Bike Forums - Weight difference between clinchers and tubular? (2024)

Ergal was code for higher strength Alloys like 7075, then the plan is to use less , and not sacrifice strength

over less yield strength, but thicker wall tubing .. so of similar strength, you would roll into a rim..

now You have tubular rims that are extruded as well .. nice detail there is a little groove for the sewn seam
to lay into . so glued surface is increased ..

all Clincher rims are extruded.. then rolled into a circle..

Think you are too heavy on the tubular and too light on the clincher.
Component Weights, by Damon Rinard

Indeed, riding on lightweight wheels is more fun. As for the coasting effect, it is real and you can even feel it on a per-pedal-stroke basis. But it is pertinent only in that situation. Around here at least, I do a lot of acceleration, deceleration, acceleration etc. for reasons unrelated to going up and down hills. Any slowing at all, even unintentional, for any reason except going uphill means speed lost which must be regained by pedaling. Which is another way of saying, as some has already said here, there is no such thing as "at a constant speed", nor is there any such thing as the mythical "straight flat road with no wind".

And he forgot the weights of the extra tubular versus the extra tube that one carries with them on a ride.

Yup. I like the feel of good quality tubulars, and I would only look for a few oz weight advantage when racing where no spare tire is needed.

You still don't get it.

So you place better because of the few oz weight advantage?

Probably not, but tubulars are lighter overall, so might as well use them for racing.

Ok, directly from Rinard:

Mavic MA40 471,476,482,509,513,513 claimed 460
Mavic GP4 403,404,405 claimed 395 old style

I'll use the midpoint values including the claimed value.

MA40: 480 grams

GP4: 400 grams

So my estimates should be corrected to tubular mass is 675 gramsClincher mass is 800 grams

Win for tubular at 125 grams saved per wheel!

It's still not really accurate since I don't have measurements on the tires. Rinard shows about 210 grams for my clincher (versus my 240 g), but does not show any Paris-Roubaix tires. My inner tube guesstimate was certainly in the ballpark for cheap tubes.

Correct.

Except you omit the conservation of energy. Once that higher outside mass has been accelerated, it takes more energy to de-accelerate it than the inside mass wheel.

So as gravity, wind resistance and tire resistance easily slows the "light" wheel, it doesn't with the "heavy" wheel. Or do you forget the hour record set with "heavy" wheels?

So over any ride greater than 30 minutes (and probably even less), accelerations and de-accelerations are equal. Inertia is equal.

So, kind Sir, please use your powers of elucidation and enlighten us.

My $.02 is that the most important things about tires are the rolling resistance, traction and puncture resistance (compound), with weight being down the list. Generally a heavier tire (kevlar strip etc) will not roll as well, so weight sort of has an impact, but maybe not for the acceleration reason that most often is given. Silk tubulars with latex tubes will roll really well, so that's their upside IMO.

Wheels have other factors where weight plays in also (such as spoke count impacting crosswind resistance). Carrying a spare tubular vs an inner tube, or patch kit, is probably going to negate the difference due to acceleration. I really think lighter feels faster, but I haven't been able to quantify it in any measurable way.

Of course.

Absolutely, or at least not so easily. Thus the use of flywheels on engines (a topic in itself)

Ahhhh, but here's the rub - time. It will take longer to accelerate and, even more important, perhaps, de-accelerate, with a greater flywheel effect. So, equal, but longer. Again I suggest, which would you rather ride, a 30-pound bike with ten-pound wheels, or a 30-pound bike with 20-pound wheels.

But its a know fact that most C&V riders are frugal, very frugal. How many of you actually ride 'light' tires and tubes?

A 'light' clincher tire/tube combo is 300g
A 'light' tubular is 250g.
Comparable clincher/tubular rim difference as noted above ~75g

Total difference 125g X2 or 250g or 9oz +/- or 1/2 pound!! I'll venture a guess and say most of C&V guys here could easily shave 1 pound or more of rotating weight.

That's already been covered, so I left it for you to add into the picture. Good job!

But really, I carry a canvas Acorn saddle bag with spare gloves, some small tools, a spare Paris-Roubaix, and a 2+ pound lock, slung under a Selle Anatomica saddle. I'm not interested in the question, "what makes a bike lighter?" And I suspect a lot of the rest of us are not, as well.

(and I just read Michigan law, and even my sport bike needs to get a headlight)

I just like the way tubulars feel.

So Sced, if you want to nail down "what makes a racing bike lighter?" have at it. But my numbers are not a part of that answer, since the components I'm including are not light enough to be racing parts, except perhaps for some unusual situations. Certainly not for track or criterium. For that you need to compare lightest to lightest, which is not what the thread was about in the first place.

Reading the Rinard list, I'm certain it's possible to find clincher setups that are lighter than some tubular setups, and vice versa. A useful "generic" mass estimate for "tubular" cannot be determined, nor can one for "clincher."

In the Rinard list we can find measured masses of an amazingly wide range of components, but no statistics on what parts were used for what kind of riding and for how much time. So there's no way to come up with a representative mass for rim, tire, and tube. I think a true answer to the OP's question is not possible.

Your 30-pound bike thingy has no relevance whatsoever. A relevant example system is 170 lb rider + 30 lb bike = 200 lb. A difference of 0.5 lb in wheel weight equals 0.5/200 = 0.25% - a small difference given the fatty olde fa*ts that we are and variability in road, weather, terrain, and bowel conditions. Even the 0.5 lb difference goes away if we throw on a spare tubular. The rotating weight versus weight elsewhere according to the linked articles and the laws of physics is, as a practical matter, a fallacy.

Ride what you like but don't proselytize wives tales and hearsay.

Quoted for truth. ROTFL. "Fan from me the witless chaff of such a writer."

Oh boy, I love a good tire discussion! :thumb:

I don't mean to be pedantic here (and I respect that you know what you are talking about and what you mean here) but technically deceleration means the wheel loses energy so it requires none directly from the rider. In braking the only work (in a physics sense) the rider must do is squeeze the brake levers. Kinetic energy is converted to heat at the pad-rim interface and therefore is not recoverable. Brakes are generally capable enough that wheel weight differences are insignificant for deceleration rate.

Now, if you are on a fixie and decelerate with reverse force on the pedals, that requires chemical energy in the muscles. Of course muscles are not subject to energy conservation in that you can put energy back in. They aren't especially efficient either because they burn energy (and generate lactic acid, etc.) just by exerting a static force without producing any displacement, a necessary component of work and therefore of energy transfer. But that's a whole 'nother question.

Normally I would not post anything like what I am about to write, but I am doing so now because your notes (admittedly the second was not directed at me) are a direct challenge. And it will make me feel good to do so. :)

Son (I know little about you but I'm old enough to call most males "son" and be figuratively accurate), I don't care doodlysquat how I place because I don't "place" at all, never have, never intend to. But I enjoy riding hard sometimes and, as has already been stated, lighter wheels feel better. If I and others can feel the difference, then that's what is important.

[self-aggrandizement on]As for whether I (or any other C&V member) get it, I've been riding derailleur bikes for 43 years. I've ridden good bikes and bad, light and heavy.
Check my bike list. I believe I could tell which one I was on if I were riding blindfolded (until I ran into something:bike2:). I've ridden 8000 miles this year alone. I've commuted on tubulars and several different grades and sizes of clinchers. My sweetie and I have ridden our tandem 7000 miles since I rebuilt it 5 years ago from a bare frame and a few parts. So I have some small experience, though no racing experience. Compared to some BF members, even mine isn't very much.

FWIW, I understand the physics very well, what matters and what doesn't. I hold a BS in physics from Va Tech and a PhD from MIT in geophysics. So there isn't too much I "don't get" when it comes down to details.[self-aggrandizement off]

What I do get is that I and others can feel a difference in wheel weight, and we know what is important to us.

Oh boy, I love a good tire discussion! :thumb:

The feel is important. It's how I know what will work for me on the open roads. If moseying along on a bike path (not that there is anything wrong with that) there are nuances that will not become obvious until I want to maintain a strong 19-21mph pace and/or climbing steep grades. This where I want a light bike that has light wheels/tires/tubes and low friction drivetrain. To say it again, I can feel the difference between a 23 and 25mm tire at similar pressures. Now, to the rocket scientists that often spout fancy equations I am not supposed to be able to figure this out. Maybe I should carry a physics textbook in my seatbag and balance a laptop on the top tube.

Thanx for your common sense postings, Jim. I do read them. :)

As somebody who has only rode 'clinchers' in the single digit dollar bracket, I am also enjoying this thread.

This makes me want to stick with what I got. Ignorance is bliss!

:lol:

I really think you read too much. Like most, you get too scientific.

Do you or have you really ridden a set of sew-ups? I mean go and bang on em' ike they are designed to do, not ride it to your local coffee shop, sit and look at the wheels with a cup of joe in your hand.

.5lbs will make a difference because you still have strength in your legs and requires you to get the bike going or sprint for a light. You do that still, do ya?

Sew-ups (light weight) were make for racing. Nothing more. 1/4 lbs on the outer edge of each wheel will kill ya in a 60 mile race, much longer in a div 1 pro race. In racing they want durability then weight depending on the course and the conditions. Its a calculated comprise. Suck wheel for 1/2 miles, all the weight saving goes away. Give me heavy wheels and let me sit in for 30 miles and I will beat him to the line with square wheels to the line. You are talking using something design for racing and doing a Sunday cruise with them. Of course it wouldn't make a difference.

In races with a lot of corners and braking or just plain hard accelerations, as a skinny climber with no fast twitch muscles anywhere, YES! This got beat into my skull (and legs) many times. I couldn't hang in a 1,2 race on my training wheels but could on my race wheels. The extra effort to muscle heavier wheels up to speed and the bigger gap ahead of me to the next wheel and draft over many repeated accelerations was a cost that would, by the end of the race, cost me a lot, real placings.

And real life in races - you are often burning off speed (and energy) because the guy in front of you slowed. You can drag your brakes a touch, sit up a little more, flip your elbows out; there are lots of subtle ways to slow. But all these methods do the same thing, cost you the energy you spent rotating those wheel up to speed. Races accelerate, races slow. That's life. Only way around it is to stay at or off the front. (And any coach will tell you that isn't a good long term plan!)

Ben

Great post. :)

I get heated up in these discussions......

Think I'll just read and enjoy!

Btw Jim, those are well earned and impressive credentials.

Judging from the things he's written, I really do not think he know what you have just ridden or at least experienced it.

Oh man, I hate accelerating out of an up hill corner. You fight like hell to get near the front going into a corner, then everyone cost for a second , mid way through the corner, then off the saddle and blast into and up the hill. Do that 45 times with a couple of corners in a crit will kill ya. Forget the type of wheel you needed, suck wheel is the plan.