[NMCycling] Road tubeless

Sat Jun 28 13:34:26 MDT 2014

George,
  Thanks for the very informative explanation.  I had read something similar several years back but had forgotten the technical details until you described them.  I guess I'll just have to wait until my Mavics give out and by that time there should be more options for the road.  

John J.

M. John Jordan (mjohnjordan at yahoo.com)

On Saturday, June 28, 2014 10:40 AM, "Tapley, George L" <george.l.tapley at intel.com> wrote:

Tubeless first happened on mountain bikes, during the development of mountain tubeless Hutchinson and Mavic partnered in order to develop the tubeless system.  For road tubeless, it was Shimano who partnered with Hutchinson to develop that system.     The big difference between road and mountain as far how the system works is concerned is that the road tire needs to have  a bead that will not stretch.  Hutchinson on their road tubeless tires uses a carbon bead.  Probably this is what other manufacturers use. The reason for this is that a conventional folding bead uses Kevlar or aramid fibers and they stretch slightly, under the higher pressure of a road tire this will cause the bead to pop off the rim.   Mountain tire because of their lower pressures can use a standard bead for tubeless.   (Personally I have used both wire beaded tires and folding bead tires on mountain tubeless set ups.)   A tubeless specific tire whether road or mountain
 has a layer of rubber that is applied to the inside of the tire which makes it actually hold air instead of allowing to bleed out through the casing. ‘

The big difference is in wheels.   Many people think that it is the bead or the hook of the rim that allows the tire to go tubeless.  While there is some mechanical attachment that happens with the bead.  What makes the tire seat and hold air is the bed of the rim.  If you look at a tubeless mountain rim from Mavic vs. a none tubeless offering from them you will immediately see the difference in the distance from the rim bead/hook to the bed of the rim.    The shorter distance from the bead/hook is what seals the tire.   This is why with certain rims you have to use a Stan’s strip or a similar homemade strip to get a tire to seat for tubeless.  The same holds true for road bikes.  The depth of the rim is just too great to get the tire to seat.   While lots of people think that a Mavic Ksyrium wheel (the ones with no drilling on the bed of the rim) will work great as a tubeless rim, they are actually kind of hard to set up and depending on
 the tire need strips to work properly due to the depth of the rim bead/hook to the rim bed.  Other rims do not need this and will work with just two layers of tape.  Some rims need more tape and some will work with thicker tape. 
The Stan’s rim with their bead socket technology is nice because of all the rims that are advertised to accept tubeless, the Stan’s rims are designed to expose more of the tire sidewall with allows for a more comfortable ride in theory because you have more casing material to flex.  It also seems to allow the tires to corner better as well possibly due to more casing to flex on the tire as well.    To my knowledge the Stan’s rims are the only rims that are designed to allow the tire to expose more sidewall. 

Since this discussion started about road tires, when it comes to dimensions of tires most tires are approximately the same height as they are wide.  There are some differences and even some differences with manufacturers.  For instance Michelin tires seem to be larger than they are advertised.   A Michelin tire marked as a 23 will often measure closer to 25 and their 25’s are usually closer to a 28.  So, a 25mm wide tire will generally measure 25mm, like wise with a 28mm tire.    

Lots of modern frames are built with such tight clearances these days that you are very hard pressed to get even a 25mm tire to have clearance on the bike.  Forget it if you want to fit a 28mm tire, the clearance just does not exist.   Just my opinion but now that bikes are made with materials that are technically stiffer and stronger than steel it is hard for me to understand why clearances have to be so tight.   I feel a well-designed bike should be able to easily accept a wide tire, say up to a 28 or even 30mm tire, and have good handling characteristics on many different surfaces. 

From:Bike-racers [mailto:bike-racers-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of M. John Jordan via Bike-racers
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 2:17 PM
To: dave; bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com
Subject: Re: [NMCycling] Road tubeless

Interesting discussion!  I have been running tubeless on my MTB for about 8 years so I am very familiar with the various issues there, but I am wanting to try tubeless for road.  I am running Mavic SSL's for wheels and, while the rims are not drilled except for the air valve hole which would make them ideal for tubeless, I have heard that the Mavics don't have enough of a "keeper" lip on the inside of the braking surface to safely hold onto a tubeless road tire.  Does anyone out there have some insights to my particular situation?

Cheers,

John Jordan

M. John Jordan (mjohnjordan at yahoo.com)

On Friday, June 27, 2014 12:42 PM, dave via Bike-racers <bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

curious what rim you have those intensives on that it measured 23.8 mm?

mine are on stans alphas and they measure a 0.97-0.98 (~24.7mm) near as i can get with my calipers.

only complaint with the intensives is that they take too long to wear out.  i have a set of the sectors i have been waiting to put on after the intensives are done and i can't wear the dang things out.

bought a set of intensives in may 2011 and then another set in late 2012 when i thought the 1st set was about done.  but, no, they just keep going.  finally wore one out and got a bad enough glass cut that i couldn't repair the other one.

still waiting for the final two to quit.  that glass cut is the only flat i have had in 4+ years of riding this system.

fwiw i ride these tires lower than typically recommended (55 front, 70-75 rear) and find the ride to be pretty nice although i am sure it is not as nice as the 28mm sector and probably more sluggish than at higher pressure but the corner amazing.  hit a 1"
 or more thick steel plate when i was coming down rabbit ears pass at something close to 50mph.  didn't see it until the last minute, no time to unweight, slammed it with those tires and alpha rims and no pinch flat, no rim damage, no tire damage.  they paid
 themselves off in that instant.

On 6/27/2014 10:37 AM, Tapley, George L via Bike-racers wrote:
I also run the Hutchinson Sector 28’s.  They are my go to tire now.  Very light at 280 grams for the tire.  Not a harsh riding but very comfortable tire and they handle amazing.  Mounted on Easton rims the tires only measured to 26.5mm.  Mounted on a Stan’s Alpha rim they plumped up to 28.7mm, I thought they handled good on the skinnier Easton rim.  To my surprise they handled better and felt more comfortable on the Stan’s rim.  

The Hutchinson Intensive was a promising tire, at 25 mm.  Overall it was a very harsh riding tire than measured at 23.4mm.  They did last a long time though.  The Fusion tires are also very narrow and harsh riding.  The casings on the Intensives and the Fusions seems much stiffer than that on the Sector. 

Some friends have been riding the IRC tubeless tires in both the 23mm and 25mm widths and they have a very good ride.  The 25 was more like a 27mm tire.  

Sure do wish that there would be some offerings to come out of Michelin or Continental.  Just to see how they compare. 

George T.

From:Bike-racers [mailto:bike-racers-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Philip B Simpson via Bike-racers
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Patrick R. Holland
Cc: racers
Subject: Re: [NMCycling] Road tubeless

I really like the Hutchinson Intensive Tubeless, I think they are all 25mm. Fusion 3s are a little softer and racier.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 26, 2014, at 4:54 PM, "Patrick R. Holland via Bike-racers" <bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:
I have the Hutchinson Sector 28’s on my cross bike for road and gravel and running at 75 psi.  The are great for rough roads, gravel, etc., but if you are concerned about going fast on nice pavement, I would probably be looking at 23 or 25 instead.  The 28 is nice, but you give up a bit in aerodynamics and rotational weight is noticable.
> 
>Here is a good online review:  http://www.bikeradar.com/us/road/gear/category/components/tyres/road/product/review-hutchinson-sector-28-48424/
> 
>Patrick
> 
>From: Michael Smith via Bike-racers <bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com>
>Reply-To: Michael Smith <schmittypods at gmail.com>
>Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014 at 4:12 PM
>To: racers <bike-racers at swcp.com>
>Subject: [NMCycling] Road tubeless
> 
>Hi all, 
>I am sorry to bother the list and revisit this but can one of you road tubeless folks give me a brief  rundown of what works and what doesn't. I saw Hutchinson has a 28c tire which is intriguing. Again, I apologize and will pay attention the first time next time.
>Thanks,
>Schmitty 238-7893
_______________________________________________
>Bike-racers mailing list
>Bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com
>http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bike-racers

_______________________________________________
Bike-racers mailing list
Bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bike-racers

_______________________________________________
Bike-racers mailing list
Bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bike-racers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/bike-racers/attachments/20140628/e2acf611/attachment-0001.html>