Which one is faster? Tubular vs clincher tire question.
Moderator: robbosmans
It could very well be because of flat fixing. You are likely correct. It's not really a "problem". You should ride whatever you like most that suits your needs.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:33 pm
Here you have a test of rolling resistance. But probably all those tires are clincher.
http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com ... ke-reviews
http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com ... ke-reviews
nemeseri wrote:Well I just realized that I started one of those threads I found earlier. So let me try to rephrase the question: every test I found online states that tubulars slower, or under special circumstances similar to clinchers. Then why on earth no-one runs them in a road TT?
I do believe that tubs offer superior handling in corners, better grip and lower weight. But in a road TT these don't really matter. All of the previous properties are true for a road bike vs a TT bike. But everybody picks the TT bike because they are simply faster.
Clinchers are proven to be more aero and the rolling resistance is now lower than tubs, purely as a consequence of the manufacturer spend going into clincher tyres. Somewhere there is a story about Tony Martin using clinchers on a time trial.
Tubs structurally are a lighter wheel, and its all weight right on the rim edge so it makes an emphasized difference. Tubs are a safer design, especially compared to a carbon clincher. Plus from a pro perspective I guess there is less to go wrong (pinch flats, etc, etc)
I wouldn't say tubs are slower just that no one test tubs anymore, or at least tests every tub. Tom Anhalt has a great blog that shows clinchers and tubular CRR and the top rollers are clincher, but then you don't see any velfolex records or vittoria crosas on there either. I run the best of both worlds on my Time Trial bike: Conti SS 23c on a bontrager D3 clincher and Zipp Speed SL 27 on a Stinger Disc. The conti gives me a better aero shape on the front of the rig and the Zipp gives me a very plush ride on the rear. Both are very fast.
Tom's Blog:
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com
And his results:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C37Wq7d6d1Chig_ClcbsWuG8ugTxKLEmvAajTD9tcU0/edit#gid=1224624714
Tom's Blog:
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com
And his results:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C37Wq7d6d1Chig_ClcbsWuG8ugTxKLEmvAajTD9tcU0/edit#gid=1224624714
Stueys wrote:nemeses wrote:Clinchers are proven to be more aero.
I think that depends on the wheel. HED for instance, designs their stingers to be pretty damn fast and they are tubular only. They do so by making the channel the tub sits in very deep.
- cyclespeed
- Posts: 1120
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:45 am
Stalkan wrote:I wouldn't say tubs are slower just that no one test tubs anymore, or at least tests every tub. Tom Anhalt has a great blog that shows clinchers and tubular CRR and the top rollers are clincher, but then you don't see any velfolex records or vittoria crosas on there either. I run the best of both worlds on my Time Trial bike: Conti SS 23c on a bontrager D3 clincher and Zipp Speed SL 27 on a Stinger Disc. The conti gives me a better aero shape on the front of the rig and the Zipp gives me a very plush ride on the rear. Both are very fast.
Tom's Blog:
http://bikeblather.blogspot.com
And his results:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C37Wq7d6d1Chig_ClcbsWuG8ugTxKLEmvAajTD9tcU0/edit#gid=1224624714
Interesting tests, but as you say, very few tubs in there, and why no Vittoria CX or Veloflex Carbon tubs? Surely two of the most popular high performance tubs out there.
Not to mention the Corsa, Record or Speed versions which have extra supple sidewalls. I have a Graphene G+ Speed tub to try and it just looks fast hanging on the wall!
Saying clinchers are more aero and better rolling than tubs is like saying black cars are faster than white cars. Unless you compare like for like, you're on a hiding to nothing.
Eg. why not test a Vittoria CX 23 tub on a Zipp 303 versus the equivalent Vittoria clincher on a Zipp 303, for both Crr and aero?
as above, saying one is faster than the other in isolation of other factors - surface and pressure in particular - isn't reliable; even after those are taken into account, the differences in profile when mounted to different wheels may still mean that a tyre that is faster in pure crr terms actually results in a system that is slower once aerodynamic impact is taken into account
the last time i saw much in the way of clincher vs. tub comparison was afm's data, but that hasn't been updated in a long time
my guess would be that for tt the most important factors in tyre selection will be aerodynamic match to the rim, getting the pressure correct for the road surface and using a latex tube, whether it's a tub of clincher is least important, there won't be that much crr difference between any decent tt-oriented tyres
given that, i'd think pro teams mostly stick with tubs as they can be ridden flat reasonably safely, which gives time for the mechanic in the team car to get the wheel ready to swap and race up to the rider, and they allow lower system weight which could be worth time on courses with climbs or where there're turns that require braking
the last time i saw much in the way of clincher vs. tub comparison was afm's data, but that hasn't been updated in a long time
my guess would be that for tt the most important factors in tyre selection will be aerodynamic match to the rim, getting the pressure correct for the road surface and using a latex tube, whether it's a tub of clincher is least important, there won't be that much crr difference between any decent tt-oriented tyres
given that, i'd think pro teams mostly stick with tubs as they can be ridden flat reasonably safely, which gives time for the mechanic in the team car to get the wheel ready to swap and race up to the rider, and they allow lower system weight which could be worth time on courses with climbs or where there're turns that require braking
nemeseri wrote:I thought it might lead me to some answers if I check out what folks use at the Ironman World Championship. I only found info on the 2014 bikes. Out of the top 15 men 6 used clinchers and 9 tubs. Although the best and third time was done on clinchers:
http://www.slowtwitch.com/News/Kona_14_ ... _4728.html
I don't know anything about ironman, but AFAIK the racers can't use any outside help, so using clinchers might be because of faster flat fixing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I would love to see more info on this problem though.
Fixing a flat tub is quicker if you've got a a pre glued spare ready. Don't you have to leave your bike overnight before a race? I always thought clinchers were used because you could ensure a butyl tube was in there, high end tubs with latex tubes lose their pressure while the bike is in limbo.
One thing people overlook in comparisons is that latex tubes aren't safe in clinchers.
Better to compare a tub with latex inner vs a clincher with light butyl tube.
Better to compare a tub with latex inner vs a clincher with light butyl tube.
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
-
- in the industry
- Posts: 5777
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
- Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
- Contact:
Ah xena I was not aware you had indoor tarmac track to test you claim on. Obviously you do. Care to share your data. Oh sorry you dont it is jut your opinion. I really could not care if clinchers are quicker or not they are far too puncture prone for me and nothing slows you down like a puncture. tubs and the tubeless tyres I use are far better in this regard.
The rolling resistance difference between the corsa G+ clincher and the tubular tyre is so small (I dont what it is or which is lower) that it wont make any difference. People dont win or loose an event because they went for a Corsa clincher or tubular. They win or loos because the position is optimised, they are on form, everything just fall into place.....
Xena seems to think otherwise. I would just like to not get caught in traffic jams on the way to a race so I actually make it to the start line.
The rolling resistance difference between the corsa G+ clincher and the tubular tyre is so small (I dont what it is or which is lower) that it wont make any difference. People dont win or loose an event because they went for a Corsa clincher or tubular. They win or loos because the position is optimised, they are on form, everything just fall into place.....
Xena seems to think otherwise. I would just like to not get caught in traffic jams on the way to a race so I actually make it to the start line.
- de zwarten
- Posts: 896
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:32 pm
- Location: belgium
Some thoughts.
- Tony Martin was world champion TT in Kopenhagen on clinchers. Possible reasons: he had alu breaking surface as well, so maybe he just preferred the braking with a clincher disc with alu breaking surface (it was a bit wet, as I remember, and some 90 degree curves). Other reason: I read they claimed it was faster with clinchers.
- Many TT guys (Contador the latest example yesterday) use lightweight discs because they are super light. Weight is clearly on the top of some good riders' minds, and tubulars have the edge here.
- Because they are lighter, tubulars accelerate better. The hard thing about racing is not to freewheel in the bunch, but to accelerate.
- Because tubulars are still a bit more round, they take curves better. This, in combination with better acceleration, makes a lot of difference when racing.
- I read above that tubulars have a more supple casing. That is not necessarily true (unless they have silk casings, like FMB). A lot of clinchers (open tubulars) have very high threads-per-inch and feel very comfortable. My Veloflex Corsa feel much better than e.g. my continental competition tubulars.
- that brings me to the second-to-last thought: some 'top end' tubulars have butyl inner tires (like the continentals), and thus not necessarily latex. Those continentals are being used by pro teams.
- Last thought: those butyl tubulars could be used in iron man as they will hold air overnight. But Iron man guys (especially when there is no drafting allowed) don't care about cornering of their tires, because like in Hawaii, you hardly have a corner and you don't have to follow wheels. So handling is much less important for those guys and even though they ride harder than me, I wouldn't consider Iron man competitors to be a leading example what to use on the road.
- Tony Martin was world champion TT in Kopenhagen on clinchers. Possible reasons: he had alu breaking surface as well, so maybe he just preferred the braking with a clincher disc with alu breaking surface (it was a bit wet, as I remember, and some 90 degree curves). Other reason: I read they claimed it was faster with clinchers.
- Many TT guys (Contador the latest example yesterday) use lightweight discs because they are super light. Weight is clearly on the top of some good riders' minds, and tubulars have the edge here.
- Because they are lighter, tubulars accelerate better. The hard thing about racing is not to freewheel in the bunch, but to accelerate.
- Because tubulars are still a bit more round, they take curves better. This, in combination with better acceleration, makes a lot of difference when racing.
- I read above that tubulars have a more supple casing. That is not necessarily true (unless they have silk casings, like FMB). A lot of clinchers (open tubulars) have very high threads-per-inch and feel very comfortable. My Veloflex Corsa feel much better than e.g. my continental competition tubulars.
- that brings me to the second-to-last thought: some 'top end' tubulars have butyl inner tires (like the continentals), and thus not necessarily latex. Those continentals are being used by pro teams.
- Last thought: those butyl tubulars could be used in iron man as they will hold air overnight. But Iron man guys (especially when there is no drafting allowed) don't care about cornering of their tires, because like in Hawaii, you hardly have a corner and you don't have to follow wheels. So handling is much less important for those guys and even though they ride harder than me, I wouldn't consider Iron man competitors to be a leading example what to use on the road.
It's little bit different with Continental tubulars, pro teams use special LTD (limited) editions, which use latex inner tubes.
- de zwarten
- Posts: 896
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:32 pm
- Location: belgium
helldiver wrote:It's little bit different with Continental tubulars, pro teams use special LTD (limited) editions, which use latex inner tubes.
Thanks. I already wondered. I bought a set of tubular wheels with conti competition, and they 'seemed' to be the pro version and they were butyl. So I (mistakenly?) thought pro riders use those butyl tubulars.
I also read that some riders at movistar (Quintana, amongst others) have their tubulars at 10 bar or even higher, and I wondered if that had anything to do with the fact that those continentals are inherently harsh and they like them very hard (at least on smooth roads).
I combined those two stories and concluded that pro riders do use tubulars with butyl inner tires, at least in certain circumstances.
de zwarten wrote:helldiver wrote:It's little bit different with Continental tubulars, pro teams use special LTD (limited) editions, which use latex inner tubes.
Thanks. I already wondered. I bought a set of tubular wheels with conti competition, and they 'seemed' to be the pro version and they were butyl. So I (mistakenly?) thought pro riders use those butyl tubulars.
I also read that some riders at movistar (Quintana, amongst others) have their tubulars at 10 bar or even higher, and I wondered if that had anything to do with the fact that those continentals are inherently harsh and they like them very hard (at least on smooth roads).
I combined those two stories and concluded that pro riders do use tubulars with butyl inner tires, at least in certain circumstances.
You're getting a bit sidetracked. The point that matters is that latex can be used safely in tubulars only.
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
Really? I guess I have been unsafe for most of the last 6 years and who knows how many thousands of miles trained and raced. FWIW, I have had less flats on clinchers mounted with latex tubes (bontrager xxx) than any type of butyl tube that i ran in the ~10 years before I switched to latex. Anecdotal, I know, but you're statement is a bit out there. Care to elaborate some?