We use UL 26x2.4-2.7 tubes in Surly Endomorph/Larry 26x3.7 tires.
Saves about a pound per wheel over the standard tube. Haven't had one
of these flat yet.

On Jun 14, 11:01 pm, cyclotourist <cyclotour...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, my buddy uses 26" tubes in his 29er wheels.  They're lighter than 29er
> UL tubes (and half the cost) as well as the tubeless fluids/strips.  He's
> pretty happy with his set up, and doesn't puncture very often.  He says it's
> not a hassle to mount them, but YMMV.
>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <
>
>
>
> thill....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't want to get into a 2nd hand argument with Eric Hjertberg about
> > aerodynamics of spokes, but I would suggest that the OP is riding a
> > Hillborne (not the usual choice for the TT crowd) and that he just did
> > his first century with relatively large, heavy touring tires. I'm sure
> > there are at least a dozen things he could do to refine his technique
> > or free/cheap ways to make his bike faster that would have more effect
> > than cutting the aero drag of a few spokes. But now that you mentioned
> > it, maybe Jan Heine can repeat his tire rolling resistance tests,
> > except to test the effect of different numbers and lacing patterns of
> > spokes. I have an academic background in fluid mechanics for whatever
> > that's worth (not much), and based on no data, I believe the
> > aerodynamic effect of a few spokes is negligible. But I've been wrong
> > before.
>
> > I don't believe ultralight tubes get punctured more often. If
> > something sharp goes through the tire, it'll most likely poke a hole
> > in any tube, regardless of whether that tube is ultralight or normal
> > thickness. I've been using UL tubes for a couple years, with no
> > noticeable increase in my flat-rate. Nothing fancy, just Kenda or QBP-
> > brand lightweight tubes. Curiously, probably because a lot of people
> > are leery of lightweight tubes, I often find them cheaper than regular
> > tubes.
>
> > On Jun 14, 9:05 pm, "XO-1.org Rough Riders" <adventureco...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Eric Hjertberg, who knows more about wheels than the rest of the
> > > planet combined, told me that the combined frontal area of 36 spokes
> > > is more than the bicycle frame itself, plus the spokes are spinning
> > > through the air as the bike moves forward, further adding drag to our
> > > forward movement. Thus, "the point" of having less spokes is about
> > > aerodynamics, NOT weight.
>
> > > As for ultralight tubes, any time saved because they are lighter and
> > > offer less rolling resistance is probably negligible, especially when
> > > compared to the time lost to the higher frequency of punctures they
> > > will provide.
>
> > > - Chris Kostman
> > > La Jolla, CAhttp://www.XO-1.orghttp://www.adventurecorps.com
>
> > > On Jun 14, 6:39 pm, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > The spoke count matters very little compared to the weight of the tire/
> > > > tube/rim combination. You can save a bunch of rolling weight and
> > > > probably improve rolling resistance, for example, simply by switching
> > > > to an ultralight tube (I almost always use ultralight tubes). You save
> > > > even more rolling weight by switching to any of the 200-250-ish gram
> > > > 25-28 mm tires on the market. If you go with new wheels, I second an
> > > > earlier recommendation of the Velocity Aerohead. Lacing radial in the
> > > > front and half-radial in the back probably saves as much spoke weight
> > > > as going to an exotically low number of spokes (exotic in the sense
> > > > that there aren't many economical 24h hubs). You could even splurge on
> > > > DT Revolution butted spokes if you wanna go crazy. Buying expensive
> > > > lightweight hubs and cassettes will give you considerably less bang
> > > > for your buck.
>
> > > > Also: Consider ways to improve aerodynamics, reduce the number and
> > > > duration of stops, work on eating/drinking on the bike without
> > > > stopping, etc.
>
> > > > Or, my favorite solution: reject the dominant racing paradigm and
> > > > embrace your slowness!
>
> > > > On Jun 14, 12:39 am, andrew hill <neurod...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > thanks guys - good suggestion.
>
> > > > > i'm using Mavic rims with 36h XT hubs front and rear, with 40mm
> > Schwalbe Mara Supremems.
> > > > > a lighter 32h wheelest/tires for event rides is an extremely good
> > idea.  and then i'd have one for a road-ey bike if i wanted to go more
> > dedicated :)
>
> > > > > best,
> > > > > andrew
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> David
> Redlands, CA
>
> "Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something
> wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym."  ~Bill Nye,
> scientist guy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Reply via email to