THE BEST TUBELESS BIKE TIRES
Among tubeless tires for everyday road cycling and racing, I’ve found that a tire’s aerodynamics, road feel, rolling resistance, and ease of installation matter most to your speed and experience. The Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR performs nearly as well as or better against these criteria as other tires we’ve tested or considered for this comparative review.
At the time of this update, you can find it at Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bike, Amazon, Merlin, Sigma Sports, and BikeInn.
Slightly more expensive but with even better grip and comfort and similar rankings on most other key performance criteria is the Vittoria Corsa Pro G2.0 TLR. You can order a pair through these links to Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bike, Amazon, Sigma Sports, and BikeInn.
In The Know Cycling is ad-free, subscription-free, and reader-supported. If you want to help keep it rolling without any added cost to you, buy your gear and kit after clicking the store links on the site. When you do, we may earn an affiliate commission that will help me cover the expenses to create and publish our independent, comprehensive and comparative reviews. Thank you, Steve. Learn more.
If you want the best tubeless tires for your road bike, there’s much to consider.
New and updated models are regularly being introduced. They have different aero, resistance, comfort, handling, grip, and installation performance properties in combination with different wheels. That forces you to consider what wheels you ride and the type of riding you do when deciding which tires to buy.
Traditional considerations like a tire’s puncture resistance, weight, wear, and price also influence your decision-making.
And if that weren’t enough, updated views about which tire widths and inflation levels give you the best performance, recently introduced standards, and supply chain shortages on some of the tires are enough to make your head spin nearly as fast as your wheels do.
To deal with all of this, I periodically update (see date at the top of this post) the tire models and sizes I’ve reviewed, what matters most in evaluating them, and how they compare to find the best tubeless tires for road cycling enthusiasts, those we can ride on every day for training and racing.
Related Reviews
THE BEST CARBON ROAD BIKE WHEELS
HOW WIDE WHEELS AND TIRES CAN MAKE YOU FASTER
What You Need To Know About Tubeless Tires
Click on any red statement below to go directly to that part of the post
Some things matter more than others in picking the right tubeless tires for your situation
Other things matter less – puncture resistance, weight, wear, and price
What Matters Most
If you are a fast rider or racer and your tire pressure is set right, choosing between tubeless bike tires that give you the right aerodynamic relationship with your rims matters most and should be where you start. Once you’ve got that dialed in, you can pick between tires that provide the best road feel (comfort, handling, grip), the lowest tire-loss rolling resistance, and the easiest setup on your wheels.
However, if you average less than 25mph/40kph on well-paved roads, ride at any speed on worn or rough pavement, or don’t care about riding fast above all else, then the minimal absolute or relative amount of rim-tire aerodynamic drag in those riding conditions won’t make a difference to your speed or efficiency.
Other considerations matter relatively less, including puncture resistance, weight, wear, and price. That’s because they aren’t as important as the four that matter most to your performance to outweigh the other criteria, and, for most tires in this review, there’s little difference between them.
I’ll explain each of the criteria that matter most and matter less in the following sections.
For this review, I’ve compared what my research and testing shows are the best tubeless bike tires for everyday training and racing, most that have a puncture belt or equivalent. These are best suited for the demands and expectations of road cycling enthusiasts.
Using the criteria that matter most, I’ve chosen not to review or include in this latest update the tubeless tires whose tire loss rolling resistance isn’t in the top tier, are a bear to install, or are intended for time-trial racing. You can read more about which tires I didn’t include and why at the end of this post.
1. Aerodynamics of the rim-tire combination
My 2022 post on how wide tires and wide wheels can make you faster confirms that the fastest riders will benefit from the reduced aero drag that comes from using tires whose actual width, once mounted and inflated, measures less than the rim’s outside width at its widest point.
However, my research for that post led me to conclude that today’s wide wheels and tires have made the rule of 105 an anachronism. Airflow reattachment happens at rim-to-tire width ratios less than 105% on wide wheels, and the penalty for having the tire wider than the rim is far less than it was on the narrow rims and skinny tires used to establish that “rule” some 20 years ago.
Mea culpa. I based many of my past tubeless tire aerodynamic ratings on this rule but will do so no longer.
Fortunately, many tubeless disc wheels introduced in the last couple of years have outside rim widths that are wider than the measured width of 28mm tires installed on them. There is also enough clearance on most modern road disc bikes for these wider tires.
The aero-optimized tire size for many wheels remains 25mm. That’s the size that those you racing or riding closer to 25mph/40kph on well-paved roads should use.
If you ride closer to 20mph/32kph or on rough, worn, or chip-seal surface roads, wider tires inflated to lower pressures will probably gain you more watts by reducing the vibration loss portion of your rolling resistance more than the aero penalties you incur from a tire that exceeds the width of your rim.
I get into all this in the post I linked you to just above.
For those of you who have wide rims now or are racing and riding fast, there are up to 3 watts of reduced aero drag to be had by having rims wider than your tires. That amount is a marginal gain worth having if you are trying to decide what tire to buy.
The challenge in getting this rim-tire combination right comes in that the actual sizes of tubeless road bike tires and wheels are both unique and change with each new model of either. For that reason, I’ve measured the actual rim and installed tire widths of current models of both to see which combinations have rims wider than the tires and by how much.
Rim-tire measurements
When I get a new wheelset for evaluation, soon after my childish excitement eases a bit, I weigh it and then measure several rim dimensions.
First, I’ll measure the depth of the front and rear rims. Most are the same but not always due to wheel design or manufacturing tolerances.
Next, I’ll record the inside rim width between the hooks or the full inside rim width if it is a hookless rim. I’ll then put my calipers across the rim’s outside width at the “brake track” or where one would be if it weren’t a disc brake wheel. If the rim has any variation in width, such as a toroidal profile, I’ll also measure the rim’s maximum width.
Using a digital micrometer, I check these depths and widths at a half dozen places until I get a pretty good fix on the average of these measurements. While there are some outliers, typically, there will be a variance of up to +/- 0.1mm across the places where I take these measurements.
For the latest update of this tubeless tire review, I’ve measured 25mm and 28mm tires on wheels whose inside and outside rim widths represent tubeless-ready road disc wheels you may own or can buy. Those rims range from 19mm inside, 26mm outside with a hooked rim to 25mm wide inside, and 32+mm wide outside using a hookless rim.
Depending on the rim and tire size, I inflate the tires to 60psi/4.1 bar and/or 80psi/5.5 bar for these tire measurements on hooked rims. I’ve used these pressures partly for continuity with the database I’ve built to measure tire-rim combinations over the years. Luckily, those pressures continue to be in the range recommended to many of us cycling enthusiasts when we plug our weight, rim and tire sizes, and other factors into one of the tire pressure guides.
Now that there’s a newly created, not-to-exceed pressure ETRTO and ISO standard for tubeless bike tires on hookless rims (72.5psi/5bar), I’ve used 60psi and 70psi for those tire-rim combinations.
To give this some context, the recommended inflation pressure for a 150lb/68kg rider using a 25mm tire on a rim with a 21mm inside width is in the neighborhood of 70psi. A 180lb/82kg rider with the same tire and rim would want to increase that pressure to 80psi or so.
Using a 28mm tire on that same 21mm rim, the recommended pressure for the 150lb/68kg rider would be 60psi, with 70psi suggested for the 180lb/82kg rider. With the 28mm tire on a hookless rim that’s 25mm wide inside, a pressure of about 50psi would be recommended for the lighter rider and 60psi for the heavier one.
If you are unsure what pressure is best for you, take a look at one of the guides and experiment with what they suggest. The easiest one recommends a pressure closest to where I end up after my experiments of lowering the pressure further is available from ENVE (which sells both wheels and tires). SRAM (parent of wheelset and tire seller Zipp) and Silca (seller of tire pumps) also have tire pressure calculators you can use.
I discuss the differences between these three and how to create the right pressure for you in the post I linked to at the beginning of this section.
Wheels and tires lined up for the March 2022 measurements.
A couple more things to finish off this preamble. Since the front wheel affects your aero performance far more than the rear, I’ve done all the tire rim-tire combinations on the front wheel. If you can’t decide between prioritizing aero performance and comfort, you have my permission to put a wider tire on the rear wheel. It won’t matter much to your aero performance unless you are doing a 40K time trial type of event.
And to reiterate what I wrote above, if you are a slower rider or even a fast one riding rough roads, you’ll likely be faster riding a properly inflated tire that’s wider than the rim.
I measure new or minimally used tires (typically with under 250 miles) and, as with the rim measurements, use the calipers to get readings at a half dozen places across the widest part of each mounted and inflated tire.
Unless you put on new tires every 1000 km (620 miles), you must account for the reality that tires will stretch and widen over time. How much? While I’ve measured mostly new tires, Jarno Bierman at Bicycle Rolling Resistance has done endurance testing that tracks changes in the width, tread-thickness, and tire loss rolling resistance of a 28C Continental Grand Prix 5000 (non-tubeless) clincher at 1000km (620 miles) intervals.
He’s found that the tire widened by 0.5mm at his first 1000km checkpoint but only another 0.2mm all the way up to 5000km (3100 miles).
Most of us enthusiasts, by definition, ride 5000km (3100 miles) to 10,000 km (6200 miles) a year and might go through one or two pairs of tires a season. Based on what Jarno found in his endurance testing, our tires will likely be another 0.5mm or wider most of the time we ride them, i.e., after about 1000km or 620 miles.
The chart below shows how much wider or narrower the rim is than the tire for each combination. When the rim is wider and should continue to be over the tire’s life, the cells showing the measurements will be shaded green. If the rim is initially wider, but tire wear will cause the tire to expand beyond the width of the rim, they get a yellow shading. When the rim is narrower than the tire to start with, the cells are shaded pink (but only because you couldn’t see the numbers if I used red).
While my measurements were limited to the wheelsets you see in the charts below, I’ve hopefully given you a wide enough range of wheels with different inside and outside widths that you can find one with similar measurements to yours.
Results and key takeaways
Click the chart to enlarge it.
Here are my key conclusions from these rim-tire measurements:
* The actual width of the same size tubeless bike tires from different brands can measure very differently, especially for narrower tires on narrower rims at higher pressure and wider tires on wider rims at lower pressures. For example:
- 25mm size tires set up on the 19.0mm inside, 26.3mm outside rim at 80psi are as much as 1.4mm different in actual width (rim wider than tire by 1.7mm, 0.9mm, 0.6mm, 0.3mm) and only two will remain narrower than the rim after about 1000 km or 600 miles of wear
- 28mm size tires set up on the 25.0mm inside, 32.3mm outside rim at 60psi are as much as 2.0mm different in actual width (rim wider than tire by 2.8mm, 2.5mm, 1.8mm, 0.8mm)
* The difference in actual width of 25mm and 28mm size tires vary from one brand/model to the next. For example:
- The increased actual width between 25mm and 28mm size tires of one brand/model averages 2.6mm installed at the same pressure across three wheels while only 1.2mm for two other brands/models
* For rims with an outside width of 26mm, you need to be very selective to find a 25mm tire that will measure less than the width of the rim once installed
* For rims with roughly the same outside width, those with a narrower inside width will make the actual width of 28mm tires narrower as well.
Comparing the measurements of different brands/models across all of the rims, I also draw the following conclusions:
* Among 25mm tires, the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR and Veloflex Corsa TLR tires measure notably narrower than the Schwalbe Pro One TLE, and 26mm Specialized S-Works Turbo Rapid Air, which measure about the same.
* Among 28mm tires, the Continental and Schwalbe measure about the same and notably narrower than the Michelin.
2. Road feel
When I describe a tire’s road feel, I’m talking about how comfortable it is, how well it handles in corners or maneuvers when you’re changing direction, and how much grip it provides in those handling maneuvers and when accelerating or just speeding along straight down the road.
The better the road feel, the more precise you’ll take those corners and do those maneuvers or generally accelerate on your bike. While it’s hard to measure, the added confidence that comes from tubeless bike tires with a superior road feel will allow you to ride more aggressively without taking on more risk. That will make you faster.
Tire size, compound, casing, and tread all contribute to the road feel as does the inflation pressure and wheel size in combination with the tire.
We’ve all read how a wider tire, inflated to the same pressure, gives you a wider contact patch between the tire and the road surface. A wider contact patch can give you better handling. A narrower tire at the same tire pressure as the wider one gives you the same tire patch area but is narrower, running more along the length than the tire’s width, and therefore doesn’t handle as well.
However, a wider tire at the same air pressure has a greater volume of air in it. That gives you less suspension and, therefore, less comfort.
One of the major reasons people use wider tires is to improve comfort. So you lower the air pressure to reduce the air volume and improve the suspension and comfort in a wider tire. (Throw the contact patch argument out the window.)
With a tubeless road bike tire that’s filled with sealant, you can keep lowering it and get more suspension without concern for a pinch flat the way you would with a tube in your tire at that lower pressure. More suspension, especially on a rougher road, can also give you better handling (and lower vibration losses) until you hit a pressure where the handling feels imprecise or mushy when cornering or accelerating.
Tire compound and casing also play a role in how the road feel of tires differ at the same width and inflation pressure. You can often feel the difference with a tire that has a more supple casing or grippier compound. These contributions to better road feel give you the ability and confidence to ride faster.
Most road tires are slick down the center with limited tread on the sides. It’s hard to know if the tread on a road tire actually improves acceleration and handling the way it does on a gravel or mountain bike tire.
My fellow tester Miles and other serious road racers believe the tread adds grip when they’re ripping through corners. Miles doesn’t like to ride tires without tread. Real or imagined, it adds to his confidence and makes him faster.
Tire companies say the patterned tread channels moisture on wet roads and trips the air to reduce aerodynamic drag. Not wanting to mess with Mother Nature or Father Grime, I religiously mount tires in the direction indicated, hoping that it will help me ride faster or, at least, not work against me should I find myself riding out on a wet, oily road.
Cynics, or perhaps those who know more about tire marketing than I do, say the tread is purely cosmetic. Per this reasoning, road bike tires deflect and rebound as their primary way to give you grip and traction, not from a small amount of tread.
But, as this perspective goes, since almost every vehicle tire has tread, consumers expect it, and road bike tires sell better with it.
Too many of us roadies inflate our wider, tubeless tires too high even though the dial shows a pressure far lower than where we have normally set our narrower, tubed clinchers all these years.
Getting your tire pressure set right is key to getting the best road feel you can with whatever tires you’re riding and reducing vibration loss rolling resistance on all but the smoothest road surfaces. Use one of the tire pressure guides I linked you to above and experiment with lowering your pressure further until you get to where the handling starts to feel imprecise or mushy.
My fellow testers Nate, Miles, and I start with these pressure guides to find a pressure that gives us the best road feel for the tires we are testing.
3. Tire loss rolling resistance
Rolling resistance has become a popular decision criterion for many riders these days. With several labs and magazines publishing results, it gets much attention and is more easily quantified than aero performance or road feel.
However, the quantified results – usually stated in watts of rolling resistance – depend on the specific protocols used by the testers. Those results will vary with the tire and rim width, inflation pressure, drum surface, drum speed, weight applied, and other test controls.
These testers measure the rolling resistance from the tire compound and casing losses. I refer to this as tire-loss rolling resistance.
They don’t measure the rolling resistance that comes from vibration losses that happen when your tires (and wheels, bike, and body) come up off the road surface and land back on it. That happens over and over and over during the course of a ride, especially on worn and rougher road surfaces. I refer to these as vibration-loss rolling resistance.
Both of these types of losses add to your total rolling resistance. But as you increase tire pressure, tire-loss rolling resistance decreases and vibration-loss rolling resistance increases.
At a certain “breakpoint” pressure unique to each tire model and size, rim size, rolling surface, rider and bike weight, and perhaps a few other factors, the increased losses from vibration will overcome the reduction of resistance in the tire. That’s the pressure just below which you want to inflate your tires and the one that most tire pressure calculators suggest.
I go into all of this in more detail in my post about how wide tires and wide wheels can make you faster.
As it relates to choosing between tubeless bike tires, here’s the really important bit: With a few exceptions, the rolling resistance results of the best handful of tires made for a similar riding purpose like those we roadies buy and that I’ve evaluated for this review (everyday tires for training and racing but not time trial or track tires) are not more than a couple of watts different at the speeds and pressures we ride tubeless bike tires under the testing protocols at each of different testing labs I reviewed.
Further, because the testing protocols differ slightly, as do the production runs that the tested tires come from, there may be almost no real differences between the best tires that would make us choose one over another based on the published tire loss rolling resistance numbers.
If all of this suggests to you that it’s a mistake to choose between the top tubeless training or racing tires solely based on their watts of tire loss or relative ranking in these tests, then that’s the conclusion I’ve reached as well. You can pick any from the top group of tire loss performers and be confident that there won’t be a tire-loss difference that will affect your speed or time.
And that’s the great benefit that BRR, TOUR, Renn-Rad, Aerocoach, and other independent testers provide us as cycling enthusiasts. They allow us to see which small group of tires are among the “best” or in the “top” tier rather than which individual one to buy based on an absolute best tire loss rolling resistance number.
Note also that if you are a partially converted tubeless tire rider, meaning you use a tube instead of sealant inside your tubeless tires, make sure to use a latex tube if rolling resistance matters to you. Using a butyl tube will add 2-3 watts of tire losses to your rolling resistance per BRR’s testing. That will essentially knock your tire out of the “best” tier of tubeless road bike tires for everyday use.
However, using a latex or butyl tube may limit your ability to reduce your vibration losses without increasing the risk of getting pinch flats more common at lower pressures.
4. Installation ease
For those of you who are tubeless converts or those who remain interested but have held off because of some of the horror stories of installation difficulties, I can tell you that a lot has changed for the better in just the last few years.
Newer, wider, deeper road tubeless wheelsets have a center channel in the rim bed that should be 2.6-3.4mm deep for hooked rims and 2.9-3.5mm for hookless ones per the 2020 ETRTO standard.
Some also have “bead locks” or shallower, narrower channels running inside the rim walls where the tire beads sit after the tire is installed and inflated. Those without locks have the horizontal rim bed meet the vertical rim wall with or without hooks.
Compare the tubeless rim bed on the left with the classic clincher one on the right.
The channel in the tubeless rim is the key to getting your tires on. At that spot in your rim bed, while the wheel’s diameter is reduced a few millimeters, the circumference is reduced over 3x (or by Pi) that amount. That makes all the difference in getting tubeless tires on your wheels.
Without using the channel, you probably won’t get your tires on. You’ll blister up your thumbs, abuse the rim beds and tape using tire levers, and likely swear ’till you are blue in the face.
So, use the channel and make it easy on yourself.
How? As you put the first sections of the first bead of the tire over the edge of your rim, put the bead into the rim channel and then mount the rest of that first bead into the channel as you go all the way around.
Keeping that first bead in the channel, push the second bead over the rim edge and into the same channel as you install the rest of the second bead.
If you are having difficulty with the second bead, ensure that all sections of both beads you already have over the rim edges are still in the channel.
You also want to put the sections of each bead near the valve on last since the valve blocks the channel, and the tire will sit higher there than if it were in the channel.
IRC created this graphic to show the steps.
Here are some videos showing some best practices for installing modern tubeless road tires on tubeless-ready rims. They take slightly different approaches, but both work.
This one from ENVE starts with a tubeless road rim and shows you how to tape it, then put on the tire, inflate, and seat it before injecting your sealant. That’s the approach I follow.
This next one from GCN starts with a pre-taped tubeless road rim and shows how to use sealant before inflating to help you seat your tire bead. This approach also works if you don’t have a valve with a removable core to add the sealant.
We’re seeing more wheels being introduced with hookless rims. They are less expensive to make and improve aero performance slightly by smoothing the tire-rim interface. At 50 to 70psi pressures, typical of what you’d use for wheels with 23mm and 25mm inside widths and 28mm tires, the beads hold the tires in place without concern for them coming off the rim.
ETRTO and ISO standards established in 2020 define the rim diameter and bead lock tolerances for hooked and hookless rims to +/- 0.05mm. They also use a more modern rim width for tire makers to use in labeling the size of their tires. This means that tires should fit more interchangeably with rims and measure truer to size once installed and inflated.
Unfortunately, we’re not there yet. While I hope installation becomes simpler and more uniform as the next round of tubeless wheels and tires are introduced, the current reality is that some tires mount, inflate, seal, and can be removed more easily on some rims than others. This is important not only when you put new tires on but even more so if you have to install a tube on the road to deal with a major puncture that the sealant doesn’t fill.
For my tire ratings, I’ve noted which tires are easier or harder to get on, and off the range of wheels we’ve tested.
Hookless Compatibility
ENVE and Zipp, two leading wheelset makers, have taken different approaches to advising cyclists on the compatibility of tubeless bike tires with their hookless rims.
ENVE tests each tire model and size on its wheels that have been submitted to them by tire companies. Tire models and sizes are listed as Approved/Recommended or Not Approved/Incompatible. Tires that are not on either list have not been submitted for testing, and ENVE suggests you “contact the tire manufacturer and ask them if their tires are approved.”
Zipp lists tire models and sizes that tire companies have told them are compatible with Zipp’s hookless rims. Zipp doesn’t do any testing to confirm compatibility. Companies that have not communicated the compatibility of their tires are listed with a message to “check with the brand for specifics.”
In the chart under section 1. Aerodynamics, I’ve noted where tires are not compatible with Zipp and ENVE hookless wheels. I say more when the same tires come out with different compatibility listings in the reviews below.
The ETRTO and ISO standard for tubeless tires on hookless or “straight side” rims states the maximum pressure at which tires can be safely inflated is 5 bars (72.5 psi). You shouldn’t inflate it higher for safety reasons; even a 250lb/115kg rider shouldn’t need to for performance reasons.
What Matters Less
5. Puncture resistance
Of course, one of the main reasons to go tubeless is to protect yourself against punctures. When you puncture a tubeless road tire with sealant, the best measure is how quickly and well the sealant fills it.
This is puncture resilience, the ability of your tire to recover from a puncture.
On the other hand, puncture resistance, the ability of a tire to initially resist a puncture, is important if you have no recourse other than to get off your bike and replace your tube.
Puncture resistance is most relevant to the tube and clincher tire world but matters much less in the tubeless one. Not only because of the role of tubeless sealant in filling the puncture but because tests run by BRR, Tour, and Wheel Energy show little difference in puncture resistance between most everyday tubeless road tires for everyday training and racing.
By my lights, puncture resistance testing data essentially evaluates the strength of your puncture belt and the thickness of your tread and side walls. It’s at best a poor surrogate measure for the puncture resilience of a sealant-filled tubeless tire, the true indicator of whether you’ll be able to continue riding when your tire punctures out on the road.
A test that measured whether and how fast a tubeless bike tire resealed punctures of different sizes in the bottom and side of the tire spinning at cycling speeds would be more useful in choosing between them than the small differences in puncture resistance. Another test that evaluated the relative effectiveness of different sealants would be a bonus.
I don’t know how to do those tests, but I’m sure or at least hope that some smart tire engineers will develop them soon.
In the meantime, we default to puncture resistance data.
The most important thing you can do to overcome a puncture is to ensure you’ve got the right amount of sealant in your tires. I find 30 to 45ml (or about 1 to 1.5 ounces) is the right amount to get your tires sealed and protected against normal punctures. However, because the sealant dries out over time, you’ll want to make sure to add more every 3-4 months to keep it at that level.
Make sure to keep enough sealant (30ml) in your tubeless road tires for them to seal quickly after a puncture.
Of course, there are times when a puncture is so large that sealant won’t do the job. Usually, that only happens with a good-sized gash in the side or bottom of your tire or when you are racing on a tire with a thin tread and casing intended only for time trials. For those situations, carrying a tube to inflate the tire and using a food wrapper or paper currency to block the tube from going through the gash is a good backup plan.
Using a set of all-season tubeless road or cross tires for commuting or on roads full of puncture-rich obstacles will give you better puncture resistance than everyday training and racing tires but will make for considerably poorer tire loss rolling resistance and road feel.
6. Weight
One of the arguments for tubeless road tires is that they weigh less than clinchers. This isn’t the case, at least not comparing different tubeless and sealant vs. tubed clincher setups.
The actual weight of the 25mm tires in this review (one is actually labeled 26mm) ranges from 233 to 267 grams and averages 253 grams. Add to that average another 30 grams for an ounce (30ml) of sealant and another 7 grams for the tubeless valve. That adds up to 290 grams.
As a reference, a top everyday clincher tire like the 25mm Continental Grand Prix 5000 weighs 220 grams. With a good butyl tube like the Continental Race 28 Light, add about 75 grams. Total 295 grams. No diff.
If you replace the butyl tube with a lightweight, 23-gram Tubolito S-Tubo Road tube, the clincher is down to 243 grams. But then you’re giving up nearly a watt of tire loss rolling resistance to the 80-gram Vittoria Latex 25/28 inner tube.
Are you planning on rolling 28mm tires for increased comfort and reduced vibration loss rolling resistance? The 28mm tires we’ve tested range from 276 to 305 grams and average 294 grams. Fill them with 1.5 ounces (45 grams) of sealant for the wider tire, and you’re at 346 grams for the tubeless (including the 7-gram valve).
Compare that with the 28mm wide Conti GP 5K clincher at 250 grams, and you’re at 325 grams with the butyl tube and 273 with the Tubolito latex tube. But my guess is you aren’t going to run a latex tube if you are going with the wider, less aero tire.
Comparing tubeless vs. tubed clinchers or different models of the best tubeless tires at 25mm or 28mm wide is a fun exercise but comes up with very small differences.
While it might weigh on the minds of weight weenies, you’d be hard-pressed to tell these differences out on the road. That’s why I put weight in the what matters less bucket of criteria.
7. Wear
The good news about riding different wheels and tires all the time is that my fellow testers and I get to try out and evaluate a lot of new gear and report that to you. The bad news is that we don’t get to ride any set of tires for more than 1,000 miles and spend a lot of time installing and removing them to test others.
Other than a tire that wears quickly or cuts easily within our testing period, I can’t really offer my own opinion on tire wear or whether one model lasts 2,500 miles while another goes 4,000 miles. Of course, we all ride on different roads, too, some of which are harder on tires. So, wear is a situational thing anyway.
I and my fellow testers can tell which tires wear quickly within the first 1,000 miles and can project wear based on what we see during this interval.
While most of us roadies are frugal, I will pick a better-performing tire over a long-lasting one every day of the week. Spending $25 more per tire to get better performance or spending an extra $50 or so to replace worn tires with better ones even twice as often isn’t going to be a budget-buster for most of us.
The bottom line: wear and price are two criteria I believe should matter less.
8. Price
Most better-performing tubeless road tires for everyday training and racing are priced between US$60-80/£50-65/€60-80 per tire. You can see the market prices for each tire I’ve reviewed in the table below.
Depending on supply and demand or individual store discounting practices, one or two may sell for as much as $20/£15/€10 more or less. But compared to what we spend on our bikes, gear, apparel, food, event fees, etc., tires are a minor cost for such a big contributor to our performance and enjoyment on the bike.
With that in mind, I suggest you put the price of tubeless road tires at the bottom of the list of decision-making criteria.
Find what you're looking for at In The Know Cycling's Know's Shop
- Compare prices on in-stock cycling gear at 15 of my top-ranked stores
- Choose from over 75,000 bikes, wheels, components, clothing, electronics, and other kit
- Save money and time while supporting the site when you buy at a store after clicking on a link
Reviews and Recommendations of Tubeless Bike Tires
The chart below shows the relative ratings of tubeless road bike tires we’ve evaluated using the criteria I’ve written about above for what matters most and what matters less.
A “o” rating means that the tire performed similarly to most of those we evaluated. Those that performed better get a “+” rating; those that performed worse get a “-.”
In the following reviews, I say more about why each tire rates where it does.
Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR
Market price US$85, £60, €50. Available at Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bike, Amazon, Merlin, Sigma Sports, and BikeInn.
The Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR replaced the popular 5000 TL, Conti’s first tubeless tire. The company set high expectations for the S TR, notably its claims of reduced rolling resistance, hookless compatibility, and easier installation than the TL.
While introduced in late Fall 2021, popular sizes were hard to find during the pandemic, and whatever sizes were available sold at the top of the price range for training and racing tubeless tires.
That’s all changed now. Prices have come down to competitive levels, and the “Conti GP5K S” is now widely available.
My fellow In The Know Cycling testers and I found this tire’s performance and ease of installation superior to others available when we first began testing them. They became the standard against which we compare tubeless tires that have followed and the benchmark tire we use to test different wheelsets.
On the plus side, the Grand Prix 5000 S TR in the right size should make for a low aero drag combination when installed on the range of modern road disc rims. The 25mm S TR sets up narrower on the wheels I tested, whose outside rim width is between 26mm and 28mm, than any of the others on review. And, the 28mm size S TR is nearly as narrow or narrower (and sufficiently aero) as the best of the other tubeless tires on rims that measure 30mm and wider.
Getting the S TR tire on rims and inflating them continues to be one of the easiest of any I’ve mounted in 7 years of installing tubeless tires, including the 50+ installations I did across 8 wheelsets from 5 leading brands for this review. While it takes two to tango – even tires made of supple materials with malleable beads and manufactured within tolerance need rims with center channels and bead seats that mate well with tires – these new Conti tubeless bike tires are the belle of the ball.
If you have even a minimum amount of experience installing tubeless tires, you’ll find that few of the best these days require levers to get them on the newer designs of road disc wheels that meet the ETRTO standard. Yet, the S TR goes on with noticeably less effort than most and inflates on nearly every wheelset I tested with a regular floor pump.
This is a HUGE improvement over the experience installing the prior generations of tubeless tires, including the Conti GP 5K TL, a tire I couldn’t get on many rims. It caused me to recommend against buying the TL except for the most skilled installers or those willing to call for a ride if they got a flat on the open road.
The new S TR is also compatible with hookless rims. But don’t inflate it above the 72.5psi or 5 bar level established by the ETRTO and ISO standards organizations and agreed to by the leading wheelset makers.
Continental’s most jaw-dropping claim is that the Grand Prix 5000 S TR is 20% faster than the TL. While they don’t define what they mean by faster, what makes it possible, or under what conditions it’s faster, I’ll assume they’re talking about the extra speed that might come from a combination of less aero drag from being narrower, lower tire loss rolling resistance, and lighter weight than the TL.
Even with the S TR setting up narrower than the TL on the same rim, both being narrower on the rim wouldn’t come anywhere near a 5% reduction in aero drag, let alone anything approaching 20%.
And while the 25mm S TR is 50 grams (or 17%) lighter than the TL per my measurements, independent testers BRR and TOUR (subscription required) found that the S TR has a marginally higher tire-loss rolling resistance than the TL.
It’s still a very low tire-loss rolling resistance number, one that only the Michelin Power Cup TLR and Vittoria Corsa Pro TLR match among everyday tubeless tires. But once again, they overpromised on something they really didn’t need to.
With its 50-gram weight loss, the 25mm S TR is one of the lightest tires in this review. I don’t know that anyone was complaining about the weight of the TL, but I don’t live in the weight-weenie world, so I may have missed that.
Yet, in the same way that losing weight to improve your watts/kg can also reduce your power, the changes that led to S TR’s weight loss may also be why it has been shown in tests by BRR to have less puncture resistance than the TL and most other tires we’ve compared it to this review.
We have punctured a couple of the S TRs over the last few years, but considering all the miles that the half-dozen pairs we’ve been using have seen, flats have not been an issue.
My advice? Keep the sealant topped off on this and any tubeless tire. With the right level of sealant, tubeless tires are still far more puncture-resilient than tubed and clinchers.
This Grand Prix 5000 S TR’s road feel – its comfort, handling, grip – is good. While not quite to the outstanding level of the Veloflex Corsa Race TLR and Vittoria Corsa Pro TLR we’ve reviewed below, it’s very good and on par with what we enjoyed with the TL.
The S TR’s handling through corners is worthy of your total trust. We push it hard in crits, sweeping downhill turns, and fast group rides and come away feeling very confident that the S TR is riding shotgun, able to cover our flanks (and keep us upright).
There’s no slip in the grip when we accelerate, either.
While the S TR is sufficiently comfortable, it’s not quite at the level of the plush Spech RapidAir or the feeling you get from the cotton casings in the Veloflex and Vittoria. And like all the Contis that use the same Black Chili compound, the S TR is noisier than most tires, including others in this comparative review.
Bottom line, the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR scores as well as or better than other everyday tubeless tires on more of the performance measures I believe matter most while getting dinged on a few criteria that matter less.
Vittoria Corsa Pro G2.0 TLR
Market Price: US$105, £90, €88. Available through links to Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bike, Amazon, Sigma Sports, and BikeInn.
The Vittoria Corsa Pro G2.0 TLR is my answer to the question: What tubeless tire would you ever want to ride beside the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR?
Vittoria appears to have combined the superior handling, grip, and comfort of the cotton casing historically used in tubulars and some clinchers into a tubeless tire that’s sufficiently aero and easy to install.
And, unlike other cotton tires where the tread is glued on the casing, the Vittoria Corsa Pro’s tread is heat bonded or “vulcanized.” Independent testers, including Bicycle Rolling Resistance and Aerocoach, show that its tire-loss rolling resistance puts it in the same top tier as the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR and Michelin Power Cup TLR, likely due in part to that process.
Putting the characteristics, numbers, and comparisons aside, riding the Vittoria Corsa Pro gives you the confidence to do things you might not usually try or succeed on other everyday training and racing tubeless tires.
Cornering hard, riding bumpy pavement, or racing in the rain like a pro, they take you to the next level.
Miles, my P-1-2 fellow tester, did training rides, fast group rides, and a couple of races on the Corsa Pro.
For him, they had great straight-line speed and excelled on bumpy terrain. Dropping the pressure a few psi before the start of a wet criterium, he felt “supremely confident” on a hard left-hand turn at the bottom of a downhill on every lap.
All this while “overcoming the limitations” of a very rigid, budget-priced carbon wheelset I had mounted them on.
His review notes included this memorable line: “To be honest, I never really found this tire’s limits.”
My most memorable ride on the Vittoria Corsa Pro was at the inaugural Tour de Cider Donuts, a mixed A and B-level club ride with a ton of climbing and a half dozen stops at apple orchards to fuel up on… cider donuts. The ride felt like a series of 7-10 mile sugar-powered intervals over less than smooth pavement covered in spots by leaves, pine cones, and needles that had fallen in the previous night’s rain.
Knowing I would ride above my usual speed (mixed group rides always seem to move at the pace of the faster riders), I mounted these tires on some light climbing wheels and hoped for the best.
The Corsa Pro’s comfort and supple road feel made me smile as soon as I started rolling. Their grip and speed allowed me to hang with the group until I dropped back after the first couple of donut stops to get some video of my friends in the C group.
Throughout the ride, I worried that the worn roads along the route, the rough ones entering the orchards, and the leaves and pine cones I rode over might flat one of my tires.
Not an issue. Indeed, the puncture tests done by BRR show the Vittoria Corsa Pro falls in the same range as the Conti GP 5K S tubeless tires. And while I need to pump them up before each ride, similar once again to what I need to do with the Conti’s, they don’t seem to lose air during the ride.
But since they have a cotton casing, they wear faster than most tubeless tires, right? While we’ve found that true with the cotton Veloflex Corsa Race TLR tires, that’s not been our experience with these Vittorias.
Given their price, the race-day riding experience they give you, and how hard it is not to think of all cotton tires as fragile, it’s natural to think you should save these for your fastest days on the smoothest surfaces.
I get it, and I won’t blame you if you want to do that. Me? I haven’t taken them off the wheels I love to ride when I’m not testing others or when it’s time to show up for a fast group ride.
Michelin Power Cup TLR
Market price US$80, €50. Available at the best prices using these links to BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Performance Bike, Amazon, and BikeInn.
The Michelin Power Cup TLR competes well against the top-performing everyday training and racing tubeless tires we’ve tested.
The Power Cup’s grip is its best feature. On smooth and rough roads, both on dry and wet days, its grip gives me the confidence to ride as hard and fast as I want to.
My fellow tester Miles especially likes how the grip feels in corners, and being a P/1/2 racer, he typically rides through corners very fast.
Compared to other tires, the Power Cup TLR’s grip seems somewhat tacky, as if it is sticking to the road surface. Am I paying a rolling resistance price for that grip?
Apparently not. Bicycle Rolling Resistance’s drum roller tests show the 28mm Michelin Power Cup offers as little tire-loss rolling resistance as the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR, both a couple of watts or so better than other high-performance tubeless tires I’ve reviewed in BRR’s medium to high air pressure test range.
Aerocoach’s tests show similarly competitive results for the 25mm sizes of those two tires and the 26mm wide Vittoria Corsa Pro TLR.
At the pressure that Miles and I ride the Power Cup, it is also about as comfortable as the Contis, a feeling that neither adds to or takes away from the ride.
The tubeless “installation experience” – getting the tires on the rim, inflating them, getting them to seal initially and hold air between rides, and removing a tire if needed – is also average, not as good as the easiest or as challenging as the hardest.
The Power Cup TLR is more bulbous than others in this category. At 80 psi, the 28mm model measures about the same width as a hookless rim with a 32mm outside and 25mm inside width. At 60 psi, that rim is about a millimeter wider than the tire. Compared to other 28mm labeled tires in this review, the Power Cup TLR gives you marginal aero benefit and less performance than tire-rim combinations on other 28mm labeled which measure 1-2mm narrower.
On rims in the range of 28mm outside and 21mm inside width, the 28mm Power Cup measures wider than the rim, creating a disadvantageous aero profile until you get well below 60psi. While I didn’t measure it, using a 25mm tire with that size rim would likely give you better aero performance while giving up some comfort.
For more comfort, Michelin also makes the Power Cup in a 30mm width. But that tire sets up wider than even the 32mm outside, 25mm inside width rim at the lower tire pressure that you’d want to ride the wider tire.
Michelin labels the Power Cup TLR with a minimum pressure of 73 psi or 5 bar for their 28mm and 25mm tire sizes. That’s 8 to 17 psi higher than the level suggested by the SRAM guide and about 10 to 20 psi above where I ultimately found the most performance and comfort from the Michelin Power Cup TLR, depending on the width and presence of hooks on the wheels I used to test the tires.
I go into more detail about our experience riding this tire below its minimum pressure, tire pressure guides, minimum pressure labels on this and other tires, implications for hookless rims, and what you should do about it in my individual review of the Power Cup TLR.
But experience and my independent streak tell me I’m okay riding the Power Cup TLR at the pressures I ride other high-performance tubeless tires on hooked and hookless rims at today’s typical rim widths.
If you value grip and low tire-loss rolling resistance with decent comfort and acceptable installation hassle, these Michelin tires offer a good option.
Schwalbe Pro One TLE
Market price US$77, £50, €60. Available at the best prices through these links to Competitive Cyclist, BTD (BikeTiresDirect), Merlin, and Sigma Sports.
Schwalbe introduced the successor to the popular Pro One tubeless tire in 2020, around the same time the ETRTO standards body had clarified their intention for tire labeled sizes to measure closer to installed sizes on wider, modern wheels.
The updated Pro One is called the Pro One TLE or Pro One EVO Tubeless and has a bit of orange in the logo, as you can see in the photo above. The earlier Pro One had a completely white logo.
This latest model is rumored to be made in the same molds used for the prior one except with labels a size up – the new 25mm is the old 23mm, the new 28mm is the old 25mm, etc. My measurements suggest that regardless of what molds they are using, they have effectively gotten their stated tire sizes close to actual tire widths after mounting and inflating them on rims that measure 19mm through and 25mm inside.
The result is good aero performance for rim-tire combinations with the 25mm Pro One TLE on rims that measure at least 27mm wide outside and with the 28mm Pro One TLE on 30.5mm and wider rims.
The 25mm TLE passed ENVE’s testing and is approved for their Foundation series hookless rims, while the 28mm TLE is a go for ENVE’s AR and Zipp’s hookless wheels.
Out on the road, this Schwalbe provides only average comfort, a characteristic that was never a strength of the original Pro One. Its grip and handling are good but surpassed by the other tires in this review, all of which were introduced after this latest Schwalbe Pro One.
Rolling resistance results from several independent testers show it a few watts off the leaders’ pace. While I have always found it fine for my B-group riding speeds, my fastest fellow testers have told me they prefer the performance of the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR and several of the other tires we’ve tested more recently.
The suffix TLE stands for “tubeless easy,” and I interpret the EVO designation to mean this is a tubeless tire that has evolved. Regardless, installation is one of the toughest of the current generation of tubeless tires and doesn’t demonstrate the level of advancement most of us garage mechanics will love.
While I could get them on most rims with my average size hands and strength, I had to use a lever with about 1/3rd of those I mounted these on to get the last section of the second tire bead over the rim edge.
It’s a stiff bead that almost always requires a compressor to get fully seated in the rim. Since the tire bead is strong enough to hold air without being fully seated, you need to look at the rim all the way around both sides to ensure there aren’t tire sections still hiding below the rim edge.
While priced below most of the other tubeless tires in this review, its relative performance tendency to wear more quickly makes it time for a new Schwalbe Pro One model if they are to keep up to the competition.
Specialized S-Works Turbo RapidAir 2Bliss Ready T2/T5
Market price US$90, £65, €83. Available at Competitive Cyclist, Performance Bicycle, and Sigma Sports.
The latest version of the S-Works Turbo RapidAir is Specialized’s top tubeless road racing tire. Unlike other brands’ fastest racing tires – all made for TT events – and similar to many of the other tubeless tires I’m comparing it with, the RapidAir comes with a puncture protection belt.
So while billed and priced as a pure racing tire, I’ve found it also serves as an everyday tire for fast-riding enthusiasts in the same way that the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR and Schwalbe Pro One TLE do. In several months of testing, I’ve had no cuts or punctures though I probably just jinxed myself by writing that.
Unlike the prior generation RapidAir available in 26mm, 28mm, and 30mm widths, the new model only comes in a 26mm width, weighs 25 grams less on my scale, adds the T2/T5 suffix to its name to signify its two-compound composition, has some minor tread changes, and has a less pronounced label.
Specialized has not announced its intention to make wider sizes of the new S-Works Turbo RapidAir though I expect it will happen eventually. I can only guess that Specialized could not get any wider models of the RapidAir made due to ongoing supply channel issues affecting the availability of other tubeless road bike tires in this comparative review.
Or, perhaps they were guided by the simultaneous release of the tubeless-approved Roval Rapide CLX II wheelset, which Roval says is “aero optimized” for 26mm wide tires. (More on this below.)
Specialized also simultaneously introduced a similarly named tire – the S-Works Turbo 2BR 2Bliss Ready T2/T5. RapidAir is in the middle of the name of one tire while 2BR replaces it in the other; all else before and after are the same.
I’m not exactly sure what 2BR means. “tubeless ready” would be redundant, and it doesn’t mean “tubular” as it’s obviously a tubeless-ready or “2Bliss Ready” tire. Whatever.
More importantly, Specialized describes the 2BR as an everyday group ride tire and a race tire durable enough for rough surface racing. With its three 120TPI casing layers (the RapidAir and Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR each have two layers), Specialized asserts the 2BR has more puncture resistance than the RapidAir yet is slightly slower and heavier than the RapidAir. The 2BR comes in 26mm, 28mm, and 30mm versions.
l tested the 28mm 2BR model and it felt slower and less responsive than the RapidAir. Fine for easier rides but a notable step down in performance.
Based on measuring the rim and tire widths of the RapidAir tires on a range of wheels, the new 26mm RapidAir should provide marginally better aero performance than the one it replaces, which was already good, though it is not likely to be perceptibly different to most enthusiasts.
Rims ranging in width from 19mm inside and 26mm outside to 23mm inside and 31mm outside measure comfortably wider than the new RapidAir tires and about 0.2mm wider than the old 26mm RapidAir. This keeps the new RapidAir tire in the same rim-to-tire width range for the 26mm tires as those from Schwalbe and Michelin in this comparative review but not as good as the Continental and Veloflex ones. (See chart in my section on aerodynamics above.)
This is most important for those riding wheels with rims in the 21mm inside, 28mm outside width, and narrower range who are riding or racing on relatively smooth surfaces at relatively high speeds well north of 20mph/32kph.
For those of us with wider rims riding rougher surfaces and not going that fast or constantly positioning our upper bodies to lower drag, 28mm tires will be sufficiently aerodynamic (rims wider than tires) and faster (lower vibration loss rolling resistance).
All of this makes it curious and somewhat frustrating that the new RapidAir isn’t (yet?) available in a 28mm width size. Specialized confirmed their testing shows the 26mm RapidAir is more aero than the 28mm 2BR when air comes straight at the tires mounted on Roval’s all-around and aero-oriented Rapide and climbing-focused, far shallower Alpinist tubeless wheelsets.
Interestingly, they also told me their tests show the 28mm tire has an aero advantage on the 26mm when tested in crosswinds on the deeper Rapide, while the 26mm was still better in crosswinds on the far shallower and climbing-oriented Alpinist.
Note that Specialized wouldn’t share their data, quantify the aero differences between their 26 and 28mm tires or generalize beyond those tires on the Roval wheelset models, so it’s hard to get more granular than these directional and wheelset-specific claims. Without the data, it’s also hard to know what yaw angles constitute “straight” and “crosswind.”
Assuming a new 28mm RapidAir has the same width as the 28mm 2BR, my measurements of the 2BR show that a new 28mm RapidAir would be about 0.5mm narrower than the prior 28mm RapidAir. That would make a new 28mm RapidAir as or more aero than the Conti and Schwalbe in this review on the range of the eight different rim size combinations I measured at 60 and 80 psi.
While setting up the Specialized tires on all those rims, I also found the new RapidAir goes on, inflates, and comes off or “installs” as easily as any tubeless tire I’ve tested including the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR. That’s a noticeable and welcome improvement from the prior RapidAir and is much appreciated by my desk jockey’s hands.
Ironically, only the new Roval Rapide CLX II tubeless wheels required a lever to get the RapidAir tire on. (Same thing with other tires I mounted on that wheelset.) And it never took me more than a track pump and my cyclist’s skinny forearms to inflate the RapidAir on any rim.
The RapidAir’s road feel – the combination of its comfort, handling, and grip – is different than the previous model and now more similar to the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR.
Most notably, the new RapidAir no longer has that somewhat spongy, somewhat tacky feel of the tire against the road that gave you a very planted and grippy sensation and unlike any others when rolling or accelerating in a straight line or getting back on the gas coming out of a turn.
It’s still on par with anything we’ve tested, just not better than everything we tested, as was the last RapidAir.
However, the cornering is still wonderfully confidence-inducing, and the tires ride quietly, two real strengths of these RapidAirs. While I don’t let design predict performance – performance speaks for itself – I’m guessing that the compound used on the tire’s shoulders that comes into contact during cornering is more like whatever was used throughout the earlier RapidAir and the compound used in the center is a slightly harder, lower hysteresis one.
It’s hard to feel whether the new RapidAir is any more comfortable than 25mm or 26mm labeled tires from other brands. I don’t ride a lot of tires at that width anymore to be able to judge fairly. While I tested the RapidAir at different pressures suggested by the SRAM/Zipp, Silca, and ENVE guides, I never felt them to be uncomfortable but also never as comfortable as 28mm tires at 10psi lower on the same wheels.
Independent tests from Bicycle Rolling Resistance show that the new RapidAir’s tire loss rolling resistance is reduced over the prior model and marginally closer to the Conti Grand Prix 5000 S TR benchmark. The differences between these two and all of the tires I’ve selected for this comparative review are small. I filtered out the tires that had much larger differences.
The relative importance of these small differences compared to other things that matter to your speed remains debatable for some though no longer for me. At the speed that these tires are meant to be ridden, I’ve concluded from my research that aero performance, road feel, and vibration-loss rolling resistance, all of which depend on your rim-tire size combinations and inflation pressure choices, matter more than the small differences in tire-loss rolling resistance between the best tubeless tires measured on a steel drum.
At US$90, £65, €83, the RapidAir’s price is in the top tier among tubeless bike tires. As with any tire, however, the additional amount we as enthusiasts pay for these or another one of the best is small and the importance is large relative to almost any other piece of gear or kit we can buy in our passion to ride as fast, safe, and enjoyably as possible.
Veloflex Corsa Race TLR
Market price US$64, £49, €62. Available from BikeTiresDirect and BikeInn.
To take a line from Monty Python’s Flying Circus, “And now for something completely different.”
While maybe not completely different, the Veloflex Corsa Race TLR tire is different enough from the rest of the field of tubeless tires I’ve tested to stand out. At the same time, the characteristics it shares with some of the fastest cycling tires around really held my attention, much like one of those old Monty Python sketches.
It’s a handmade (think FMB), cotton (think Specialized Turbo Cotton) tire made in Italy (think quality). It has a built-in puncture belt yet is still as light as the best belt-less race day tires from Vittoria, Schwalbe, and Pirelli and scores nearly 2x as well as those and the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR in BRR’s puncture resistance tests.
Add to that, the Veloflex Corsa Race TLR’s price is less than any of the other tires in this review.
That’s a lot of goodies packed into one tire.
If you’re in it to win it, the 25mm Corsa Race TLR measures narrower with room to spare mounted at 80psi on rims as narrow as the Campagnolo Bora Ultra WTO 60 (26.3mm outside rim width) to as wide as the Bontrager Aeolus RSL 62 (30.9mm).
For those of us looking for wider tires, the Corsa Race TLR only comes in a 25mm size. When I asked Veloflex if they had any plans to introduce a 28mm wide version, they responded that they didn’t for now as “the yarn used to produce the 350 TPI casing is really thin and wouldn’t be in the safety parameter for the high pressure exerted on the area of a 28mm section.”
OK then. But 350 TPI casing? More to throw on the goodie pile.
Being a cotton tire, it goes on and off of rims with keyboard roughened hands (i.e., “soft” like mine) but takes a liberal amount of sealant (2 oz) to get it airtight the first time and probably needs to be regularly refilled to keep it inflated. It also wore pretty quickly in our testing. The label on the lower part of the shoulder began to wear off from cornering.
How does it feel on the road? Pretty freakin’ amazing. As a cotton tire and although it has a puncture layer, I was a bit careful with it the first couple of rides out, concerned that it would be too sensitive for my rough handling on worn roads.
Yet, it was sensitive in a very supportive way, sharing more feedback from the road than most other tires I’ve ridden. That feedback helped me corner in the way a caring partner would, letting me know when I could go harder and when I needed to ease off.
I soon stopped worrying about whether it would be as fragile as other cotton tires I’ve ridden, like the Specialized Turbo Cotton clincher and enjoyed the added comfort of such a supple tire.
For how well it performs and how relatively little it costs, the Veloflex Corsa Race TLR is a great tire. Even if it wears sooner than others, something I haven’t seen in our testing but I suspect will be the case from its cotton casing, I wouldn’t be dissuaded from riding it.
I just wish they could make it in 28mm and wider sizes.
Why some tubeless tires aren’t included in this review
There are a handful of thin, puncture-belt-free tubeless road bike tires that have tire loss rolling resistance so low that some enthusiasts may be tempted to ride them, if only in races. I’m talking about tires like the Vittoria Corsa Speed G+ 2.0, Schwalbe Pro One TT TLE, and Continental Grand Prix 5000 TT TR.
I’ve not tested them, and I don’t race. My fellow tester Miles, who races a lot in Pro/1/2 regional races and is very competitive in Masters Nationals age group races every year, won’t use them. Unless you’ve got a support car following you, it just doesn’t make sense. You flat, and your race is over.
The Continental Grand Prix S TR and Schwalbe Pro One TLE that are included in this review are close enough in their tire loss rolling resistance ratings that you may not notice the difference to these top-rated, belt-free tubeless tires. You should be able to regain those watts and then some with more time in your position or by dialing in any number of other incremental gains (inflation pressure, chain lube, better fitting kit, etc.)
I rated the Bontrager R3 Hard-Case Lite TLR among the best in prior updates of this review because it was one of the most aero, had a great road feel, and was clearly the easiest to install. Since then, others like the Continental Grand Prix 5000 S TR measure just as aero and go on as easily yet have far better tire loss rolling resistance scores.
The Zipp Tangente Speed Road Tubeless tire was a + performer on every one of the criteria that matter most. Unfortunately, Zipp stopped selling the tire when Covid hit, likely due to production issues at their supplier. No word on if they plan to bring it or something like it back.
A favorite of many, I included the Continental Grand Prix 5000 TL and rated it well in past updates for it road feel and tire loss rolling resistance despite its installation challenges on some rims. It’s been replaced by the Grand Prix 5000 S TR I reviewed above.
Hutchinson’s Fusion 5 Performance 11 Storm is a light, easy-to-install, and low-priced tire that I’d included in earlier editions of this review. As other tires have improved in the areas that matter most, the Hutchinson no longer competes well on anything other than price.
I’ve tested the ENVE SES Road Tire and included it in the previous update of this review. Regardless of its other performance properties, none of which stand out, I just can’t get past how hard it is to get on and off every rim I’ve tested it with, including ENVE ones, so have taken it out of this latest update.
Installation challenges also caused me to drop the Vittoria Corsa G+ 2.0 and Maxxis Padrone TR from earlier editions of this review.
While you still need a compressor or floor pump with a high-pressure cylinder like the Joe Blow to get some tires to inflate, you shouldn’t have to engage in hand-to-tire combat to get any tubeless tire on and off a rim these days.
I’ve looked closely at adding other everyday training and racing tires that get reviewed in industry publications, including the Pirelli Zero Race TLR, Goodyear Eagle F1, and Challenge Strada Pro HTLR. The tire loss rolling resistance of these falls a step or so below the tires I have included at the 60 to 80 psi pressure range that’s right for most of us.
* * * * *
Thank you for reading. Please let me know what you think of anything I’ve written, or ask any questions you might have in the comment section below.
If you’ve benefited from reading this review and want to keep new ones coming, buy your gear and kit after clicking the store links in this review and others across the site. When you do, we may earn an affiliate commission that will help me cover the expenses to create and publish more ad-free, subscription-free, and reader-supported reviews that are independent, comprehensive, and comparative.
If you prefer to buy at other stores, you can still support the site by contributing here or by buying anything through these links to eBay and Amazon.
You can use the popup form or the one at the bottom of the sidebar to get notified when new posts come out. To see what gear and kit we’re testing or have just reviewed, follow us by clicking the icons below.
Thanks, and enjoy your rides safely! Cheers, Steve
I had 2 sets of Hutchinson which both delaminatef at the joins clearly seen when immersed in water. These were exchanged. The third set I binned same type of issue. Since changed to 5000tl love them and no problems
My experience with the Conti 5000 TLs is similar. They are EXTREMELY difficult to mount when new. But otherwise, they perform and hold up well. The Schwalbe Pro One TLEs are easier to mount, but don’t roll as well. Also, the Schwalbe are more susceptible to “cuts”. I’m on my second set of both brands with the same observations.
Again- thank you. Site is awesome and today it was incredibly timely as I have had 3 flats in a week with brand new rubber (Bontrager R3 clincher but 2 unlucky cuts and one hasty mount that pinched) and was about to order Conti5000 TL when I saw your article this morning…. Four questions: 1) is there a better sealant? lasts longer, evaporates less, seals more, better container so less mess… 2)I had a LBS employee say that he had a few customers he was switching back to clinchers because the tires lost considerable pressure every day. I was sort of confused by two things as I walked away: they said that one ladies tires went from 90PSI to 70 in a day and had to be pumped up each day. I check tire pressure every day so…. so who cares about having to check tire pressure, and why 90PSI to start based on values you checked… essentially shop guy might have many missing knowledge pieces but maybe something to the losing pressure? 3) why would Trek’s own tire not be a good aero fit with their own rim? they know the rule of 105 – right? I’m on last years Madone with Aeolus XXX 4 wheels so had been also considering the Bontrager R3 but were pretty pricy and now seem to be an aero disadvantage…. 4) haven’t gone to TL yet but I lowered my clinchers to the recommended pressure today (82) just for kicks and they felt pretty “squirrelly.” Is that the clinchers or the pressure? will I feel that when I go tubeless? Again – Thank you! Site is my goto and will be buying in a few days based on links from the site.
Scott, thanks for your kind feedback and support. Your questions are good ones. My accompanying post called The Realities of Tubeless Road Tires provides some perspective that you may find helpful as you decide what to do next.
In answer to your specific questions.
1) I’ve used different sealants but haven’t tested them for the things you’ve asked about. I use Stan’s No Tubes tire sealant. However, with any sealant, you’ll need to be willing to learn how to use it and maintain it in your tires if you want to have success with it. The “Realities” post I linked to above will help get you there.
2) Tubeless is not for everyone and especially not for riders who aren’t comfortable with change. I wouldn’t suggest it to anyone who doesn’t do their own regular maintenance and things like checking their pressure frequently before riding, cleaning and lubing their chain regularly, washing their bike, etc. Most road cycling enthusiasts do these things, enjoy keeping their bike in great shape, look for the right gear, optimize their pressure, train for events, etc. Most recreational riders leave the maintenance to others, do what the salesman suggests for things like gear, tire pressure, etc. and enjoy riding a few times a week without ever considering a training plan or preparing their physiology for an event. Both are fine but I wouldn’t recommend tubeless to recreational riders as shouldn’t most sales and service people at bike shops.
3) I asked Bontrager about their view of the Rule of 105. Was told there are many, many factors they model to determine rim and tire dimensions. This is true about most companies that do computational fluid dynamics (CFD) now and trade-off many considerations within and beyond aerodynamic drag. Rule of 105 isn’t an end/be all but is a rule of thumb that seems to work out for many.
4) “Squirrelly” is a subjective term. If the cornering feels sloppy on you XXX 4, you are likely underinflated. But if the tires just feel a little more comfortable or less hard than what you are used to, that doesn’t mean that they are underinflated. Recommended clincher pressure is typically a little higher than tubeless so make sure you’ve got that dialed into your calculations. Use the Zipp pressure guide to make that distinction. It might take you a while to get comfortable psychologically as well as physically riding at lower pressures. I know it did for me. But after a while, the increased comfort and better handling overcame the sense that I wasn’t hardened up enough. Steve
Steve, it’s nice to see your tire reviews not only in-depth but with their selection criteria evolving. I’d like to see your test of the new Enve SES TLR tires, not only the 25c but also the 27c on wide wheels like the Enve 3.4ARs (I ride Light Bicycle WR50s = same width). These being made by Tufo adds a new manufacturer to the mix. I want aero performance but comfort and feel are at the top for me to let me keep riding at 60+ years. Thanks
Dan, Thanks for the feedback. Just received and installed the 25c on the SES 5.6. Photos up on our social media accounts. Trying to get a hold of a set of 27c for 3.4 AR tests now but ENVE site shows they won’t be available until December. Will report out on both. Least I can do for a young man like you still wanting aero while enjoying comfort. Cheers, Steve
Awesome review as usual, I’ve really come to trust your advice and so far it’s helped me (among other factors) achieve better average speeds – currently about 17.5 to 19.5 mph (depending on the hills and wind) which is about a 2 mph increase since I’ve started reading your posts. The hills are what really kill my average speed, I normally cruise along at 22 to 24 mph on flat pavement and the only advantage I can not seem to gain is the aero effect of the correct rim/tubeless tire combo since I have alloy wheels. I’ve pretty much upgraded every component on my bike so I’m left looking for any marginal gain I can get. I was wondering if you might have any interest in reviewing the Kenda Valkyrie Pro TLR? I already bit the bullet and I’m waiting for a set of 23mm to arrive in hopes that they will fall into the rule of 105 on my rims but I was curious to see if the larger sizes might be a good option for carbon wheels if I ever choose to upgrade. I do realize Kenda tires probably create as much excitement as watching paint dry and the names they choose aren’t the greatest or even remotely related to cycling for that matter but these tires have received some solid reviews from customers (one mentioned that they are narrow) and might be a decent budget option. None of the major cycling websites have done an in-depth review it seems and Kenda doesn’t give any statistics other than weight. I’ve been running the GP 5000TL in 25mm and while they feel amazing and roll fast the amount of air I lose daily is concerning and they always seem to have a bulge in the tire, while this is probably nothing to be worried about it doesn’t inspire confidence. I was also wondering if I should even be concerned about the aero gain with shallow (27mm) rims?
Steven, Thanks for your kind feedback. Glad to help. Those are pretty impressive speed gains. As your questions about tires, your last point is the key one. There’s no aero benefit or loss you’ll see because of tire width on 27mm deep wheels. Inflation pressure and the rolling resistance will affect your speed so you want to get both right. I know nothing about the Valkyrie but do know that the Conti GP 5K TL has very low rolling resistance. Steve
Might be time to upgrade to carbon wheels after all, thank you.
Seeing as the Kenda tires will not be beneficial in the way I had hoped I was looking to get the Zipp Tangentes but the company I like to buy from was out of stock so I opted for the new Michelin Power Road TLRs and I’m actually quite impressed with them. They mounted and seated easy enough and the bead actually stays locked in place on my Easton rims when deflating them completely and removing the valve core which scores major points with me, topping off or replacing sealant will be simple with a syringe and reinflating them will be stress free. Michelin is also buying into the lower pressure concept and has 87 psi listed as the max pressure on 19C rims for these tires. The ride quality (to me) feels better than the GP5000s, they seem to absorb more road buzz but still let you feel enough feedback and they also feel just as fast. I only have about 120 miles on the pair so of course durability and puncture resistance is still in question. Unfortunately I do not own a pair of calipers so I couldn’t tell you how wide they get on 19.5 mm internal rims but they appear similar the the GP5000s so they may or may not be a good aerodynamic option for some carbon wheels. Not sure if you would be interested in trying them out but they seem like a pretty good option.
Steven, I have checked into those tires. As a filter to choose between tires, I’ve tested only those that I’d consider everyday training and racing tire and that have a puncture belt. While I hope not to jinx you, the Power Road TLR don’t have a puncture belt in them so I passed. Steve
That does concern me, although the puncture resistance is supposed to be decent it is strange they chose to not put one in. Time will tell I guess.
The Michelins (surprise) did not end up working out for me, you just may have jinxed me but I’m not blaming you – I should have listened to reason regarding the lack of a puncture belt. I got about a 3 mm cut that would just not permanently seal, too bad because I really enjoy the way they ride. Thankfully I bought the Zipp tubeless tires in anticipation of failure with the Michelins and will install them soon, I was wondering how your luck has been as far as punctures go with them?
Steven, Did you try patching the Michelin? A 3mm isn’t that big that you shouldn’t give it a try. Steve
I tried using the Stan’s Dart Tool but broke the plastic tip off two of them (wrong angle), I will patch the bad tire and keep them as backups for the Zipps. I just mounted the Tangentes and they were surprisingly easy to get on the rim, so easy I was afraid they might pop off at high pressure but of course that didn’t happen. The beads do stay locked in when the tire is fully deflated (awesome) and first impressions are these are going to have a really nice ride, hopefully my horrendous luck with punctures and sidewall cuts doesn’t continue with these. Thanks again for the in-depth review, if you hadn’t covered the differences in bead thickness I doubt I ever would have considered buying Zipp’s tubeless tires.
I’m at a loss here, the maiden voyage with the Zipp tires ended up with my front tire completely popping off the rim (both beads) 13.5 miles into the ride as if it exploded. I don’t know if it’s my rim or a faulty tire or the garbage roads I ride on but I followed the installation instructions Zipp has on YouTube perfectly. I’ve had a Hutchinson tubeless ready tire and a GP5000TL do the same thing when trying to inflate it for the first time but never had a tire do this on the road, has this ever happened to you with any tire?
The obvious questions: What wheels are you using? Are they tubeless ready? Tape well? Sealant or tubes? How much sealant? What pressure? What condition are your wheels in?
I have Easton EA90SL tubeless ready wheels, the tape (DT Swiss) is in good condition and I use 30-40ml of Stan’s Race sealant. I used Zipp’s tire pressure guide and ran 85/90 front/rear, my wheels are in good condition as far as I can tell – both are still true or very close. There is a very small nick on the outer edge of the rim but I highly doubt it would have caused the tire to blow off. Maybe the Easton’s bead hooks are too small but the Michelin and Zipp beads looks pretty similar to me, I suspect I got a bad tire. I tried reinstalling it to see if it would hold but air was leaking past the bead in at least 2 spots so I couldn’t get it to seat, I did put the Michelins back on with no issue.
Steven, Not sure what is going on. That tire and rim combination, if each are sound, should be good up to 100psi or so. Perhaps there’s something going on in the rim that is not easy to see. You might want to have a trained eye look at it.
I’d also suggest you set aside the Stan’s Race sealant in favor of the Standard sealant. While neither should have caused the tire to blow off the rim, the Race sealant is known to dry up pretty quickly and no longer seal; it is best for race day only. If it was a few days from when you sealed up the tires to when you rode them, that might have contributed to the problem and your Michelin not sealing earlier after the cut you got in the tread.
Backing into where you’ve set your pressure, I’m estimating you are riding the latest EA90 SL that has a 19.5mm inside rim width, the 25mm width Zipp tires, and you weigh 200 lbs or more. If you weigh less, are using a 28mm tire, or have the prior model EA90 SL that was 17mm, you might want to recheck your pressures settings. Also should use the standard tire casing settings. 85-90 psi is pretty high for tubeless but, again, shouldn’t cause the tire to blow off. Steve
You’re right about the wheelset and my weight (205-210), the tires did feel a bit harsh and really fast at that pressure and I was going to drop 5 psi each on the next ride. Thinking about my rim I have had quite a few flats and they always seem to happen at higher speeds or I won’t notice a slow leak until I hit a crater and feel the rim slam against the road. Although the wheel is still true I may have stressed it enough to cause some flex which contributed to the tires blowing off. Seeing as the GP5000TL and Michelin tires inflate well over their advertised widths they most likely would have enough flexibility to stay on the rim whereas the Zipps combination of running true to size and the high pressure I ran them at would make them much more susceptible to blowing off with a compromised rim.
Thanks again for your feedback, I will switch to the regular Stan’s and have my wheel checked out.
Hey Steve, so I ended up replacing my front wheel and getting another Zipp tire and so far they have been excellent. These hold air better than any tires I’ve tried (tubed or tubeless), for the first time ever I actually had to let air out the next day to get the comfort level where I wanted it. They really feel rock solid when leaning into corners, no noticeable deflection even after dropping the front to about 75psi. I don’t know if it’s the compound or the wall thickness but I get the sense these will not puncture (not easily anyway), kind of reminds me of using the GP4000 SII when I felt safe running over just about anything.
I did buy two more tires to have a spare and one of them has white lettering where the first three have gray. I’m guessing the white lettering is the newer version but was wondering if you know one way or the other or have seen both? I got them from Planet Cyclery so I highly doubt either one are fakes.
Steven, Good to hear. Let’s hope your puncture-free rides continue for a while. As to the lettering, I’ve only ever seen white. Steve
Great article as usual Steve.
I run the new Giant SLR-1 disc hookless wheelset and I’m very impressed in combination with the Giant Gavia tyres.
I have been a dedicated GP4000 and 5000 user in the past.
I’m puzzled as to why Continental have painted themselves into a corner with there “DO NOT USE ON HOOKLESS RIMS” ruling.
Surely they are or should have accelerated testing in order to open up a growing and future mainstay of the market in hookless rims?
Do you have any information from Continental on this?
When big hitters like Enve, Zipp and Giant are backing hookless rims a big tyre hitter like Continental should be onboard. Both Pirelli and Goodyear have just launched tubeless, hookless compatable tyres as relative newcomers to this area of the market.
Michael, I don’t know any more than what Continental has stated. Making tires for cars, bikes, and other wheeled vehicles, they certainly know tires and wheels so I’ll go with their recommendation. There are certainly other brands to choose from that work with hookless rims. Steve
Thanks Steve
Please could you list some of the tyres that you know that are compatible with hookless rims?
Nick
Nick, The list I trust is this one that ENVE publishes and updates for their hookless rim wheels. Zipp says any tire works with their 303 hookless rims but they don’t test different tires (ENVE does) and some tire makers like Continental say their GP5000 TL shouldn’t be used with hookless rims. Steve
“I’m puzzled as to why Continental have painted themselves into a corner with there “DO NOT USE ON HOOKLESS RIMS” ruling.”
The Conti seems to dominate, at least on the Internet. Virtually every single discussion threads or tyre reviews have the Conti mentioned and compared to. It seems that every person on earth who rode a bike have tried them.
So Continental can afford not to hurry for anything.
I can concur with the findings about Pro One TLE – I fitted a pair without having read this review. My first go at tubeless. Fitting was on 24mm external Kinlin 26T rims – and was very easy. The 30mm labelled tyres filled out to only 29.5mm, weighing 290g. The ride quality is OK but not same feel as high quality supple sidewall tyres with latex tubes. I was a bit disappointed having read the glowing reviews.
My past experience includes the Zipp Speed R28 (non tubeless), looks like I should have stuck with Zipp.
Greg, thanks for sharing your experience. One thing I will say in Schwalbe’s favor is that they were first ones I’ve tested that have modified their sizing for modern rim sizes and in sync with where the standards appear to be going. So while tires once mounted and inflated used to be (and many still are) 1-3mm wider than the labeled size, the Schwalbes are a lot closer. Steve
I have Easton R90 alloy rims (for rim brakes) and ride on Continental GP5000TL tires. I think the rims are shade under 25mm wide. The tires appear to be >105% when inflated to 75psi. The tires are due for replacement and I’m considering the Zipps you recommended. I ride at 20mph on the flats and do a lot of climbing. What are your thoughts about the aero characteristics of the Zipps for my setup, and should I maybe consider a different tire because of its width?
Robert, I wouldn’t worry about the aero characteristics of your tires. The R90 rim specs are 27mm tall, 24.25 max outside width and 19.5mm inside. Your rims aren’t deep enough to bring you any aero benefit. I’d use the other criteria to make your choice. Steve
Hey Steve, a general question….do you find that the wear/longevity of a tubeless tire tends to be inferior to that of its non-tubeless counterpart?
I’m new to tubeless this season (so only have experience with one brand), but note that tread wear is surprisingly quick- particularly on the rear.
Dave, I think it depends on the compound and perhaps tire thickness in the tire model regardless of whether it’s tubeless or clincher. For example, the Conti GP 5K clincher and TL both use the same compound so I don’t know why one would last longer than another. Steve
Hi
I Have recently bought a Giant TCR Advances Pro 1, which comes with Giant’s own SLR 1 42mm (deep) wheelset. The rims are 17mm internal and 23mm external. Tubeless ready, but can run clinchers.
Going by your recommendation, from an aero point of view, at least, I should be looking for a tyre that ‘comes up’ as 22mm.
Is this correct? Or would a tyre with an actual width of 23mm suffice?
Many thanks in advance
Nick
Hi Nick, Truth is, you’re unlikely to find a tire that comes up narrower than your outside rim width. 23mm tires will likely measure 24mm or so. Meanwhile, much of the cycling world has moved on to 25mm tires. You’d need a 21mm tire to get that 105% rim to tire ratio but they’d be hard to find in a clincher and I’m not sure they’re even made in a tubeless model. In your case, I’d suggest you go with a 25mm tire to optimize comfort and rolling resistance at lower speeds and work on your position on the bike and the amount of time you can spend in that position to improve your aero performance per this post https://intheknowcycling.com/how-to-ride-faster-on-your-bike-10-better-ways-part-1/#6. When you’re ready, moving up to an aero wheelset https://intheknowcycling.com/aero-bike-wheels/ will get you those watts back from having deeper wheels. Steve
“The rims are 17mm internal”
Incorrect. You were looking at an older rim model. The new hookless 2021 model is 19.4mm internal.
https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/slr-1-42-disc-2021
Hi Steve: sorry if I missed it in the article, but do your recommendations apply to Enve 3.4 wheels, particularly the Rule of 105/aero benefits? I need new tires and have always used Contis, so am wondering if I should switch up to the Zipps you recommend (on Competitive Cyclist, of course). Thanks!
Jay, Depends which ENVE 3.4 are you referring to – 3.4 rim, 3.4 disc or 3.4 AR disc? You can get aero benefits from each using the rule of 105 but they are more limited on shallower wheels like the 40mm or so 3.4 series. The Zipp Tangente Speed Road Tubeless RT25 will give you those benefits on the 3.4 rim and 3.4 disc. The Schwalbe and Specialized reviewed in this post will be marginally more aero than the Zipp RT28 on the 3.4 AR disc but have other drawbacks I wrote about that would steer me toward the Zipp. You should not use the Conti on the 3.4 AR as both Conti and ENVE say they are incompatible. And thanks for supporting the site by using the link to my recommended stores. Steve
Thanks for the response, Steve! I should’ve said the ENVE 3.4 disc.
When ordering the Zipp Tangente, I see references to the “RT25” tire, but also just to the “Speed” tire. Are they different models? By the way, Competitive Cyclist appears to be sold out.
Jay, I’ve added links to stores that have the tires in stock. The best price is now $59 at this link to Planet Cyclery, another store I recommend and that supports the site. The tire model is the Zipp Tangente Speed Tubeless. The RT25 stands for Road Tubeless 25mm. It also comes in an RT28 or Road Tubeless 28mm. They also make Tangente Speed Clincher and Tangente Speed Tubular tires for clincher and tubular wheels. But you want the Tangente Speed Tubeless 25mm tire often referred to as the RT25 for your 3.4 disc. Hope that covers it. Cheers, Steve
You da man!
Love you reviews. Do the Zipp NSW 303 have an internal width of 21 mm, I thought NSWs were 19 mm? In your review on the best rim carbon wheelsets where the best performers were the NSW 303 and Bontrager XXX4, you said you ran tubeless, do you remember the tires you used for that review in Feb. 2020?
Thank you
Mike, Thanks for your feedback. The latest Zipp 303 NSW rim brake wheelset has a 19mm internal width. The disc brake version is 21mm. I don’t remember which tires I used back then. Steve
Thank you!
There seems to be something wrong with Enve’s Aero Drag + Rolling Resistance Drag chart in the 3rd section. The blue line (Aero Drag + Rolling Drag) should be a simple sum of the other two (Aero and Rolling separated) shouldn’t it? It obviously isn’t. For example, at 20MPH Aero Drag looks like 120W and Rolling 45W, the combination should be about 165W. I agree that rolling drag is certainly less important but I don’t come to the conclusion that it is insignificant.
Other than that I very much appreciate this analysis!
Clarence, Yeah, I agree. It looks like it’s poorly drawn. Best to look at the orange and grey lines. However, I don’t think I wrote that rolling resistance is insignificant but that it “matters relatively less than aero drag starting around 12 miles per hour and increasingly less as you go faster.” With few exceptions, the amount of difference between like tires is so small (a couple of watts) that making a choice on rolling resistance alone rather than also considering aero performance would be a mistake. Great aero and rolling resistance performance would be ideal but I’d prioritize the aero drag (rule of 105 as a surrogate) if I had to choose between them. Steve
Bought a pair of Zipp Tangente in early 2019 – without being ridden, both sprung leaks in the centre of the tread (sprayed my mechanic’s workshop with sealant)! These were successfully returned and since then have used original Pro 1 (cut-up quite quickly but pretty reliable) and Hutchinson (easy to install, grippy, but have had a few sidewall gashes and gone through tires quite quickly). GP 5000 in the cupboard for next tire change (not looking forward to fitting).
Performance not being my main goal, my general argument for tubeless is, if it saves you having to change a tube even once, it is one time you did not have to do a puncture repair by the side of the road. But be sure to prove you can get the tire off if you have an issue, and be able to remove the valve (I use ones that let you use a hex key and little spanner e.g. muc-off). Following these rules, I did convince my partner to go tubeless and she has already avoided at least one puncture stop.
Regarding Zipp, I have also had a Zipp wheel fail with a negative warranty experience (should post details of this somewhere more appropriate for other’s to consider when buying wheels), so overall would never purchase a SRAM / Zipp product ever again!
Anthony, That’s an unbelievable experience you had with the Zipp tires. With your experience on the Schwalbe and Hutchinson, sounds like you are pretty hard on tires. With performance not being your main goal, you might want to go with more of an all-seasons kind of tubeless tire rather than any I’ve reviewed here. Steve
Thanks for the in-depth review! Much appreciated. I am getting ready to install my 2nd pair of Zipp Speed rt25 tires. I started using them last year mainly due to ease of installation compared to the competition, and have been very happy with them. I have a new wheelset (HED Jet6) which will be used mainly for racing next year. With winter coming and only occasionally using these wheels, I was thinking of just leaving tubes in for while and having one less bike/wheelset to worry about maintaining sealant or the sealant drying out. But I notice the Zipp box and tire itself say “Tubeless Only”. Do you have any idea if this disclaimer is meaningful in practice? I thought you could always put a tube in any tubeless tire. Thanks.
Bill, As with you, I can’t think of any reason why you couldn’t put a tube in. Perhaps give a call to Zipp on Monday to see if they can explain what’s on the box. Steve
What has happened to the Zipp Tangente tubeless? The have become almost impossible to find and now the RT 28 doesn’t even show up on Zipp’s website. I got one from R&A Cycles that came with a white decal which was discolored (yellowish) where it had been exposed to light in the original box. Although I didn’t find that acceptable, I kept it since they are so scarce. Eventually R&A somehow got some more in stock (when nobody else was), so I ordered a second one. It came with a silver/grey decal rather than white, but looking at it closely you could see it was also discoloring where it was exposed to light in the box display opening. Now the R&A website says the RT28 has been discontinued. The do show RT25’s in stock. Zipps website never showed them with a silver decal. Very confusing. Any idea what’s up Steve?
Greg, This is another case of demand exceeding supply and supply being constrained by Covid. I know it’s very frustrating but is happening all across cycling and in most other industries where product is in high demand. I called Zipp customer service and they confirmed the RT28s are out of stock on their site but have not been discontinued. I regularly update the post after searching all of the stores I recommend and post links where they are available from the best stores at the best prices.
As to your experience with R&A, I can only say it’s not a store I recommend because their customer service rating from the independent services I use rate them poor (Trustpilot) and average (Google). Discolored labels could mean they didn’t store the tires well or they are older tires that have been sitting around for a while. Either way, they aren’t ones that are likely to give you the performance of a newer tire. Not sure what the deal is with the silver/grey decal.
While I do recommend the RT25 tires, there are other good 28C tires, some of which will give you better aero performance if that’s important to you or are available at a lower price if not the same performance to hold you over until the RT28s are back in stock. Cheers, Steve
Hi Steve,
I bought a pair of Enve SES 3.4 rim brake wheels this winter and am very anxious for the snow to go away so I can get on the road to ride them.
I know you rate them well , as I used your advice and a recommendation from a wheel builder to confirm my decision.
These are new 2020 model with 21 mm inside width , 38 deep front and 42 deep rear.
My question for you is which tire do you think is best for this wheelset.
I have the new Enve 25 mm tires ( I ordered them with the wheels), but I wonder if you have a particular 700×25 tire you know works especially well with this wheelset ?
My priorities are , comfort , and then speed and ease of installation .
Thanks , you remain a trusted resource .
Dave
David, I haven’t completed my review of the ENVE tires but, since you already have them and they are designed for the wheels you bought, I’d start there. If you don’t care for them, you can refer to my recommendations in this review. But no, I don’t recommend specific tires for specific wheelsets. Rather, specific tires maximize aero performance on specific rim widths and other factors I detail in the post. But since comfort is your priority and the 3.4 aren’t deep enough to have a big aero impact, you could easily pick from those I’ve rated at the top of the recommendations section based on what is most important to you. Steve
Hi Steve – impressive work with this post!
I just took delivery of my 4.5 AR earlier than expected and now I’m scrambling around researching the best tubeless tires to get.
The ENVE website states the front wheel width is 31mm (30.5mm for the rear) and after speaking with their support team they stated that their new SES 27c Road Tire inflates to 30mm and their 29c inflates to 31mm.
If I’m understanding correctly, 30mm + 105% = 31.5mm.. so even though ENVE say the wheels are optimized for 28c, their own 27c inflates too much to have any aero benefits – is that right?
I’m waiting for them to email me back with what their 25c tires inflate too.. was really looking forward to running 28s though lol.
Edward, It’s a bit more nuanced than you describe it but it’s probably my fault for not making this clearer in the post. While I haven’t tested or measured the production line ENVE tires, I think you’ll be best with the SES 27c or the Schwalbe Pro One 28c tubeless tires.
Here’s why. First, these numbers and their effects are more shades of grey than black and white. For example, ENVE shoots for 31.0 and 30.5 front and rear external rim widths but on the 4.5AR I tested, the front rim width came in at 31.2 and the rear at 30.4. Since there are tolerances around these widths (along with my measurement accuracy) and, in my experience widths vary 0.1 to 0.3 at different places on most rims, yours may be wider or narrower than the target.
Second, tire widths depend on both tire pressure and tire use. Higher tire pressure increases tire width and a tire with 1000 miles on it is wider than a new one. Exactly how much difference depends on the pressure range and tire but were talking about 0.1 to 0.5mm in my experience.
Third, the aero benefit starts to kick in around 18-20 mph and, since it’s exponential, you really start to feel it in sustained momentum around 22-23 mph and up. The 4.5AR is aero for sure but is more of an all-around wheelset that brings aero, comfort, handling, crosswind mgmt. and other benefits in good measure. If aero is your overwhelming priority, you’d want to go for a deeper wheelset, for example, the ENVE 5.6 or something with 55-65mm deep wheels.
And finally, as long as the tire isn’t wider than rim, you aren’t wiping out the aero benefits of the wheelset when riding at 18-20 mph speeds and higher. Yes, the greatest benefit kicks in at 105% and there’s notably less benefit below but if you are at 103% (31/30), you aren’t wiping out all your aero benefits of a deeper wheelset.
BTW, I definitely wouldn’t go with a 25c tire on that rim. Yes, it will likely exceed the rule of 105 but on a 25mm internal width rim, the tire’s sidewalls will get rounded off, provide less support to your rims, and make your handling very sketchy.
I hope that makes things clearer. Steve
Hi Steve, thank you for the detailed reply!
ENVE wrote back to me saying do not use 25c on 4.5AR as they just won’t work.
I primarily ride in Miami where it’s flat as a pancake so 100 mile rides at 20mph avg are quite common, with shorter rides averaging 21-24mph so I almost went for the ENVE 5.6 – but.. it gets hella windy here with the various tropical storms and hurricanes we frequently have, plus I plan to travel with my bike to more mountainous regions so opted for the 4.5AR as I’m also a big fan of comfort on my long rides and hoping wider tires will help with that, as well as with grip when caught in a sudden downpour.
I ended up ordering the ENVE 29c last night before reading your reply, and have put an order in for the 27c but probably won’t receive those until May!
Hopefully the 29c won’t feel too sluggish and I’ll be able to get some use out of them on light gravel after I run 27c as default.
What did the Schwalbe Pro One 28c inflate to for you?
I noticed you said the 28c is like their old 25c, so if they’re 28mm inflated then I’ll try cancel my ENVE order.
Edward, See the Rim to Tire ratio chart in the post for all the details. Steve
Got it – thank you.
Curious to know why you would recommend the Schwalbe Pro One over the S-Works Turbo RapidAir?
One reason for going for the ENVE 29c was the aesthetics of matching to the rim, but S-Works will match my frame and your write up on them seems better than the Schwalbe.
Aesthetics!$%&? We do science 🙂 Look at the numbers; the Schwalbe is a slightly narrower (and therefore more aero) tire that is also less expensive than the Spech. It performs similarly except on comfort.
Haha I hear you. Didn’t realize there were further aero gains going beyond 105%, surely there’s a point where 108% vs 111% see incredibly diminishing returns vs say 103% vs 105% because even though it’s only a 2pt vs 3pt difference, you’re crossing the threshold required to see gains?
Look at the chart. The 4.5 AR front rim width is between the HED Eroica and 3.4 AR on the chart. Based on how the Schwalbe and Spech measured on those rims, I’m projecting that the Schwalbe will come in closer to 105 than the Spech on the 4.5 AR.
My mistake then, I had been assuming the width was the same between the 3.4 and 4.5 AR and was just using data in chart for 3.4, but there’s a 1 and 1.5mm smaller width on the 4.5AR per ENVE’s specs (weird the rear would be narrower than the front).
From Schwalbe: “The 28c Pro One is true to width on a 19mm wide internal rim, so on your 25mm internal rims it’s going to be about 30-31 mm wide.”
From Specialized: “Unfortunately, we haven’t mounted our tires and measured them on those wheels so I can’t give you an exact measurement. I can tell you that our S-Works Turbo RapidAir 28mm measures 29.9 on our CLX 32 rim with an internal width of 20.7mm. So on that ENVE rim that you have, maybe 31mm.”
It seems there’s no tire that will meat the 105% rule for 4.5 AR even though both of the above mentioned do on the 3.4 AR.. I wonder if the 1/1.5mm narrower width makes up for not being able to recapture the air around the rims?
If I can find the right tool, I’ll measure my 4.5 ARs for you. But let’s assume the 31mm is really an average of 31.2mm around the rim based on the variance of the 3.4 – this would mean I need a tire that inflates to no more than 29.7mm if I’m to hit that sweet spot, correct?
There is no link to rolling resistance tests in the article. Where was the Zipp tire tested as fast as the Gp5000?
Sebastian, Rolling resistance test results vary depending on protocol so my ratings show relative differences from tests done by respected, independent testers rather than absolute scores based on a single test or protocol or a company-sponsored test or set of claims. For the Zipp tires, I looked at tests done by Wheel Energy for Bike Radar reported here. Yes, not exactly the same tires against the same competition, blah, blah, blah but the same/similar compounds as in the current tires made by the same companies. BRR will be testing the Zipp tire using their own protocol later this month for added perspective.
I’ll also use this opportunity to paraphrase what I wrote in the section above on this topic: Rolling resistance differences found in the lab between the kind of tires I evaluated are not more than a few watts, will be more or less significant depending on the road surface you ride, and matters relatively less than aero drag at the kinds of speeds most enthusiasts ride. Steve
Thanks for the reply. Unfortunately I cannot open the link (‘this site can’t be reached’). My rims are 31mm wide, so all 25c tires should obey the 105% rule. Also, according to the figure in your article, rolling drag is bigger than 10% of the total aerodynamic drag (wheels 10% of total) even at 30 mph. So for me rolling resistance is the deciding factor (if I compare tires with proper puncture protection) maybe price and weight as well. Never had tubeless installation problems except with a corsa speed 1.0
My bad. Here’s the correct link to the Wheel Energy tests (also fixed in my comment above). https://www.bikeradar.com/features/10-of-the-best-performance-road-tires-lab-tested/. As mentioned, BRR will test this tire later this month so be on the lookout for that one too. Cheers
I’ve been riding regular GP5000’s for 3-4 years with very little problems. I think I’ve ran 2-3 tires in the rear in that time, around 4-5000km per year. So I was really happy about that, also because I had only 1 or 2 flats.
Now with my new bike I run the same width (28mm) GP5000’s, but now in tubeless. Getting them on was a b*tch, but once they were on they were a-ma-zing. Really great rolling and subtle.
However, now around 6 months later I’ve had 2 flats, which couldn’t be fixed by the sealant. I’ve managed to patch one hole, but now again another similar hole. Not in the center of the contact patch of the road, but also not at the sidewall, a little in between.
My main concern is that I’m screwed when this happens when I’m far from home. Both times happened near home so I could work. I always carry a spare tube, but I don’t see myself changing a TL GP5000 along the road, they’re so difficult to get back on…
I think the last flat happened when I did some light gravel where they used some concrete rubble to patch some holes. I love to do some light gravel sometimes, and it was fine with the tubes, but seems to puncture quickly without tubes and can’t get patched with just sealant.
So I’m wondering, what kind of tire should I go for next? Something still fast, but easier to get off and on when I need to, and something maybe a bit more suited for light gravel. I do 90% of my riding on smooth tarmac, so I don’t want to lose too much speed, but having something that doesn’t puncture this quickly would be nice. I’m on a gravel bike so I can fit wider tires, like 36 or 38c without issues.
Gerben, Yeah, road tires in this review will puncture riding over gravel like what you’ve described. I did a gravel tire review with tires in the 35 to 40c width range. They are intended for a wider range of gravel surfaces than you are describing but there are some very fast ones in that group. Steve
That’s insane Zipp is discontinuing production of the Tangente tubeless tire, did they happen to mention why? I’ve been loving these tires – fast rolling, no punctures, they hold air incredibly well and haven’t worn down all that much. I’m wondering if they might be cooking up a TLR version that weighs less as that seems to be the trend lately. I was also wondering if you will be reviewing the new Pirelli P-Zero tire?
Steven, Haven’t heard a good reason for Zipp pulling these tires and don’t know their plans for the future. Not planning to review the P-Zero Race TLR. Reports from others suggested that they are rather average. Steve
Wouldn’t you know it, the next ride after mentioning no punctures I get a slice that sealant won’t fix – had to be at least 5mm. Looking forward to seeing which tire you recommend to replace the Tangente.
So seems like ENVE 4.5 AR Disc + Bontrager R3 TLR – 28mm is the best performing combination overall?
While I haven’t tested that combination, I rate each as best performers and based on how the R3s size up on other 25mm wheels, would expect they would be an aero combination.
I’m running Bontrager R3 HC Lite non tubeless, on my 3rd set, 10k km and still no punctures. Could I run a tube in a set of Bontrager HC Lite TLR without ruining the performance?
Dont ask why or tell me to run tubeless please….
Yes. You can run a tube in any tubeless tire including the R3
Steve, just a heads up that Rennrad included the bontrager in its recent tire test. Came in about 7 watts (single tire) behind the test winner (pro one TLE and GP5K) in terms of rolling resistance. Also to note, having spoken to Schwalbe reps, this year’s run on the Pro One TLE has been reinforced with a thicker side wall (now 15g heavier) and the compound has been tweaked. And based on Rennrad and RoadBike tests, appears to now be on level with the GP5K (and arguably faster given the well documented drop in Crr performance of GP5K as they wear).
Kevin, Thanks for your comment. I looked at the Rennrad test results. If the Bontrager R3 is indeed 7 watts behind or 56% higher than the Conti GP5K TL and Schwalbe Pro One TLE, then there is a problem. I don’t know where the problem might lay – the tires we rode, the tires they tested, the test protocols and controls, etc. or the rolling resistance is actually that much higher – but Miles, Nate, and I would likely notice if one tire had that much more rolling resistance than another. I expect BRR will run their test on the Bontrager in July so we’ll have another data point from a source whose tests and protocol are independent and a bit more transparent. (note, Rennrad did their lab testing at Scwhalbe.)
I also wouldn’t (and don’t) put a lot of stock in what a company rep says. And I’d expect the Crr increases somewhat for all tires as they age. BRR’s tests on the clincher Conti GP5K showed the rolling resistance to be only about a watt higher (10%) after 5km of wear.
I’ll also reiterate that rolling resistance matters less the faster you go and the deeper your wheels. Other things like the actual installed and inflated width of the tire on your rims (Rule of 105/108), the road feel (grip, handling, comfort), and their ease of installation (mount, inflate, seal, dismount) are equally if not more important depending on how and what you ride and what’s most important to you. Steve
The update to this review prompted me to check and realize my 5000TL’s have just about reached the end of their useful (and disappointingly short) life. For anyone looking to try the R3 TLR, better grab them fast if you can find them. At least in the 700x 28mm, they are backordered til Nov ’21 (which is not exactly prime riding time here in the northeast). After calling around, I finally found a shop with 3 on their shelf, and thus grabbed a pair. This supply shortage of bike stuff is a drag.
Thanks, Steve, for keeping us in the know.
Hey Steve, were you running the Rapidairs in the recommended pressures range? 85-100 seems counterintuitive for tubeless although I’m sure they have their reasons. I was able to find one Bontrager tire nearby to replace my rear tire but unfortunately the bead was too wide for my alloy rims so I went with a set of the S-works instead. I’m heavy so I tried running them at 90 front and 95 rear but had to let air out during the first ride since it was quite harsh.
Steven, Depends on the tire size and inside rim width in addition to your weight. I’d use one of the tire pressure calculators I put up links to in the post to close in on where you might start and then go up or down in 5psi increments from there to get the best combo of road feel (grip, handling, comfort) for your preference. Steve
I have used the calculators before and they typically suggest pressures slightly higher than I prefer. I was pretty happy running 75/85 with the discontinued 25mm Zipp tires, and I may have been taking Specialized’ recommendations too seriously. Those pressures are probably there for racing since that is supposed to be what they were developed for, just wasn’t sure at first if it was risky to go lower than 85psi. I’m most likely overthinking the matter, definitely going to try dropping to the pressures I was running before. Thanks again for a great review and the recent update, the search for the perfect tire may be never ending but they are definitely improving. I’ve only done one 16 mile ride on the S-Works but initial impressions are very good, just hoping they last me a few thousand miles or more.