-
Clinchers are faster aerodynamically. Clinchers are faster in rolling resistance terms. That'll do me.
Tub systems are lighter but the difference isn't huge and weight weenies died out with drillium and purple ano.
Tubs are more resistant to pinch flats but if you're pinch flatting you're either a shit mechanic, can't bunnyhop or aren't watching where you're going. I'd like to see a timed tyre/tube change between regular clincher rider and regular tub rider. I'd then like to see them both ride around a corner at 70kph and see which tyre actually hangs on after being inflated.
Or ride through glass (aka the London) and hike a bike to the nearest bike shop and see what they have in stock - tubs or clinchers? See who's fastest home then.
Conti might not be into latex tubes but that was more likely to be the pain in the arse they are with people who don't know what they're doing tying up their support line. "My tyre's gone flat but I can't find a puncture?!" or "how do I install this floppy tube, it won't stay still". All the tests I've seen show latex tubes are faster (here's one: http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-latex-tube-2014). "BMC, Orica-GreenEdge, Lotto and Lampre as well as some British teams" use latex versions of Conti's tubs, whereas the retail plebs get butyl.
hippy-
Clinchers are faster aerodynamically.
Not even according to Zipp. While wider clinchers have greatly improved their aerodynamics they still lag in what is possible with tubular constructions.
Clinchers are faster in rolling resistance terms. That'll do me.
Most of these statements seem to refer back to either the IRC or Tour's tests which were extremely flawed. Tom Anhalt's tests are not great but a bit more realistic.
If you want to kill the performance of tubular tyres you just need to use weak sticky mastics (such as Pastali) or tape.
Tub systems are lighter but the difference isn't huge and weight weenies died out with drillium and purple ano.
At least 150g difference per wheel is not "weight weenie". Tubular tyres allow not just for lighter systems but the shape of the tyre is "more ideal". They handle better in curves-- which also makes them faster.
Tubs are more resistant to pinch flats but if you're pinch flatting you're either a shit mechanic, can't bunnyhop or aren't watching where you're going. I'd like to see a timed tyre/tube change between regular clincher rider and regular tub rider. I'd then like to see them both ride
These days most races allow for wheel changes-- no need to sling a tyre along.... but tyre changes? Not sure what a "regular" tubular rider is. But if you ask? Are tubulars idiot proof.. They are, of course, not..
around a corner at 70kph and see which tyre actually hangs on after being inflated.
112 km/h? Other than in a slipstream or downhill I doubt anyone is going to hit that speed.. And hitting 100 km/h on a descent and taking a corner will just wash out .. That said the lateral forces acting on tyres on the track are not tiny-- and I've seen quite a few blowouts at highspeed without seeing the tyre roll off. In amateur road races I've seen clinchers leave their rims...
Or ride through glass (aka the London) and hike a bike to the nearest bike shop and see what they have in stock - tubs or clinchers? See who's fastest home then.
We're talking now about "weekend warrior turf".. Speed here is not the ultimate issue but passion, comfort, fun, handling etc. Here the guys on deep section carbon are doing it for "style points"..
Tubulars in shops? Those days are behind us-- and the tubulars I've seen in bicycle shops over the past few years nearly always seem to be the crappy Continental Giros (and at absurdly high prices). That said.. how 'bot when the shops are closed. I've ridden trashed tubular tyres home. When my clincher rear blew last month I walked the the 10+ miles home. I would have had no qualms riding the bicycle home if it had been a tubular tyre.
Conti might not be into latex tubes but that was more likely to be the pain in the arse they are with people who don't know what they're doing tying up their support line. "My tyre's gone flat but I can't find a
I'm talking about tubular tyres.
puncture?!" or "how do I install this floppy tube, it won't stay still". All the tests I've seen show latex tubes are faster (here's one: bicyclerollingresistance.com/road-bike-reviews/continental-grand-prix-4000s-ii-latex-tube-2014). "BMC, Orica-GreenEdge, Lotto and Lampre as well as some British teams" use latex versions
Sure a number of Conti sponsored riders-- I've mentioned this quite a few times-- request their ProLtd tyres with latex inner-tubes. They are handmade in Korbach and they do a number of variants-- including heavier duty inner-tubes. Most ProLtd tyres, however, are made with their special butyl and not latex inner-tubes. While some riders in Team BMC might have gotten latex I think most got butyl.
of Conti's tubs, whereas the retail plebs get butyl.
Hardly. I had over the years a large number of team tyres. Most of the Competitions were butyl. Looking even at their high-end track tyres... I see butyl..
EdwardZ
Since I've never heard anyone claim that clinchers are lighter than tubular solutions... So are we talking about aerodynamics (whatever that means since its not that easy to talk about especially on the road given side winds and pack effects but even on the track its hard to address)? Handling? Rolling resistance? Puncture resistance? All of these soft features come together to define if something is "faster".
Can't really speak about Schwalbe and some of the others.. Bontrager? You mean Trek? Did not know they did any R&D on tyres... Don't they source their better tyres from Lion (Vittoria)? I've never seen any studies by Schwalbe-- heck they, I think, stopped being in manufacturer decades ago and morphed into more of a trading house with their tyres being made by Swallow, these days Hunga's Indonesian factory. Conti, of course, still makes tyres-- and still makes their top tyres in Germany (and some even handsewn). The studies they've done working with elite riders I've seen did not support the claim. Continental is, if I recall, not even convinced that latex inner-tubes are, in practice, "faster". They afterall equip their top riders typically with special buytl tubes-- within the ProLtd production teams that demand latex can get them but most get buytl. Changing production and materials (such as their abandonment of cotton)? I asked a few years back and was told it was related to the availability of materials from within the Conti group and not performance. Zipp? Does not seem to be Zipp's well published opinion either.. Is there consumer pressure towards clincher solutions? Sure. Its large. Most of the European and American makers of high end full carbon wheels I've spoken with-- including those selling clincher wheels-- don't really like them but try to offer what they consider is the best product they can under the given constraints. Most of these companies need, afterall, to sell their wheels.