When I was mountain biking I ran tubeless, and it was a huge improvement on technical singletrack (rocks, roots, drop-offs). I'm not as sure for my gravel bike, so I'm still running tubes.
I haven't noticed a downside, so I'm wondering *given my situation* if it's worth it:
- I'm 155 pounds - 650b wheels with 48mm GKSK - 1/2 of the rides are on gravel/dirt trails across the street from my house, these are twisty (tight turns) with lots of climbing and descending...but relatively smooth - other 1/2 is mixed surface on rail trails, gravel roads (largest gravel is pea/marble, but some small pot holes), and paved roads - I run the tires at 30-35 PSI, they're pretty comfy on gravel and surprisingly fast on the road; and given my low weight I don't see the risk of a pinch flat - where I ride, there are no thorns or things that frequently puncture tires (the one-off is always a possibility)
I know with tubeless I can safely run even lower pressures, but would this be much better? I may bikepack with this bike in the future (less than a week at a time), so I'll have more load and would likely increase pressures (probably more paved roads on such rides).
I will not run tubes because I like to run lower pressures for a faster/smoother ride offroad. I am 175, and I run 48mm tires around 25-30 psi. I was on vacation last week and rented a high end bike that had tubes. I got 4 flats (1 pinch flat and 3 punctures) in 100 miles of riding, more than I have had in 10 years on tubeless tires, you're never going to get me to use tubes again. But if you are happy with your setup and it works for you, then theres no reason to switch.
Even if it hasn't happen yet, or you don't think it's going to happen, you can bottom out the tyre or get a puncture any time.
For me switching to tubeless consisted of putting on a tyre by hand, pouring some sealant in, and airing it up with a compressor. That's it. No more hassle than putting in a tube. To me "is it worth it" is not a question because there are simply no downsides.
I am 150lbs Riding 650b with Terrene Elwoods 47mm - 30 to 35 psi. My local riding is a similar mix of roads/trails as you. Been riding tubeless since spring of this year with 2,500+ miles. No flats. No problems. Few worries. I check pressure and top off as needed. I won't go back to tubes if I have the option Just in case, I still carry a tube (or two), pump and tire irons. One thing to be aware of - it can be difficult to remove a well seated tubeless tire from a rim in the event of a flat. My set up is not that bad. Even so, I purchased a stout set of tire irons to make things more fool proof.
You'll save some weight -- and rolling resistance -- switching to tubeless, especially if you have tubes that are the right size for those tires.
I carry levers and spare tubes (2 for any long ride), but since they're "just-until-I-get-home" tubes, I go with lighter options. I've used 18-23mm tubes in my 38mm tires, though on longer rides/races, I carry at least 1 tube that's closer to recommended size. I think I've had to put in a tube at most 3 times over the past 3 years / 30,000 miles.
If you're unlucky the rim/tire combo you have may be less than trivial to get it setup, but that's probably the only "worth it" question here. It'd be easy to test out (even w/o sealant at first) just to see if you have a tough combo.
I have been running tubeless on my mtb, gravel/'cross, and road bikes for a number years now. Road tubeless is probably the only one where there's still a fair bit of argument (wider selection of narrow tires available) for going with tubes, especially since really high pressures don't necessarily seal up nicely on puncture. But with running 28mm minimum and being satisfied with 60psi (or less in a pinch), it makes sense for me on the road too. (My first foray into road tubeless was using Hutchinson tires and they were absolutely terrible -- more flats than tubed tires and ride was worse than my GP4kIIs tires -- so I switched back to tubes until Schwalbe's Pro One and then later/now the Specialized Turbo 2bliss.) I've had many punctures that would have been flats but just sealed up or were easily pluggable. So I don't plan to ever go back to using tubes on any bike.
So, what do you all think of an alternative such as sealant filled tubes? I live in goat head heavin here in Arizona and the extra weight of tube and sealant isn't an issue since I ride gravel for adventure and do not race. I have used this on MTB bikes in past with great success.
Orange Seal in tubes works great in goathead country. I've been setting up a lot of bikes that way when it doesn't make sense to upgrade to a tubeless setup.
I'm not sure about how it would do for the pinch flat side of the tubeless argument. But for goatheads, tubes with removable valve cores and some sealant is a no-brainer.
I don't live in goathead territory, so my opinion should be discounted accordingly. For @Frank, I'm not sure I see the advantage to sealant in tubes vs. sealant in a tire if you do have a rim that will work tubeless. The tube might be marginally less messy to install. But you still have risk of pinch flats, added rolling resistance and added weight. (The latter two may not be relevant/important for some riders.) And you need tubes with removable valve cores, which is the exception more than the rule. (Some people also require removable valve cores on their tubeless tire setups; I just add pop the bead to add sealant and don't bother removing valve cores.)
Agree---we have to run a higher pressure in these tubes than if we were to go tubeless which so far has prevented any pinch flats. I suspect will change to tubeless eventually which will be even better and allow lower pressures. Thx.
Its funny when people go on about the weight benefit of tubeless, and how they would never go back to tubed. But then say they always carry tubes "just in case". Kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window.
Cmtgravel wrote:Its funny when people go on about the weight benefit of tubeless, and how they would never go back to tubed. But then say they always carry tubes "just in case". Kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window.
Not really. When I used tubes I would have to carry tubes also because some flats can't be patched. Years ago I had a slime tube that got a puncture that would not seal even with a patch. I had no tube with me so I had to do a lot of walking. A smart biker always plans for the worst, especially on long rides. What I think is funny is the people who try to find reasons not to go tubeless, either for money reasons or because they don't have the (limited) mechanical skills to set up tubeless tires. There are very few people who have gone tubeless who have any desire to go back to tubes. I also don't see anyone rushing to go back to inner tubes on cars either, do you think there is a reason for that? The only benefit of inner tubes is they are cheap and easy to install. As far as performance and reliability tubeless blows tubes away.
Cmtgravel wrote:Its funny when people go on about the weight benefit of tubeless, and how they would never go back to tubed. But then say they always carry tubes "just in case". Kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window.
I'm not a weight weenie and I didn't go tubeless because of the weight but... Rotating weight is different, and doesn't matter if I ride with tubes or tubeless, I always carry a spare tube. So yes, I do save weight, rotating weight, because I would carry a spare tube anyways.
Just because you carry a spare tube it doesn't mean that you have to use it. But you need to be ready for anything. Do you ride without a multitool? I'm guessing not. Tubeless is not perfect and it won't eliminate punctures a 100%, no one said that.
But still, saying that carrying a tube "kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window" is kinda dumb and not true at all.
Since I installed my new tyres in May I bottomed out the front tyre a bunch of times and pulled out a few thorns out of my tires. Did I get a pinch flat? No. Did I get a puncture that didn't seal immediately? No. Did I carry a spare tube? Yep. Does that mean that my tubeless setup is not reliable? Nope. Did I have to use that spare tube? Nope.
Some people treat going tubeless like it's some kind of a big deal, when really it's not. Pretty much all good tyres are tubeless ready, and any kind of decent wheelset has tubeless ready rims and usually comes pre taped with valves included from the factory.
Yup. I agree tubeless is better but my new gravel bike has good tires tho not tubeless ready so will use with slime tube then switch to tubeless after wear them out a little
Cmtgravel wrote:Its funny when people go on about the weight benefit of tubeless, and how they would never go back to tubed. But then say they always carry tubes "just in case". Kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window.
It's less weight to have one tube on your bike vs three tubes.
Cmtgravel wrote:Its funny when people go on about the weight benefit of tubeless, and how they would never go back to tubed. But then say they always carry tubes "just in case". Kinda throws the whole weight and reliability argument out the window.
Well, in general I agree with the sentiment (we could all take a step back), but I think specifically here: - I would carry at least as many spare tubes if I were running tubed tires and - I'm far more likely to notice a difference in rotating weight as opposed to a tube in my jersey pocket.
Edit: I guess everyone above me said the same thing 😉 I should read the full thread first.
I once peeled dried sealant from inside a repair shop tire which came out in one piece. It was light brown and looked like a rattlesnake skin. I rolled it up and put it on the gram scale: it weighed 220g=1/2 pound.
Skldmark wrote:I once peeled dried sealant from inside a repair shop tire which came out in one piece. It was light brown and looked like a rattlesnake skin. I rolled it up and put it on the gram scale: it weighed 220g=1/2 pound.
Well, you buy a 500ml bottle of sealant, you have two tires, you have to use it all, right?
And what does a tube weigh? I'm sorry,i didnt mean to start an argument or sound condescending earlier, i just find it amusing. I understand the arguments, i just feel like sometimes "progress" is not necessarily a step forward. I've been seriously cycling for 35 years- road, mtb, now gravel. Never really found tubes to be a big issue, so i have no reason to switch. I weigh 205 lbs, i run tubed tires at 35-40 psi, it works great, and i havnt flatted in over 2 years . Having said that, i'll prob flat on my next ride.
Cmtgravel wrote:And what does a tube weigh? I'm sorry,i didnt mean to start an argument or sound condescending earlier, i just find it amusing. I understand the arguments, i just feel like sometimes "progress" is not necessarily a step forward. I've been seriously cycling for 35 years- road, mtb, now gravel. Never really found tubes to be a big issue, so i have no reason to switch. I weigh 205 lbs, i run tubed tires at 35-40 psi, it works great, and i havnt flatted in over 2 years . Having said that, i'll prob flat on my next ride.
Ha, yes, you'll definitely flat on the next ride :-) (I hope not.)
A tube weighs between 100-200g for gravel-size tires. But 220g of sealant is pretty ridiculous. That is not normal. The required amount of sealant weighs ~40g, if I remember right.
Skldmark wrote:I once peeled dried sealant from inside a repair shop tire which came out in one piece. It was light brown and looked like a rattlesnake skin. I rolled it up and put it on the gram scale: it weighed 220g=1/2 pound.
![[idea]](https://cdn.websitetoolbox.com/images/boards/smilies/idea.gif "Idea - :idea:")