubeless this morning having gotten tired of repairing flats on that bike (though, admittedly, I'm running more fragile tires on those bikes). Having figured out how to mount tubeless tires without using a lever, I'm not seeing a huge downside. I hope not to get stuck on the side of the road making a big mess with sealant when I get a road-side flat, but I'm hoping that will be relatively infrequent.

I don't know of many people that have switched to tubeless that have bad things to say. When I used to run GP4000s with tubes, it was very uncommon for me to get flats. Maybe once ever 1,000-1,500 miles on average. I know I did a 4,000 mile run with GP4000s with no flats. It's certainly not the no-brainer in road cycling that it is in mountain biking. I haven't had a flat on my tubeless mountain bikes in a very, very long time. But those tires have a lot of volume to seal a hole.

popeye

Mavic is in trouble.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/p...vership-455575

Seattle Forrest

​​​​​​Nobody is saying nothing you can change on a bike ever makes any difference. People buy lighter wheels for several reasons: less inertia, less total weight, they look better, people just feel like upgrading something on their bike because they have some money burning a hole in their pockets.

Nobody said any weight difference between two wheelsets is a placebo. We're talking about the effect of replacing tubes with sealant. That, by itself, is an imperceptible difference.

Dean V

You shouldn't confuse the "feel" of the bike with actual speed.
No one is going to be able to tell if they are travelling down the road 0.1mph faster with the same effort.
For example a light wheelset can transform how the bike feels, but the actual speed difference may be way less than you think.

L134 

I think it is important to recognize that all that video might “prove” is that, between those 3 specific set-ups, the tubeless set-up has less rolling resistance when ridden on rollers or that specific track than the other set-ups ridden on those rollers and that track. To the OP’s question, I would say, yes, said difference in rolling resistance will only be perceptible to pros - MAYBE - but doubtfully(speculation). But, for some reason, most pros ride tubulars even though they have been “proved” to have the most rolling resistance. Go figure. That test probably needs to be repeated several hundred times in all sorts of riding conditions before it says much of anything about only those specific set-ups tested. The video is entertainment and not much more.

rhys_t

Thanks for that bruce19. That helps a lot. Both videos explained a lot to me.


Cheers


Rhys

rhys_t

Dont suffer from flats that regularly although some of the roads here in the UK are horrible to ride on. I think its not something I need to look at that much as it was more for rolling resistance gains than anything else.

rhys_t

This was something else that confused me. Are there lots of wheelsets you can run with clinchers and then also run tubeless? I dont think tubeless is the route for me just now, maybe faster wheels next year but that's about it.

Yeah I am very interested in a power meter, time to start researching that too!

Thanks

colnago62

Tubulars are used in the pro ranks for the ability to keep riding on one when flat. Rolling resistance pales in comparison.

WhyFi

Yup. Most new wheelsets are tubeless compatible and can be run with tubes or tubeless.

That said, there are a few oddball wheels (some ENVE, the new Zipp 303S, etc) that require that you run tubeless tires, but those are typically wide, hookless designs (they don't have a hook on the inside of the rim to hold on to the tire bead).