Latex vs tubeless
Moderator: robbosmans
I'm using tubeless only on my rim brake bike, sworks turbo rapidair 2bliss and orange sealant. On my disc brake bikes, I use turbo cotton and latex because it's my favourite tire.
4 flats on TL in 2 months. Probably just bad luck and purely anecdotal, but that's how it is. 1 sealed while riding (realized only after the ride), 2 sealed with dynaplugs, 1 didn't seal. Tried to remove the tire and install a tube in glaring heat but impossible to push the sidewall into the rim bed. I admit I'm not very strong though. Gave up after 30 minutes... It was the first time where I couldn't get home human powered. With latex tubes, I had 1 flat this year.
I'm still using TL on that bike because latex and rim brakes are a no go for me. But a couple of guys I know reverted to tubes this or last year for different reasons. But the added gain in riding comfort on TL was not enough for them so they switched back to tubes.
4 flats on TL in 2 months. Probably just bad luck and purely anecdotal, but that's how it is. 1 sealed while riding (realized only after the ride), 2 sealed with dynaplugs, 1 didn't seal. Tried to remove the tire and install a tube in glaring heat but impossible to push the sidewall into the rim bed. I admit I'm not very strong though. Gave up after 30 minutes... It was the first time where I couldn't get home human powered. With latex tubes, I had 1 flat this year.
I'm still using TL on that bike because latex and rim brakes are a no go for me. But a couple of guys I know reverted to tubes this or last year for different reasons. But the added gain in riding comfort on TL was not enough for them so they switched back to tubes.
About price: for a gp5000 the TL version is about 5 euros more expensive, a latex tube is about 8 euros. So yes the TL version is cheaper, especially considering that on average you will likely need more than 1 tube per tire.MikeD wrote:Assuming that TL means tubeless, tubeless tires are more expensive than regular clinchers. No need to carry a spare tube? You should because tubeless isn't fool proof. Also, most tubeless tires require sealant to hold air.Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
About carying a spare tube, I don't I carry a TL repair kit, much smaller. If I get a flat that can't be repaired with that a spare tube wouldn't have helped either.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
- luckypuncheur
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:26 pm
- Location: Germany
The question is: Could the flats be avoided by using tubes? I'd say: 100% not. It's just bad luck and anecdotal. Roadside repairability is generally not worse with TL once the tires have stretched (but a lot messier, no doubt - would definitely prefer a clincher roadside repair).
From what I've seen in terms of TL punctures: If a Dynaplug can't fix it, inserting a tube might not help either.
FWIW, in 15 years, I had three occasions where I couldn't get home by myself:
- Slashed Continental Competition tubular 50 km after initial installation (glass)
- Slashed Continental GP 4000S sidewall (sharp rock)
- 2 tire blow offs with Challenge Stradia Bianca due to rim/tire incompatibility
I hardly ever puncture regardless of the system (I attribute that to being meticulous about my equipment in general and tires specifically). And I mainly ride Continental and Schwalbe tires inflated to the correct pressure before each ride (and replaced in time). My last roadside repair is ages ago (can't really remember).
From what I've seen in terms of TL punctures: If a Dynaplug can't fix it, inserting a tube might not help either.
FWIW, in 15 years, I had three occasions where I couldn't get home by myself:
- Slashed Continental Competition tubular 50 km after initial installation (glass)
- Slashed Continental GP 4000S sidewall (sharp rock)
- 2 tire blow offs with Challenge Stradia Bianca due to rim/tire incompatibility
I hardly ever puncture regardless of the system (I attribute that to being meticulous about my equipment in general and tires specifically). And I mainly ride Continental and Schwalbe tires inflated to the correct pressure before each ride (and replaced in time). My last roadside repair is ages ago (can't really remember).
Get a bicycle. You will certainly not regret it, if you live.
I think your lack of flats is entirely dependent on the surfaces/conditions you ride on/in! Tubeless can be excellent, tubes can be excellent - it all depends on what your priorities are........luckypuncheur wrote: ↑Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:37 amThe question is: Could the flats be avoided by using tubes? I'd say: 100% not. It's just bad luck and anecdotal. Roadside repairability is generally not worse with TL once the tires have stretched (but a lot messier, no doubt - would definitely prefer a clincher roadside repair).
From what I've seen in terms of TL punctures: If a Dynaplug can't fix it, inserting a tube might not help either.
FWIW, in 15 years, I had three occasions where I couldn't get home by myself:
- Slashed Continental Competition tubular 50 km after initial installation (glass)
- Slashed Continental GP 4000S sidewall (sharp rock)
- 2 tire blow offs with Challenge Stradia Bianca due to rim/tire incompatibility
I hardly ever puncture regardless of the system (I attribute that to being meticulous about my equipment in general and tires specifically). And I mainly ride Continental and Schwalbe tires inflated to the correct pressure before each ride (and replaced in time). My last roadside repair is ages ago (can't really remember).
You forgot the cost of sealant. It isn't cheap and needs to be renewed, unlike a tube.Cycomanic wrote:About price: for a gp5000 the TL version is about 5 euros more expensive, a latex tube is about 8 euros. So yes the TL version is cheaper, especially considering that on average you will likely need more than 1 tube per tire.MikeD wrote:Assuming that TL means tubeless, tubeless tires are more expensive than regular clinchers. No need to carry a spare tube? You should because tubeless isn't fool proof. Also, most tubeless tires require sealant to hold air.Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
About carying a spare tube, I don't I carry a TL repair kit, much smaller. If I get a flat that can't be repaired with that a spare tube wouldn't have helped either.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
The cost is almost negligible. 16oz of Stan’s is $17. You can fill a set of TL tires 4 times with one bottle. If you replace the sealant every 3 months then a bottle lasts you a year.MikeD wrote:You forgot the cost of sealant. It isn't cheap and needs to be renewed, unlike a tube.Cycomanic wrote:About price: for a gp5000 the TL version is about 5 euros more expensive, a latex tube is about 8 euros. So yes the TL version is cheaper, especially considering that on average you will likely need more than 1 tube per tire.MikeD wrote:Assuming that TL means tubeless, tubeless tires are more expensive than regular clinchers. No need to carry a spare tube? You should because tubeless isn't fool proof. Also, most tubeless tires require sealant to hold air.Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
About carying a spare tube, I don't I carry a TL repair kit, much smaller. If I get a flat that can't be repaired with that a spare tube wouldn't have helped either.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
As mentioned earlier latex tubes need to be replaced as well, but as to cost for sealant 500ml of Schwalbe doc blue is 13euro even if you fill with 60ml every time that's 4 euros a year (that's a high estimate) so you get to the price of the tube +tire combo assuming you don't have any punctures.MikeD wrote:You forgot the cost of sealant. It isn't cheap and needs to be renewed, unlike a tube.Cycomanic wrote:About price: for a gp5000 the TL version is about 5 euros more expensive, a latex tube is about 8 euros. So yes the TL version is cheaper, especially considering that on average you will likely need more than 1 tube per tire.MikeD wrote:Assuming that TL means tubeless, tubeless tires are more expensive than regular clinchers. No need to carry a spare tube? You should because tubeless isn't fool proof. Also, most tubeless tires require sealant to hold air.Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
About carying a spare tube, I don't I carry a TL repair kit, much smaller. If I get a flat that can't be repaired with that a spare tube wouldn't have helped either.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
That should have said I carry a TL repair kit.Cycomanic wrote:About price: for a gp5000 the TL version is about 5 euros more expensive, a latex tube is about 8 euros. So yes the TL version is cheaper, especially considering that on average you will likely need more than 1 tube per tire.MikeD wrote:Assuming that TL means tubeless, tubeless tires are more expensive than regular clinchers. No need to carry a spare tube? You should because tubeless isn't fool proof. Also, most tubeless tires require sealant to hold air.Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
About carying a spare tube, I don't I carry a TL repair kit, much smaller. If I get a flat that can't be repaired with that a spare tube wouldn't have helped either.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
The problem with anecdotes like "I rode 10k km without a flat" is that punctures are so much a matter of luck. I've ridden whole seasons without a flat and punctured 3 times on a single ride (I would ride TL just to avoid that time, 2.5h waiting on the side of the road for a pick up is very annoying), so your experience can vary a lot.
Regarding TL, the downsides are possibly sealant on your bike, but I take having to clean my bike after the ride over having to change a tube (which could mean the group/race rides on without you) any day. You need to top up with sealant and rotate wheels if they sit too long, isn't much of an issue for me. In winter I lift the wheels up and spin them once a week, topping up once a year is also a job of 10min max. If you ride latex tubes you should have a look at your tubes once a year as well to see that they haven't become brittle.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
What a troll comment… let me passive-aggressively say all other opinions expressed here are useless particularly all those that have been testing both systems .Cycomanic wrote:I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless, except for maybe tires you only ride once a year (and those you probably could just tun TL without sealant); TL is cheaper, demonstratably less flats, rolling resistance is the same, much safer behaviour when puncturing, no need to cary around spare tubes...
This thread shows that there is not a single valid educated opinion and what suits one doesn’t suits another. Furthermore it points the lack of standard despite Mavic having done all the engineering but brands giving zero *f##k*, not to work on QC or modify their production systems…
From someone that uses tubulars, tubes and tubeless (and moved two of the three tubeless wheels to tubetype).
How do you know how long I have been cycling? It's also unnecessary to become personal.Gazelleer wrote:It is interesting to see that people who just started cycling and only know tubeless tires, disc brakes and electronic shifting know exactly what’s best for everyone...
I also did not say that TL is best for everyone I simply said there is rational reason not to go for TL. I don't get why everyone is offended, many decision we make about our bikes are not rational. The big brands wouldn't be able to charge their prices otherwise. I mean almost every one here rides a bike that is thinking rationally about it is probably way more than what we should spend on it. That's fine we want to feel good about our bike. Similarly we avoid certain brands/compnonents we have had experiences with. Basing that on a one off experience also does not make much sense.
Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk
Quite wrong. We ran few stats among junior / espoir teams that do all their “long rides” together and 70% of the flat were on 35% of the riders. Some look more than others where they put their wheels, some cleaned their tires each time they felt they ran over something. At the end punctures rates varies even riding on the same roads.tjvirden wrote: I think your lack of flats is entirely dependent on the surfaces/conditions you ride on/in!
No, I think you misunderstand! Perhaps I could have given more explanation.....C36 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 04, 2021 6:04 pmQuite wrong. We ran few stats among junior / espoir teams that do all their “long rides” together and 70% of the flat were on 35% of the riders. Some look more than others where they put their wheels, some cleaned their tires each time they felt they ran over something. At the end punctures rates varies even riding on the same roads.tjvirden wrote: I think your lack of flats is entirely dependent on the surfaces/conditions you ride on/in!
In my experience, what you highlighted about "where they put their wheels" is number one above all else, once people are using "reasonable" setups of all types. And I completely agree with "At the end punctures rates varies even riding on the same roads."
BUT, I have ridden tens of thousands of Kms in France and Italy, with one flat. In South-East England, it's exceptional that I'll go more than 2000 Km before a flat. The pavement surfaces and conditions are completely different and the rate of flats is completely different too - they're linked.
Since punctures occur in one revolution of the wheel, wiping tires is a useless exercise and can be dangerous if you get your hand caught between the rear tire and the frame.C36 wrote:Quite wrong. We ran few stats among junior / espoir teams that do all their “long rides” together and 70% of the flat were on 35% of the riders. Some look more than others where they put their wheels, some cleaned their tires each time they felt they ran over something. At the end punctures rates varies even riding on the same roads.tjvirden wrote: I think your lack of flats is entirely dependent on the surfaces/conditions you ride on/in!
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
Not quite what you said to start your message.Cycomanic wrote: I also did not say that TL is best for everyone I simply said there is rational reason not to go for TL. I don't get why everyone is offended, many decision we make about our bikes are not rational.
Cycomanic wrote: I think this thread just shows what a conservative bunch is cyclist are. Rationally there is pretty much no reason to go with tubes over tubeless,