There is glue involved in tubeless tires? Clearly, I am way out of the game because I didn't know that. I thought it was like how they are on mountain bike tires. I look forward to reading about it.
I have zero experience with tubeless wheels/tires but I think you are referring to the "sealant" and not "glue". Installing tubeless tires require a bit more effort and injection of the sealant. I imagine you also have to make sure the rims are very clean and free of defects. I believe the earlier tubeless wheels were dedicated and you needed tubeless rims to work with tubeless tires but Campagnolo has 2-way-fit versions of their high performance wheels that can also accommodate regular clinchers. The 2-way feature is perhaps useful should you collect some damage to the rim from use and the tubeless no longer seals properly - you can clean it up and use regular clincher tires. Tubeless wheels do tend to be very slightly heavier as do the tires. There's also added weight from the sealant. However, you also no longer have inner tubes and the tubeless rim tapes are different and perhaps lighter since they are only designed to seal and not cushion against spoke ends. I think they are generally a good idea, especially for high mileage applications and will probably improve over time, offer more tire/wheel selections. They have been successfully used on the nastier road courses on the Pro Tour.
No glue with tubeless. There is a small amount of liquid sealant that's poured in which will automatically seal small to medium punctures. Primary benefit is flat protection against punctures, lower pressures can be run since pinch flat is no longer really an issue, and less rolling resistance across the entire pressure range since there is no longer internal friction from the tube. Really helps if your rims are tubeless compatible, but I think people have converted standard rims as well with varying success. Regarding ditching spare tube, co2 and lever, it's something that's been on my mind the last couple weeks too. You are completely immune to small punctures. Even with larger ones where the object stays in, they say to just remove the object, fill with air and spin the wheel around to distribute the sealant. Tubeless won't help if your sidewall gets gashed open, but this isn't such a big issue riding exclusively on tarmac I think. I went tubeless last summer when I switched tires. Certainly adds peace of mind.
Vig, My Fulcrum wheels are tubeless ready, but I don't know if my HED ones are also. When you ride on your tubeless, do you carry a bottle of sealant only? Can you "feel" a difference ?
Hi Daniel, you don't carry any sealant with you. You pour a few ounces of sealant inside when installing the tire and that's it. If there is a puncture the sealant closes it automatically. I still carry a spare tube, co2 and lever because in the event of a major tire cut that the sealant can't plug, you put the tube in and ride home on that. My riding is 80% gravel, some of it gnarly, so it's a precaution I'm forced to continue with. If I went back to riding only on the road I think it may not be necessary. I switched tire brands and also went up in size so afraid I can't give you a back to back comparison. However I know an Australian that rides 10-15,000 km a year, and switched from tubed to tubeless versions of the Schwalbe Marathon tires. He's an engineer and a data nut. His observations were: "- Slight improvement on average speed of around 0.5-1kmh. (measured over multiple rides over the same 41km route). - Even at the same pressure, the TL version is more compliant, but also felt stiff. Hard to explain, run over a small stick and get no feedback through the bars, but hit a larger obstacle like a pot hole and the tyre still feels hard. - Running at lower pressures by around 5% has yielded better comfort, eliminated any issues of numb fingers (particularly for long periods in the lowers). But with no issue of speed drop or a feeling of running on under inflated tyres. -Rolling resistance... My top speed (so rolling down hill) has increased by a measurable 2-4% over the same roads."
I'm running tubeless on my gravel grinder. So far very pleased--I can run lower pressure (nice on washboard dirt roads), and no issues with flats. However, I only have a handful of rides so far. And I'm running 20-25 psi--not what I'd run on my road bike. I've been running tubeless on my MTBs for years--never flatted and could not be happier.
I ride tubeless on four individual bikes. Three mountain bikes at pressures below 35psi and a road bike at 90 to 110 psi. There is a noticeable improvement in over all feel with tubeless at a given psi. I also typically run lower psi than I would with tubes. Mountain biking in environments like Sedona with lots of cactus plants, tubeless is a must. Although I ride tubeless on the road, I don't think it's any advantage. The liquid will not stop a punctured tire at 90 psi from deflating and the liquid sprays everywhere. Especially when your travelling at 30 mph.
Great bunch of videos if anyone hasn't seen them. The guy interviewed is a carbon expert and consults to bike and wheel manufacturers as well as aerospace like Boeing. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET1jRVynOBA[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFdG2NgIc7s&t=1253s[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZbg5hCRyvs[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qsLYlVWkbQ[/ame]
Nifty videos and interesting guy, this Australian carbon bike guru Raoul Luescher. I also notice how comments about disc brakes in the first video were slid into the discussions on the backs of what was actually a carbon wheel topic. CARBON CLINCHERS However, the crux of Luescher's criticism of (rim) braking on on carbon wheel failures actually centred around his dislike of carbon clinchers "it's a poor design" (PART 1 starting at 7:25), not of rim brakes per se. At this point he goes on to say the aircraft industry calls that "black aluminium", whereby people dishonestly pass off carbon versions of aluminium designs as being better just by switching the materials without design the new parts for carbon. In fact, he says carbon tubular wheels "...don't have anywhere near the (failure) problem ... you can get away with it ..."- in PART 1 at 8:09 Luescher was asked after he dismissed carbon clinchers as poor designs "So when you say, eh, carbon clinchers... are you going put singles in that category as well?...", whereupon Luescher says emphatically "NO!...". BTW, Autralians call tubulars "singles". When I first rode bikes, we used STEEL clinchers on our beater bikes and aluminium rims were all tubular racing jobs. Aluminium clinchers came on the market years later and were clearly received by the market as flawed compromises for riders who couldn't deal with the glue and more technical aspects of repairing tubular tires. Yes, we used to peel off the tape, slice up the stitching in our flatted-out tubulars, patch up the inner tubes and sew and glue them back up afterwards. Hence, tubulars were also popularly called "sew-ups". At any rate, I don't use carbon clinchers. My clinchers are high performance Campy or Fulcrum (Campy brand) aluminium clinchers. They brake really well. My carbon wheels are all tubular because I think carbon clinchers are the worst of both worlds. Incidentally mine are ZIPPs (which Luescher says are the best) and I'm also testing a set of MICHE. We used aluminium clinchers to knock about because their tires were cheaper but tubulars are far better in responsiveness and frankly-speaking much much faster to change out if you have a flat. As Luescher describes, carbon clinchers fail because heat build-up softens the resin on the sidewalls of the carbon rim, warps the rim, blows out the rim and then the inner tube blows up and then you end up riding on the carbon rim. This potential problem would worsen with TUBELESS TIRES using rim brakes as the tire would not even have an inner tube and would deflate as soon as the sidewalls deform enough to let air out, something that riders in hilly terrain, like Daniel, should take careful note of. DISC BRAKES As for disc brakes being discussed in the 1st video (i.e. PART 1), Raoul was prodded by one of the interviewers at 16:56 to agree with him that "disc wheels, disc brakes ...would be the way to go". However, Luescher sticks to his criticism of only the carbon clinchers, not rim brakes per se. Luescher says he started racing in 1980s the period that was 10 years after my start whereas these interviewers from Cycling Maven are really just kids in their early 30s at most. They probably don't have any background experience racing on tubular racing wheels. Clinchers were not meant to be raced on back in our days and Luescher knows it. The industry saw an easy opportunity to make an extra buck by promoting aluminium clinchers as performance alternatives to tubular rims and the Public got suckered into it. But if you're serious about racing on the road or track, you use tubulars. I don't think that's changed. Then in PART 2, at 1:145 when asked about the dangers of hot brake "...discs slicing through riders in races" (in a fall involving multiple riders), the other interviewer actually tries to cut off the discussion, tries to dismiss this by saying chain rings are also dangerous but he completely fails to acknowledge the fact that disc brakes are not alternatives to chain rings. The hot, potentially sharp brake discs are additional hazards, not alternative hazards. He even admits at 2:11 "...we have seen...sliced people open I guess but is that (an) extreme case? I've seen chain rings in people's legs as well, sooo for me personally I'd like to race with them...". Silly non-argument. At that point the discussion gets even a bit more silly when Luescher surprisingly suggests "well the simple thing's to put a cover over it". This is not a good idea from at least the following perspectives:1) a cover would create aerodynamic drag and turbulence 2) added weight 3) most-importantly, it would reduce cooling to the disc, cause it to get even hotter, cause it to warp. Ever had discs on your car warp and cause pulsing or rubbing??? Heat has to go somewhere so if you block off the disc, it will get even hotter and the disc cover will then get hot with the disc cooking inside it. Rim brakes use the entire rim as a cooling surface. IMO, an immediate better solution would be to look into better conductive surfaces and also use more advanced filler material inside the rims to absorb the heat and then release it when the rims are no longer being braked. An effective disc cover for disc brakes would require the entire disc to be covered. Which brings me to my last point. Just like carbon clinchers was a flawed extension of carbon application on bicycle rims, disc brakes on road racing bikes is a flawed application of disc brake technology on bicycle wheels. According to Wikipedia, development of disc brakes began in the 1890s and were first used as automotive brakes in 1902 but didn't work as the copper discs used wore out quickly. Early successful disc brakes were used on planes and tanks. prior to and during WWII. The first motorbike use was on racing motorcycles in 1965. Not sure when MTBs first used them. A road bike is not an MTB, not a motorbike and not a car... which is the same kind of criticism that Luescher had for the aerospace industry when they tried to pass off "black aluminium" as good design (see above for my reference to "black aluminium"). As you may also surmised as I have, that the pursuit of trying to make disc brakes work properly on road bikes is now leading to suggestions of putting covers on brake disc, which compromises the disc brakes (likely to cause them to warp). It amounts to suggesting a completely different design, a clean completely purpose-built brake for road bikes should be the proper answer to improving on rim brakes. That's the biggest reason why I don't bother with disc brakes in road bikes. It's also the same rationale I have about forced induction for Fcars... it's only an interim band-aid, half-fast solution and the Public just buys them because they fall for it or because there are no other choices as new NA Fcars are not available. This is why I am so vehemently against disc brakes on road bikes. I know they have to come up with better solutions and I don't want manufacturers to have an excuse to stop making rim-brakes, wheels and bike frames... because they actually work fine and the industry is only forcing disc brakes on the Public because they want people to buy new bikes. NA engines work fine and forced induction cars are being pushed into the market because makers are forced by governments who want to APPEAR to reduce carbon footprint. If you put your foot down on the pedal in a turbo-charged car, it will use a lot of gas and its EPA mileage rating will go out the window. It's BS. Anyway, I gotta run.
sheesh Michael, I thought the disc bit at the end might catch some attention. I almost didn't post the carbon wheels videos because of it. Uhh...let's not misrepresent what the guy actually said though. He wasn't prodded into saying that disc brakes are better. Here's a link to the section starting on disc brakes at 16:55 as you referenced. https://youtu.be/ET1jRVynOBA?t=16m55s I'm still not sure why you're up in arms about this though. More choices are always better. Like I've already said.. it's pretty simple, a test ride makes all things clear. And a lot of road cyclists are voting with their wallets for disc despite the infancy drawbacks of very marginal weight and aero penalty. Best of all you can continue to enjoy your rim brakes, i will ride my discs, and the sun will rise again tomorrow.
Well, if you feel that way why did you not also include the video segment at 1:45 in PART 2 that I mentioned in my message where that guy, supposedly an intelligent adult cyclist made the incredibly dumb comparison between the dangers of chain rings and hot brake discs. This is what I wrote in my last message..."...Then in PART 2, at 1:145 when asked about the dangers of hot brake "...discs slicing through riders in races" (in a fall involving multiple riders), the other interviewer actually tries to cut off the discussion, tries to dismiss this by saying chain rings are also dangerous but he completely fails to acknowledge the fact that disc brakes are not alternatives to chain rings. The hot, potentially sharp brake discs are additional hazards, not alternative hazards. ..."And this is the PART 2 video at 1:45 I referred to. https://youtu.be/bFdG2NgIc7s?t=1m45s The fellow then gets even more unhinged and admits that he would race with disc brakes even when he has seen brake discs slice people open. You only have to look at the expression on Luescher's face during these sequences to realize that he doesn't feel comfortable with this guy and doesn't want to accidentally create an argument and upset the interview, which is otherwise a plug for his business and good free advertisement. This is what I said in my last message..."...He even admits at 2:11 "...we have seen...sliced people open I guess but is that (an) extreme case? I've seen chain rings in people's legs as well, sooo for me personally I'd like to race with them...". Silly non-argument. ..."And here's the segment of the video showing the guy making those ridiculous statements. https://youtu.be/bFdG2NgIc7s?t=2m11s No. That's not why corporate businesses offer new choices at all. Businesses that are beholden to shareholders do not create choices for customers to improve conditions for customers. Altruism does not exist in corporations run by employees. As an employee your real job is to increase profits for the company. OTOH, if you own your business 100% you may do as you wish but that's not so in the bicycle business, just ask Shimano... who likes to make fishing gear too. Corporate businesses create new choices simply so you will choose what they want to sell you, even if it isn't good for you, caveat emptor. Think about this statement for a few minutes. Bike makers and retailers have expanded their businesses in recent boom years to the point where they need to have people continually buy expensive gear just to support the expansions (e.g. business loans) they have taken on. They have already saturated the sales potentials of their existing products. They have run out of customers to sell their current stuff to. Unfortunately, most cyclists don't need to buy any more top end expensive gear once they have a few bikes already. So makers and retailers are facing financial ruin unless they turn the market upside down. They need an excuse to get people to buy more stuff. Ever wonder why stock markets often go up and down? Someone STARTS A RUMOUR. They do that when the market is too quiet. Ever wonder why women buy new clothes? They see famous persons on TV shows wear them. Ever wonder why those famous persons wear them on TV shows? Money. People start a rumour or in this case, they create a hype... about a half-baked idea, a badly-designed revamp of the brakes, wheels and bike frames. Yes, swapping to new disc brakes also requires new wheels as well as new frames... ever had someone tell you to buy new wheels and new cars just to own brakes with questionable improvements? No, because they don't think we're that stupid. But with $12,000 bikes, hey these guys can afford multiple $12,000 bikes so they're probably bored and will go for it. Corporate businesses offer new choices just to make more money. In many cases, they get sued because people are hurt by half-baked new products. There are many court case backlogs in America concerning consumer lawsuits against businesses selling them half-baked product choices. You tell that to the poor guys mentioned in the Luescher interview with their melted carbon clinchers. And how many times do you get to do daredevil mountain descent test rides on $12,000 bikes that actually fit you? Sorry, a test ride will NOT make all things clear if those are your test criteria. If you mean bike makers will altruistically increase their product lines, increase their costs of inventory and increase production facilities or capacities just to offer you more choice, there are people who would like to sell you some bridges in NYC. If manufacturers can get enough production volume with disc brake gears, wheels and bikes they WILL CURTAIL VARIETY AND AVAILABILITY OF RIM BRAKE PRODUCTS and force people to switch and then stop making them completely. Makers can do that using marketing pressures on the retail trade. Ever wonder how come nearly all most complete bikes have Shimano gear? The same reason why name brands get preferred shelf locations in supermarkets - MONEY! If disc brakes on road bikes become mainstream, wheel makers will be forced to switch attention to them in order to maintain their market share. Resources for rim brake wheel development will at least be compromised. I ask you, do you have a choice to buy a NA Ferrari replacement for the 458? We know Ferarri doesn't like turbos but they were forced to make new cars with turbos. And what happened to the NA Ferraris? Poof, gone! Would Ferrari offer 488 in NA as well as turbo versions? NO! Will Ferrari keep using turbos in the future? NO! They will use turbos to bridge them to HYBRIDS. With Fcars, owners can just sell their older cars, perhaps even at a profit. Do you think cyclists with $12,000 bikes can ditch them at a profit when they have problems finding desirable new wheels for their rim brakes? This is how businesses work.
Michael, sorry but I haven't read your last post. It's getting a bit ridiculous and neither of us are going to change the other's mind, go for a test ride and vote with your wallet. I genuinely posted those videos because I thought people might be interested in the cf insight; there was no intention of rehashing rim vs. disc brakes. This is my last post on the subject and if it means I'm conceding that's fine. Good night and enjoy the rest of your weekend.
I appreciate your candour but you really should read my last post. The videos are nifty and interesting but unfortunately, questions about disc brakes were introduced by one interviewer who later proceeds to force his opinions on the person being interviewed and effectively pre-empted the guru from answering. Think about it. You and your buddy visit this guru to get his sage views on carbon wheels but your buddy starts a discussion on disc brakes. When you then bring up the subject of injuries from brake discs your buddy prevents the guru from answering by going off the deep end with a completely illogical argument and an emotional proclamation that he doesn't care (if injuries may arise). So why is your buddy hogging the comments when the whole point of your being with the guru is to get the guru's comment on your questions? This is exactly what happened. So really, please think about that. My main concern is the poorly-designed application of disc brakes on road bikes and the videos you posted actually convey that concern if you thoughtfully watch and listen to Luescher's answers and the reactionary responses of the 2nd interviewer, Shane Miller. If disc brakes were truly well-designed and useful I would be for then but as a businessman and experienced cyclist, I can see as clear as day, that disc brakes are not well-designed for that purpose and are really being pushed on to the market because companies are probably in financial trouble and need people to buy lots of new stuff. It's dishonest. Finally, neither of us have to post if we don't have any more points to make so it doesn't mean that I or you would be conceding if we've made our points.
Michael, thank you for your thoughts. I certainly appreciate them and hadn't thought along those lines. I still don't agree, but life would be pretty boring if everyone had the same perspective. Here is another interesting one, completely different. Interview with Jesse Carlsson, winner of the 2015 Trans America bike race. Self-supported, 4300 miles (6900 km). He finished it in around 19 days despite some major illness along the way. Totally different animal than the traditional pro racing that I enjoy following. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQAp9uvxbps[/ame]
Yes, I agree and thanks for posting this video. Jesse Carlsson and his mates in those "hyper endurances" races are truly amazing competitors and unique athletes. I cannot fathom what it must feel like to have so little sleep and so much saddle time. If I were to try it, I would likely not be able to dismount after a couple of days of that nonsense. This sort of achievement is the stuff that could be instrumental in successfully developing and promoting purpose-built bikes for people who are into those sorts of riding conditions. FWIW, I am all for disc brakes on cyclocross bikes as they complement very well the all-weather, generally nasty conditions and requirements of that discipline, which is in fact not all that different from these "hyper endurance" events. Forty years ago I rode to classes through Winters on a fixed single with big fat knobbly c'cross tubulars. My current training bike is actually a c'cross bike.
Paris-Nice on right now for the next 90 minutes on 99:SN1HD (Rogers). Bois-D'Arcy stage, beautiful route... forests, chateaux, great driving roads.
Mike Hall, one of the most successful ultra cyclists, was tragically killed by a motorist in the Indian Pacific Wheel Race in Australia. Mike won the 2012 World Cycle Race, 2013 Tour Divide, 2014 TransAm and 2016 Tour Divide. He founded the Transcontinental Race across Europe in 2013 and his time of 91 days 18 hours in the 2012 World Cycle Race beat the Guiness Record time. RIP
160 miles, 17'000 ft this weekend. Day 1 - Tour de Cashiers (100 miles, 10k feet. Placed 6th overall out of about 80 starters) Day 2 - Decided to try the ascent of Mt Mitchell, since I was already out in western NC. Whoa was I slow. The legacy of the prior race day made for some h-e-a-v-y legs. (Yes, I had to run a saddle bag on Sunday -- I was miles from any support. Yes, that's a big ol' 32 cassette. Momma didn't raise no dummies) Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Simply incredible. People that dont know any better will be amazed by the distance. Other cyclists are in awe of the elevation that went with it. Bravo, Dan. And BTW, I vote for you to go back to posting your workouts on Strava. Forget the other goons and their advice.
The hills in Costa Rica are effin steep, I need lots more training; and the lizards can bite your tire off. LOL Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
One day. Two wheels. 200 miles. Rode from central North Carolina to the Atlantic ocean. (I'm the doofus in the middle of this picture). I expected the ride would be pretty easy physically, but take its toll on my mind and willingness to keep turning the pedals. Surprisingly, it was simply a long day in the saddle and not too bad. Average watts remained pathetic (I usually ride 2.9-3.3 w/kg) thanks to favorable elevation profile, strict limits on 1-mile pulls per rider, and winds that didn't kick up until the last hour or so. On the mental side, it seemed easier than a 100-miler. Not sure why, but there was something really invigorating about watching the miles click up above 150. I scrogged up one section of the route and ran about 21 solo miles incorrectly. By the time I caught back to my mates, my average speed had dropped <20, so that's really weighing quite heavily on me this morning. The achievement of big miles, in my mind, is totally overshadowed by my crappy speed. I think (if/when) we do this again, we can pull a 21mph average assuming slightly cooler temps. I was on a 28 cassette, and would likely switch down to a 25 next time. Zero mechanical issues, zero nutrition issues, zero hydration issues. I'll get a super chillax 40 mile recovery ride today, then make the 5 hour drive back home. In ten days, we're headed back to western North Carolina for some hills. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
...three very trim-looking blokes with very bad fashion senses. Were you riding echelon most of the way except for the unintended 21 mile detour you took? How was the wind? The stats seem to indicate not too much elevation through the plateau and a gentle drop through the plains to the ocean. Average cadence seems low though, especially if you were in a group most of the way. Could make up some pace with higher cadence? Interesting temp range but looks like the weather was nice. Wish I had places like that to ride around here.
Terrible power for sure. We were two abreast for most of the ride, and with such a favorable elevation profile, the was very little TSS given the distance. No fashion sense? Come on! The guy in the middle is basically a male model (or so he thinks)
