There must still be a few readers out there who have not followed the Dutch Monkey down the merry tubular path; for them I offer an update on an alternative. Road tubeless has been lauded as the best thing to happen to cycling since the introduction of seatpins. These have been around for years but the road version has not gathered the expected momentum. Michelin made them then discontinued, Continental* is not interested, Bontrager said they were coming out with a model or two, Maxxis has a model. Hutchinson has a nasty little near-monopoly on the road tubeless market. Basically, there are maybe six models total and Hutchinson makes three of them. The tyres are different from regular clinchers in two ways: their square carbon bead snugs into square extrusion in the tubeless specific rim and they have a butyl inner-wall layer. The bead makes an airtight seal. The addition of latex sealant inside the tyre prevents almost all air loss and self-seals.
For unexplainable reasons I was advocating for them long before I actually used them. I liked the idea of no pinch-flats but moving to 25mm tyres mostly solved that. I liked the idea of using lower tyre pressure, which also was solved by going to 25mm inner-tubed tyres. It is claimed tubeless ride like sew-up tyres due to the lack of inner-tube but the tubeless tyres have a butyl coating on the inside to keep them airtight so they can’t be as supple. They may ride better than clinchers but they are heavier than sew-ups. Tubeless require forty grams of liquid sealant, there’s some more weight.
Pros
Cons
Debatable misconceptions
I’ve been using Hutchinson Intensive tubeless tyres on Campagnolo Eurus 2-way fit wheels for nine months. I’ve had a total three punctures, all resulting in latex spew, sealing and riding. So the good news is I haven’t been sweating on the side of the road replacing inner-tubes. That never was a big problem, I can do that in seven minutes, I’ve been doing that for many years. Seven minutes is less time than it takes to clean the bike from the latex after-party. What I don’t know about are the slow leaking punctures that the latex handles without messy fanfare. Seven minutes is also about a tenth of the time one will spend fixing a flat on a sew-up tyre. Even if “fixing” means peeling it off, putting in a pile you will never touch again and installing a new sew-up tyre.
I can dispel some misconceptions. The tyres do easily seat with a floor pump. I’ve installed the last resort inner-tube in my shop for practice but not in the field. Installing an inner-tube with the sealant covering everything roadside would be nasty. If one keeps the bead at the center of the rim and finishes at the valve, most can install a tubeless tyre with cycling gloves on, no tools. They will also come off easily if the bead is kept in the center of the rim and one starts near the valve. It is no harder than clinchers. I haven’t tested the claim that they stay on the rim while riding deflated, nor will I.
Do they ride better? That is the Question. We would happily put up with the lack of tyre selection and latex cleanup if the ride was a lot better than inner-tubed clinchers. I wish I could proclaim right here, right now that they rule but I can’t. I find it very hard to qualify those differences without some real testing. My inaugural ride on road tubeless was also my inaugural ride on my new Eurus wheels. The bike did corner much better, that was obvious and I assumed it was the Eurus wheeels not the tyres. Maybe that assumption was wrong but there is no way to tell unless I had two wheelsets to test one after the other, which I don’t. If the ride improvment was definitive, should it be the tyre of the future? If more tyre manufacturers jump into the pool the technology would improve and remove a few of the problems.
What the world needs is this: three wheelsets, a clincher, a tubeless and a tubular. All built the same except for rim/tyre choice. Have a group ride where wheels are swapped and tested, blindfolded! It is the only way. We await the offers.
Are we all confused? Are you sorry you just read an article with no definitive conclusion? You are welcome.
*Continental won’t manufacturer a tyre unless it stays on the rim at double it’s maximum pressure. I can’t imagine clinchers perform better than tubeless for that particular test.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
"An inner-tube can still be installed it sealant.. ...has dried up."
Surely this is not an issue worth considering as dried up sealant is indicative of maintenance so lackluster that it would have any self respecting velominati self flagellating with a chain whip to the point of death.
For that matter, isn't the whole sealant thing a bit irrelevant to this as it can be used in all three options? The only upside is that when the latex does dry up it can be pealed out of a tubeless while the tube and the tub have had it.
Fair summary Gianni.
Funnily enough I've been running Hutchinson Tubeless on Campag Eurus for two years, but I've just decided it isn't worth the hassle and switched to tubes. I can't say I have noticed any particular difference.
I can confirm it is possible, but messy, to put a tube in at roadside. I had a cut that the sealant couldn't manage.
Main reasons for me were the lack of tyre choice and the fuss.
The Hutchinson tyres are crap, and very poor wearing. And I have never successfully repaired a tubeless tyre so that's 40 quid every time there is a significant puncture. The sealant doesn't seem to stop it completely and I wouldn't trust it for more than getting you home.
And the sealant tends to coagulate inside along the rim, so you end up with 40g of liquid sealant and 40g of coagulated sealant, unless you clean it every time, which is a pain.
I find it strange that Campag/Fulcrum are going big on the two-way fit stuff but don't seem to have brought tyre manufacturers along with them. Hamlet without the Prince. Until then I'll go back to the clinchers.
"I haven't tested the claim that they stay on the rim while riding deflated, nor will I" ...
It is this above statement which will prevent me from ever trying tubeless. Having run them with mixed success on my MTB I cannot get past what would happen in the even of a rapid deflation at speed on a descent.
I also made the switch to tubular tyres about the same time as Frank. I was initially worried until I had my first roadside puncture. 15mins was all it took to put on a new tyre and get going and that was mainly because I was being overly cautious. The second time punture took under ten to swap as this time i brought a plastic tyre lever to help unseat the glued tub from the rim.
I'm not against tubeless and can see the benefits as I did when I used them on my MTB but I don't see what it solves over a normal clincher? If you have a punture big enough that it causes the goo to come out then you have to whack in an inner tube anway, so you have to carry one just as you would with ordinary clincher tyres. Oh, and good luck with changing unseatting a tubeless tyre from a tubeless rim at the roadside, those bad boys are tighter than a camel arse in a sandstorm to get off.
Coming back to my first concern it is highspeed flats that woory me riding on clinchers or tubeless now. The two puncture I have had on tubular tyres were both fairly fast (over 50kph) and happened very fast but without incident, i just rolled to a stop. My previous pucture to that on a clincher tyre wreck a carbon rim, had it been on the front I think it would have wrecked my No.1 and me.
You can also run the anti-flat goo in tubular tyres and woulf therefoe (IMHO) have the best of both benefits.
I'm interested in how the advantages of a tubeless setup compare to the 23mm wide HED C2 and Velocity a23 rims mounted with 23mm tires. I've read numerous reports of better cornering performance and a more supple ride due to the change in the profile of a 23mm tire the wider rim creates and the lower pressure the tire can be run at (According to HED, the recommend an 11% drop in pressure of a 23mm tire on their C2 rims). Anyone with experience?
@VeloVita The a23 rims with 23mm tires do indeed handle a little better. The tires end up measuring 25mm wide when mounted, and they end up handling a lot like... 25mm tires. Maybe a touch better, but that might be because you can run slightly lower pressure. The nice thing is that you now have a huge selection of what are now effectively 25mm tires that weigh the same as 23mm tires. You also have a much improved selection of effectively 27mm tires. The a23 rim weighs 15g less than a Ksyrium SL rim too.
There are a few new wheelsets out there that are running a wider front rim than rear, so I feel a little less goofy with the 23 on the rear and one of my stock of old Vittoria Open Coursa 25's on the front. On ugly pavement descents (my favorites,) the combination is noticeably faster.
Gianni, I appreciate the long term, honest review. I'm used to reading product reviews from a guy who recommends classic bend bars after two minutes of sitting on his bike in a basement.
Granted, that review did end up being accurate.
I can't comment on how they run, whether they are any good, whether they save time or will make you a better rider. And btw, I love reading a review where someone has taken the effort to compare and had come up inconclusive...at least it is honest and to the point....that's actually quite rare these days where someone is always trying to sell you something new.....that costs more!
For what it is worth, here is how I see it...
This is innovation for innovations sake. Someone has spent a load of RnD time (and money) thinking this would be a great thing. They have run off and focus group'd the world with a bunch of pre-loaded marketing questions about customer need and then got the answers they wanted to justify production. Next watch out of a load of pro guys swearing by them (Cipo probably runs them on his Bond Ad...yeah right!).
All in all you get a possible benefit on punctures time saved on the road side (which is crucial in a grand tour...but they also have spare wheels!) but if the puncture is bad...its worse than having a tube. They are heavier, you can spread monkey spunk all over your bike and have to clean it and this is classed as the latest innovation?!
Don't get me wrong..I am no luddite....but I turned to Co2 when I realised it really did save me time and effort and the chances of getting 3 punctures was so unlikely if it happened god would be more likley descend from heavens and mend my puncture with his very own Belgian Toothpaste.
But this? nah...BMW tried promoting on their cars a few years ago....I don't see the rest of the industry doing "oh shit that was a good idea why didn't we think of that!"
Leave me with my clinchers...cost effective wheels and cheap tubes....those riding tubs/sew ups, enjoy your ride quality and the spare strapped under your saddle where the EPMS does not rightly belong....and....move along, there is nothing to see here.
Nice article though Gianni...good to have the debate!
The photo caption touts the Rule 40 compliance but fails to note the Rule 60 washer nut violation. Does the valve nut hold the tubeless valve stem in place? If so it appears the tubeless setup is inherently rule-violating.
Great article, but before making a final judgement, try the Hutch Fusion 3s as opposed to the Intensives - much nicer more tubular-like ride and a little less weight. Also, for the fat-tire guys, Hutchinson announced a 28mm version of the Intensive last June, although it hasn't materialized in stores yet. Given that the current 25mm Intensives really measure 23mm, the 28s will probably be 25mm - Nice option for a winter tire.
@Nate Nailed it again. The valve stem nut is required for tubeless, hence road tubeless is inherently in violation.
I gotta say, I love my tubeless mtb setup, but haven't drunk the kool-aid (tubulars or tubeless clinchers) on the road yet, for most of the reasons @Gianni so eloquently details above. Same (I hate to admit) with carbon wheels, although several clubmates are showing marked improvement after switching to deeper section carbon wheels, and switching to 25's may be in the stars.
Gonna dance with the current setup (RolfPrima Elan RS with Conti 4000s 700x23's + tubes) for a tad longer. Keep the datapoints coming tho!