Dave Mayer

Performance overlap? You must consider the combination of rims and tires. In my experience there is no overlap between clinchers and tubulars. I have numerous sets of both. If we are comparing alu rim options, here is what I have for clinchers: Campy Shamal & Eurus, high end Fulcrum, Sun Ringle Accelerators, Vision, and a number of handmade wheelsets with Open Pro rims.

In terms of ride performance, every one of these is inferior to the ancient tubular wheelsets I've picked up for free - discards from ride pals or the trash piles behind local bike shops.

I admit that some clincher tires are now being made to a very high standard, but due to the fundamental, insurmountable disadvantage of the clincher rim design, clincher wheels will never achieve the performance potential of tubulars.

The widespread availability of cheap carbon tubulars further widens the performance gap.

miamijim

If you want to compare apples to oranges go for it.

Everything else being equal, expensive clinchers will outperform cheap tubulars all day long. Nothing more, nothing less.

RobbieTunes

^^ There, we have two completely opposite opinions. ^^

I'm a mid-range price guy, and almost always buy my wheel sets used, and overhaul them.
I get my tires new and used, but still, a mid-range price guy.

I'm getting significantly better performance with tubular wheel sets and tires (in my price range) than clinchers.
Therefore, I can't tell you how high-end clincher wheels/tires would compare to high-end tubular wheels/tires.
My guess is that the tubulars would walk all over them. They sure do at the mid-range level.

I get a lot of low-mid tires in with trades, etc. I give the clinchers away.
I do have a new set of the $17 Yellow Jerseys, and a nice used set of Vittoria Rallys.
I'll probably give them away, sooner or later.

I like what I like and don't plan on buying any more wheels.
My past experience, overall, with tubular wheels and mid-range tubular tires, is better than with clinchers.
Doesn't mean I don't ride on clinchers. For some things, they're better, like convenience.

I'll never know the high-end market of either. I don't like the low-end market of either.

LesterOfPuppets

Yep. I've enjoyed quite a few clinchers over Vittoria Rallys, for instance. When I could get Vittoria Rallys locally for $25, I'd say they were better than any $25 clincher I could get locally but now they're up to $35 and for that I can get Clement Strada LGG, which I like better than Rallys.

Dave Mayer

This answers your question:

Climbing Wheels - Super Light Carbon Climbing Wheels For Climbers 980g Yoeleo

$650 tubular wheelset from an established manufacturer with a good rep. Active road riders would consider this a mid-range purchase.

This wheelset is 980 grams.

So this mid-range tubular wheelset is lighter than any clincher wheelset. You can spend $3 large and not get there with clinchers. Due to the fundamental weakness of the rim design, it is not possible to produce a 980 gram clincher wheelset.

Apart from the unavoidable weight penalty, with clinchers, you are still faced with the following negatives:

• Fragile rim beads, which get damaged when you run tires flat
• Clinchers are scary dangerous and unstable when you do get a sudden flat
• Pinch flats (tubulars: none)
• Greater chance of tire blowoffs and rim strip failures
• Serious heat dissipation problems with carbon clinchers.

So bottom line is that a mid-range tubular wheelset will outperform any high-end clincher wheelset.

jimmuller 

Unfortunately this falls perilously close to the two arguments skinny vs. fat and high pressure vs. low pressure. Nevertheless I'll ponder and propose the question: In what way are they better? Or to put it another way, how are they better? Or to put it yet another way, what makes you or I or anyone else think one is better? Inanutshell, what does "better" mean?

I know I really like the feel of the tubular wheels/tires I have on two bikes. They feel lighter, quicker to spin up with less effort, smoother rolling, longer rolling. They may track more accurately, but that's pretty subtle and may not be real. But then, the whole thing may just be self-delusion, a fallacy not supported by objective measurements. Or maybe it's a feature of the frame as much as the wheels (though I wouldn't think so). So I'm asking what other people mean by "better".

FWIW, I do have a set of wheels for the Masi with high-end clinchers (Veloflex Masters, 23mm) on nice, lightweight rims. I wore out (rather quickly, alas) a set of Vittoria clinchers on those rims. This year I also built up a set of tubular wheels for the Masi with high-end tubulars (Veloflex Criteriums, 23mm). Both wheel sets have the same spoke count and the same FW, so in principle I can swap them for a true comparison though I haven't had as much opportunity to ride the tubulars yet. The Vittoria clinchers felt very nice indeed until they became so thin they'd flat at every minor opportunity. The new Veloflex clinchers are also nice. I think the tubulars feel better but truth be told I'm not sure I could tell the difference blindfolded. Or maybe I could.

crank_addict

How about looking at if from 'price irrelevant' perspective for your vintage / classic wheels - choice of clincher or tubular?

iab

You are placing way too much importance on equipment.

Performance comes from the rider. UCI legal bike, tubular or clincher, makes no difference in any race.

But if you want to compare apples to oranges, a 28mm clincher will outperform a 20mm tubular on rough roads any day and every day.

RobbieTunes

Good point.

Price irrelevant: tubulars, for me, Scott, on coolness, ride quality, and even more so on carbon rims.

When I say "better performance," Jim, I define "better" as "preferable in almost every category, to the alternative," performance.

When I say "performance," I explain "performance" as "doing what I want done, how I want it done, when I want it done, and generally the opposite of price irrelevance.

In my humble, numb-ass and hands cycling world, I prefer the grip and ride of tubulars, the durability of tubulars, the "bicycle look" of tubulars, the lower rotational rim weight that I perceive in tubulars, the complete disregard my fellow cyclists often have for tubulars (as well as shops). When I'm riding a $50 (tire and tape) Tufo that is not the softest tire in the world, I rationalize this to myself as "better" than the $15 sale Hutchison Equinox, Chen-shin, or Schwalbe Leganos, etc, all of which feel like the brake is rubbing. Plus, I know that $50 Tufo is going to last 5x as long as those $15 sale tires. My cheapskate inwardly turning self-rationalization wins every time.

I move to the rims available, cheaper than all get out, mainly because they're tubular.
1-Bontrager Aeolus 6.5's for $1000 (traded my "best" two sets of clincher wheels that I was hoping to sell for $550 each). The hubs alone (rebadged DTSwiss 240S ceramic) may be almost worth the cost, and they came with Gatorskin Sprinters mounted. Poor guy couldn't wait to give up the tubulars for my clinchers.
2-American Classic Carbons (700c, Shook hubs, 35mm) with Challenge Criterium tires mounted, $300 (sat at the bike coop forever).
3-American Classic Carbons (650c, Shook hubs, 35mm) with Tufo S Jet Specials mounted, $250 (I drove 100 miles and he said I was the only response-3 months)
4-Reynolds Stratus carbon (700c, 40mm) with Vittoria Evo Corsa CX tires mounted (hopelessy overglued, but new), $400 (tubular + Campy rear = buyer's market)

Now, one can look at the incredibly rapid and severe depreciation that affected the market value of the above wheels, and I'd understand, and perhaps I'm still high from the acetone used to remove the old cement, or just stoked like a nipster hipster on my perceived savings, but that's a lot of wheel quality for the dough, dude. If I'd never sampled earlier tubulars, like Ambrosio Crono, Wolber GTX Profil, and Matrix ISO-II, I'd never be sniffing around for the modern stuff, but I'm glad I did.

A worn clincher is a repeated exercise in holding your breath until the next flat, and I also tend to pinch more flats than I get on the road. Not sorry to have forgotten how that feels.

The way I ride, it's all I've got left to feel good about.

Fred Smedley

fify

Fred Smedley

Who buys 20mm anything?

jimmuller 

Sorry, I asked the wrong question. My bad. Of course better is better. It had better be or else it is no better than anything else.

So what do you or anyone else mean by "performance"? I think I know what it means to me, but I'm curious about what makes you or anyone else perceive a tire as having better performance?

revchuck 

A tire that sticks well, including in the wet; wears well, rides well, and is reasonably flat resistant. Among clinchers, two tires that meet these criteria are the Michelin Pro4 Endurance (my favorite) and the Conti GP4000S/SII. Both tires stick well enough to be used as race tires and typically last >3k miles on the rear. Probably due to my lack of experience with them, I'm unaware of any tubulars that match that.

iab

People who ride on a wood track.

RobbieTunes

Here. I think the relevant word is "I," as performance can be a lot of things. To me, it means being able to perform tasks as assigned in an expected way. Sort of like saying "bang for the buck," and having to define "bang."

Fred Smedley

You weren't talking about a wood track "a 28mm clincher will outperform a 20mm tubular on rough roads any day and every day." or was anybody else on this thread.

iab

Context is everything.

Road Fan

I'm not sure I'd buy a 20 or 21 mm clincher because the max pressures are usually lower than I'd want - I tend to use Berto chart values plus 5 to 10 psi. I'd certainly use a 20 or 21 mm tubular, even though I don't now, just for local JRA and my weekend rides out NW of Ann Arbor

Ranger63

Yellow Jerseys Tufos (3/$50 ) are a deal. Been dealing with these folks for years now and never had a complaint (about them or their products)
I did,however, have the bike shop add Stans to the tubes at the beginning of the season and here I am 2K later with no flats.

Road Fan

To me, performance needs to be measurable. Since I have no tools for measuring anything other than time, I try not to talk about performance. I like tubulars more than nearly all clinchers I've had, and I think they feel better. I don't know how to measure those impressions. So for me, better is liking and the way the ride feels. Softer than a box of rocks, but no bottoming, that "singing" feeling or sound.

gomango

Best deal I have seen is at Ribble on the Vittoria Corsa Elites.

3 for $101.

crank_addict

Funny you should mention. I have a pair of NOS Fasgrip 20mm width / 175gm Time Trial clinchers. Couldn't resist the $5 price and they look so wicked

Perhaps someday I'll find an ape dropped TT ride or build a funky early tri-racer.

crank_addict

As the controversy goes round and round, the OP was primarily after the pro/cons for vintage 'tubular wheels'.

However if one is riding on vintage 'clinchers', and wants a sneaky fast, fine ride plus safety of a tubular, check out the Tufo C Elite Jet tubi/clinch. Only 160gm but takes more of your wallet.

Road Fan

Are they Tufos?

Vonruden

I use stans in all of my tubulars with removable core stems...works like a charm.