clinchers v tubs Clinchers win

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderators: robbosmans, Moderator Team

xena
Banned
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:49 pm

by xena

Frolle posted this in the pro cycling thread but I thought worthy of its own thread

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/arti ... ter-45671/

Clinchers are King :thumbup:
Xena a demi god among the digital demimonde that is WW community

http://i.imgur.com/hL5v3ai.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/131970499@N02/

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

Conversations about which is the faster solution matter only if you are racing where seconds may matter. For most of us clinchers will always be the solution of choice due to their ease of changing out in the event of flats. Besides the fun in going faster should be due to leg strength and endurance getting better which matters far more than choice of gear. I must say I did like hearing that clincher's were competitive, but maybe that's confirmation bias speaking.
Colnago C-59 (Dura Ace)
Firefly(Ultegra)
Colnago C-64 disc(ultegra) with Bora 35 wheels

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

fromtrektocolnago wrote:Conversations about which is the faster solution matter only if you are racing where seconds may matter.


That's one of the reasons tubulars are used almost exclusively in pro cycling.
The most important reasons is that tubulars are better than clinchers in almost every performance aspect.

xena
Banned
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:49 pm

by xena

kgt wrote:
fromtrektocolnago wrote:Conversations about which is the faster solution matter only if you are racing where seconds may matter.


That's one of the reasons tubulars are used almost exclusively in pro cycling.
The most important reasons is that tubulars are better than clinchers in almost every performance aspect.




Yeah but clinchers have come along way ,ask Tony Martin.
I have rode both I don't see any real difference . Clinchers roll just as fast. The test showed they were faster.
Its the rubber that hits the ground, how you put them on a wheel is a different matter.
I think maybe pro teams have been a bit stuck in the past and ignored the development of clinchers.
The test go's some way to proving you are wrong.
Xena a demi god among the digital demimonde that is WW community

http://i.imgur.com/hL5v3ai.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/131970499@N02/

User avatar
rmerka
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: Austin, TX

by rmerka

It's a good video and I think they did as good a job as possible for a short video and "un-scientific" test as they could. I think they should have tested a technical mountain descent. I believe this is where a tubular wheel really shows it's merits. I generally ride clinchers, it's good to know that I'm getting some aero advantage in addition to my shiny bald head slicing through the wind :lol:

davidalone
Posts: 622
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:27 pm

by davidalone

clinchers have been known to be faster than tubs for a long while now.

But Tubs are used by pros for the following reasons, not because they are perceived to be faster.

1) they are less prone to flatting, all things being equal.
2) can be run at lower pressures without pinch flatting
3) carbon tubulars are safer than clinchers from the standpoint of heat braking issues.
4) you can ride a flat tubular for a good distance safely. not so a clincher. This is espeically an issue if you flat on a fast descent in a crowded peloton.
5) the aspect of increased mechanical complexity is solved by having pro mechanics.

the aero advantage and Crr advantage is small. if my livelihood depended on racing, I'd take additional safety over a small aero and Crr advantage.

User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 3510
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

Thanks davidalone.

End of thread.

Louis :)

jeffy
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:51 pm

by jeffy

i wonder what someone would think about how inconvenient tubulars are if they have ...

    taken off a tubeless clincher at the side of the road
    put in a tube and then got the tubeless tyre back onto the tubeless rim (a VERY tight fit)

I am not sure tubulars is less stress and strain than tubeless considering that sealant is just as/similarly effective with both. And in catastrophic failure i would guess it is a wash.

tubeless is cheaper ..... just

jamesbass
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:19 pm

by jamesbass

My experience is that, at any given price point, clinchers are ~300g heavier.

User avatar
boysa
Posts: 1430
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 10:03 pm
Location: Too far from my bike.

by boysa

I think the issue of ride quality and handling, the two reasons I prefer tubular, are being overlooked.
"Deserve's got nothing to do with it." William Munny

xena
Banned
Posts: 1149
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:49 pm

by xena

davidalone wrote:clinchers have been known to be faster than tubs for a long while now.

But Tubs are used by pros for the following reasons, not because they are perceived to be faster.

1) they are less prone to flatting, all things being equal.
2) can be run at lower pressures without pinch flatting
3) carbon tubulars are safer than clinchers from the standpoint of heat braking issues.
4) you can ride a flat tubular for a good distance safely. not so a clincher. This is espeically an issue if you flat on a fast descent in a crowded peloton.
5) the aspect of increased mechanical complexity is solved by having pro mechanics.

the aero advantage and Crr advantage is small. if my livelihood depended on racing, I'd take additional safety over a small aero and Crr advantage.


I don't think flatting for a A1 condition tyre is a issue

I don't know how low but for PR etc you may have a point. Maybe someone else may know for sure.
I do deflate in wet conditions with no issue.

I think most riders prefer to descend on alloy rims then carbon. They definitely feel safer than carbon. I just came back from Nice and rode a whole bunch of cols, no issue whatsoever.
You would be very unlucky to get a instant flat. The roads are usually swept at pro races. The fans even make sure there is nothing obvious to cause problems.

I think your points are good but I'm not sure they would hold up in real racing environment ....
Xena a demi god among the digital demimonde that is WW community

http://i.imgur.com/hL5v3ai.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/131970499@N02/

sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

xena wrote:
You would be very unlucky to get a instant flat..


You've been the lucky one!

Instant flat on clinchers in the mountains is a far from remote possibility

Tubs also handle better due to the round profile - particularly noticeable at speed

Aren't hour records done on tubs? Why not clinchers?
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

User avatar
ak47
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:57 pm

by ak47

I switched this year to tubulars. Can't say the tubulars feel faster, but they roll nicely. I went from 25 mm tyres to 22 mm tubs (both are Conti GP4000S), comfort difference is small, but the cornening speed went up I feel so much more confident on descent. I can lean much more with my bike in a corner and grip seems to be progessive. The difference is so huge I will probably never consider going back to tyre.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

xena wrote:I think maybe pro teams have been a bit stuck in the past and ignored the development of clinchers.
The test go's some way to proving you are wrong.


No, they ignore nothing. It's just that pro teams do not choose their tires based on bikeradar's articles.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

boysa wrote:I think the issue of ride quality and handling, the two reasons I prefer tubular, are being overlooked.

So true, I think these are THE biggest reasons virtually every pro team in the Grand Tours are still running tubulars. I threw the word "virtually" in there only to cover the case where maybe there are some clinchers, but aside from the mentioned Tony Martin using them in a Time Trial, I can't think of one.
I myself would never choose to use clinchers when I have my tubulars on hand. Ive just gotten used to the overall feel and positive handling in corners in particular that it's a no brainier for me. But I don't mind the maintenance of gluing and I have spare sets to use as well. They aren't for everyone, no doubt, and the clincher market will always dwarf the tubular market. Still, I prefer a the tubulars, regardless of conditions.
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

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Post Reply