[slidey]

Ya that's the one

That looks like a good one. I wonder though if anyone has had the tube slip back in?

 

[006_007]

That looks like a good one. I wonder though if anyone has had the tube slip back in?

Never did when I used it more then a decade ago. You are splitting the tube, mounting the tire, and cutting the excess flaps off - no real way for it to slip under as the tire stays inflated.

Swapping tires sucked as I don't believe I ever re-used a split tube - was way easier to just use another new one.

 

[slidey]

You don’t need to pack it in. Just use a medium tension and go around a few times.
I just use plain old pallet shrink wrap, 1000 ft roll, 5 inches wide?
you need something to keep it out of the spoke holes, that’s it. When aired up, shrink will stretch just fine, no need to fuss with it like tubeless tape. It’s not making an adhesion seal, it’s making a physical seal. It extends, like a split tube, outside the rim. After build you’ll trim it to the rim/tire join, but the shrink will extend greater than bead to bead.
Yes used on some 222 and their upscale cousin which I think Was 522. It’s been a couple years but this worked better than several other methods.
Gorilla tape - shrink is easier to clean up and fix leaks
Self sealing silicone tape - much easier to install, but this self sealing tape was pretty easy. Expensive though.
Clear gorilla tape - glue is hard to get off, not recommended
Split tube - didn’t work well for me, I’m not sure why, didn’t try it a bunch as tubes also cost money and shrink is free.
The main issue with shrink is that you have to replace it on each install. Not that. If a drawback really. The main strength is that the rim stays clean and doesn’t need solvents or elbow grease to prep between tire swaps. Just be careful when making the valve hole.

Ohhhhh, I see now. I admit I missed the part where you mentioned trimming the excess once the tire is mounted. Just for clarification, when you do wrap with medium tension does the shrink sit suspended across from edge to edge or is there some slack to where it can droop to fill the rim bed? I would assume not as from what you described it sounds to me like the shrink covers flat over the rim and then when the tire seats itself onto the bead it simultaneously pushes back against the shrink and stretches it slightly before sitting in place.

 

[Grinchy8]

Ohhhhh, I see now. I admit I missed the part where you mentioned trimming the excess once the tire is mounted. Just for clarification, when you do wrap with medium tension does the shrink sit suspended across from edge to edge or is there some slack to where it can droop to fill the rim bed? I would assume not as from what you described it sounds to me like the shrink covers flat over the rim and then when the tire seats itself onto the bead it simultaneously pushes back against the shrink and stretches it slightly before sitting in place.

It’s not taunt like a drum. It can have some slack in it. Too tight would probably tear easier when you put the tire in.
All the usual stuff still applies - don’t have too many wrinkles, take care with levers, etc.

what makes this method great is the shrink and tire rubber love each other , easy seals.

when you try it it’s pretty clear what the correct tension is. Just a little is needed.

 

[slidey]

It’s not taunt like a drum. It can have some slack in it. Too tight would probably tear easier when you put the tire in.
All the usual stuff still applies - don’t have too many wrinkles, take care with levers, etc.

what makes this method great is the shrink and tire rubber love each other , easy seals.

when you try it it’s pretty clear what the correct tension is. Just a little is needed.

Well now I really want to try this. I'll try split tube as well and compare the two. And while some tubeless tape isn't required for either I don't think it'll hurt to add some for additional protection. Don't want sealant somehow making its way into the spoke holes. I'll report back, thanks again for sharing your method!

 

[Travolta]

1. yes
2. yes
3. yes

Corner hard enough with low pressure and you will get any tire to fold over.
Whether or not what you plan to do will work depends on how you ride.
17mm is pretty slim. I would only use 2 or 2.1" tires on that.
Some small rims are a ***** to set up tubeless due to the design. The 221 should be fairly straightforward and easy.
Tape the holes shut, fill with goo, put tire on, inflate. Done.

 

[Noob1999]

I'd like to attempt a tubeless setup on some vintage wheels. Thinking of going with a cheap pair of Mavic 221's, some sealant, presta tubeless valves, and some type of TR tire.
I have a few questions about this process...

1. for MTB wheels, is 17mm ID too skinny for a reliable tubeless setup?
2. is the old gorilla tape method okay for these wheels? I was looking for old Stan's strips with the valves built in, but they say they're for 21.5-25mm rims.
3. have you done a tubeless conversion on similar rims and has it held up even under cornering? What PSI do you run?

Thanks

Any here above named method to seal the rim will work, but I’d like to know why you want to do this conversion?
If it’s for “flat protection” alone it’s a fine idea, if however your goal is to ride with lower pressures it’s no good idea with a 17mm ID rim even not with a < 2.1” tire.
Yep done that, learned the hard way, in the end I remember riding with a slightly higher pressure than with a tube.

 

[bingemtbr]

I'd like to attempt a tubeless setup on some vintage wheels. Thinking of going with a cheap pair of Mavic 221's, some sealant, presta tubeless valves, and some type of TR tire.
I have a few questions about this process...

OP, that part about vintage wheels + cheap pair of (rims) Mavic 221's + tubeless = worry.

Please consider the age of the wheels and metal fatigue. If the rims are from the '90's (i.e. "vintage") then they are not the same caliber as Stan's rims from 2014, and definitely not comparable to an ENVE (or any other brand) of wheel/rim) in 2024. However, if the wheels/rims were manufactured recently, I'd say go for it but make sure you have a good health insurance with a dental plan. ;-)

 

[slidey]

OP, that part about vintage wheels + cheap pair of (rims) Mavic 221's + tubeless = worry.

Please consider the age of the wheels and metal fatigue. If the rims are from the '90's (i.e. "vintage") then they are not the same caliber as Stan's rims from 2014, and definitely not comparable to an ENVE (or any other brand) of wheel/rim) in 2024. However, if the wheels/rims were manufactured recently, I'd say go for it but make sure you have a good health insurance with a dental plan. ;-)

I ride hard on a pair of Mavic 221's with tubes and they have held up just fine so the question on my mind is more about the effectiveness of a tubeless setup + the ability of the tire to stay on the bead. I don't know if that's the rim I will end up using but that's what I currently have. For what it's worth I saw a forum post from 20 years ago where someone tried 221's with these Stan's strips (the kind with the integrated valve) and reported that it worked fine and was ridden on hard. I considered trying the strips mentioned but I can't find it and will assume Stan's no longer produces them. But if I can mimic this setup with split tube or the shrink method described above, and it's safe, I will love to try it.

 

[slidey]

Any here above named method to seal the rim will work, but I’d like to know why you want to do this conversion?
If it’s for “flat protection” alone it’s a fine idea, if however your goal is to ride with lower pressures it’s no good idea with a 17mm ID rim even not with a < 2.1” tire.
Yep done that, learned the hard way, in the end I remember riding with a slightly higher pressure than with a tube.

You got me because I've actually been pretty lucky with tubes. But I like tubeless on my modern bike because of the comfort and because no tubes = no snake bites. On small 26" wheels I find that just 1/4 a bar makes a huge difference in comfort and control. If I can run a little bit less pressure and also not worry about pinch flats when doing it then I will be happier. Even if I have to run the same exact pressures I will feel better knowing there's no tube to pinch.

 

[slidey]

1. yes
2. yes
3. yes

Corner hard enough with low pressure and you will get any tire to fold over.
Whether or not what you plan to do will work depends on how you ride.
17mm is pretty slim. I would only use 2 or 2.1" tires on that.
Some small rims are a * to set up tubeless due to the design. The 221 should be fairly straightforward and easy.
Tape the holes shut, fill with goo, put tire on, inflate. Done.

I think I will try one of the two methods mentioned above. This is for the reason that, as I have found in my continuing research, older clincher rims have too deep a rim bed for tubeless alone and need more than just a single layer of tubeless tape to help with tire retention. I think there is a very good reason that split tube for example was so popular. That seals the rim and adds volume. My remaining concern is the width of the rim and how low I can run the tires.

 

[woodsloop]

You got me because I've actually been pretty lucky with tubes. But I like tubeless on my modern bike because of the comfort and because no tubes = no snake bites. On small 26" wheels I find that just 1/4 a bar makes a huge difference in comfort and control. If I can run a little bit less pressure and also not worry about pinch flats when doing it then I will be happier. Even if I have to run the same exact pressures I will feel better knowing there's no tube to pinch.

If you don't have to worry about punctures from thorns, etc. and are only concerned about pinch flats, tubeless is worse/more expensive because snake bites still can happen, except now the holes end up in more expensive/ less repairable (even with a patch, structural casing strands are broken) tire casing. In a pinch flat with tubes, the tubes have a protective effect for the tire casing.

On the wheels and tires subforum currently, someone was asking a kind of related question about fattest tire size for his vintage 26" rim and bike. I pointed out that his rim was probably around 17.5mm internal width. When I switched to 2.2" Race Kings on my 17.5mm internal width rims, I got what I wanted in ride quality. But I'm still restricted by how low I can go in pressure because the tire will squirm/collapse below low 20s psi in high G turns (at my weight of about 155lbs). So you can't do the 16-17 psi thing that other people can do with wider internal width rims and 2.4 tires.

https://www.mtbr.com/posts/16356525/

I went through this thought process a few years ago because I like my old '90s bike (that I have ridden from new and will never get rid of) and have optimized (if not a complete retromod) it to the extent that it can be reasonably optimized. In the end, I decided that tubeless didn't make sense with the old rims. I didn't want to deal with the hassle of using split tube or screwing around with how many layers of tape for no real gain, since I don't get punctures where I live. My last flat was years ago, and I didn't even really mind getting it. Also I ride seasonally (ski in the winter), and didn't want to mess with refreshing sealant when I have no maintenance now other than pumping up the tires.

I've considered getting wider 26" rims at some point but will wait until the brake track wears through my front rim before changing it up. There are 26" rims that are 25mm internal like the Velocity Cliffhanger, but it's probably 160+g more just for one rim more that what's on the bike now. The Sun Sta-Tru TR25s are 25mm internal, and intermediate in weight between the old and the Cliffhanger (still 505g vs. ~440g with actual weight lower due to rim wear) but I see no reviews of that rim. There are 26" carbon rims that were tempting, and I did a lot of research on rim brake and carbon rims/carbon rim brake pads since I run rim brakes. But even with brake pads for carbon rims, they would be a downgrade in braking capability (my current rim brake setup is really good). 25mm internal width might allow lower pressure than the low- to mid-20s psi that I run now, but I'm actually quite happy in every way with 2.2s on the narrow rims. . . great upgrade to the original 1.95s or previous 2.1s.

In the end, the best compromise for me (at least until my rims wear out) for my type of riding is to keep running tubes on 2.2 tires. I use the lightest 2.2 tires (Race King Race Sport sub-480g) and butyl tubes (Conti superlight, sub 100g) that I could get.

 

[Travolta]

older clincher rims have too deep a rim bed

If the tape is snuck then it should not matter if the rim bed is deep or shallow as long as the tape has enough contact so air won't leek under it or it doesn't get pulled into the bore holes by the tire pressure.
My tubeless setups have like 2-3mm overlap over the holes with gorilla tape. Never had any leeks so far.
Cut the tape to your inner diameter and you should be fine.

 

[slidey]

If you don't have to worry about punctures from thorns, etc. and are only concerned ....

I find myself relating to this quite a bit. My bikes that get the most use are the vintage ones with no disc brake support. (If I ever find a set of disc brake wheels for my compatible bike I'll save myself the trouble and find something UST compatible) I have a set of Mavic 221s and for a while I was experimenting with tire widths and pressures with tubes. 26x2.25 is the widest I could do and it works best for me at 1.4-1.6 bar or about 21-23 PSI front and rear. The handling I'm sure could be better but they definitely don't fold over the wheel or anything. I've been lucky with tubes in these tires for the most part. I did try going 20 PSI or a little below that and got a tear at the valve, but the ride did feel good. With how I ride I guess it's impressive I haven't been pinching tubes, then again I don't weigh very much.

Depending on the terrain 23 PSI with tubes is okay. But other times it's uncomfortable. I'm just tempted to have that slightly cushioned feeling I feel on my modern bike with tubeless, and know I don't have to ride on eggshells when there are loose rocks about. I don't run it at ridiculously low pressures anyway. I just like a balance between handling and comfort as well as peace of mind. If I can run a 26x2.25 at 20 PSI instead of 23 PSI it would be good enough for me. This is provided that it's without a lot of hassle after first setup.

I understand what you're saying and I can't assume I won't have the same problems. But is it worth a shot? Maybe I do it and I love it. If I don't then at least it'll no longer be a mystery.

 

[Noob1999]

Maybe I do it and I love it. If I don't then at least it'll no longer be a mystery.

All being said I’d say go ahead and look for yourself.
Since you’re a lightweight rider, there’s prolly more possible than for a heavyweight rider.

Nevertheless..
Last year I converted my wife’s 26” Merida bike to an e-bike (she’s got Parkinson disease) and while doing that I upgraded everything to XTR , Pike fork, carbon steerer, ISM saddle etc.
I tried to talk her into a new (FS) bike, but she is that attached to it, that she refused it.
The wheels are XTR WH-M988 and the tires a Crossking plus a Mountainking 26x2.3, tubeless, front 19 PSI, rear 22 PSI.
She weighs 115 LBS and don’t make the assumption she can’t ride or being slow, when she gets on the bike there’s nothing that keeps her from riding hard or riding tech, gnarly, jumplines, you name it.
Point is, she’s light weight, the rims are UST with a 22mm ID and she’s running somewhat heavier and wider casings than what you’re naming.
All this accounts for lower pressure….

/edit
Looking at that last pic I remember I still need to shorten the brakelines and droppercable😂

 

[slidey]

All being said I’d say go ahead and look for yourself.
Since you’re a lightweight rider, there’s prolly more possible than for a heavyweight rider.

That's a really nice gift rebuilding her favorite bike
I understand what you're saying. I definitely don't expect to be running super low PSIs on these. Even on my 27.5er with legitimate tubeless wheels I run some pressure that's between soft and firm (1.25 bar or about 17 or 18 PSI) and is only slightly lower than what I'd run with tubes. The main thing is that I can feel comfortable dropping the pressure very slightly and know I will be less likely to have a pinch flat than with tubes at those pressures.

 

[slidey]

I think it would be nice to update this thread for everyone who replied and for anyone who's searching for a similar solution for old wheels and wants to hear (so far) a success story.

I decided to try one of the DIY methods that involves layering tape to build up the rim bed. The candidates were a set of old wheels that are actually even slightly narrower than the Mavic 221's, about 16mm inner. I chose these because I just wanted a low stakes test subject before taking the Mavic wheels from my bike. If there's any interest in the exact process I used then let me know and I'll put a step by step of the process. But long story short, the tires I chose sealed up so well that they held air without any sealant. And once I actually injected the sealant through the valves I noticed there wasn't a single drop of sealant coming through between the rim and the bead.

I haven't done a real ride yet but I did a 15 minute test ride where I experimented with tire pressures and tested the sidewall support and rolling over various obstacles to simulate rocks and other technical features. No burps occurred and I appreciated the decreased unsprung weight. I'll edit my reply when I get a reading on the tire pressures I'm running. But so far so great and the tires have been holding air for 24 hours now.


Update...
I did another ride that I'd call in between "chill" and "real" and the ride felt great! Absolutely no leaks from the front tire. Rear tire just had two pea sized wet spots on the bead which I would assume is quite normal. It may just be the sealant filling in inconsistencies in the tape. I've had the same or greater on legitimate tubeless setups on modern wheels.