A lot of riders come into the shop asking which tire system is simply the best. Unfortunately, there is not a cut and dry answer to this question. Ergo, there remains three tire systems still on the market. What is best for each individual rider is going to depend on their needs, conditions, cycling discipline, and familiarity and comfort level with installation and maintenance of their chosen system. So riders can make an informed decision, I shall explain the pros and cons of each system here.
CLINCHER
Let’s start by discussing what has become standard in the industry, the clincher and tube system. Standard clincher tires with inner tubes is the industry standard because it is the easy system when it comes to both installation and maintenance. It also is generally the most inexpensive system and therefore has the most options available on the market over the other systems. Moreover, high end clincher tires with a latex tube are highly competitive with a both tubeless and tubular systems with regards to both weight and ride performance.
With all of the benefits of this system is is understandable that it is the most common on the market. ‘Why would anyone choose a different system’ one may wonder. The main reason that riders choose tubeless or tubular over clincher systems is simply that tubes are prone to pinch flats. Moreover, they are not recommended to be run at low pressure; this is an important ride performance characteristic for certain disciplines such as mountain and cyclocross. When other systems have the ability to self repair, this is not the same with inner tubes. Yet, repairing an inner tube is cheap, even if an inner tube is not patchable, replacing inner tubes is relatively inexpensive.
TUBELESS
Tubeless systems are the favored system among many cyclists in numerous disciplines. When running a tubeless system, the rider benefits from less rolling resistance, decreased weight, and the ability to run the system at lower pressure for disciplines that require more traction such as cyclocross and MTB. Of course, since there is no tube to pinch or puncture, the rider benefits from significantly less flats. Moreover, when used in conjunction with a liquid sealant (latex based) tubeless systems have the ability to self repair small holes that may otherwise cause flats.
The most glaring downsides to this system are that they are more expensive than tube and clincher systems and that they are also more difficult to mount, often requiring an air compressor for installation. In addition, use of the latex based liquid sealant can be messy. Moreover, though flats are less common, if a flat does happen that does not self repair, maintenance is much more involved than that of the standard clincher and tube system.
TUBULAR
Tubular tire systems are often the most preferred by competitive cyclists. The reason being that they produce the lightest wheel and tire combination. Tubular tires are generally higher quality, provide better grip yet with lower rolling resistance, and have a higher thread count (TPI), and ergo have a better ride quality. Moreover, this system is nearly impossible to pinch flat and can be run at much lower pressure than other systems, perfect for disciplines that require greater traction. Though this may be thought to have the best ride qualities of all three systems, they are often avoided by riders who are not at competition level. The reasons for this are readily apparent.
The downsides to a tubular system often outweigh the benefits for most riders. First, a good tubular system is more expensive than traditional clincher and tube systems. Mounting tubular tires requires gluing the casing to the rim; this process is both labor intensive and requires a great deal of time. Therefore, tires cannot be easily swapped when either one is damaged or the rider simply wants a tire with a different tread. This system is also quite difficult to repair when punctured.
All this being said, clincher systems continue to dominate the market for a number of reasons previously mentioned. High end clincher tires are going to provide comparable performance to tubeless and tubular systems, especially when used in conjunction with latex tubes which decreases rolling resistance. Moreover, even though the rider is more prone to punctures, punctures are easy and cheap to repair. Yet depending on your needs and riding conditions, another system may be more beneficial.
Please feel free to direct any questions my way, I understand it can get very convoluted when deciding what system to run. I am happy to lend any professional expertise that you may require.
Fulton Bikes 