Latex Tubes vs Ultra Light Butyl Tubes?

[ToffieBoi]

Hello everyone.

I recently wonder about this topic, and when I had a research all the results were from really old times. So I believe the information is outdated.

Now on my bike I have 24C GrandPrix tires with Schwalbe SV20 inner tubes. They are 65gr butyl tubes. Also in my wardrobe, I have a set of Specialized Turbo ultralight Butly tubes, pre talced. They also weight 65gr each.

My friends are riding on 50gr butyl tubes from Continental and never had problems. I also never got punctures so far, and I ride my bike on really rough, sometimes even gravel and cobblestones.

So in that case, I wonder if it is logical to switch latex innertubes which are more expensive, a bit heavier and less airtight. All older reviews said that they are lighter and have better rolling resistance but they are not lighter now, in that case.

I also heard that latex tubes are more flexible so better on "snake-bite" punctures, but it is less likely happening on road bike.

So, I am waiting for opinions about it.

[Marin]

I recently read a blog post, maybe from Jan Heine (?), stating that light butyl tubes actually perform better in rolldown tests.

[fdegrove]

Hi,

The information is not outdated.

stating that light butyl tubes actually perform better in rolldown tests

That could be true but it will come at a price as it takes very thin butyl (or similar formula) to come close to the flexibility of a top quality latex inner tube.

Ciao,

[HillRPete]

ToffieBoi: in my unscientific opinion/experience there is not a lot to gain from running a latex tube (in a relatively sturdy tyre such as the Conti). Also Conti's tubulars usually do pretty well in the rolling resistance tests, and they use butyl tubes. The biggest potential is in finding the right pressure for your tyre, weight and surface quality.

Edit: typo

[HammerTime2]

If you want latex tubes, stick to tubulars, where the latex tubes can be secure in a controlled environment.

[rmerka]

That's good advice HammerTime2. The one issue I've had with latex tubes in clinchers was a sudden blowout when I found myself on an extremely bumpy, and I mean extremely bumpy, road that was also super steep 20% + downhill and I laid on the brakes too hard. Pow lost the front tire and barely managed to stay upright. Found a burn mark and hole where the latex popped. I ride butyl's now, it's just not worth the risk, considering I like to explore and that hill caught me by surprise. Latex IMHO is too fragile for clinchers.

[bm0p700f]

I use conti supersonic tubes without issue. I have had a latex tube on my MTB blowout before. I was not riding, it was before a race and the bike was on it's side then boom. It was a hot day maybe that caused it. I had to change that tube quite quickly before griding. Never had then for road tyres except in tubulars. I wonder on a all day ride how much Psi I loose when riding my Pave's?

[thisisatest]

Info I've gotten is that thin latex is still better at rolling resistance than the thinnest butyl, but the margin has dropped significantly. I personally think it's silly when people get light clincher wheels, pick light tires, then slap on 110g road tubes. 0.6mm (or 0.45mm if you can find them) butyl tubes will save 90-120grams! For the price of tubes! Best deal going.
Conti's test (on 26" mountain bikes) showed that a thicker tube wall did not improve flat resistance until the tube went over 200g. For reference, a standard 26" tube is around 165g, thinnest ones under 100g.
Latex has too many compromises for me.

[Marin]

I really liked how latex tubes felt on my MTB, but I had a few blowouts (not punctures!) from out of nowhere. I never looked back after going 100% tubeless (on all 3 MTBs...). I would love to go tubeless on the new road bike as well, but it seems the tech is not mature enough yet.

[kode54]

i had more issues with thin butyl tubes like Conti super light tubes and was more prone to pinch flats when changing tubes on the road. i have light butyl inner tubes on, but now, i only carry the heavier tubes as a spare. i've had too many quick change pinch flats with the thin butyl tubes than with regular Conti race tubes.

[mattr]

I had to change that tube quite quickly before griding.

I've actually left the grid to change tyres. A downpour while we were gridding up was good enough reason, and it got me on the podium. Despite a 2 minute disadvantage off the line. (Mud tyres really did make a difference that day!)

And blowouts on latex (mtb) seem to be caused by the tube sticking to the tyre, then the flexibility of the latex allows the tyre to walk round the rim, especially at low pressures.
So you end up with 1/4 of the tube stretched round half the rim.

More talc and regular deflating and reinflating fixes it.

Or tubeless.

[WMW]

I recently read a blog post, maybe from Jan Heine (?), stating that light butyl tubes actually perform better in rolldown tests.

Very flawed inaccurate test. It is easy enough to test this in a controlled environment.

Latex tubes add nothing to Crr, but butyl ones add quite a lot due to high hysteresis. Super thin ones aren't as bad, but they still add a couple watts of drag.

[WMW]

The one issue I've had with latex tubes in clinchers was a sudden blowout when I found myself on an extremely bumpy, and I mean extremely bumpy, road that was also super steep 20% + downhill and I laid on the brakes too hard. Pow lost the front tire and barely managed to stay upright. Found a burn mark and hole where the latex popped.

Latex tubes are unforgiving of poor installation. They are so tough that they will survive if you pinch them under the bead... then fail when you have high temperatures or forces.

When properly installed there is very little force on the tube... it just sits there creating an air barrier. You won't get a "pow!" unless the container fails... and that won't be the tube's fault.

I've been running latex tubes all the time for over 5 years and love them. One nice feature is how they don't puncture easily from thorns and staples, so long as you pull it out fairly soon anyway.

[HillRPete]

WMW: if you could share how you come to that conclusion (edit: re Heine's testing), that would be great. It seems people are either strongly following, or rejecting Jan Heine's work, but I've never seen the critique being substantiated beyond "one doesn't test like that". I'm an engineer myself, but not in a mechanical field, and interested to understand the issues at hand better.

[rmerka]

The one issue I've had with latex tubes in clinchers was a sudden blowout when I found myself on an extremely bumpy, and I mean extremely bumpy, road that was also super steep 20% + downhill and I laid on the brakes too hard. Pow lost the front tire and barely managed to stay upright. Found a burn mark and hole where the latex popped.

Latex tubes are unforgiving of poor installation. They are so tough that they will survive if you pinch them under the bead... then fail when you have high temperatures or forces.

When properly installed there is very little force on the tube... it just sits there creating an air barrier. You won't get a "pow!" unless the container fails... and that won't be the tube's fault.

The tube didn't make a sound when it went flat and it wasn't pinched in the bead. It just melted the tube from me braking too hard for too long. Latex melts at about half the temp that butyl does. With respect to temperature latex is most certainly more fragile.