Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Going tubeless, how I did it (badly)

I recently built some new wheels and set them up with tubeless tyres.  It did not go smoothly.

Writeup with lessons learnt on the blog

https://audaxing.wordpress.com/2015/10/28/going-tubeless-not-made-easy/

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

16 comments

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 8 years ago
0 likes

My one pro 28mm have arrived they weigh 293 g with no sealant. Schwalbe say 275 g, close - ish. Will fit them later

Avatar
peted76 | 8 years ago
1 like

FYI tubeless doubters (I was one) I'm a convert - 25mm Schwalbe Pro Ones on SL23 rims with 20ml of sealant = 279grams.

The more I ride them the more I love em. I'm running 80psi in the rain and about 95psi in the dry. Defo more comfortable. Even at 110psi getting bounced about, I feel this set up for me just rolls better.  It just seems a little more floaty at times, probably more so at speed thinking about it.

Previously BTW I ran the continental supersonic race tubes (50g's) and Schwalbe One 23mm clinchers 205g(?) directly prior to going tubeless for comparison.

 

Avatar
peted76 | 8 years ago
0 likes

The internet is full of gangster roadies going 'getto tubeless' with non tubeless rims.

The risk is mainly due to tyre burps. Which at most road higher PSIs isn't really an issue, but at lower PSI I believe tyres can burp. Burps on rode tyres are only likely to happen when you hit an unexpected obstacle such as a large deep pot hole, or if you're off road, a tree root/log.

However consider IF you were to hit a large pot hole at speed with road PSI's in play - you'd probably be thrown off or at least have a hell of a wobble, and you'd looking for issues and be very aware of your tyres after such an incident.

I read up significantly on Tubless before jumping in with both feet and I found this RARELY happened in real life. However if you're a bigger lad and run low PSI's then you may want to consider the risks further.

 

 

 

 

Avatar
vorsprung | 8 years ago
0 likes

@Cyclosis I found your comments quite alarming

 

Normally I would just ignore random strangers saying things on the Internet but in the case of road tubeless tyres there really is so little reliable information available.   There is a general lack of experience with the tyres so most of the writeups are about Stan's rims.  Although a few people have done exactly the same as me, that doesn't make them right.  As we are considering a somewhat unusual catastropic event other users with the same set up could go several months (or years) without seeing this problem

 

What I'd like to know is - do you have a first hand report of Archetypes + a Stan's conversion kit with a rim strip + sealant actually going wrong in the way described?

 

This article http://biketestreviews.com/staying-safe-riding-road-tubeless-wheelstires/ talks about a known problem with conversion kits and tyres sliding off which I have purposefully avoided

Avatar
Cyclosis | 8 years ago
1 like

Archtypes are not tubless compatible; they lack the bead-shelf which helps keep the bead seated. 

It is potentially dangerous to use these rims for tubless — the tyre could roll of the rim should you get a rapid drop in pressure.

Avatar
Scoob_84 | 8 years ago
0 likes

DCR wheels are currently building me a set of Archetypes as i type, but i was led to believe that these arn't tubless rims. 

Avatar
vorsprung replied to Scoob_84 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Scoob_84 wrote:

DCR wheels are currently building me a set of Archetypes as i type, but i was led to believe that these arn't tubeless rims. 

There are no proper standards for what a road tubeless rim is.  Stan's have some patents but there isn't anything like UST for road rims.

It's my impression that it is easier to mount tubeless tyres on a Stan's rim but they work equally well on almost any rim

Avatar
jollygoodvelo | 8 years ago
1 like

I realise that this is probably covered elsewhere at very great length - but what's the main point of going tubeless?  Is it the puncture resistance (or tolerance) provided by the sealant?  I'd always assumed it was for weight saving, but if you've got three layers of rim tape and a bottle of sealant sloshing around each tyre that sounds unlikely?

Avatar
vorsprung replied to jollygoodvelo | 8 years ago
0 likes

Gizmo_ wrote:

I realise that this is probably covered elsewhere at very great length - but what's the main point of going tubeless?  Is it the puncture resistance (or tolerance) provided by the sealant?  I'd always assumed it was for weight saving, but if you've got three layers of rim tape and a bottle of sealant sloshing around each tyre that sounds unlikely?

Look at it this way.  I could fit 650g Marathon Plus tyres and not have any punctures or I can go tubeless at about the same weight as a normal clicher.  So it's 400g lighter for the same puncture resistance

Avatar
700c replied to vorsprung | 8 years ago
0 likes
vorsprung wrote:

Gizmo_ wrote:

I realise that this is probably covered elsewhere at very great length - but what's the main point of going tubeless?  Is it the puncture resistance (or tolerance) provided by the sealant?  I'd always assumed it was for weight saving, but if you've got three layers of rim tape and a bottle of sealant sloshing around each tyre that sounds unlikely?

Look at it this way.  I could fit 650g Marathon Plus tyres and not have any punctures or I can go tubeless at about the same weight as a normal clicher.  So it's 400g lighter for the same puncture resistance

Or you could put sealant in an inner tube?

I don't really get them either..

Avatar
jollygoodvelo replied to 700c | 8 years ago
0 likes

700c wrote:
vorsprung wrote:

Gizmo_ wrote:

I realise that this is probably covered elsewhere at very great length - but what's the main point of going tubeless?  Is it the puncture resistance (or tolerance) provided by the sealant?  I'd always assumed it was for weight saving, but if you've got three layers of rim tape and a bottle of sealant sloshing around each tyre that sounds unlikely?

Look at it this way.  I could fit 650g Marathon Plus tyres and not have any punctures or I can go tubeless at about the same weight as a normal clicher.  So it's 400g lighter for the same puncture resistance

Or you could put sealant in an inner tube? I don't really get them either..

Glad it's not just me.  So it's for 'ultimate' puncture resistance at the lightest weight possible.

I think I'll keep choosing 'perfectly acceptable' puncture resistance from good quality inner tubes and 150+tpi tyres.

Avatar
vorsprung replied to jollygoodvelo | 8 years ago
0 likes

Gizmo_ wrote:

700c wrote:
vorsprung wrote:

Gizmo_ wrote:

I realise that this is probably covered elsewhere at very great length - but what's the main point of going tubeless?  Is it the puncture resistance (or tolerance) provided by the sealant?  I'd always assumed it was for weight saving, but if you've got three layers of rim tape and a bottle of sealant sloshing around each tyre that sounds unlikely?

Look at it this way.  I could fit 650g Marathon Plus tyres and not have any punctures or I can go tubeless at about the same weight as a normal clicher.  So it's 400g lighter for the same puncture resistance

Or you could put sealant in an inner tube? I don't really get them either..

Glad it's not just me.  So it's for 'ultimate' puncture resistance at the lightest weight possible.

I think I'll keep choosing 'perfectly acceptable' puncture resistance from good quality inner tubes and 150+tpi tyres.

Theorethically the single skin should give a good ride.  But TBH compared with the previous tyres on the bike (admittedly these are at the extreme end of nice) Michelin Pro Race they are no better for ride quality

I am also hearing good things about the durability of these tyres ( how long they last, not the puncture resistance)

I think it's difficult to say at the moment if the marginal gains for this tyre and the tubeless system add up to a compelling case in the short term.   I will have to wait and see how it goes long term

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 8 years ago
0 likes

If you don't have a compressor then a co2 refill will do the job for first inflation

Avatar
wellcoordinated | 8 years ago
0 likes

 "...I wish I’d built a compressor with a plastic 1 litre Coke bottle". Yep I made one of these in about 15 mins. It's amazing how easy it makes getting the tyres properly seated onto the rims.

I too had a problem with air leaking from around the spoke nipples. This was caused by the poor seating of the valve on the rim profile. Air was leaking around the valve and then into the inner chamber of the rim and then out around the spoke nipples. I discovered this by filling the bath with 100mm of water and testing for leaks like you would with an inner tube.

I've been riding tubeless for about a year now and I never had a puncture, at least not one that didn't seal instantly. Once you get them properly installed tubeless a great.

 

 

 

Avatar
mike the bike | 8 years ago
0 likes

I'm tempted to convert to tubeless on my workaday bike but, as both wheels are in fine condition, it may be some time into the future.  But I shall file away your experiences, Vorsprung, and hope to recall them when I need it.

Happy riding.

Avatar
vorsprung replied to mike the bike | 8 years ago
0 likes

mike the bike wrote:

I'm tempted to convert to tubeless on my workaday bike but, as both wheels are in fine condition, it may be some time into the future.  But I shall file away your experiences, Vorsprung, and hope to recall them when I need it.

Happy riding.

Yeah, the driver for doing this was that the wheels on this bike needed major work so replacing them was the easy option

Latest Comments