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
@Nate yep you need the valve nut there - it assists with holding the valve's airtight seal against the inside of the rim.
I bought into the tubeless thing about 3 years ago. Got some shamal 2 ways and initially loved the feel of them (on Fusion 2s). But that may well have been the pleasure of running them at 90psi. Anyhoo, all was good until within the space of a month I had 4 punctures, 3 of which were tyre cuts so big that the sealant couldn't repair it. The other one was quite cool in that it repaired itself (with a minor latex money shot for me) whilst still rolling with some loss of pressure - but enough to get home.
Fixed two of the other flats by inserting a tube and 5 dollar note - which was no easy thing. One time I just couldnt do it (weak hands, cold day) so i had to taxi it home. Moved to the Intensive 25s, which never missed a beat.
Unfortunately the mental scarring of the roadside flats - and the general fucking about with sealant and more annoyingly, cleaning out dried sealant from time to time - left me happy to see the back of them. Sold them with a bike last month and wont be going tubeless again until i am more convinced about their pros outweighing their cons.
I like the "idea" of tubeless, lower pressures, etc., but you do still get flats and they are a massive pain in the arse when they occur. Better off going for tubbies if you are moving away from clinchers.
@Chris
I bet once you put sealant in a tubular it can't be repaired. I finally figured out when a tubeless starts to lose air like an inner-tube clincher it means the sealant is pretty much gone.
@ChrisO
Yeah, I suspected that too. I patched the inside wall my first puncture with a normal inner-tube patch and didn't touch the other two. They are fine. You are right about a lot of fuss. I almost like the fuss, I hate seeing the bike getting sprayed with sealant. Also, maybe I've been lucky having three for three punctures sealing nicely.
@sgt
Good to see you around these parts amigo. Do your clubrides go up and down the mountain or are they mostly down in the flats? I'm not down with carbon rims for my riding/don't see the point, and I hear horror stories about melted rims and the like amongst the SoCal canyons.
@Marcus Sounds like all of the benefits of a wide rim (e.g.HED) with more hassle.
Well put Gianni, I my self keep it pretty simple, clincher for all reasons mentioned above plus is gives the beer fund more capitol and i like that. That sealant is nasty stuff, if one has to insert the old standby tube in winter of the upper midwest. Your at the murcy of the gods on any given day.
@sgt
I'm going to keep with the data points but if I was to abandon them would go back to 25mm clinchers. I ridden and patched enough tubulars not to want to go back. Maybe that's a mistake. Maybe they would make me climb like an angel. Or not.
Good read. I've worked in bike shops off and on since 1978 ("a friggin' old guy-groan") and always had tubis on at least one of my bikes up until 3 or 4 years ago, BUT, these days a GP4000S with a light tube and a pair of 1405gram wheels is what I'm riding.... and can't for the life of me see the need or benefits of tubeless. My setup has nice ride qualities, good handling, long life, flat resistance, what more could you want? My friend just had her cross bike set up tubeless. She found a goathead in a tire the other day and when she pulled it out it went "pfffft" and sealed itself. "See"? She said. "TUBELESS rocks". Yeah, well I'm waiting for the phone call when she cuts the tire and finds that jizz everywhere and can't get the damn thing off and it's getting dark and the wolves are circling, and blah, blah, blah. FOLKS, just buy a quality tire and tube and ride the damn thing. You need light? Tubis are still a good option for that special race/ride. And you can put sealant in tubis if you feel the need and still have a light good riding set-up.
p.s. - A little trick. If you're riding a tube or tubi that doesn't have a removable valve, use a hypodermic syringe to inject the latex in directly. The latex will seal the pinhole.
Slightly off topic, but I saw the photo and initially thought the article was going to be about the Hutchinson Intensive clincher, which is one of my favorite tires. Not the lightest, not the smoothest (although not bad either), these tires in my experience are ridiculously long lasting and incredibly puncture resistant, even in winter and on gravel. You can also pick them up quite cheaply. I also love the Hutchinson Fusions, but don't like the color options usually available! Having briefly skimmed these posts, I've no plans to switch to either tubular or tubeless...
I'm curious, have you actually tried squirting sealant through a hypodermic syringe? It's hard enough getting it into a de-cored valve without the solution clogging up...