Tubs vs clinchers: Clinchers are faster..

[durianrider]

GP 4000s faster than any tub out there based on this test by Tour mag in Germany...

http://www.conti-online.com/generat...al/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf

 

[Bustedknuckle]

GP 4000s faster than any tub out there based on this test by Tour mag in Germany...

http://www.conti-online.com/generat...al/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf

Not why you use a tubular tire, rolling resistance.

 

[purcell]

GP 4000s faster than any tub out there based on this test by Tour mag in Germany...

http://www.conti-online.com/generat...al/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf

So ..........?

 

[Wallace]

GP 4000s faster than any tub out there based on this test by Tour mag in Germany...

http://www.conti-online.com/generat...al/downloads/download/tourtest_gp4000s_en.pdf

For some reason I thought you were a bike racer. If so, why are you paying any attention to this nonsense?

In a less snarky tone: "rolling resistance" has been shown over and over to be a complete non-issue in competitive cycling--it's all about weight. Compare the weight of a sew-up on a carbon fiber rim to any clincher and you'll see why the pros only ride tubulars.

 

[Cancellator]

For some reason I thought you were a bike racer. If so, why are you paying any attention to this nonsense?

In a less snarky tone: "rolling resistance" has been shown over and over to be a complete non-issue in competitive cycling--it's all about weight. Compare the weight of a sew-up on a carbon fiber rim to any clincher and you'll see why the pros only ride tubulars.

Aren't tubulars supposed to handle better as well?

 

[Parera]

Pinch flats are sadface.

 

[BroDeal]

For some reason I thought you were a bike racer. If so, why are you paying any attention to this nonsense?

In a less snarky tone: "rolling resistance" has been shown over and over to be a complete non-issue in competitive cycling--it's all about weight. Compare the weight of a sew-up on a carbon fiber rim to any clincher and you'll see why the pros only ride tubulars.

The tests show a range of nearly 20 Watts at 35 km/hr between different tires. That is a rather huge amount.

Not even for racing, for just hanging with a group of bros, you will be doing a lot more work if you choose the wrong tire.

 

[ElChingon]

Pinch flats are sadface.

I hear they're great in super hot weather on asphalt

 

[simo1733]

I hear they're great in super hot weather on asphalt

Better than carbon clinchers at least.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

In a less snarky tone: "rolling resistance" has been shown over and over to be a complete non-issue in competitive cycling--it's all about weight. Compare the weight of a sew-up on a carbon fiber rim to any clincher and you'll see why the pros only ride tubulars.

What nonsense.

Having said that, tyre weight and rolling resistance are roughly correlated.

Performance of a tyre is a function of many things.

When speed is of primary concern (over say durability, handling, puncture resistance, comfort, cost, ease of use/replacement), then the tyre's rolling resistance (Crr) and its aerodynamics (CdA) are the primary considerations.

Crr is a function of many characteristics, such as tube type, threads per inch, weight, rubber compound, construction, shape, width/profile, and if it's a tubular, how it is glued and what it is glued with. Inflation pressure is an issue as well (and one that's often misunderstood).

Cda is dependent mostly on tyre's width but is also dependent on the rim you choose to ride it with.

Often there is a trade off between the two, and the best rolling tyres may not be the most aerodynamic, and vice versa.

Tyre weight is of little significance to performance (beyond how it relates to Crr). 2 orders of magnitude less important than aero and Crr.


Besides, Pros ride what they are given by the sponsors.

 

[Scorpius]

Didn't Tony Martin win the 2011 World TT on a pair of limited edition Continental Grand Prix RS clincher tyres.

http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/de/continental/fahrrad/allgemein/home/gp4000rs_de.html

 

[laziali]

Didn't Tony Martin win the 2011 World TT on a pair of limited edition Continental Grand Prix RS clincher tyres.

http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/de/continental/fahrrad/allgemein/home/gp4000rs_de.html

He sure did. When I pointed that out a number of months ago on another tubs v clinchers thread here the response from one poster was "yeah, one guy" you can't win against that - I still remember folks saying it's only one guy when Lemond used the clip on aero bars in the 89 Tour. Fignon sitting weeping begged to differ ...

 

[Bustedknuckle]

The tests show a range of nearly 20 Watts at 35 km/hr between different tires. That is a rather huge amount.

Not even for racing, for just hanging with a group of bros, you will be doing a lot more work if you choose the wrong tire.

20 watts really isn't a huge amount, and that's from the highest to the lowest. Average differences are teeny, lost in the noise. 'Lot more work'...only if all other things are equal, and they never are. By making blanket statements means one guy has some gadget, the other doesn't, the one with it, automatically wins..which is never the case.

AND if the 'bro stage' is a long one, the comfort of the guy with tubulars will make him fresher at the end of the 200KM ride..which means he will be using less 'wattage' than his rock hard, clincher 'bro'.

BTW-Lemond would have won even if he were on a Schwinn letour...Fignon had a HUGE saddle sore and could barely sit on his saddle..on that last stage in '89.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

He sure did. When I pointed that out a number of months ago on another tubs v clinchers thread here the response from one poster was "yeah, one guy" you can't win against that - I still remember folks saying it's only one guy when Lemond used the clip on aero bars in the 89 Tour. Fignon sitting weeping begged to differ ...

Fred Guesdon won 97 Roubaix on clinchers, didn't seem to make much of an impact on tire choice over the years. Hate to break it to you this way, but Martin would have won that TT on any tire that was available to him. Had it even been a tubeless set up guaranteed all the apologists from that camp would be on here talking about the death of tubulars. It ain't happening anytime soon.

The 89 Tdf aero bar analogy doesn't apply. Thanks to that we found difference between a rider in a TT position and one that isn't is a big, big deal. But with the tires we're comparing apples to apples. Tire performance from clincher to tubular to tubeless is NOT the determining factor for winning or losing races. FFWD back to 2011 Worlds TT. You think Wiggo and Sparticus were thinking "damn, if only were were riding clinchers!" HA-HA!!

You guys put too much faith in equipment. The manufacturers absolutely $$$adore$$$ people like this..

 

[Master50]

20 watts really isn't a huge amount, and that's from the highest to the lowest. Average differences are teeny, lost in the noise. 'Lot more work'...only if all other things are equal, and they never are. By making blanket statements means one guy has some gadget, the other doesn't, the one with it, automatically wins..which is never the case.

AND if the 'bro stage' is a long one, the comfort of the guy with tubulars will make him fresher at the end of the 200KM ride..which means he will be using less 'wattage' than his rock hard, clincher 'bro'.

BTW-Lemond would have won even if he were on a Schwinn letour...Fignon had a HUGE saddle sore and could barely sit on his saddle..on that last stage in '89.

You were doing so great discounting those clinchers until you made a broad sweeping statement about the conditions people use clinchers. What after 200 km the guy with the rock hard tubulars pumped up to 160 is beat by the guy on the 25 clinchers pumped up to 90. Not everyone pumps their tires up to rock hard. I tend to inflate my 23 to 100 ish and the 25 on the rear to 90 ish. Lots of chip seal roads here. The last time I regularly road tubular wheels they were heavy and the tires I could afford were say continental sprinters. My current favourites wheels are lighter than those old 32 spoke Campy C record hubs. Only carbon wheels are lighter than my Shamals and frankly these aluminum wheels are plenty great all rounders which are the same weight in tubular or clincher. Go tubeless and the tubular wheel is maybe 60 grams heavier. I look forward to tubeless when the time comes to replace a rim but I cannot see any real need to go back to tubular. I would rather save another grand and get a pair of mad fibre or lightweight clinchers. Then there is the actual need for all the performance gains. Like I am beating anyone? I have a lot more money now to support tubulars but why? So I can get a flat on a mountain decent? I am 57 years old with a 8000 Km a year habit over the last 27 years. I have never lost a tire after a flat but I have rolled a tubular in a crash. I can hardly imagine how badly I need that little bit of insurance and from what I have read the new tubeless tires stay on the rims a bit better than standard clinchers?
Almost all pro teams use clinchers including in the races but I agree tubulars are by far the most common. In terms of just living with them Clinchers are the leader and I expect that tubeless will get to the top.

 

[avanti]

...................Tyre weight is of little significance to performance (beyond how it relates to Crr). 2 orders of magnitude less important than aero and Crr.
............................

But minimizing wheel/tire weight is important for races with lots of climbing (where aero drag is less of a factor) or for races where there is lots of deceleration and acceleration.

 

[M Sport]

Tire performance from clincher to tubular to tubeless is NOT the determining factor for winning or losing races. FFWD back to 2011 Worlds TT. You think Wiggo and Sparticus were thinking "damn, if only were were riding clinchers!" HA-HA!! .

Whatever they were thinking I doubt they were laughing much after just getting hazed by a minute and a half.

FWIW I didn't need research to tell me my best all round tyre choice was a GP4000s, I worked that out over the last decade of natural selection.

 

[laziali]

...

You guys put too much faith in equipment. The manufacturers absolutely $$$adore$$$ people like this..

On the contrary, I pay a LOT less now to ride Schwalbe Ultremo clinchers than I used to pay for tubulars when I was racing. (To be honest, I can't tell the difference now, although I sure could back 20 years ago when I last raced on tubs) So I'm spending less, not more - manufacturer's dream you said?

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

On the contrary, I pay a LOT less now to ride Schwalbe Ultremo clinchers than I used to pay for tubulars when I was racing. (To be honest, I can't tell the difference now, although I sure could back 20 years ago when I last raced on tubs) So I'm spending less, not more - manufacturer's dream you said?

I do like Schwable CX tires, but I'm a Conti fan and they FINALLY released the CycloXKing in tubular form. All over that for next season! Clincher tech has gotten better, more on par with the feel of tubulars, but they will never be the same. It's always been the benchmark, the marketing d-bag that writes descriptions for clincher and tubeless systems is constantly referring to tubulars: "rides like a tubular", "supple like a tubular", "handles like a tubular", and so on. It's no wonder that the most raced tires are tubulars if all the other systems keep on with the comparisons. In the PT it's always been more than 90% tubular, only in the last 10-15 years has tubeless even scratched the surface, clinchers in the PT are much greater of anomaly. The mfg's adoration thing was pointed more at the OP than you. I know you laziali, we go way back, kind of.

Tubulars rule on race day, no if, ands, or buts.

 

[BroDeal]

20 watts really isn't a huge amount, and that's from the highest to the lowest. Average differences are teeny, lost in the noise. 'Lot more work'...only if all other things are equal, and they never are.

Twenty Watts is twenty Watts. It's huge for recreational cycling speeds. The article has many tires that have a ten Watt difference with the better ones. That is also large. As I said, choose the wrong tire and you will be hurting compared to someone who chooses one of the better tires.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Whatever they were thinking I doubt they were laughing much after just getting hazed by a minute and a half.

FWIW I didn't need research to tell me my best all round tyre choice was a GP4000s, I worked that out over the last decade of natural selection.

Yes, and I'm sure it was the tires, or Martin's doping program was timed just right. Between the two of us we're pushing 25 years of Oxy Conti use. Wanna push for citizen sponsorship?

 

[simo1733]

Yes, and I'm sure it was the tires, or Martin's doping program was timed just right. Between the two of us we're pushing 25 years of Oxy Conti use. Wanna push for citizen sponsorship?

I guess that the whole of OPQS must have switched to clinchers for all events by now.
Boonen will love them at Roubaix and Flanders.Just show him that article first,he won't mind dropping the tubs.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

You were doing so great discounting those clinchers until you made a broad sweeping statement about the conditions people use clinchers. What after 200 km the guy with the rock hard tubulars pumped up to 160 is beat by the guy on the 25 clinchers pumped up to 90. Not everyone pumps their tires up to rock hard. I tend to inflate my 23 to 100 ish and the 25 on the rear to 90 ish. Lots of chip seal roads here. The last time I regularly road tubular wheels they were heavy and the tires I could afford were say continental sprinters. My current favourites wheels are lighter than those old 32 spoke Campy C record hubs. Only carbon wheels are lighter than my Shamals and frankly these aluminum wheels are plenty great all rounders which are the same weight in tubular or clincher. Go tubeless and the tubular wheel is maybe 60 grams heavier. I look forward to tubeless when the time comes to replace a rim but I cannot see any real need to go back to tubular. I would rather save another grand and get a pair of mad fibre or lightweight clinchers. Then there is the actual need for all the performance gains. Like I am beating anyone? I have a lot more money now to support tubulars but why? So I can get a flat on a mountain decent? I am 57 years old with a 8000 Km a year habit over the last 27 years. I have never lost a tire after a flat but I have rolled a tubular in a crash. I can hardly imagine how badly I need that little bit of insurance and from what I have read the new tubeless tires stay on the rims a bit better than standard clinchers?
Almost all pro teams use clinchers including in the races but I agree tubulars are by far the most common. In terms of just living with them Clinchers are the leader and I expect that tubeless will get to the top.

Tubeless road has been around for over a decade..still only one real tire maker of these. Tubeless fror MTB makes all sorts of sense, for the road-nada.

Not sure what your point is. I use tubulars everyday, have very few flats and gluing the things on isn't a black art or something. For 'some' tubeless applications, it's far more messy and troublesome than a tubular.

If ya like clinchers, groovy, but the point of the OP was about RR, which is small, tire to tire and NOT the reason tubulars are still used by a BIG margin in the peloton.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Twenty Watts is twenty Watts. It's huge for recreational cycling speeds. The article has many tires that have a ten Watt difference with the better ones. That is also large. As I said, choose the wrong tire and you will be hurting compared to someone who chooses one of the better tires.

Baldedash, a tire doesn't make one hurt vs one who has a different tire. It's not that dramatic. Marketeers want you to think so but it just isn't. If it were nobody would ever buy a 'worse' tire. Nobody would buy a Zaffiro or a Conti UntraSport.

 

[Wallace]

Baldedash, a tire doesn't make one hurt vs one who has a different tire. It's not that dramatic. Marketeers want you to think so but it just isn't. If it were nobody would ever buy a 'worse' tire. Nobody would buy a Zaffiro or a Conti UntraSport.

I beg to differ. I think we've all had that experience where you're 60 miles out on a seriously fast, no mercy group ride and half way up some monster climb you start losing contact, and you know it has nothing to do with your inability to say no to a third slice of pumpkin pie or those rides you missed due to your late-night research into the most recent developments in small-batch bourbons--it's all because you chose the wrong tires. Damn rolling resistance!