Reynolds Strike tubeless vs Bora One 50 tub for competition?

[calleking]

Hi,

Sorry for another tubeless vs tubular vs clincher thread but I just can't make up my mind on this.

So I got my Aeroad CF SLX 8.0 Di2 a few weeks ago and it came with the new wider (outer/inner diameter: 25/17mm) Reynolds Strike SLG 62mm which work with tubeless tyres.
http://www.reynoldscycling.com/wheels/Strike-SLG_V2

I've been switching back and forth between running the new promising Schwalbe One Pro or selling the wheels and going for Bora One 50 tubs. People seem very happy with the Boras on these forums. I've read a lot of good things about tubeless and it seems like with the latest tyres the tech is catching up in terms of performance vs clinchers/latex tubes and tubulars. Weight wise they're as heavy as clinchers but have a decent rolling resistance and very good puncture resistance.

This year will be my first year competing and I just lack the experience to tell if it will be worth the extra hassle tubular gives to get that lower weight/grip/feeling tubulars give. I have no clue how to change tubs so I'd have to invest some time learning that.

Also, most road races around here are pretty flat with a few shorter climbs (2-3 minutes @ 7-8%). The saved weight won't be critical and that takes away some of the advantage the Bora One 50's had.
Another thing is that I'm not exactly racing at the highest level so the marginal gains I'm chasing by choosing wheels could just be a fraction of what other variables like sleep/nutrition/training/positioning during races could give. According to that power profile chart that is around on the internet I'm a mid Cat 2 rider if that says anything.

Reynolds Strike SLG 62mm are 1635g
Bora One 50 tubulars are 1265g

My thoughts are that I should stick to the Reynolds for now since this is my first year. I will be pretty lost during races anyway

Has anyone raced on tubeless wheels? What were your experiences? Worth giving it a go?

[phillipivan]

If you prefer the Bora's knock yourself out.

However if you want to improve race results the money would be better spent on a power meter and a coach.
If after a season or two you find some characteristic of the wheels problematic then look for a wheelset that addresses those weaknesses.

[kgt]

Bora.

[mimason]

First year racer? "Race what you are willing to replace" It all comes down to numbers and what you want to risk.

If you are already comparing yourself to CAT2's power output and you will be racing CAT5 then save the coin and ride off the front with a Huffy, otherwise, blow up the field with your tricked out Bora rig. Just watch out for the inexperienced, poor bike handling, kamakaze riders with no safety sense that are going to take you out.

[MikeyBE]

I'd say race first and see how you get on. You will probably be on a better bike then most of the field with your current set up! A power meter is a worthwhile investment.

Sent from my 6039Y using Tapatalk

[calleking]

Thanks for the input! I will most likely just go with the Reynolds and get a feeling of them this year.

I had the feeling that was the best option for me - unless someone had experienced something very negative about tubeless while racing on them.

[Miller]

Has anyone raced on tubeless wheels? What were your experiences? Worth giving it a go?

Not road raced, but I time-trialled on Hutchinson atom galactik tubeless all last season, front wheel all of the time, rear when I wasn't using a disc. Yes it's worth giving them a go. I think I was giving up very little by comparison to the best racing tubular and the reliability and durability was excellent. Got a lifetime best at 25 miles with the front tubeless wheel and rear disc with tubular.

Tubeless virtues should be even more apparent for bunch racing.

[joepac]

Any performance gains you get from switching to Boras will be marginal at best, and at 62mm the aero gains from the strikes may offset a decent chunk of the weight penalty. You are not going to be slowed down by the current wheels. A power meter would be a much better investment as well as structured training.

As far as running tubeless goes, I have never done it, but the roadies I know who have have switched back to regular clinchers. If you do happen to flat the mess the sealant makes and problems with setting the bead are more of a hassle than they are worth. This was a couple of years ago, so maybe the new crop of TLR tires would minimize some of those problems... I have toyed with the idea of running the Pro Ones, but the regular Schwalbe One V-Guard clincher has been great to me, with great cut and puncture resistance and excellent rolling resistance. For me, the small performance gain (a watt or two) is not going to outweigh the hassles of tubeless.

[phillipivan]

Has anyone raced on tubeless wheels? What were your experiences? Worth giving it a go?

Yeah mate. I raced road last year on the One's tubeless, and have moved onto the Pro Ones through the summer crit season when the Ones were done. I've won twice and placed twice on that setup. The tires aren't what held me back from winning more, fitness and race smarts would be at the top of that list, probably in the opposite order.

However, more to the point, whilst the Veloflex & Vittoria I have run in the past may have felt a bit nicer, I am every bit as confident through the corners and in the wet (or more so) in the Ones / Pro Ones. The puncture resistance is quite good, the old rear I wore down to threads without ever noticing a puncture. I have had two puncture experiences where I have resorted to applying a patch to the inside of the tyre (as the puncture wouldn't reliably seal otherwise), this is not a side of the road job however.

Pi.

[MikeyBE]

I have to say that the wet grip on my One clinchers is pretty awesome. Hard to tell the difference between them and vittoria pave tubulars!

Sent from my 6039Y using Tapatalk

[ohhyeok90]

for competition, tubular.

no doubt. end of discussion.

[Geoff]

Aside from all of the ride characteristics, rolling resistance, lighter system weight, etc. that tubulars have going for them, one of the best reasons to ride tubulars is that they don't flat as much. The reason that is true is that it is very difficult to get a pinch-flat as compared to a clincher wheelset.

In a road race, the problem is that you are invariably spend a fair amount of time riding in a pack behind other guys. Accordingly, you often get no warning of a pothole or other road hazard before you are into it. A tubular will give you a fighting chance to keep racing, whereas a clincher is dramatically more likely to flat.

While the tubeless system offers a similar benefit vis-à-vis its resistance to pinch-flatting, it does not have the balance of the tubular advantage ((the aforementioned rolling resistance, lighter system weight, etc.) Another huge benefit of the tubular system over the tubeless system is the availability of a tremendous range of race-proven tire options for a wide range of conditions. While conceptually interesting, the tubeless universe of tires is still quite small. Last, there is the issue of safety. That is one area that tubulars have a big advantage over the competing systems.

Because of the unique method of mechanical attachment to the rim, in the event that a tubular punctures, there is still a very good chance for the rider to ride-on to the finish, a wheel-change opportunity or at least a safe stop because (if properly adhered) the tire is unlikely to dismount from the rim.

[joepac]

Aside from all of the ride characteristics, rolling resistance, lighter system weight, etc. that tubulars have going for them, one of the best reasons to ride tubulars is that they don't flat as much. The reason that is true is that it is very difficult to get a pinch-flat as compared to a clincher wheelset.

In a road race, the problem is that you are invariably spend a fair amount of time riding in a pack behind other guys. Accordingly, you often get no warning of a pothole or other road hazard before you are into it. A tubular will give you a fighting chance to keep racing, whereas a clincher is dramatically more likely to flat.

While the tubeless system offers a similar benefit vis-à-vis its resistance to pinch-flatting, it does not have the balance of the tubular advantage ((the aforementioned rolling resistance, lighter system weight, etc.) Another huge benefit of the tubular system over the tubeless system is the availability of a tremendous range of race-proven tire options for a wide range of conditions. While conceptually interesting, the tubeless universe of tires is still quite small. Last, there is the issue of safety. That is one area that tubulars have a big advantage over the competing systems.

Because of the unique method of mechanical attachment to the rim, in the event that a tubular punctures, there is still a very good chance for the rider to ride-on to the finish, a wheel-change opportunity or at least a safe stop because (if properly adhered) the tire is unlikely to dismount from the rim.

Clinchers and tubeless tires like the turbo cottons and Pro Ones beat pretty much all competition including tubulars... In general high quality clinchers at least tie tubulars in rolling resistance. And the best tubular rolling resistance is assuming you go through the painstaking process of properly gluing a tubular using multiple coats of glue and chipping off all the old glue.

And sooner or later you will get a flat, which can be changed in 5 minutes or less with clinchers.

[tommasini]

.............and the original question was which of these for racing by the OP. Any flat without a quick wheel change ends the race. I can second the notion about hidden potholes. In a group ride there's a friendly call out.......in a race - good luck on getting a warning. Then if a flat occurs it's race over unless a complete wheel can be gotten from a follow car (road race) or free lap in the crit.........and if it is a RR then good luck still on catching as there is generally no long string of follow vehicles to work back through.

[joepac]

I train on my carbon wheels during the spring/summer race season because it is a pain to switch pads and wheels all the time, so ease of fixing a flat in a time period of minutes instead of days makes sense for me. My point was that clincher tires and wheels have caught up to or outperform tubs in every field but weight; the ease of use, *typically* better rolling resistance, and better aerodynamic interface of clinchers minimize that disadvantage.

You could say the benefits of clinchers outweigh those of tubs