indigo_pete
Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any thoughts?
Pete
Pete
View Full Version : Latex inner tubes??
Latex inner tubes??
Weisse Luft
Originally posted by indigo_pete
Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any thoughts?
Pete
Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant than butyl.
The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any thoughts?
Pete
Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant than butyl.
The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
Dave
indigo_pete wrote:
> Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
> about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
> to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
> thoughts? Pete
>
>
>
> --
>
>
Do you own a floor pump?
> Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
> about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
> to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
> thoughts? Pete
>
>
>
> --
>
>
Do you own a floor pump?
The Martins
Have been using them for 2 year with a set of Veloflex Pave. No problems at
all.
"indigo_pete" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:tIkIc.791$jB6.421@fe41.usenetserver.com...
> Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
> about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
> to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
> thoughts? Pete
>
>
>
> --
all.
"indigo_pete" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:tIkIc.791$jB6.421@fe41.usenetserver.com...
> Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
> about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
> to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
> thoughts? Pete
>
>
>
> --
Werehatrack
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 00:13:13 GMT, indigo_pete
<usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
>about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
>to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
>thoughts? Pete
Latex is more porous than butyl. Be prepared to pump up the
tires more often. They have no advantage whatsoever in the
area of punctures.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to
reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel.
<usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>Has anyone used the Michelin latex inner tubes? I thought
>about trying them in my road race wheels, but I don't want
>to put something in there that is a puncture risk. Any
>thoughts? Pete
Latex is more porous than butyl. Be prepared to pump up the
tires more often. They have no advantage whatsoever in the
area of punctures.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to
reply via email. Surrealism is a pectinated ranzel.
Mark Hickey
Weisse Luft <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>than butyl.
I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex tubes
(at least one model) may be more thornproof than a thicker
butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace around
the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but probably no
worse at least.
>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
That they do! Something to think about if you do long rides.
That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison to the
difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of the air
in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com (http://www.habcycles.com/) Home of
the $695 ti frame
>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>than butyl.
I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex tubes
(at least one model) may be more thornproof than a thicker
butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace around
the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but probably no
worse at least.
>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
That they do! Something to think about if you do long rides.
That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison to the
difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of the air
in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com (http://www.habcycles.com/) Home of
the $695 ti frame
Robert
Mark Hickey wrote:
> Weisse Luft <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>>than butyl.
>
>
> I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex
> tubes (at least one model) may be more thornproof than a
> thicker butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
> suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace
> around the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but
> probably no worse at least.
>
>
>>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
>
>
> That they do! Something to think about if you do long
> rides. That 40 grams savings is going to pale in
> comparison to the difference in rolling resistance if you
> lose 10% of the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5
> hour race.
Wait - lower tyre pressure does not necessarily cause
significant increase in rolling resistance. Factors such as
tread thickness and pliability of the casing fabric (thread
count per inch is an indicator) are greater determinants. I
refer to other threads in this NG where the rolling
resistance issue has been done to death many times ;-)
What I appreciate about latex tubes is that they are
slightly quieter and give a softer ride at a given pressure.
Sure they lose air but that's no more than 5% over a 12-hour
period. At 70g they are slightly heavier than the lightest
butyl (55g) but it's the comfort I like. Feels like I'm
riding singles (tubulars again).
But to get the ultimate comfort and low rolling resistance,
I'd like to recommend a latex tube together with the
Veloflex Master tyre (20 mm, 170 g). Casing is made of fine
(i.e. not coarse) fabric, and these tyres can be run as low
as 7 bar (98 psi?) without significant increase in rolling
resistance. They can also be removed without using tyre
levers. They're also rated up to 9 bar (130 psi) for those
who like a hard ride
. . .
/ Robert
> Weisse Luft <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>>than butyl.
>
>
> I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex
> tubes (at least one model) may be more thornproof than a
> thicker butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
> suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace
> around the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but
> probably no worse at least.
>
>
>>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
>
>
> That they do! Something to think about if you do long
> rides. That 40 grams savings is going to pale in
> comparison to the difference in rolling resistance if you
> lose 10% of the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5
> hour race.
Wait - lower tyre pressure does not necessarily cause
significant increase in rolling resistance. Factors such as
tread thickness and pliability of the casing fabric (thread
count per inch is an indicator) are greater determinants. I
refer to other threads in this NG where the rolling
resistance issue has been done to death many times ;-)
What I appreciate about latex tubes is that they are
slightly quieter and give a softer ride at a given pressure.
Sure they lose air but that's no more than 5% over a 12-hour
period. At 70g they are slightly heavier than the lightest
butyl (55g) but it's the comfort I like. Feels like I'm
riding singles (tubulars again).
But to get the ultimate comfort and low rolling resistance,
I'd like to recommend a latex tube together with the
Veloflex Master tyre (20 mm, 170 g). Casing is made of fine
(i.e. not coarse) fabric, and these tyres can be run as low
as 7 bar (98 psi?) without significant increase in rolling
resistance. They can also be removed without using tyre
levers. They're also rated up to 9 bar (130 psi) for those
who like a hard ride
. . .
/ Robert
Qui Si Parla Ca
indigo-<< I thought about trying them in my road race
wheels, but I don't want to put something in there that is a
puncture risk. Any thoughts? >><BR><BR>
No such thing as a free lunch. latex are lighter but also
not as duable as butyl.
Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com (http://www.vecchios.com/) "Ruote convenzionali
costruite eccezionalmente bene"
wheels, but I don't want to put something in there that is a
puncture risk. Any thoughts? >><BR><BR>
No such thing as a free lunch. latex are lighter but also
not as duable as butyl.
Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com (http://www.vecchios.com/) "Ruote convenzionali
costruite eccezionalmente bene"
Alex Rodriguez
In article <f074f013brd2q52be05gnsb07sqtk9gh0k@4ax.com>,
mark@habcycles.com says...
>Weisse Luft <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>>than butyl.
>I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex tubes
>(at least one model) may be more thornproof than a thicker
>butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
>suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace
>around the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but
>probably no worse at least.
I recall seeing an ad for a latex tube where the tube
is stretched over the sharp remains of a bottlw
without breaking.
>>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
>
>That they do! Something to think about if you do long
>rides. That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison
>to the difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of
>the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
I use to ride latex tubes and the main reason I don't any
more is that I would have to pump up the tires before every
ride. I never had major air loss on a single ride/race, so
that was not an issue for me.
---------------
Alex
mark@habcycles.com says...
>Weisse Luft <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:
>>Yes, they used to be the lightest but thin butyl are
>>just as light and are much cheaper. Latex are a bit more
>>puncture resistant to snakebite flatting but they are
>>not any more thorn/glass/nail/steel belt frag resistant
>>than butyl.
>I saw an independent analysis that suggests the latex tubes
>(at least one model) may be more thornproof than a thicker
>butyl tube. The author suggested it was due to the
>suppleness of the latex allowing the tube to displace
>around the thorn more easily. Maybe... maybe not, but
>probably no worse at least.
I recall seeing an ad for a latex tube where the tube
is stretched over the sharp remains of a bottlw
without breaking.
>>The other disadvantage of latex is they tend to lose
>>pressure more rapidly from diffusion.
>
>That they do! Something to think about if you do long
>rides. That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison
>to the difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of
>the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
I use to ride latex tubes and the main reason I don't any
more is that I would have to pump up the tires before every
ride. I never had major air loss on a single ride/race, so
that was not an issue for me.
---------------
Alex
Jp
Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com> wrote in message news:<f074f013brd2q52be05gnsb07sqtk9gh0k@4ax.com>...
> That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison to
> the difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of
> the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
My experience is that you could expect to lose 10-20% in
24 hours with reasonably fresh tires (tubes). My
experience also has been to see that number deteriorate as
tires (tubes) get more use, maybe related to
inflation/deflation cycles or keeping the tires (tubes)
pumped up between rides (but could just be coincidental
slow punctures- I don't know).
As I've said before here, I've had fewer punctures with
latex tubed tubulars, but that may be because generally with
tubulars the better tires have latex tubes.
JP
> That 40 grams savings is going to pale in comparison to
> the difference in rolling resistance if you lose 10% of
> the air in your tire over the course of a 4-5 hour race.
My experience is that you could expect to lose 10-20% in
24 hours with reasonably fresh tires (tubes). My
experience also has been to see that number deteriorate as
tires (tubes) get more use, maybe related to
inflation/deflation cycles or keeping the tires (tubes)
pumped up between rides (but could just be coincidental
slow punctures- I don't know).
As I've said before here, I've had fewer punctures with
latex tubed tubulars, but that may be because generally with
tubulars the better tires have latex tubes.
JP
Alex Rodriguez
In article <x4sIc.98364$dP1.330318@newsc.telia.net>,
rxobert.bxrown@txripnet.se says...
>What I appreciate about latex tubes is that they are
>slightly quieter and give a softer ride at a given
>pressure. Sure they lose air but that's no more than 5%
>over a 12-hour period. At 70g they are slightly heavier
>than the lightest butyl (55g) but it's the comfort I like.
>Feels like I'm riding singles (tubulars again).
Quieter?!?! I don't recall every having someone comment on
how load their tubes were.
-----------------
Alex
rxobert.bxrown@txripnet.se says...
>What I appreciate about latex tubes is that they are
>slightly quieter and give a softer ride at a given
>pressure. Sure they lose air but that's no more than 5%
>over a 12-hour period. At 70g they are slightly heavier
>than the lightest butyl (55g) but it's the comfort I like.
>Feels like I'm riding singles (tubulars again).
Quieter?!?! I don't recall every having someone comment on
how load their tubes were.
-----------------
Alex
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0