Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 479
  1. #51
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    2 scoops, weighs 60g'ish. Same amount i was injecting into my Qtubes.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  2. #52
    viva la v-brakes!
    Reputation: FishMan473's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,722
    Ozzy, this looks very promising but I have to ask: you really get away with just 2 scoops of Stans in this? I'm not sure that I'd trust less than 3, and I have no need to seal holes just cover the inner surface of the tire.

    For those of us NOT riding in the thorny outback this is still heavier than q-tubes (without sealant), but only nominally. I really wish someone could do some quanitifyable analysis on tubes vs no-tubes with fat-bike tires.
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    I have a car. I made a choice. I ride my bike.

  3. #53
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Not understanding you calculations ? I have done this now 5 times and done the calcs everytime. Im only posting it up here to help others decide.

    My bare wheel is 1745g, setup tubeless is 1855g so 110g total for the tubeless setup. Q-tubes weigh 220g and thats without a rimstrip. How much are your rimstrips weighing ? add that to the 220g.

    Its well under half the weight of the lightest tube'd setup.

    If you want to add 2 scoops of stans its a total of 170g, even 3 scoops takes it to around 200g. I was adding 2 scoops to my Qtubes anyway as small punctures here are a PITA, ive been tubeless for 5 years on all my other bikes.... i couldnt go any longer with tubes in the fat wheels.

    Adding more stans only makes it last longer, 2 scoops is plenty for 2-3 months then just add some more. Theres no need to fill the wheel with it because if you get a stick puncture it only going to spit the lot of it on the trail anyway.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  4. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,153
    A Surly rim strip weighs over 100 grams.

    Two things to note when comparing weighs of tubeless vs. tubed:

    In a tubeless setup the weight is closer to center, which means it affects acceleration less.
    Also the sealant is liquid, which is not the same as solid weight when it comes to acceleration.

  5. #55
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Saul Lumikko View Post
    A Surly rim strip weighs over 100 grams.
    Even with the lightest rim strip configuration, tubeless with this 3M tape, Vinyl rimstrip and foam is still half the weight.

    Saul im not 100% on your theory of rolling water, at a certain speed all the liquid gets centrifugally displaced around the worst place there is.... being the inside of the tread wall.

    But after my findings, im sure theres a lot of riders out there that are not even counting rim strips.... they are a shocking weight unless you have been careful with them.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  6. #56
    viva la v-brakes!
    Reputation: FishMan473's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Even with the lightest rim strip configuration, tubeless with this 3M tape, Vinyl rimstrip and foam is still half the weight.
    Ozzy, again I think you are coming up with a good system here. BUT, I don't see how you can claim its "half the weight" of a tubed system. Maybe if you have a tube with sealant in it, which for your purposes may be necessary, but for me, and most fatbikers, is not.

    By your most optimistic math:

    110 g of tubeless rim set-up + 170g (only 2 scoops!) of sealant = 280 g
    100 g of Surly rim strop + 220 Q-tube = 320 g

    Lighter? Yes. Half the weight? not even close... 10% is more like it.

    Plus I think your calculations are optimistic. I would not run a 3.7" tire tubeless with any less than 3 scoops. Basic geometry tells you that a 3.7" tire has twice the surface area of a 2.2 tire, meaning you should probably add about twice as much sealant. And you can make your own rimstrip (as I did) that is lighter than the Surly strip, I think mine is around 60 grams.

    Still the weights are comparable. For me, the ease of changing a flat in sub-freezing conditions with gloves on seems higher with tubes than it would for tubeless, and that factor overrides a few grams of weight plus or minus, as far as I am concerned. Obviously for you puncture sealing is more critical. Different folks, different strokes.

    I want to know more about rolling resistance and ride quality of tubed vs tubeless. Positive impacts in these departments would compel me to give tubeless a try. Thanks for working through all the bugs for me
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    I have a car. I made a choice. I ride my bike.

  7. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fakie1999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by FishMan473 View Post
    For me, the ease of changing a flat in sub-freezing conditions with gloves on seems higher with tubes than it would for tubeless, and that factor overrides a few grams of weight plus or minus, as far as I am concerned.
    Changing a flat would be no different really.

    In a tubeless setup, break the bead, remove valve stem, install tube.

    In a tubed setup, break the bead, remove old tube, install new tube.

    I do agree on the amount of sealant though. 2 scoops in such a big tire doesnt sound like it would be very effective. Thats how much sealant I use in 29x2.2 tires.

  8. #58
    viva la v-brakes!
    Reputation: FishMan473's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Fakie1999 View Post
    Changing a flat would be no different really.
    Except that you're likely to get wet, gooey and cold.
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    I have a car. I made a choice. I ride my bike.

  9. #59
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,156
    This reminds me, I should clean out my AM/FR bike tires of the Stan's sealant... then I can post photos of Stan's Boogers.

  10. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by FishMan473 View Post
    Ozzy, again I think you are coming up with a good system here. BUT, I don't see how you can claim its "half the weight" of a tubed system. Maybe if you have a tube with sealant in it, which for your purposes may be necessary, but for me, and most fatbikers, is not.

    By your most optimistic math:

    110 g of tubeless rim set-up + 170g (only 2 scoops!) of sealant = 280 g
    100 g of Surly rim strop + 220 Q-tube = 320 g

    Lighter? Yes. Half the weight? not even close... 10% is more like it.

    Plus I think your calculations are optimistic. I would not run a 3.7" tire tubeless with any less than 3 scoops. Basic geometry tells you that a 3.7" tire has twice the surface area of a 2.2 tire, meaning you should probably add about twice as much sealant. And you can make your own rimstrip (as I did) that is lighter than the Surly strip, I think mine is around 60 grams.

    Still the weights are comparable. For me, the ease of changing a flat in sub-freezing conditions with gloves on seems higher with tubes than it would for tubeless, and that factor overrides a few grams of weight plus or minus, as far as I am concerned. Obviously for you puncture sealing is more critical. Different folks, different strokes.

    I want to know more about rolling resistance and ride quality of tubed vs tubeless. Positive impacts in these departments would compel me to give tubeless a try. Thanks for working through all the bugs for me
    I think he was saying 170g is total setup with 60g of sealant(2 scoops).

    So, 110g of valve,tape and foam + 60g of sealant = 170g
    220g tube + 100g rim strip = 320g

    not half, but pretty darn close.

  11. #61
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post
    I think he was saying 170g is total setup with 60g of sealant(2 scoops).

    So, 110g of valve,tape and foam + 60g of sealant = 170g
    220g tube + 100g rim strip = 320g

    not half, but pretty darn close.
    spot on ^^^

    Plus I was adding the sealant to my tubes anyway.

    170g of sealant would be near 1/4 of a litre.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  12. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    I think you're right about the flat tire situation too, if you do get a rip big enough to need a tube put in, it should be easy enough to pop the valve out of the way, and stick a tube in. So, unless you're trying to not have to carry a spare tube, and rely on a patch kit, It's about the same, and a patch kit would be very difficult in gloves.
    Besides, If you're going tubeless, it should be very rare that you get a flat at all.

  13. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Saul Lumikko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,153
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Saul im not 100% on your theory of rolling water, at a certain speed all the liquid gets centrifugally displaced around the worst place there is.... being the inside of the tread wall.
    The difference between liquid and solid is not 100% this or that, there are lots of factors like viscosity and friction (liquids still have some). The point is that when you accelerate from standstill and the tire rotates 1/4 turns for example, the tube will rotate the exact same amount at the same time. Liquid will gradually pick up the speed and spread out to the tread wall, but at that point you're rolling already and weight location (far from center) isn't so critical. When you've reached the speed you keep, rolling weight matters very little. Going uphill you of course pull all the weight with you, but that includes you, all your gear and the bike regardless of where the weight is.

    It's not like liquid weight has zero effect on acceleration, but the effect is reduced compared to solid weight, so I think they can not be compared gram for gram. I'll rather take 100 grams of sealant in my tires instead of 100 grams of rubber.

    Going further would require a lot of testing to see how much exactly the difference is. All I say is that there is a slight difference in the favor of liquid.

  14. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Schott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    586

    Tubeless Tuesday.

    Do you know how long it took to find this thread again? Search is a fail. I'm carsick from scrolling. Worth it, redoing my tubeless, and I want that tape.

  15. #65
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Schott, both my sets are still tight as ****. No leakage and the foam was holding up really well last time i looked.

    The tape looks like its done an awesome job.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  16. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sickmtbnutcase's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    135
    Yup, same here (thanks to this thread). Have run some very low pressure for snow. bottomed out on the rim a few times with no ill effects. No burps. Essentially perfect so far.

  17. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    Schott, both my sets are still tight as ****. No leakage and the foam was holding up really well last time i looked.

    The tape looks like its done an awesome job.
    Would that be the "Gorilla Tape" that is doing a great job?

  18. #68
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    Would that be the "Gorilla Tape" that is doing a great job?
    No, the 8898 Strapping tape (blue). I will never stick Gorilla tape on a set of wheels ever again.

    Ive had about 5-6 rolls in different widths over the past 2 years and used it on every wheel ive had in that time, my enve wheels also came with Gorilla tape from the factory and i dont know why they stick with it, its heavy, it leaves a messy residue, it moves when air pressure pushes against it (more critical on fat wheels), it has or gets over time an uneven glue spread allowing tubeless fluid to go through and under it and the tyre bead sticks to the glue ripping threads off the tape when you remove a tyre.

    You tear the old stuff off to replace it and spend an hour plus getting glue off your rim seat/bead of each wheel.

    All 4 sets of wheels i have now are tubeless with the strapping tape and doing beautifully.

    IMO its terrible stuff but YMMV.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  19. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by ozzybmx View Post
    No, the 8898 Strapping tape (blue). I will never stick Gorilla tape on a set of wheels ever again.

    Ive had about 5-6 rolls in different widths over the past 2 years and used it on every wheel ive had in that time, my enve wheels also came with Gorilla tape from the factory and i dont know why they stick with it, its heavy, it leaves a messy residue, it moves when air pressure pushes against it (more critical on fat wheels), it has or gets over time an uneven glue spread allowing tubeless fluid to go through and under it and the tyre bead sticks to the glue ripping threads off the tape when you remove a tyre.

    You tear the old stuff off to replace it and spend an hour plus getting glue off your rim seat/bead of each wheel.

    All 4 sets of wheels i have now are tubeless with the strapping tape and doing beautifully.

    IMO its terrible stuff but YMMV.
    Thanks for the clarification! What width do you use and where did you get it?

  20. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OFFcourse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    744
    The only tape I could find close to suitable in middle-earth was called BearTape (I think it's the same as gorilla), with a strip on the left side, right side and in the middle. It weighted in pretty close to a surly 90g rim strip, but the sealant was coming out through the cut outs and unused spoke holes it needed another couple wraps to seal. I thought I was losing some weight with my 18g of nylon and packing foam then the tape went on
    Blue tape looks to be the ticket.

  21. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    50
    I just taped my Surly rimstrip on the rim with Stan's tape. It might be a 50g heavier solution than without the rimstrip, but I get to keep the cool blue rimstrip.

  22. #72
    Fat & Single
    Reputation: ozzybmx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,742
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    Thanks for the clarification! What width do you use and where did you get it?

    If you are in the US you can get it from RS Hughes in any width, i could only get it in 48mm here so that was the width i used.
    Ti O'Beast
    Indy Fab
    One9
    Dirty Disco CX

  23. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: alshead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,245
    Anyone find the 8898 tape in anything wider than 72mm? I'm trying to go tubeless on a set of Holy Rolling Daryls with 120tpi HD's. One wheel seated up with some foam and gorilla tape, but the other won't seat up no matter what I try. I've tried split tube, foam, gorilla tape + stans in the bead socket... just won't air up.
    "There are two kinds of mountain bikers in the world: those who are faster than me, and me."

  24. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BoogieMang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by alshead View Post
    Anyone find the 8898 tape in anything wider than 72mm? I'm trying to go tubeless on a set of Holy Rolling Daryls with 120tpi HD's. One wheel seated up with some foam and gorilla tape, but the other won't seat up no matter what I try. I've tried split tube, foam, gorilla tape + stans in the bead socket... just won't air up.
    I was able to get my HuDu to seat up on a Rolling Darryl with just gorilla tape. I had to put a tube in, seat the beads, unseat one side, pull the tube out, and then was able to get the other bead to seat with a compressor... it wasn't exactly easy, as I did have to kind of pull up on the sidewall to get it to pop on... a pair of extra hands helps.

  25. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by alshead View Post
    Anyone find the 8898 tape in anything wider than 72mm? I'm trying to go tubeless on a set of Holy Rolling Daryls with 120tpi HD's. One wheel seated up with some foam and gorilla tape, but the other won't seat up no matter what I try. I've tried split tube, foam, gorilla tape + stans in the bead socket... just won't air up.
    I put Larry's on my Daryls. Layer of foam, then Standard Gorilla overalpped for width. Do not put tape in the bead area. Inflate w/compressor Until it beads. Fill through valve w/ syringe. Has not leaked a pound since January.

Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •