Ads |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 5:40:54 AM UTC-4, wrote:
Snipped Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou What about putting tire sealant into a tube before you flat? Isn't that what tire sealants are for? With Schrader valves it's easy to put in tire sealant; with Presta valves it's easier if you have a removable valve core on the tube although it can be done with a non-removable valve core if the person putting in the tire sealant is careful. Cheers |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:40:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou Why the furor about tubeless and no flats. After all they have been making goop to inject into tire tubes and making them self sealing for about 30 years now. Strange that no one seems to be using that although it is considerably cheaper - about 2.00 a wheel. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 03:56:30 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 5:40:54 AM UTC-4, wrote: Snipped Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou What about putting tire sealant into a tube before you flat? Isn't that what tire sealants are for? With Schrader valves it's easy to put in tire sealant; with Presta valves it's easier if you have a removable valve core on the tube although it can be done with a non-removable valve core if the person putting in the tire sealant is careful. Cheers The famous "Green Goop" sealant costs about $2.20 a wheel (Amazon) and takes only a few minutes to install. Green Goop apparently was originally concocted for the early off the road bunch (late 1980's) and apparently is a success as it is still being sold. Two Bucks a wheel (Plus tube) is certainly cheaper then a tubeless tire and wheel will be :-) |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:25:54 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:40:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou Why the furor about tubeless and no flats. After all they have been making goop to inject into tire tubes and making them self sealing for about 30 years now. Strange that no one seems to be using that although it is considerably cheaper - about 2.00 a wheel. Why you ask me? Carl Fogel (how is he BTW) used that green stuff and I didn't know anyone who patched more flats than him. I don't think that green goop works for pinch flats. Tubeless does by default; no tube to pinch. For road bikes pinch flats aren't a problem at least not for me. Off road with a crossbike with 32-35 mm wide tires it is because you want to run them at low pressure for traction. If I gonna try tubeless it will be on my crossbike but without the goop. Lou |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:04:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:25:54 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:40:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou Why the furor about tubeless and no flats. After all they have been making goop to inject into tire tubes and making them self sealing for about 30 years now. Strange that no one seems to be using that although it is considerably cheaper - about 2.00 a wheel. Why you ask me? Carl Fogel (how is he BTW) used that green stuff and I didn't know anyone who patched more flats than him. I don't think that green goop works for pinch flats. Tubeless does by default; no tube to pinch. For road bikes pinch flats aren't a problem at least not for me. Off road with a crossbike with 32-35 mm wide tires it is because you want to run them at low pressure for traction. If I gonna try tubeless it will be on my crossbike but without the goop. Lou I adjust the tire pressure to manage pinch flats. It is a little optimistic, I think, to expect a tube/tire not develop leaks is you smash it flat between two hard surfaces at high speeds. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 4:00:24 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:04:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:25:54 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:40:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou Why the furor about tubeless and no flats. After all they have been making goop to inject into tire tubes and making them self sealing for about 30 years now. Strange that no one seems to be using that although it is considerably cheaper - about 2.00 a wheel. Why you ask me? Carl Fogel (how is he BTW) used that green stuff and I didn't know anyone who patched more flats than him. I don't think that green goop works for pinch flats. Tubeless does by default; no tube to pinch. For road bikes pinch flats aren't a problem at least not for me. Off road with a crossbike with 32-35 mm wide tires it is because you want to run them at low pressure for traction. If I gonna try tubeless it will be on my crossbike but without the goop. Lou I adjust the tire pressure to manage pinch flats. It is a compromize between comfort, traction and vulnerablity for pinchflats. Off road on a crossbike traction is more important. Do you ride off road on a crossbike with 32 mm wide tires? It is a little optimistic, I think, to expect a tube/tire not develop leaks is you smash it flat between two hard surfaces at high speeds. I expect a tubeless tire with sturdier side walls to be more robust for pinchflats. It is silly to ridicule someones choice. This applies to you and to Tom. I think Andrew got it right. Sometimes tubeless makes sense, sometimes it is a solution looking for a problem. Lou |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Flat repair
On 16/08/2018 10:41 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 4:00:24 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:04:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:25:54 PM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 02:40:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 10:02:24 AM UTC+2, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:16:32 AM UTC+2, AMuzi wrote: On 8/15/2018 6:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/15/2018 1:39 PM, wrote: On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 12:26:14 AM UTC-7, news18 wrote: On 14/08/18 08:48, wrote: Obviously you like carrying around two tubes, a patch kit, two CO2 cartridges and a filler and a mini-pump because it seems romantic to you. Speaking of weight, just how heavier are these tubeless systems compared to the old tyre and tube system. You are perfectly free to feel that the same technology used on every other rubber tired vehicle in the world is not suited to bicycles but if you're going to argue, don't use inadequate responses like "lock you in to their products" or "testing procedures are only for very narrow test conditions." when this isn't the case at all. It is far easier to test bicycle tire performance than those of a motorcycles. +++ How many of these "every other rubber tyred vehcicles" are not driven by an ICE or similar power plant. P.S. you can leave out shopping trolleys. . Why are you arguing this? Tubeless tires are missing the weight of a tube. What's more, because the sealant is so reliable you can use lighter racing-style tires rather than armored tires such as the Gatorskins or the others of similar construction. The flat tests I presented earlier was a guy riding Continental 4000's - a racing tire that has minimal rolling resistance in the tests. I don't understand what you want us to do, Tom. I've got six personal bikes plus a tandem. Oh, plus another 1930s antique stored in the garage attic. They have five different wheel sizes. Surely you don't want me to run out and convert them all to tubeless? I have no current plans to buy another bike. If I start down that path, I might look at the issue. But I'm not seeing a compelling advantage. Right now, my main issue is learning how to repair them if there is a problem, because I do get recruited to help fix bike problems. I'm not looking forward to dealing with the goop. If it were possible to make a proper tubeless bcycle tire with out goop, we'd all ride them. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Right. Goop is the reason I not even consider tubeless. Up to the last tire test in TOUR magazine the best tubeless tires had a higher RR compared to the best clincher tires. Now they are on par. They are a bit heavier and harder to mount. That would be all manageable for me but dealing with the goop not. Lou But from reading posts here it seemed like the anti-flat goop was main argument for using tubeless. Without goop I think the chance of a pinchflat is much lower so you can ride with lower pressures for traction reasons or comfort. That is an advantage riding off road on a cross bike or MTB. Pinchflats on a roadbike is a no issue for me. My flats on the roadbike are almost exlusively caused by small glass pieces or chips of rocks. For that you need the goop to make the tubeless tire self sealant. Lou Why the furor about tubeless and no flats. After all they have been making goop to inject into tire tubes and making them self sealing for about 30 years now. Strange that no one seems to be using that although it is considerably cheaper - about 2.00 a wheel. Why you ask me? Carl Fogel (how is he BTW) used that green stuff and I didn't know anyone who patched more flats than him. I don't think that green goop works for pinch flats. Tubeless does by default; no tube to pinch. For road bikes pinch flats aren't a problem at least not for me. Off road with a crossbike with 32-35 mm wide tires it is because you want to run them at low pressure for traction. If I gonna try tubeless it will be on my crossbike but without the goop. Lou I adjust the tire pressure to manage pinch flats. It is a compromize between comfort, traction and vulnerablity for pinchflats. Off road on a crossbike traction is more important. Do you ride off road on a crossbike with 32 mm wide tires? It is a little optimistic, I think, to expect a tube/tire not develop leaks is you smash it flat between two hard surfaces at high speeds. I expect a tubeless tire with sturdier side walls to be more robust for pinchflats. It is silly to ridicule someones choice. This applies to you and to Tom. I think Andrew got it right. Sometimes tubeless makes sense, sometimes it is a solution looking for a problem. +1 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Possible to repair a flat-spot (kerb hit) on rear rim? | waldspirale | UK | 5 | April 30th 07 10:32 PM |
Pinch flat repair? | MuniAddict | Unicycling | 8 | March 11th 07 08:33 AM |
Pinch flat repair? | MuniAddict | Unicycling | 0 | March 11th 07 03:36 AM |
Pinch flat repair? | zfreak220 | Unicycling | 0 | March 11th 07 03:29 AM |
Flat tire repair. | Arne | Recumbent Biking | 13 | August 19th 04 03:39 PM |