Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So, I've been running Stan's system on my Syncros DS28s for a few months now and I've been exclusively using UST tires during that time because they set up easier and seem to hold air much better (duh). I just ordered some 2.6 Kenda Telonix wire bead and dual ply. I got them for a trip to Snowshoe Mtn. in July. The Shoe is gnarly with big rock gardens and huge roots which is why I wanted some big sticky meats.

Anyway, these tires have me freaking out about running them tubeless. Kenda states right on their site not to use latex based sealants. What do the experts have to say? I ordered some Maxxis DH tubes (don't want to pinchflat) just in case I decide to just run tubes but I really don't want to add a pound of rotational weight per wheel. I should add that I ride DH/FR with a Transition Blindside and weigh 225# ready to rock.

I'm afraid of rolling the bead or burping the tire mostly.
 

·
i call it a kaiser blade
Joined
·
744 Posts
personally if i'm running DH, i want to make sure i can trust ALL of my gear.

...

that's my 2 cents.
 

·
Saving lives with knives.
Joined
·
959 Posts
I have been running Kenda Nevegal Standard with Stan's for a two year and I have never had a problem. What I have seen happen with the Kenda UST tires, is bubbling of the casing when used with stan's sealant. So I would shy away from Kenda UST tires + Stans. But Stan's + regular Kenda tires should work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,094 Posts
I have been running Kenda Nevegals with Stans for more than 4 months. Love it. But would not trust it on a real downhill course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I really love running tubeless but I think I'm going to have to run the fatty tubes for this trip. The narrower rim (by DH standards) and big tire combo has me worried. I plan on rebuilding my hadleys with Mavic 823s in the future and I don't think I'll be as worried at that point since it is a tubeless specific bead/rim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
scarsellone said:
This is weird? Why would it work for the std nevegale & not the UST version?
Rubber compound perhaps? The chemicals in the sealant may break down the inner coating of the UST tires which results in de-lamination and blistering.
 

·
Pivoteer
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Most of the guys I ride with run Kendas (single ply) tubeless and NEVER have any problems. Our terrain is super rocky, technical, and probably more difficult than most DH courses, though not as fast.

I personally run Maxxis DH tires tubeless with ZERO issues. Maxxis tires clearly are a better quality tire. From the bead to the sidewalls. The supertacky compound and 3C is rediculous. Kenda does have a winner in the StickE rubber, but overall, Maxxis works better for me and I have 110% confidence in them. Running any DH tire tubeless will not be an issue. The steel bead and 2 ply sidewalls give me far more confidence than any single ply tire tubeless or tubed. I even feel more confident with DH tires vs. true tubeless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,762 Posts
combatkimura said:
Anyway, these tires have me freaking out about running them tubeless. Kenda states right on their site not to use latex based sealants. What do the experts have to say? I ordered some Maxxis DH tubes (don't want to pinchflat) just in case I decide to just run tubes but I really don't want to add a pound of rotational weight per wheel. I should add that I ride DH/FR with a Transition Blindside and weigh 225# ready to rock.

I'm afraid of rolling the bead or burping the tire mostly.
It isn't rolling a bead or anything like that. The problem arose when Stans first hit the market and started to really gain in popularity. Folks started having issues with Kenda tires. When being used with Stans sealant they would sometimes (not all the time) develope blisters in the outer casing of the tire. Research into the problem determined that something in the latex sealant was working it's way between the inner body and outer rubber casing of the tire and causing the two layers to delaminate creating a bubble of trapped air and sealant between the two. This lead to some tire failures, nothing severe to my knowledge, but certainly disconserting to the rider.

Anway all this lead to Kenda not recommending the use of latex sealants in their tires and going so far as to void any warranty should latex sealant be used in one of their tires.

With that said, many people have used or are using Kenda tires, both UST and non-UST, with Stans sealant with 0 problems.

Personally I much prefer to have 100% confidence in my equipment. The old Kenda problem and current disclaimer give that "shadow of a doubt", that makes me shy away from running any Kenda tire tubeless with latex sealant. I still love my Nevegals, love the girp and the high volume, but they go on tubed. For a tubeless set up I usually run Continental or Maxxis tires.

I seriously doubt that you'd have a problem running the Telly UST's with Stans. But if you are like me, that shadow of a doubt will always be in the back of your mind. If you can get past it cool. If not run em tubed. If nothing else it will give you peace of mind.

Good Dirt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,762 Posts
combatkimura said:
They aren't USTs actually, just regular 2.6 dual ply wire beads.
Eh, probably only increases the chances of problems a little bit. Just keep in mind that 95% of the reported problems were after the tire hand been run for a period of time with the Stans selant, usually amounting to several months. And was the most often reported tire with the problems was the Nevegal, a much lighter duty single ply tire. Of course that was about the most popular tire on the planet at that time. You'r looking at running a much heavier duty dual ply tire. I'd say go with whatever makes you feel the most comfortable. And as noted, many folks are currently running Kenda tires with Stans with no issues. You'r call on this one.

Good Dirt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Here's what I plan on doing. I'm going to set one up and see how easy it is to seat and how well it seals and holds air. I may even try to set it up without the sealant to see how well it holds air (I'll use the soapy water to seat it though). If I'm comfortable with the results I'll run them tubeless. Even if I roll the bead or burp it I'll have a tube with me to throw in there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
It seems most of the time when someone has an issue, and they use Stans, they just automatically assume the sealant is the cause when there really is no proof one way or the other. Tires blister, knobs fall off, etc, etc even when sealant has never been used, its just something that occasionally happens. Maybe sealants can have a negative effect on tires but maybe they don't, but I have not seen any credible proof that they do. I think the reason manufactures don't approve of its use is because they don't want to encourage people converting regular tires to tubeless and they don't want to have to test their tires against all the various sealants on the market.
 

·
Sugary Exoskeleton
Joined
·
4,657 Posts
Officially: Kenda says no.

Unofficially: Works awesome. I have had one tire (four years ago) bubble out of my last 20 Kenda tubeless conversions, a pretty good ratio IMO. I use mostly single-ply tires, but my 2-ply experiences were even better. The wire bead DH tires in my experience seal up instantly and hold air almost indefinitely. I suppose like any tire it's not a ticket to running 15psi, but by running standard tire pressures (28 and up, in my case) I have never had a Kenda/tubeless/stans failure.

The 2.6 on the skinnier rim might seem to be the biggest challenge, but I have used 2.5 Nevegals on Crossmax XTs and they are even skinnier than the Syncros. It was not optimal from a handling standpoint, but tubeless wasn't the issue. I doubt you will have any problems. May the force be with you.

combatkimura said:
Here's what I plan on doing. I'm going to set one up and see how easy it is to seat and how well it seals and holds air. I may even try to set it up without the sealant to see how well it holds air (I'll use the soapy water to seat it though). If I'm comfortable with the results I'll run them tubeless. Even if I roll the bead or burp it I'll have a tube with me to throw in there.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top