# Anybody still using TUBES?



## dualsport650 (Nov 4, 2004)

Is anybody here still using TUBES and NOT convinced that Tubeless is the way to go?

I'm thinking of buying myself a new pair of wheels, but I'm old-school and just don't know if I want to deal with "Tire Sealant" and "Burping Tires" etc. LOL!

Tubes still work for me during my recreational XC MTB riding and around town rides.

Here's my Rim/Tire/Tube set-up for my 200 pounds of mass. 
Works great. No complaints. :thumbsup:

* Rims: 26" Mavic 717 Disc 425 gr
* Tires: 26" Continental Race King Supersonic 480 gr
* Tubes: 26" Continental 125 gr
PSI 35-40 (I'm out of shape and hard tires ROLL FAST!)
(I don't know if going much lighter than this is real safe for someone who's 200 lbs.)

Somebody talk me into going "Tubeless." (Or... NOT!) :thumbsup:


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I use Eclipse tubes, only 54gms. And fairly resistant to pointy things. They cost about $1.15/gm


----------



## dualsport650 (Nov 4, 2004)

WORD BRO. That's $60 for a tube.

I'm weight-conscious, but not 
THAT much of a Weight-Weenie.

;-)


----------



## Flamingtaco (Mar 12, 2012)

Don't let the hype fool you. Whether it be the trouble of dealing with sweaty tires, nervousness over new tech, or simply a lack of funds to convert, most of us are still running tubes. From a performance perspective, tubeless can offer ride enhancements, but when considering other factors, it is not yet a mature tech. Most roadies run clincher rims over tubular for the same reasons, many decades after tubular becamse mainstream.


----------



## jekylljim (Nov 10, 2014)

I'm still running tubes but I am looking at tubeless. Im put off by how many say it can be a PITA to set up.
Tubes are fine for me, just have to run slightly higher pressures than I'd like.

As for weight, I do not care at all. Currently running a DH tyre for Enduro and havent noticed any extra exertion required going up hills. Saving a few grams here and there is all a placebo in my opinon.


----------



## lRaphl (May 26, 2007)

I tried tubeless 3 years ago and I was always burping at random time into my rides. Got tired of that since I was always fearing of taking a walk. On top of that, I had to run higher pressures than with tubes in my tires or else the burping was even worst. I'm now using Maxxis flyweight tubes so I'm not getting that huge of a penalty in weight.


----------



## moefosho (Apr 30, 2013)

I have ran UST, tubeless, and tubes and I can say that I have had far more issues with tubes than tubeless.
This is 2 years in a row without leaks, burps, or pinch flats at 20psi. Set them up with a floor pump. Last year was UST tires and wheels. This year is TLR wheels and tires. 

Better grip, no maintenance, no pinch flats.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

I may run TR/TL (wateva fits best) up front as I'm pretty sold on the HD 2.35 ^^ still looking at sorting out allround RT...


----------



## MichaelV8V (Aug 16, 2014)

Yes, I'm still using tubes. For the riding I do, tubeless just seems like a load of faffing round for no performance gains, so I use tubes, take a spare just in case, and everything works just fine


----------



## ApolloMike (Nov 5, 2014)

My wife still has tubes. I am tubeless. Running in the low to mid 20s, depending on conditions.

I have a (large) friend who tried tubeless. Front was fine. Rear we put a tube in. He kept burping the rear, and it became an issue. Maybe if he had a little more finesse......


----------



## jeffrey j (Jul 10, 2010)

Tubeless for 3+ years now and NO regrets. I only weigh 160lbs, but run b/t 20-24lbs in f/r respectively. To me, it's not as much about saving a little weight, it's about how the tires feel on the ground run tubeless. To me, the tires just seem to wrap around the trail better without tubes.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

Tubeless is tried and true at this point..just need to make sure you are using TLR rims and tires and you will have zero issues. Burping is an issue related to conversions of non-TLR combos and even then...when I had conversions I never burped a tire.


----------



## huckxc (May 11, 2012)

If they made water flavored koolaid, people would buy it!


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

Kool-aid? This is mature tech that has great advantages..no kool-aid necessary.


----------



## dualsport650 (Nov 4, 2004)

I run my TUBES at almost 40 PSI!

You guys are running TUBELESS at PSI's in the 20's.

Doesn't that SLOW you down, SOAK UP your ENERGY 
and make you PEDAL HARDER?

How does that work Bros? :skep:


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I run tubes in Race King 2.2's at 28PSI rear and 27PSI front on 19mm wide rims.


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

I have run Trek TLR system, as well as Stans Crest rims with TLR tires. Zero issues. Based on my limited experience, I don't see why anyone would screw with tubes on a mountain bike.

I have burped air a few times, only once enough so that I couldn't ride it anymore. And that was my fault for letting them get too low. Had I been using a tube at that low a pressure the tube would have been shredded.

The main reason I like tubeless is reliability. Never a problem with punctures. I don't carry anything to fix flats, and have never had a flat (other than the burping which I mentioned). The ability to run lower pressure is great from a comfort and handling standpoint. The weight savings is a bonus.

The weakest part of TLR systems is the need to refresh the goop every so often if you want to maintain the puncture sealing ability. But that is easier than fixing flats, and can be done in the shop at your convenience instead of along the trail. And the goo is getting better. I think at some point it will be developed to the point where it will last the life of the tread.

You don't HAVE to run lower pressure. AFAIK all TLR systems will permit at least 40 PSI, and most will go much higher. My I pumped my Bontys up to 60 PSI once for the heck of it. However, unless you are running on a smooth surface, a softer tire will actually roll more easily. See
http://www.mtbonline.co.za/downloads/Rolling_Resistance_Eng_illustrated.pdf

Even the road guys are starting to run less pressure. Maybe 95 PSI instead of 120, but still less. It gives them more control and a more comfort with no increase in rolling resistance.

One reason that tubeless is slow to catch on for road is that it is more difficult to keep the tire seated with the pressure those guys run.


----------



## Bent Wheel (Oct 6, 2007)

Still running tubes. Had the chance to go tubeless when I recently built my new bike, but decided against it. Tubes......always have probably always will.


----------



## iperov (Sep 9, 2012)

99% riders of this planet still using tubes.


----------



## kjlued (Jun 23, 2011)

dualsport650 said:


> Is anybody here still using TUBES and NOT convinced that Tubeless is the way to go?
> 
> I'm thinking of buying myself a new pair of wheels, but I'm old-school and just don't know if I want to deal with "Tire Sealant" and "Burping Tires" etc. LOL!
> 
> ...


I have tubeless and tube bikes.

So I will simplify it for you.

If weight savings is your goal then no it is not worth it. 
There may or may not be some savings but it is dependent on so many factors that there is no real answer. Either way, if you save anything it will be minimal.

If you want to run lower pressure than yes, it is worth it. 
I am as low as 20 pounds with no burping or other issues.
With tubes, less than 28 pounds usually will result in pinch flats. 
(My terrain is extreme, rocky and rooty. Pisgah is my back yard.)

Even if running the same pressure, tubeless has an advantage of letting the tire conform better to the terrain.

For the type of riding you describe "recreational XC MTB riding and around town rides" I personally would not go tubeless.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

Weight. If you are running TLR rims and tires and have standard 29er tubes, these can weigh ~200g a piece. Stan's weighs 50g/scoop. So with 2 scoops, you can loose up to 100g/wheel. It saves weight. If you are converting with Stan's rim strips, the weight savings may be negligible as the strip w/valve stem + sealant will weigh about what a tube does. You can run v. light tubes that will get you the same weight savings mentioned above but you loose flat resistance.

PSI. On the road, higher pressures will typically yield lower rolling resistance. Off-road, higher pressures will cause you to bounce/deflect off of all the bits on the trail rather than smoothly roll over them and this is the reasoning behind running lower pressures. Lower pressures are more comfortable and provide better traction. I run ~22psi on my 29er HT with ~2.0 tires and weigh ~160lbs. Much more comfortable and I am just as fast as the old-school way of running 30+ psi. Obviously, your weight will factor into this. Interestingly enough, road pressure thinking has also changed recently and I run less psi (80-90) on the road as well compared to what I used to (110+) due to this same issue..my times are no different and I am more comfortable and don't get pinch flats.

Flats. Tubeless is more flat resistant period. This isn't a point to argue. Its the primary reason for running tubeless.

Hassle. Tubeless is more hassle. This isn't a point to argue. You get good at it and a compressor helps but its still more messy/slower to change out tires etc. than tubes. Worth the extra hassle to me.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

iperov said:


> 99% riders of this planet still using tubes.


True, but on Saturn tubeless has the edge.


----------



## Ray Dockrey (Feb 23, 2006)

I just did my first tubeless conversion and it was way easier then I thought it would be. I found a 2 ounce measuring cup at Walmart with a long pour spout that is perfect for pouring the sealant into the tire. 

It did take me several tries to get the bead to set using my compressor but once I figured out what I was doing wrong it was very easy.


----------



## ApolloMike (Nov 5, 2014)

After reading (and responding) to this thread yesterday, I decided it was about time to add some stans to my setup. 50ml per tire, aired up to 45psi, and about a mile ride around the neighborhood to spin it around, and let sit until morning. I got up this morning, lowered air back down to 24 and 26, and put the bikes in te back of the truck. Heading to the trails for a few hours now.


----------



## Tim2103 (Mar 8, 2012)

iperov said:


> 99% riders of this planet still using tubes.


I highly doubt that.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Tim2103 said:


> I highly doubt that.


I dunno, there's about 2 billion Asians who commute around their cities on bikes. I bet those aren't tubeless. Us mountain bikers are a drop in the bucket.

I kid.

I would hazard a guess that within the recreational mtn biker population, the percentage of tubeless is not far from reaching majority. A lot of bikes come that way now, and ghetto has such a proven track record that more and more are trying it out.

I can only speak about the group that I ride with, and it may be skewed by geography (desert, cactus), but of the dozen or so riders that I know, only ONE still runs tubes, and IIRC, isn't by choice, I think he tried it and the tire/rim combo just didn't work well.

The amount of flack that ghetto tubeless gets is baffling to me. I've done it to three sets of wheels now, not one of them was meant to be tubeless, I've never had a single issue. period. I don't baby my wheels either. I run low pressure and often fail to choose good lines.
One of the sets, a pair of SUN rims, actually pre-dates tubeless capabilities, they're that old.. All it took was some gorilla tape and Stan's, they sealed up fine.


----------



## onlycrimson (Nov 11, 2008)

I've been running tubeless on one of my bikes for 5 years and it's been awesome. Highly recommend for piece of mind. No flats in that time. My tubed bike is fine too but I need to run my rear tire in the mid 30's to avoid a snake bite.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

If we're talking 'all' mountain bikers... i.e. anyone that takes their companion off the asphalt... w/o solid data, I'd apply the 80/20 principal (80% do while 20% don't).

I would also hypothersize, that on the types of trails we (serious mtb-ers) frequent... the numbers may be reversed.

Anecdotally - there are 5 mountain bikes in my household (i.e. bikes that have been ridden off of the asphalt), and none of them are setup tubeless. 

Also, camping on the weekend w/ some family friends. There were all up 17 bikes for riding on the local trails - none of them were setup tubeless. 

Opinions are like A-holes... everybody has one & they're usually full of...??


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

I agree that more folk use tubes and tubeless is mainly within the enthusiast group.


----------



## slcpunk (Feb 4, 2004)

I think TiGeo nailed it. it can be a slight hassle, especially until you find your perfect combo of rim and tire. but the flat avoidance for tubeless is a huge benifit. Unless you are light and never pinch flat or live somewhere where you never get thorns, tubelss can save you from a bunch of flats. Just don't skimp on the tire - you want somethint that has sidewalls that can take some abuse. ( at least in the us west where things on/off/around the trail tend to be sharp and pointy ) My only frustrations were a direct result of using crappy tires.

nothing like riding through a bunch of goat heads with tubeless, knowing you would have been screwed otherwise!


----------



## dualsport650 (Nov 4, 2004)

I live in Bend, Oregon which has HARD-PACK
trails with a light sprinkling of SAND on top.

I run tubes and don't get flats EVER.
(Well, it very RARELY happens.)



















Those 2 pics are a LOW-Altitude trail.

The GNAR is higher up in the mountains.
But even then we don't have thorns, just ROCK GARDENS.


----------



## iperov (Sep 9, 2012)

btw Aircomp latex never flat since bought one year ago.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

As the tyre technology gets more puncture resistant/lighter, why go tubeless?

-------------------------------------
Opinions are like A-holes... everybody 
has one & they're usually full of...??


----------



## dualsport650 (Nov 4, 2004)

kjlued said:


> I have tubeless and tube bikes.
> 
> So I will simplify it for you.
> 
> ...


THANK YOU!!!

Great reply.

Yeah, I don't think I need TUBELESS.

I think I'll stick with the TUBES.

Thanks Bro.


----------



## ApolloMike (Nov 5, 2014)

targnik said:


> As the tyre technology gets more puncture resistant/lighter, why go tubeless?
> 
> -------------------------------------
> Opinions are like A-holes... everybody
> has one & they're usually full of...??


Lower pressure for more grip/contact patch is why I did it. I no longer spin out on short steep ups.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

I run tubeless on my 29er since I ride it the more. 

I have a 26 FS that I still use tubes on. I'll use it maybe once or twice a month during the spring and summer months for shuttle and ski resort riding. Not really a light bike at 27lbs.

My road bike runs tubulars with some Stan's in it.


----------



## kjlued (Jun 23, 2011)

Tim2103 said:


> I highly doubt that.


I wouldn't doubt it at all. In fact, I would guess it to either be conservative or that he didn't want to add decimals.

Most riders are on bikes under $500 and could care less about tubeless.


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

Dualsport650: So hey, if what you are happy with what you have, ride and enjoy. Thanks for the photos. It's interesting to see all the different terrain that we ride on in this great country of ours. Nothing at all like around here on Georgia.

We have tons of greenbriers. You can try to avoid them, but you are going to get some punctures.



kjlued said:


> If weight savings is your goal then no it is not worth it. There may or may not be some savings but it is dependent on so many factors that there is no real answer. Either way, if you save anything it will be minimal.


Don't minimize the potential weight savings. It would be hard to not save any weight, and depending on what you are replacing, the savings can be significant. The 29x2.25 tubes that came on my bike weigh 180 grams each. The tubeless stem weighs < 10 grams. The Bontrager rim strip is rather heavy -- 30 grams heavier than the factory strip it replaces. Still, that leaves 140g or 5 ounces for goop per wheel to break even. No one runs that much.

A more typical setup would be Stan's tape, which would probably be on par with a stock rim strip, and 3 oz of goo per wheel. That saves 80 grams or nearly 3 oz per wheel. I run 2 oz of goo BTW. Not like getting a new high-end wheelset by any means, but insignificant? No. It is 6 oz saved where it matters most.

Ok, you can get lighter tubes, and maybe TLR tires are heavier, I don't know. My 29" Race Kings, with Black Chili Pepper, ProTection and all that are around 620 grams. But that's how much I saved using the tires that came on my bike -- pretty typical I think. Even with 120g tubes, you could save 100 grams total with 2 oz goo per tire.

If you already have TLR rims and tires, the cost would < $50 to get the tape, valve stems, and some goo, which isn't a lot to save 6 or even 3 oz. But since people usually go tubeless for a better ride or fewer flats, you are really getting 6 oz or whatever for free. Not bad.


----------



## raganwald (Mar 1, 2011)

Well, it seems to be that if you pose a question like this:



> I'm happy doing _____, it seems to me that changing would mean Bad Things 1, 2, and 3, so it's not worth it. But go ahead, try to change my mind!


You are almost never going to hear something that changes your mind.

It also seems like an odd question to ask in the Weight Weenie's forum. I'd pose it over in Wheels & Tires to get a more balanced set of answers. Here's the focus ought to be on saving weight. If it's a bit more more (or a lot more!) money, so what? Likewise, if you asked that question in the XC racing forum, people are going to go with whatever is faster, and if it's more money or a bit more of a hassle to set up, so what?

All that being said... I have run tubeless for a few years now, and the only trouble I had with burping was a 2.4" tire on a Stan's conversion with rims that weren't tubeless-ready. I'm 200-ish pounds and have had zero burping trouble with a 2.25" tire on a converted rim or with a 2.25" tire on a Stan's rim that was made for tubeless.

I ride with a tube in my pocket, I did cut a tire badly once, I put the tube in and that got me back to the trailhead.

As a weight weenie, the weight savings are significant enough to put up with cleaning the gunk out once a season and re-seating the tires. Other than that, it's been wonderful. So I would say, if your rims are tubeless-ready, what are you waiting for? If they aren't tubeless-ready, maybe you should look at taking weight ff the bike elsewhere first Like a lighter set of wheels that happen to be tubeless-ready -)

And oh yes, if you do ask in the Wheels & Tires forum, I'll go on a good long while about the improved traction. The difference with tubeless is incredible, it makes the bike fun to ride.


----------



## FlaMtnBkr (Apr 23, 2008)

Don't low pressures feel like riding on a flat tire? It seems like a mushy tire would slow you down and rob energy?

I'm not new to biking but haven't tried tubeless because of a long break due to health issues. I used to ride with at least 50 PSI and would race with 60. It was fast and helped stop pinch flats when going all out and taking the fastest line. Traction wasn't a big issue because while they would slide in corners it was controlled and predictable. I would just about always drop people in tight technical trails.

I just got a new bike and it is TLR so I will try it at some point but curious what others think. I'm also concerned about the ammonia in tire sealant attacking aluminum rims. Has anyone seen this or corrosion in rims after long term use? Or read about it being an actual problem and not just speculating that it can happen?

Also curious about easy ways to lighten up a new Scott Spark 710 that is full XT but I guess that is for another thread.

Thanks!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Yes, lower pressures offer more rolling resistance, and you'll notice it if riding on pavement. However I don't notice that as much on the tails, although technically some energy is still lost.

However the traction is improved, and pinch flats simply no longer apply.


----------



## Crossmaxx (Dec 2, 2008)

Not true. Lower pressures allow the sidewalls of the tire to absorb a lot of trail chatter that would otherwise slow you down. Low pressures (within reasonable limits) and large tire volumes are generally faster than high pressure setups.


----------



## _Neo (Sep 19, 2014)

I was a holdout on the tubeless bandwagon for a long time. I rarely got pinch flats, and figured it was a lot of work for a little benefit. I switched to ghetto tubeless (gorilla tape, Stans) and I am a convert. I will not ever use tubes again. I didn't switch to tubeless to run crazy low pressure, but as others have said, the traction, grip, and "feel" of the trail is increased. It makes riding, cornering, accelerating more fun/better. Even if you only save a few ounces it is still worth it (although I saved half a pound due to already needing flat attack in my tubes, due to ever present thorns). You will notice the bike will feel more agile and quicker because of entropy. The tube is rigid and takes more energy to accel/decel than an equal weight of sealant (Stan's, etc.) Because the sealant is fluid and can sit near the bottom of the tire. All I can say is try it, it's awesome.


----------



## shupack (Nov 28, 2012)

phlegm said:


> Yes, lower pressures offer more rolling resistance,


not actually true:

http://www.mtbonline.co.za/downloads/Rolling_Resistance_Eng_illustrated.pdf

I recall reading somewhere (can't find it now in a quick search...) that roadie's are running slightly wider tires so they can run lower pressures, for the reasons illustrated in that study.

I went tubeless about 18 months ago, havn't looked back. With good tires/rims the initial setup is easy. I'm using Stans Arch rims and Specialized Control Front (2bliss ready) and Maxis Ardent Rear. The spec tire popped right on, no trouble. Ardent needed to be done with a tube to seat one side, then the other side went on easy.

First time I set up tubeless was a pain because I was using 6 month old Nevegals, the sidewalls wouldn't hold enough air to seat the bead, even with a compressor and doing one side at a time. Fought with one of those for an hour before I gave up and bought new tires.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^True. 25c tires are common on road bikes now and I am running lower pressures to get a more comfy ride.


----------



## ltspd1 (Nov 25, 2007)

I think it depends on your situation. If you live in an area with goatheads or the like, or if you're just prone to getting flats, you really should give tubeless a shot. If you rarely flat, then maybe there's no reason to give up tubes. I live in an area with lots of goatheads, and it wasn't unusual to have two or three flats a month. Got sick of fixing them, so, despite the fact I'm a Luddite at heart and not mechanically inclined, I got some Stans Crests and set them up tubeless...easy as pie...just followed the procedures on the Stans' website. That was >2000 miles ago and I haven't had a flat since. So for me it really paid off.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

shupack said:


> not actually true:
> 
> http://www.mtbonline.co.za/downloads/Rolling_Resistance_Eng_illustrated.pdf
> 
> ...


Very interesting article - thanks for sharing - although I am still at least partially correct/partially sane. From page 2 in the .pdf posted:

_"Way off! As soon as you leave the road, reducing tyre pressures does not just leave rolling resistance more or less unaffected, as can be heard here and there, but actually reduces rolling resistance!"_

So, my pavement segment comment should still apply.

But, wow, I always assumed a bit of a penalty for the lower pressures in the woods. Maybe this explains why I've never noticed it.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

iperov said:


> 99% riders of this planet still using tubes.


I don't know any mountain bikers that run tubes.

I've been running tubeless for almost 4 years and have not had one burp or flat using many different combinations of ghetto with non-TLR tires and rims to UST rims with UST tires.

The people who say tubeless is a hassle are the ones who haven't tried it. Adding sealant every once in a while is a five minute job.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^truth.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> I don't know any mountain bikers that run tubes.
> 
> I've been running tubeless for almost 4 years and have not had one burp or flat using many different combinations of ghetto with non-TLR tires and rims to UST rims with UST tires.
> 
> The people who say tubeless is a hassle are the ones who haven't tried it. Adding sealant every once in a while is a five minute job.


I've run tubeless for years, but let's be realistic: some tire and rim combos are a hassle. True UST is a breeze, but thin sidewall tires like the ones I typically run often need to have a tube put in them first.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

You're right, not all combos work well or are a cinch to set up. But once set up it's piece of cake. I don't see setting up tubeless or maintaining tubeless any more bothersome than bleeding brakes or other routine maintenance. It's just a part of riding.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> You're right, not all combos work well or are a cinch to set up. But once set up it's piece of cake. I don't see setting up tubeless or maintaining tubeless any more bothersome than bleeding brakes or other routine maintenance. It's just a part of riding.


Indeed, fair point.


----------



## upstateSC-rider (Dec 25, 2003)

I use tubes on the mtn bike and tubeless on the road because most of my miles are on the road and I always hated dealing with dried sealant.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> You're right, not all combos work well or are a cinch to set up. But once set up it's piece of cake. I don't see setting up tubeless or maintaining tubeless any more bothersome than bleeding brakes or other routine maintenance. It's just a part of riding.


Well said and v. true.


----------



## willworkforbeer (Jan 14, 2007)

Yep, still tubed up.
I like the idea of tubeless, and the fact that it may save a little weight and prevent flats, but I generally run about 28 psi on the trails (I tried lower pressures and did not like the squirmy feel the tires had), so the enticement of running lower pressures does not apply to me. I ride off the seat most of the time, and keep a pretty close eye on junk in the trail, so the possibility of a pinch flat is lessened.
Also of note, the trails in our area are for the most part free of thorns and other assorted puncture sources.
The other thing I did not like was the need to replenish the sealer periodically; I don't want to go to the garage, grab the bike for a ride, and find that it has dried up and I have 2 leakers.
Not to say I won't try it in the future, but at this point I am not convinced it will make my life easier.


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

FlaMtnBkr said:


> Don't low pressures feel like riding on a flat tire? It seems like a mushy tire would slow you down and rob energy?


They do, if you go too low. I probably run more pressure than most tubeless riders -- 22 front & 27 back, sometimes a little lower depending on the trail. I like a good solid on-rails feel in corners. However, I feel that lower pressures actually roll easier over rough ground & roots.



> I used to ride with at least 50 PSI and would race with 60.


WAY too high, even for tubes IMO. Go as low as you think you can without pinch-flatting. I only rode with tubes for a month, but as I recall I was at 35 rear/30 front. 2.25" 29ers, I weigh 175 lbs. I think you will agree that it handles better and actually rolls easier.



> I'm also concerned about the ammonia in tire sealant attacking aluminum rims. Has anyone seen this or corrosion in rims after long term use? Or read about it being an actual problem and not just speculating that it can happen?


I haven't heard of anyone actually having a problem. As long as the rim is painted, I think you'd be OK.

I found this:
Ammonia-free tubeless sealant?

Stans sells both aluminum rims and sealant with ammonia in it, and they do seem to know their stuff.

Not all sealants have ammonia. Some don't have any latex, and therefore don't need ammonia.

Here's a rundown on my experience with various sealants FYI.

*Stans, the first I tried, seals great, but makes a mess that is hard to clean as the latex solidifies, tends to dry out quickly, and is on the expensive side.

*Bontrager Superjuice: Doesn't leave a mess that can't be easily washed away with water, and can be refreshed as it dries out by adding water. No latex. Rather expensive. I think you can still get superjuice, but Trek is pushing a newer latex-based sealant.

*Slime for tires, the regular old stuff you get at anywhere. Fair sealing, no mess that water won't clean, no latex. Dries out fairly quickly, can be reconstituted with water to an extent, but the lint sealing fibers tend to come out of suspension. If you don't get big punctures and don't mind replacing it every couple months, this is the way to go. Cheap.

*Slime Pro for bicycles. Heard good things about it on Amazon reviews, especially about it lasting a long time. Fairly expensive, but I ordered a bottle to try -- right now I am busy and would rather not worry about replacing sealant, and I got a sidewall puncture that the regular Slime wouldn't seal properly. It would seal then start leaking again.

The Slime Pro sealed very well.

It is latex-based, so I was concerned about mess. I got new wheels, and in moving the tires over, was very disappointed to find that the mess it left was worse than Stans. Totally dried out an the whole interior of the tire was filled with strands of latex. Reminded me of an alien's guts on a horror movie.

But, the other tire was fine. The goo was as good as the day I installed it. After 4 months. So I suspect that the one that went wrong got contaminated with something. I will call Slime and inquire, but remember that someone posted that Orange Seal did the same stringy-alien-guts thing, and that Orange seal says that the tire must be completely free of any other sealant. I guess one could throw the tire in the dishwasher before mounting.

Next I might try Flat Attack:
Flat Attack
It is non-Latex, so if it seals as good as they say it does, it could be a winner. The price for a quart is quite good on Amazon.

Or heck, I might try oatmeal


----------



## Duckman (Jan 12, 2004)

phlegm said:


> I've run tubeless for years, but let's be realistic: some tire and rim combos are a hassle. True UST is a breeze, but thin sidewall tires like the ones I typically run often need to have a tube put in them first.


Exactly. I've run tubeless since 02. Some wheels are awesome and air up/seal right off. My 29r Crest wheels were like that. Some suck, and after fighting it all afternoon, I've given up and just ran light weight tubes. About half my wheelsets are tubeless. ALL my best race wheels are(all being Stans wheels of some sort).

Also done the tube-in-first routine. Yes it works, but was a PIA.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

DennisF...read the homebrew megathread....


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

Thanks -- I have actually done some reading there. I'm too old to read the whole thing 

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-components/best-tubeless-brew-406115.html


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Well I'm no WW but I do run tubeless with Stan's sealant and I find the tire wears out before the sealant dries out. My tubed friends pinch flat quite a bit and I never have to resort to a tube on the trail. Burped twice with too low pressure but just added air with my mini pump.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

Honestly, in my opinion, setting up, and maintaining tubeless systems sucks... I have spent years working as a bike mechanic, and the only thing i hate more, is washing customers bikes, followed directly by washing my own bikes(absolute torture).

that being said, i haven't run a tube in one of my bikes for 5+ years... The only exceptions have been the odd emergency, being stuck somewhere south of the middle of nowhere. The benefits of tubeless have already been posted, suffice to say, its great.

My current understanding, is that tubeless is not about the weight, its about the performance. If you aren't willing to put in the effort, then we'll never convince some of you of anything.

as an aside.....

I have always wondered, how the weight of the sealant works (not mass). If the wheel is stuck to the ground, and is rolling, wouldn't the liquid slosh around, and stay at the bottom? 

Doesn't the weight only matter if you are bunny hoping, or actively putting upward force on your bike, because now it is being lifted? Sorry if my rudimentary understanding of Liquid physics is flawed...

I dont want to derail this thread, but i have always been curious. I know that it is in the bike, so it will always be present at weigh in, but does the fact that it is liquid, make a difference on how well the wheels roll?


----------



## Bent Wheel (Oct 6, 2007)

Those of you still running tubes, which do you prefer.....schrader or presta?


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Schrader stems in my tubeless wheels.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

CuddlyToast said:


> I have always wondered, how the weight of the sealant works (not mass). If the wheel is stuck to the ground, and is rolling, wouldn't the liquid slosh around, and stay at the bottom?
> 
> Doesn't the weight only matter if you are bunny hoping, or actively putting upward force on your bike, because now it is being lifted? Sorry if my rudimentary understanding of Liquid physics is flawed...
> 
> I dont want to derail this thread, but i have always been curious. I know that it is in the bike, so it will always be present at weigh in, but does the fact that it is liquid, make a difference on how well the wheels roll?


I think that after coating the inside of the tire, there is not much to slosh around. I also think that as the wheel spins, centripetal force will spread the remaining liquid to the outside of the wheel not sloshing around at the bottom. I too have a very rudimentary understanding of liquid physics and I am sure someone will let us know the errors in our thinking.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> I think that after coating the inside of the tire, there is not much to slosh around. I also think that as the wheel spins, centripetal force will spread the remaining liquid to the outside of the wheel not sloshing around at the bottom. I too have a very rudimentary understanding of liquid physics and I am sure someone will let us know the errors in our thinking.


There was a discussion about it somewhere here, maybe the Best Tubeless Brew uber-thread (?) I just read what some smart guys wrote, but it made sense to me.
Essentially my understanding as yours....fluids exhibit a 'walking speed' dependent on viscosity, where they will tumble to the low point of the tire and remain a puddle- up to a certain angular velocity. Faster than that and they get pinned to the inside of the tire by centripetal force and distribute evenly.

IIRC from the thread that happens with most sealant at around 5 mph.


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

I think ya'll are correct about the goo not staying at the bottom of the tire once you spin up. I saw a demonstration by a guy selling a wheel-balancing device for cars. It was a clear circular tube that fastened to the lug bolts, and had some shot in it. He would spun the wheel up, and the pellets would distribute themselves evenly around the ring. He would then put a heavy magnet on the rim to cause an out-of-balance condition. The shot would then bunch up opposite thw magnet to rebalance the tire. 

This wouldn't happen at a very slow speed of course, but the wheel wasn't spinning very fast -- you had to be able to see the pellets. 

I didn't buy it, but it was cool to watch.

And, as pointed out, most of the goo is clinging to the tire walls. I have only maybe a teaspoon accumulating in the bottom.

Bent Wheel, I've only used Preata with tubeless, but schrader would be no problem. Presta is better though -- smaller hole in your rims, lighter, and no valve cap to mess with. And it's what everyone uses.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

DennisF said:


> Bent Wheel, I've only used Preata with tubeless, but schrader would be no problem. Presta is better though -- smaller hole in your rims, lighter, and no valve cap to mess with. And it's what everyone uses.


I'm well aware this argument is pedantic, but I disagree presta is better. I think it's a personal preference. I've chosen schrader. 
If your justification for smaller hole is strength, the difference in hole diameter is 2mm- hardly relevant in today's 23,25,30,35 and 40mm width rims. I would agree with you on a road wheel, but that not the discussion.
My schrader valve stems weigh 7.5g each on a postal scale. Stans claimed weight is 7 each. You are the ultimate weight weenie if you quibble over half a gram.
There's no reason to use a valve cap with schrader. I believe that the protected valve core is a strength of the system. I suppose there is an infinitesimal chance that a rock could wedge inside and deflate the tire, but on the other hand, I've actually had a piece of trail debris bend the exposed valve core of presta (tube).

I rather like being able to use a standard air chuck on a compressor without having to find the little brass adapter.


----------



## DennisF (Nov 4, 2011)

Don't disagree except for not needing a cap on Schraders. I grew up on a farm, and mud and dust getting in the valve when not using a cap was a problem. If you add air and there is a little dirt in there, it can get stuck between the mating surfaces and prevent the spring from closing the valve. It would also gunk things up and make it difficult to remove the core.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

These discussions are always funny...the naysayers often are folks that haven't tried whatever it is that is being debated. Want to know what lower pressures are all about? Try it! Want to see what the tubeless thing is? Try it! If you try it and think it sucks...so be it.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

DennisF said:


> Don't disagree except for not needing a cap on Schraders. I grew up on a farm, and mud and dust getting in the valve when not using a cap was a problem. If you add air and there is a little dirt in there, it can get stuck between the mating surfaces and prevent the spring from closing the valve. It would also gunk things up and make it difficult to remove the core.


I'll buy that. I've never in my life lived in a place that has to consider mud and gunk clogging up a valve core. My perception is skewed. 
I'm still confused by all the schrader haters out there.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

ARandomBiker said:


> I'm still confused by all the schrader haters out there.


Because they dont work as good, in my experience. They dont hold air as well, gunk gets in them easily, if you ride anywhere that has moisture/dirt, and I have had spare tubes come with loose valve cores (and realistically, only a very, very, small group of people carry around a valve core tools)

The only benefit to shrader valves, is that said valve core can be removed, and fresh sealant can be poured in, or the entire assembly can be removed to help increase air flow in setting up tubeless... Unfortunately, i can do all of that with my new presta valves... so i kinda dont see the point in them?

The only negative i can give presta valves, is that some chucks dont fit on right away (I thread an adapter onto my spare tube, so i always have one) and that they are more fragile... but this has yet to be a problem, basically ever.

So yes, most likely the world would still rotate if i had to use tubes/shader valves... but i think that there are better alternatives, so i might as well use them.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

I'll chime in a little bit on the valve core issue. I don't really see either one being better than the other. I don't seem to ever recall issues with schrader as a kid, every BMX bike and cruiser I ever had was schrader, every car I've ever had had schrader on the tires. I like presta because the length makes it easy to air up when using a mini pump. I use the ones with removable cores so it's easier to add sealant.

I do carry a schrader core remover in my trail tool bag. Every shock and suspension fork happens to have a schrader valve on it and the core remover has come in handy once or twice at the trailhead.


----------



## FlaMtnBkr (Apr 23, 2008)

People have said they can run pressures that would result it pinch flats with a tube. But aren't you trading pinch flats with rim strikes if pressure is that low? 

I think I would rather get a pinch flat to let me know my pressure is low or I'm riding too aggressive for the pressure I'm at. Seems like a flat is easier (and a lot cheaper) than a busted up rim?


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^sure..that is an issue but if you hit bit hard enough to pinch flat you are hitting your rim too typically.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

FlaMtnBkr said:


> People have said they can run pressures that would result it pinch flats with a tube. But aren't you trading pinch flats with rim strikes if pressure is that low?
> 
> I think I would rather get a pinch flat to let me know my pressure is low or I'm riding too aggressive for the pressure I'm at. Seems like a flat is easier (and a lot cheaper) than a busted up rim?


Tire pressure associated with a tubeless set up is always gonna be unique to the individual and their riding habits. I typically run 23/25-26 front/rear, but I only weigh about 170 geared up. If someone say 185-200+ ran that pressure maybe they would have rim strikes occurring more often...I don't and haven't.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

You know....this thread has got me thinking more about tubes/tubeless. I recently picked up a used cross bike and I almost without thinking...was going to convert it to tubeless. I stopped. Tubes are fine in this application. I have ridden it several times without flatting and changing tubes is so easy..I can do it under a minute if I was at full speed. Tubes are fine. Tubes worked for years. I do however believe that on a mountain bike with TLR tires/rims, tubeless is a better setup, allows lower pressure/more traction/less rolling resistance (off road), nearly eliminates flats, and all of this for a bit more time every few months to replenish some sealant.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

A point on the replenishing of fluid.

For those considering tubeless as weight loss, consider that the fluid dries, and must be topped up as TiGeo references. I suspect that after 2 top ups you are already beyond the weight of tubes in terms of caked-on, dried up fluid.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^Correct...but....I always remove the tire, clean out the dried up good, and replenish to avoid the weight build up. I weigh my bike all the time and can see when the sealant is dried up by the weight! Once it gets to a certain point, I know I need to top off (also can't hear the slosh when I wiggle the tire as it hangs in my garage. The dried sealant doesn't weigh much.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

It would be interesting to weigh a tire at each service interval, assuming people were removing them anyway. Removing the dried gunk that hangs off certainly helps, but I suspect there's a layering/coating happening that slowly builds up, like plaque in my arteries. (Lovely.)


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

I'll be honest, i dont think Ive ever had a tire last that long... I find weight weenie tires tend to get roached mega fast (*cough* schwalbe *cough*) 

Typically, they all die from deep sidewall slashes, or just too many punctures to hold air anymore.

The only tires i replace for being worn down, are my dh tires, and usually i have to go through 3 sets of minions in a season.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

You are probably right - the tire would die long before the gunk built up too much, especially for WW riders.


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

CuddlyToast said:


> I'll be honest, i dont think Ive ever had a tire last that long... I find weight weenie tires tend to get roached mega fast (*cough* schwalbe *cough*)
> Typically, they all die from deep sidewall slashes, or just too many punctures to hold air anymore.


You are talking about "dispo-schwalbe's"  non snakeskin, I've had good luck with SnakeSkin Rocket Ron's in terms of sidewall integrity.


----------



## CuddlyToast (Oct 30, 2013)

doccoraje said:


> You are talking about "dispo-schwalbe's"  non snakeskin, I've had good luck with SnakeSkin Rocket Ron's in terms of sidewall integrity.


True, but then i wouldn't be a very good weight weenie if i rode the heavier, snake skin tires


----------



## turbodog (Feb 28, 2004)

iperov said:


> 99% riders of this planet still using tubes.


I think you're being a bit generous. I'll bet 99.9%+ of bicycles world wide use tubes.

I've been on group rides (with people who don't post on MTBR) where I'm the only one running tubeless.

People need to step outside the MTBR echo chamber. An extremely small portion of bikes are sold tubeless and very few people convert to tubeless. It's only racers, very serious riders and tech geek enthusiasts really..........and some of those people prefer tubes.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

^^^spot on. We are a v. small minority of "all" riders. Your average rider who walks in a shop and buys a $1000 bike will likely not go tubeless unless the shop sells him/her on it. Out of the "serious" set in my area, tubeless is prevalent as far as I can tell..but again...the serious set is a v. small percentage of the total rider population in the area.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

I was running tubeless before I joined the "echo chamber" but totally agree that most of the bicycles in the world still have tubes.

For where I live (Arizona) tubeless makes the most sense. I would spend more time patching and changing tubes than riding. Prior to converting, it was a given that someone would flat every ride and it was a good day when no one did.


----------



## turbodog (Feb 28, 2004)

Plenty of pinch flats where I ride, most people I know still run tubes.


----------



## iperov (Sep 9, 2012)

turbodog said:


> I think you're being a bit generous. I'll bet 99.9%+ of bicycles world wide use tubes.
> 
> I've been on group rides (with people who don't post on MTBR) where I'm the only one running tubeless.
> 
> People need to step outside the MTBR echo chamber. An extremely small portion of bikes are sold tubeless and very few people convert to tubeless. It's only racers, very serious riders and tech geek enthusiasts really..........and some of those people prefer tubes.


so if you ride tubeless with no any serious cycling career, u just a clown


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

turbodog said:


> I think you're being a bit generous. I'll bet 99.9%+ of bicycles world wide use tubes.
> 
> I've been on group rides (with people who don't post on MTBR) where I'm the only one running tubeless.
> 
> People need to step outside the MTBR echo chamber. An extremely small portion of bikes are sold tubeless and very few people convert to tubeless. It's only racers, very serious riders and tech geek enthusiasts really..........and some of those people prefer tubes.





iperov said:


> so if you ride tubeless with no any serious cycling career, u just a clown


I don't think that's what turbodog is really saying.


----------



## turbodog (Feb 28, 2004)

phlegm said:


> I don't think that's what turbodog is really saying.


Correct. It's a worthwhile upgrade for most people, but most people are not going to be willing to go out of their way to install it and maintain it, unless they are highly motivated for whatever reason. I don't ride nearly as seriously as I used to, but I still ride well enough and enjoy a well setup high end bike, so I run tubeless.


----------



## ApolloMike (Nov 5, 2014)

turbodog said:


> Correct. It's a worthwhile upgrade for most people, but most people are not going to be willing to go out of their way to install it and maintain it, unless they are highly motivated for whatever reason. I don't ride nearly as seriously as I used to, but I still ride well enough and enjoy a well setup high end bike, so I run tubeless.


And when you get home, start cleaning your bike, and see a bit of stans on the outside of the tire, right in the middle of the tread, you are glad you were tubeless.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wjphillips (Oct 13, 2008)

There's nothing wrong with running tubes. It's just that you can't run lower pressures without risk of pinch flats. Tubes filled with sealant are pretty effective. But personally I run tubeless, so I can run very low pressures.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

I still run tubes, I tried to convert on my own right before a race a few years ago and could not get it to seal properly (yes i used a compressor). all of the sealant leaked outta every nook and cranny to the point that it looked like i got a little to excited about my tubeless set up.
I've never had that much of an issue with pinch flats but have always run my tires hard to avoid them and also, lets not forget that more PSI is less rolling resistance. I understand what the hype is all about and have a china set of 35mmwide wheels in the mail as we speak that i might have to set up tubeless but for now sticking with latext tubes for both XC, SS roadies and my cross (yes forgive me, i race cross and use clinchers)


----------



## inter (Nov 27, 2010)

mackdhagen said:


> I still run tubes, I tried to convert on my own right before a race a few years ago and could not get it to seal properly (yes i used a compressor). all of the sealant leaked outta every nook and cranny to the point that it looked like i got a little to excited about my tubeless set up.
> I've never had that much of an issue with pinch flats but have always run my tires hard to avoid them and also, lets not forget that more PSI is less rolling resistance. I understand what the hype is all about and have a china set of 35mmwide wheels in the mail as we speak that i might have to set up tubeless but for now sticking with latext tubes for both XC, SS roadies and my cross (yes forgive me, i race cross and use clinchers)


Did you put the sealant first without checking if the tire would somehow hold air without sealant?

What I usually do, make sure the tire seat properly and can hold air for a few minutes before putting in sealant.

i would put some soapy water around the rim on both side, then air up till I hear the popping sound, then see the bubbles come out, you can see if the leak big or small.
no sealant yet at this point.
if the leaks seem small, then I proceed with putting sealant thru the valve. sealant will take care these small leaks. otherwise, I would try to re-seat the tire again ,without putting any sealant.

Tubeless setup is hassle for first timer. after doing it for a few time, it is easier and cleaner too, no messy sealant on the floor.

I run tubeless for 5 years already, I think I got 2 flats in 5 years, due to dried sealant and a sidewall cut, not bad.


----------



## Livewire88 (Jun 15, 2013)

I use Continental Supersonic Tubes streached around my 29er wheels.

Under 100g per tube and not one puncture as yet, saying that my HT only gets used on pavement and pressure is always set at 40psi.

Looking to run tubeless on my FS in the near future, hoping the conversion won't be to much of a pain!!


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

inter said:


> Did you put the sealant first without checking if the tire would somehow hold air without sealant?
> 
> What I usually do, make sure the tire seat properly and can hold air for a few minutes before putting in sealant.
> 
> ...


Good tip thanks,
Nope did not do that.


----------



## mca90guitar (Apr 2, 2015)

Just switched to give it a try. I ride really rocky, rooted thorn ridden trails so figured it might help.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

mackdhagen said:


> Good tip thanks,
> Nope did not do that.


Just flatted out on a real important race to qualify for nationals, i was doing ok to...Classic snake bite pinch flat...guess its time to switch


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I converted when I found I just couldn't get comfortable with more then about 27 psi, just no traction (I weigh 145). So I figured it was a ticking bomb for a pinch and I race.

Pulled the old tubes, found that the tubes in there weighed 3 pounds (combined)!!! Dropping 3000 or so grams in one shot is nice.

I had some problems, and recently learned that Stan's dries faster then I thought. But I'm definitely staying tubeless up front where I prefer to be at 25 psi. I can run high in the rear without issue.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

Just tried to convert my tubless setup! got the tire to seat properly (heard the pop) pumped it up without sealant (even put tubes in overnight to compress the tape and widen prep the tire) and it held ok and heard/saw some small pin-holes in the sidewall. Thought that this orange seal (Orange Seal Tubeless Sealant Refill | Orange Seal ) would take care of it. Put in about 4 oz' per tire and can't get it to hold air overnight. I am using 35mm carbon rims with schwable 29r thunder burts and racing ralphs (2.1 and 2.25). 
Whats next? The Burts holding air a little better but not much. Should i check the tape or double tape it (using 25mm stans tape on 35mm wide rims), put it under water or maybe try the stans sealant? I think its all coming out of the sidewall. 
Help! this is the second time i've tried to convert and just can't get my S&#t to hold air.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

In the sidewall, or the bead? I ran in to the same problem when converting the Race Kings, they leaked through the sidewall and never sealed. I bought new Rocket Ralph's and while they leaked a little, they did seal.

I read later that you need to clean the inside of the tire first. I'm going to try and put the RK back on for my 12 hour race this weekend and save the RaRa for another day (I prefer the feel of the RaRa).


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

pretty sure its the sidewall, i can see the sealant leaking out there. I'm gonna pump them up and put them under water to see more. I gotta 12 hr comming up too in a few weeks and need these to be dialed in.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

mackdhagen said:


> pretty sure its the sidewall, i can see the sealant leaking out there. I'm gonna pump them up and put them under water to see more. I gotta 12 hr comming up too in a few weeks and need these to be dialed in.







I tried for a few days before buying the new tires.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

I always found that if my newly converted tires leaked air slowly overnight, all I had to do was go on an actual trail ride with a generous amount of sealant in the tire and that would "complete" the sealing process.

On another note, I just recently bought another set of Continental Race King Supersonics in 26x2.2. These had always typically given me fits trying to seal them properly (probably done 5-6 pairs now). This latest pair was a complete departure from the norm. I inflated them on a spare rim with tubes, left them for a couple days and when the time came to do the tubeless setup, they aired up with little drama, I did the shake and twist 3-4 times each and very very little sealant came through the sidewalls. 

They sealed up almost like a tubeless ready tire. Oh, and they conicidently happened to be the lightest pair of Supersonics I have ever had, 465 and 472g. Thank you eBay!


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

Still getting a ton of leaking...what can i do!?!? I am fairly certain that the leaking is comming out of the sidewalls. I don't want to trash these and get a new pair. Should i take them out, clean and try new sealant? I tried this Orange sealant brand, 40oz' per 29er tire (Ro Ro's and Thndr Brt's) When it did not seal i added some stans and even a little WTB, i'd say that each wheel has at least 5 oz' each in there...help!


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

mackdhagen said:


> Still getting a ton of leaking...what can i do!?!? I am fairly certain that the leaking is comming out of the sidewalls. I don't want to trash these and get a new pair. Should i take them out, clean and try new sealant? I tried this Orange sealant brand, 40oz' per 29er tire (Ro Ro's and Thndr Brt's) When it did not seal i added some stans and even a little WTB, i'd say that each wheel has at least 5 oz' each in there...help!


Stans/Orange Seal should eventually seal up the sidewall leakage. I've used RoRos successfully in the past, and am currently running a Thunder Burt in the front without issue, so the tires certainly are fine for tubeless.

There could be some leaking happening at the valve itself, or even some slow leaks across the rim. Different tubeless valves have helped me in the past, however I've had rims that simply never worked well with tubeless so I gave up - even after trying 3 layers of rim tape.

[Edit] Oh, and 5 oz of fluid is way too much - you've now added more weight than the tubes you were replacing. You can get by with ~ 2oz.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

So do ya think i should try and double tape and reseal? I've tried 2 different brands of valves with the same result (stans and american classic). I have not thrown them under water to see where its coming from because i can just see sealant and hear air coming outta the sidewalls. I have not checked the tape yet. Again these are wide 35mm chinese carbon rims taped with 25mm stans tape.
Thanks for your help with this...This is the second time i've tried to set up TL and just can't get it going


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

Hey man - I feel your pain. I've had wheels setup easily, and also the nightmare you are describing. As a warning, the last rims that did not work for me were no-name Chinese carbon as well, although there are several shapes & widths out there.

If you've tried multiple valves, that pretty much eliminates them. I'm still really surprised with the sidewalls, because tiny pinholes of that type are exactly what the sealant does best. You would see tiny bits bubbling out of the pinholes that should eventually stop.

Are you sill seeing never-ending bubbles out of the sidewalls? No harm in another layer of tape, but what you describe is the trouble I had on those Chinese rims. Gave up and switched to Rovals, and the same tires sealed up instantly. Pretty much proved the rim issue in my case anyway.


----------



## Bos (Feb 13, 2013)

spray soapy water on spoke holes and valve hole. If it leaks from those areas then, its probably the tape. I had a very slow leak from the valve hole last week, I removed the valve, cleaned the rubber grommet, dipped the grommet in sealant, retightened it by hand and that leak was gone. Use a spray bottle with soapy water and you can see exactly where the leak is coming from, no guessing. I have a Maxxis Ardent that had weaping on the sidewalls. Since I could see exactly where from using soapy water, I just rotated the wheel so the sealant was on the the leaking sidewall, and it slowly sealed up. Now it holds air for a week with very little additional air added before a ride.


----------



## Grimalkin (Feb 8, 2015)

Tubes...Maxxis Flyweight with rim strips 96 grams according to manufacture.

I have tried tubless, just to much of a mess, easier to buy a tube.

JMHO


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

How quickly does the air leak out? Could you get an hour long ride offroad in with enough pressure? If so as I said before, that was always the solution to sidewall leaks for me.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

BlownCivic said:


> How quickly does the air leak out? Could you get an hour long ride offroad in with enough pressure? If so as I said before, that was always the solution to sidewall leaks for me.


Just dunked them under water and the leak is coming out of the sidewalls for sure. Nothing out of the rim, valve hole or anywhere else. The holes are big enough that you can hear and feel. I wonder if its the orange sealant? In frustration I added more leftover stans and WTB (both old bottles)sealants to see if that would work and wonder if the combo thrinned out... They hold air enough to ride for an hour or so.... I think, it sporadic every time I fill it... I'm this close drone just being done with this whole tubeless trend.


----------



## Back2MTB (Jun 4, 2014)

If you want to run tubeless I suggest buying tires and rims that are designed to work together. I run WTB rims and tires and every tire I've mounted has been laughably easy. Amazing upgrade to run tubeless and 22-24PSI for a 200lb shredder!


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

Mackdhagen..... I have had a few Thunder Burts that have been tricky....
#1... are you using the TLR snakeskin version? If not.... GET SNAKESKIN... the thinner sidewall ones will leak forever as they're designed to have tubes.

Otherwise... as others mentioned, pump your tyres and go ride, enough to really get the sealant sloshing around and into every hole. When you get back, check the pressure and pump them up again.
If the air is mainly coming from one side, leave them lying on that side overnight.

Either way, whether you get a seal eventually or not, I'd recommend removing the tyre and having a look at the inside walls, if the sealant has been doing it's job, it should be set all around the sidewall where it has been patching.
If the sealant has gone a weird brown colour or has separated, then get a new batch.

My tips for when setting up new tyres tubeless... (assuming that your tape is in good condition and sealed nicely)
#1 Install the tyre with a tube for 15-20 mins to help remove the folds and get the shape right
#2 Clean the inside of the tyre with isopropyl alcohol and clean rags and allow it to dry
#3 Use a small brush to paint sealant onto the tyre's rim beads, let it get a little tacky and then install the tyre
#4 Inflate the tyre without any sealant inside using a high volume pump or air compressor, this should seal the bead.
#5 Remove the valve core and put 60-90ml sealant in each tyre. Re-install valve cores and inflate.
#6 Do the shake
#7 Ride around the block
#8 Check the pressure. If it's dropping, use soapy water (no need to submerse the whole wheel) to find where your leaks are and concentrate shaking the fluid onto those areas.... repeat 7-8

Once you've done this a few times, it takes 5 mins per tyre after step 1...


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

acko, used your tips and i think it worked..just cleaned it out and re-did it. It still slowly leaks over a weeks time (is that normal?) but better than before,


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

Can you find where there's a leak with soapy water?

Sometimes very slow leaks just never go away but they stay inflated for the ride duration easily


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

The MK I put on sealed up pretty well after I scrubbed the inside like in the video. I didn't have to add air all through the 12 hour until the last lap. I assumed I burped the tire, but I wasn't sure when. Then had to put air in again about 10 minutes later, but the race was over in another 10 minutes. 

I added air that slowly leaked out that week, and found a few minor leaks in the sidewall still, but the morning of my last XC race wasn't the time to deal with it. Of course, found my front RaRa totally flat for the first time, so that didn't leave me feeling warm and fuzzy.


----------



## etnies (Nov 8, 2014)

I'm riding a ZTR Rapid wheelset, schwalbe rocket ron + Stan's, 1500km so far with no flats! (In my speed bike I use a 50mm wheels with Victoria Rubino tyres, michelin tubes with stan's sealant inside, 1000km no puntures...). There is no reason to stop using it.


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

I'm out again on tubeless setup.
Racing last week and flatted out on my rocket ron front...Made it almost the the finish then had to run it through (only missed one or 2 places). Looked like a little slash in the tire (not side wall..common to ro ro's)
I have a 100 miler coming up (SM100) and think i might just go back to tubes...afterall are tubes that much heavier (and in some cases can be lighter)?
I understand the deflection thing but for racing you need reliablity...tubeless has just proven to me to be not that reliable.


----------



## Acko (Feb 18, 2014)

Mack... you must have worst luck ever.
I wouldn't even consider tubes for a second.... and not even for weight savings.. for reliability, tubeless has been flawless.
I reckon I used to go through 10-15 tubes per year and now I can't remember the last time I had to even use a tube


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

EXO, Snake Skin, Protection... If a tires name doesn't include one of these terms I wouldn't touch it, tubed or tubeless 

-------------------------------------
Opinions are like A-holes... everybody 
has one & they're usually full of...??


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

The heavy duty tubes I pulled out of my bike were 1.5 pounds. 3000g is a huge rotating mass weight penalty!


----------



## leugene (Jun 20, 2008)

mackdhagen said:


> lets not forget that more PSI is less rolling resistance


Not true off road...



Sidewalk said:


> The heavy duty tubes I pulled out of my bike were 1.5 pounds. 3000g is a huge rotating mass weight penalty!





UtahJohn said:


> The tire is always too heavy until you get the first flat, then it was obviously manufactured way too light!


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

leugene said:


> Not true off road...


Very true now that I read into it and that Schwable german precision white-paper is very compelling, but its almost course specific.
So I'm planning on a hundred miler endurance race coming up that is about 33%single track,33 road and 33 fireroad/double track. 
I need reliability (because its a long race with no support, your out there and time is your enemy in enduro XC's) and low rolling resistance for the majority of the course which in 50/60% of the course is just road or fire road. 
If the majority of the course consisted of bumpier terrain where deflection and traction were an issue then yes. Here I just want to be fast where you can really gain some time and safe on the singltrack (which is, on this course, is softer, rootier singltrack)

Discuss and debunk 
Love,
the tubeless hater


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

mackdhagen said:


> Very true now that I read into it and that Schwable german precision white-paper is very compelling, but its almost course specific.
> So I'm planning on a hundred miler endurance race coming up that is about 33%single track,33 road and 33 fireroad/double track.
> I need reliability (because its a long race with no support, your out there and time is your enemy in enduro XC's) and low rolling resistance for the majority of the course which in 50/60% of the course is just road or fire road.
> If the majority of the course consisted of bumpier terrain where deflection and traction were an issue then yes. Here I just want to be fast where you can really gain some time and safe on the singltrack (which is, on this course, is softer, rootier singltrack)
> ...


So why not go tubeless for ultimate reliability (no flats) running lower pressure on the singletrack and fireroads and give them a little gas for the road sections (and subsequently take it out if needed)? I would run non-agreesive tires (I think of the Specy Renegade for this type of race).

I just think about a 50 miler I do here each year that is 85% fireroad (sand/gravel/etc.) w/a little singletrack and 15% paved and riding this at 25 psi tubeless (a few psi above my normal singletrack pressures) was no issue and much more comfy than riding higher pressure in an attempt to reduce rolling resistance on the road portion. BTW, I also have employed the less psi theory on the road - I ride my road bike at 80psi r/75psi f (I weigh 160) with no ill-effect on my times/speeds. I used to run well over 100 psi with the same "more psi = less rolling resistance" mindset. So much more comfy now.


----------



## phlegm (Jul 13, 2006)

mackdhagen said:


> Very true now that I read into it and that Schwable german precision white-paper is very compelling, but its almost course specific.
> So I'm planning on a hundred miler endurance race coming up that is about 33%single track,33 road and 33 fireroad/double track.
> I need reliability (because its a long race with no support, your out there and time is your enemy in enduro XC's) and low rolling resistance for the majority of the course which in 50/60% of the course is just road or fire road.
> If the majority of the course consisted of bumpier terrain where deflection and traction were an issue then yes. Here I just want to be fast where you can really gain some time and safe on the singltrack (which is, on this course, is softer, rootier singltrack)
> ...


How about the best of both worlds?

adventure journal ? Schwalbe Reinvents the Mountain Bike Tire


----------



## mackdhagen (Jun 17, 2011)

That looks dope...But 250 ! that price will drop no doubt but lets say over time their able to knock 100 off the price...it'll still be like buying tubulars for your mtb or cross bike. It looks justified because it sound complicated but still..

That's cool though and thanks for sharing. I wonder what the weight penalty is on it? It almost sounds a little more like a trail/FR sorta thing and not so much XC (gotta weight-weeny the conversation..that is where we are after all)


----------

