Apart from me and Screenman, who is tubeless?

[GrumpyGregry]

Whichever police force wants me. We've done work at most of the southern and central forces, and sone Northern ones. Done some private tuition locally at the Tiifield Estate and Salcey Forest. Done a bit at Cannock to, but wasn't welcomed with open arms, possibly due to being qualified 2 levels higher than their resident trainers.

Rarely do private work now, a lot of effort, petrol and grief for not much money, not to mention wear and tear on my own equipment, although I do get invited to do a spot for kids organisations and charities etc, which I do if I'm available.

Found it - March 2011 MBR, they also had trouble with Stans, 3 attempts to get it to seal a Conti tyre on a Commencal rim.

and no one has ever pinched a tube between rim and tyre have they....

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You can use tubeless ready tyres on most rims, as long as you use the conversion kit. If you like there are three main ways to go tubeless, without resorting to ghetto, but I 'll get to that in a bit.

1. Stans tubeless strips (not to confused with Stans tubeless tape) are like half an inner tube with a valve attached. Other makers also do them, such as Bontrager. They sit in the well of the rim, sealing air from the spoke holes, but also help the tyre to seat in the rim. You can use them on some ordinary rims.

You are best using tubeless ready tyres as they are less porous and have a consistent bead that will seat under the rim clincher. You seat the tyre on the stans strips, then inflate and add latex fluid. The strip is pushed into the clincher by the tyre. The latex fluid contains granular material and this creates a seal at all points where air escapes, and after a few minutes forms a perfectly airtight seal. Using a conversion kit like this gives you the performance advantage of tubeless but without the weight benefit.

I read somewhere it was necessary to drill the valve hole in the inner side of the normal rim. At which point I did lose a lot of enthusiasm for the idea.

 

[02GF74]

Drago, you do talk some rubbish sometimes. The conversion kits are extremely good value and do the job well, but how would you know as you have stated you have the proper one's so have not tried the conversion kits.

02GF74, it is not about weight saving and lower air pressure I am sure increases rolling resistance. Why carry 2 inner tubes? how many do you carry now?

I wonder why tubeless is used in most other modern forms of transport, cars, motorbikes, etc.

^^^^ say some one else is talking rubbish then you say that? how much thicker and how much reinforcement does a motor vehicl tyre compared to a bicycle tyre? you can dribe over glass and thorns no probs, like to see you do that with a bike tyre and not get a puncture.

anyways, I carry one spare plus repair kit - there is a tube in each wheel. if I get a puncture, then I always try to repair it, failing that I use the inner, and I may have used the spare inner 1 in 20 pucntures? dunno exact amount but I like to cycle knowing I have back up.

If I carry one spare with tubeless set up, once I have used the spare, what do I do if I get puncture?

Despite what I see on the web, I am not convinced about the sealant stuff, my firend has used slime tyres and I am forever fixing her flats; all I can see they do it block up the valve.

you can tell me Stans is better thant Slime and that Stans seals a tyre better than Slime seals an inner tube and I will not dispute.

maybe I should give it a go??

 

[Cubist]

^^^^ say some one else is talking rubbish then you say that? how much thicker and how much reinforcement does a motor vehicl tyre compared to a bicycle tyre? you can dribe over glass and thorns no probs, like to see you do that with a bike tyre and not get a puncture.

anyways, I carry one spare plus repair kit - there is a tube in each wheel. if I get a puncture, then I always try to repair it, failing that I use the inner, and I may have used the spare inner 1 in 20 pucntures? dunno exact amount but I like to cycle knowing I have back up.

If I carry one spare with tubeless set up, once I have used the spare, what do I do if I get puncture?

Despite what I see on the web, I am not convinced about the sealant stuff, my firend has used slime tyres and I am forever fixing her flats; all I can see they do it block up the valve.

you can tell me Stans is better thant Slime and that Stans seals a tyre better than Slime seals an inner tube and I will not dispute.

maybe I should give it a go??

you carry a puncture repair kit to mend the inner tube of course!

And yes, Stans is far,far better than Slime.

 

[screenman]

I do not think some people can read the title of the post.

 

[lulubel]

And yes, Stans is far,far better than Slime.

Having never used either, my initial thought was that running tubeless with sealant was much the same as putting slime in your inner tubes. And everything I've heard about slime is that you just squirt it into the tubes, where it adds a lot of weight, is horribly messy if you get a leak, and it blocks the valves after a while.

I read up a bit on Stans, and the difference (apart from the sealant itself being different - presumably) seems to be that you use a very small amount, and spend some time when you first fit the tyre making sure that the inside surface of the tyre and the join between tyre and rim are coated with sealant. The impression I get is that Stans sealant is more of a liquid consistency, whereas slime is sticky goop.

As a result of this, Stans tubeless system is lighter, less messy and does a much better job than inner tubes filled with slime.

Is that anywhere near correct?

 

[Motozulu]

Not sure the weight is an issue with slime - the bottle was 8 oz - can't see that as crucial? It has blocked my valves though, but that may have been my fault for not inflating/deflating at the 10 or 2 o'clock position. One of the inner tubes developed a split near the valve so when I replaced it I did'nt slime it - so now I'm riding one slimed one not - I ride with a spare tube now. Since the change, I've still not had a flat and the slimed tyre no longer blocks up now that I inflate it correctly.

All of which probably proves bugger all

 

[Cubist]

Instructions are to put 60ml per tyre up to 2.35. That's a lot lighter than standard butyl tubes. It stays fluid in most circumstances. It isn't unpleasant to work with, and so far has proved pretty effective up to date.

 

[lulubel]

Not sure the weight is an issue with slime - the bottle was 8 oz - can't see that as crucial?

8oz is 226.8g

How much did you use?

If you use a whole bottle split between 2 tubes, that's an extra 113g roughly per wheel, which is more than half again as much as the weight of my inner tubes. Considering that's rotating mass, I'd say it's significant if you're someone who's trying to shed weight off his bike. Otherwise, not so significant. (I added considerably more than that per wheel when I went from Schwalbe tubes and Racing Ralphs to Conti tubes and Mountain Kings.)

 

[lulubel]

Instructions are to put 60ml per tyre up to 2.35. That's a lot lighter than standard butyl tubes. It stays fluid in most circumstances. It isn't unpleasant to work with, and so far has proved pretty effective up to date.

Do you know how much the tape that you stick inside the rims weighs? I'm curious about the weight side of things now we're talking about it.

 

[Cubist]

Do you know how much the tape that you stick inside the rims weighs? I'm curious about the weight side of things now we're talking about it.

It's lighter than standard rimcloth. My guess is that it's a bit heavier than sellotape. I've got some somewhere, I'll weigh it in comparison with say sellotape or masking tape.

 

[Cubist]

It's lighter than standard rimcloth. My guess is that it's a bit heavier than sellotape. I've got some somewhere, I'll weigh it in comparison with say sellotape or masking tape.

No, can't find it. Mrs Cube may have "tidied" it away.

 

[Cubist]

Research suggests about 10 grammes per wheel on a 25mm rim (Flow etc) . Don't forget it's instead of standard rimtape. The fluid weighs about 50g and the valve about 12g. So, is 72g a saving over a lightweight tube and ordinary rimtape?

You can get 2.25- tubes as light as 150g or thereabouts. Add 10g ordinary rimtape, and you're at 160 g. Stans weighs less than half that. However, lightweight tubes are a nightmare for pinch- and thornflats whereas Tubeless isn't.

Proper Stans Tubeless system for me. Weightwise, performance (grip) wise, and keeping the air in.

 

[lulubel]

I'm certainly not going to argue that the weights are impressive. It might be something to consider once I get over the whole "MTBing is just such amazing fun" stage and start seriously chasing Strava segments. (Although not if I go touring and want to keep swapping tyres, as I was saying in my suspension vs tyres thread.)

 

[AlanW]

I cannot see why the big debate on weights, surely the major benefit with going tubeless above all is the fact that you can run much lower pressures than you can with inner tubes and have no fear of getting a pinch puncture.

But another plus, I been running tubeless for just over two years now and have not had a puncture that required me to fit a inner tube as a "get out of jail" option. Loads of some pretty serious thorns, but the Stans latex liquid have sealed it every single time once the offending item has been removed.