Weight Weenies

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 9:14 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:51 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 20, 2023 3:18 pm

If you are concerned about the puncture/faliure protection of your tubless setup I would consider using airliners. This way you have both, good puncture protection through the sealant and protection against runflats through the airliners in case of a more catastrophic failure.

I am running the same 25/28 GP 5000 S TR setup like you plus Vittoria Airliners. I am verry happy with this setup and personally don't see a reason to change this.

What sort of catastrophic failures are you imagining?

Basically every puncture or cut that is too big for sealant to seal which will then unevitably lead to a runflat.

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 4:53 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 9:14 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:51 pm

What sort of catastrophic failures are you imagining?

Basically every puncture or cut that is too big for sealant to seal which will then unevitably lead to a runflat.

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Aren't those expensive carbon wheels only giving you about as much of an advantage as the liners are taking away? Better to buy cheaper carbon wheels with no liners. Same overall performance, more money to spend elsewhere.

Why not just have an innertube and something to patch the tire?
And wasn't this problem also present with inner tubes?

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 5:40 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 4:53 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 9:14 am

Basically every puncture or cut that is too big for sealant to seal which will then unevitably lead to a runflat.

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Aren't those expensive carbon wheels only giving you about as much of an advantage as the liners are taking away? Better to buy cheaper carbon wheels with no liners. Same overall performance, more money to spend elsewhere.

Why not just have an innertube and something to patch the tire?
And wasn't this problem also present with inner tubes?

clearly off-topic.. but you are not correct. The penalty for liners is next to nothing. Like 0.1-.2 watts. (if we are talking about something like Vittoria airliners)

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 5:40 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 4:53 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 9:14 am

Basically every puncture or cut that is too big for sealant to seal which will then unevitably lead to a runflat.

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Aren't those expensive carbon wheels only giving you about as much of an advantage as the liners are taking away? Better to buy cheaper carbon wheels with no liners. Same overall performance, more money to spend elsewhere.

Why not just have an innertube and something to patch the tire?
And wasn't this problem also present with inner tubes?

Because airliners remove a catastrophic failure scenario from a critical component on your bike. And yes, it's been a problem with pretty much every tire technology out there. Slightly less with tubs but even they don't exactly have amazing handling when empty.

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 5:40 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 4:53 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Aren't those expensive carbon wheels only giving you about as much of an advantage as the liners are taking away? Better to buy cheaper carbon wheels with no liners. Same overall performance, more money to spend elsewhere.

Not sure what you are trying to prove or disprove here, but your statement above is not correct:
"The averaged test results clearly show there is no rolling resistance penalty when using the Air-Liner Road" (Jarno Biermann, https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... er-average). Also, the additional 20g of rotational mass added by an airliner is a rather insignificant addition to the overall rotational mass of the tubeless tire setup, i.e., tire + tape + vale + sealant totalling +/-300g.

But we are digressing from the original topic...

Lina wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 7:04 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

Why not just have an innertube and something to patch the tire?
And wasn't this problem also present with inner tubes?

Because airliners remove a catastrophic failure scenario from a critical component on your bike. And yes, it's been a problem with pretty much every tire technology out there. Slightly less with tubs but even they don't exactly have amazing handling when empty.

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

Don't forget, this is the Aeroad thread where we are discussing about bikes typically equipped with DT Swiss ARC 1400 or 1100 wheels which retail between 1400 and 1600 EUR. According to my math, the extra 50 EUR for an airliners is an insurance for both my health and my wheels which is well worth the cost.

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 10:39 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 5:40 pm

edchristoph wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 4:53 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

Isn't the subset of runflats that are fast enough to be dangerous along with it happening in a situation where it is dangerous along with situations that aren't so dangerous that the airliner can do its job properly incredibly small?

Even if you have a rather slow runflat (although I would make the argument that a puncture which is too big for the sealant to do its job will almost always cause rapid pressure loss) at some point you will damage your wheels. This, at least for me, is the big advantage of using an airliner: it protects me and my expensive carbon wheels in any case of runflat. It even allows me to continue my ride to safely get back home (I had this once) without damaging anyting.

Aren't those expensive carbon wheels only giving you about as much of an advantage as the liners are taking away? Better to buy cheaper carbon wheels with no liners. Same overall performance, more money to spend elsewhere.

Not sure what you are trying to prove or disprove here, but your statement above is not correct:
"The averaged test results clearly show there is no rolling resistance penalty when using the Air-Liner Road" (Jarno Biermann, https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... er-average). Also, the additional 20g of rotational mass added by an airliner is a rather insignificant addition to the overall rotational mass of the tubeless tire setup, i.e., tire + tape + vale + sealant totalling +/-300g.

But we are digressing from the original topic...

Lina wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 7:04 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:54 pm

Why not just have an innertube and something to patch the tire?
And wasn't this problem also present with inner tubes?

Because airliners remove a catastrophic failure scenario from a critical component on your bike. And yes, it's been a problem with pretty much every tire technology out there. Slightly less with tubs but even they don't exactly have amazing handling when empty.

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

Don't forget, this is the Aeroad thread where we are discussing about bikes typically equipped with DT Swiss ARC 1400 or 1100 wheels which retail between 1400 and 1600 EUR. According to my math, the extra 50 EUR for an airliners is an insurance for both my health and my wheels which is well worth the cost.

I have an Aeroad CFR EPS. I know what the wheels are. I don't run airliners and I've never had any 'insurance' on any of my bikes for blowouts.

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:19 pm

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

Lina wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:20 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:19 pm

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

exactly... disc brake, tubeless and liners. Somethings the average joe was using before the pro's adopted

Lina wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:20 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:19 pm

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

Did you also run thick heavy tubes on clinchers in the past as insurance against blowouts?

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 6:47 am

Lina wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:20 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:19 pm

^^^^This is exactly it and probaly one of the reasons why so many pro teams are moving from tubs to tubless w/ airliners.

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

Did you also run thick heavy tubes on clinchers in the past as insurance against blowouts?

Could you use heavy tubes without effect on rolling resistance or ride feel? No you couldn't.

Lina wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 7:39 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 6:47 am

Lina wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:20 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:19 pm

This is the real reason people are moving to airliners. Following the pros without thinking.

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

Did you also run thick heavy tubes on clinchers in the past as insurance against blowouts?

Could you use heavy tubes without effect on rolling resistance or ride feel? No you couldn't.

The lowest rolling resistance and best ride feel tires are more likely to blowout, so you are likely to have to a degree already chosen safety over feel already.

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 28, 2023 2:12 pm

Lina wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 7:39 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 6:47 am

Lina wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:20 pm

Just no. As weird as it may seem to you some people are infact capable of thinking for themselves. I've been for tubeless long before pros were on them. I've been for shorter cranks, narrower bars, more forward saddle position before they were in. I've had a blowout with clinchers, airliners are a cheap insurance for my rims and especially for my health in case of blowouts. It's NOT fun when you have a blowout at +50 km/h. I've yet to test one with the airliners but I'm confident it's going to be better than without them.

Did you also run thick heavy tubes on clinchers in the past as insurance against blowouts?

Could you use heavy tubes without effect on rolling resistance or ride feel? No you couldn't.

The lowest rolling resistance and best ride feel tires are more likely to blowout, so you are likely to have to a degree already chosen safety over feel already.

My current tires are the 5th fastest tires BRR has tested. So there's not many faster tires out there. And the only reason I won't use TT specific tires is because they have such little tread that you'd have to change them every couple of weeks and that gets pretty expensive pretty fast. For a specific big race I might even do it if my tires need to be replaced before it anyway. With clinchers I wouldn't do that because the risk of puncturing would be much higher. And again, with tubeless and airliners it's possible to run the fastest tires you want without having to worry about blowouts or flats the same way. It's yet another benefit of tubeless tires. It's possible to confidently run faster tires without having to worry about flats or blowouts.

Lina wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 28, 2023 2:41 pm

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 28, 2023 2:12 pm

Lina wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 7:39 am

BenCousins wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 27, 2023 6:47 am

Did you also run thick heavy tubes on clinchers in the past as insurance against blowouts?

Could you use heavy tubes without effect on rolling resistance or ride feel? No you couldn't.

The lowest rolling resistance and best ride feel tires are more likely to blowout, so you are likely to have to a degree already chosen safety over feel already.

My current tires are the 5th fastest tires BRR has tested. So there's not many faster tires out there. And the only reason I won't use TT specific tires is because they have such little tread that you'd have to change them every couple of weeks and that gets pretty expensive pretty fast. For a specific big race I might even do it if my tires need to be replaced before it anyway. With clinchers I wouldn't do that because the risk of puncturing would be much higher. And again, with tubeless and airliners it's possible to run the fastest tires you want without having to worry about blowouts or flats the same way. It's yet another benefit of tubeless tires. It's possible to confidently run faster tires without having to worry about flats or blowouts.

Feels like a weird combo to run the most dangerous tires out there with a liner. Are you doing flat or flattish races?

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

I recently got a Aeroad SL with the DT Swiss ARC 1600 rims and GP5000 clinchers. Currently running Conti race butyl tubes (normal race, not the light).

I've been considering going tubeless to reduce rolling resistance but quite worried about the safety (blowouts), so now considering the GP5000S TR + Vitorria airliner combo.

The ARC1600 are tubeless ready, 20mm hooked rims, so hopefully able to get a good seal with the GP5000S TR.

The bike from factory is running a 25mm/28mm combo. Sticking to these sizes would suggest a small size airliner upfront and a medium size in the back. I wonder if the small would still work in the back with the 20mm rim and 28mm tyre combo so I can just get the small road kit and avoid having to buy an extra medium liner. I could also switch to 28mm tyres front and back, and use a medium kit but not sure about the aero loss given the narrow rims.

My objectives are to reduce rolling resistance, not increase weight, add rim protection in case of a flat and improve safety in case of a blowout. Keen to hear what others have done and any thoughts or recommendations.