First of all, lets look at the tire issue. One: a good mtb tubular does not exist, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t. Secondly, if you are afraid of rock cuts, or destroying an expensive tubular mtb tire, please tell me that you don’t run 29″er tubeless set ups, because when you rip your sidewall on that Hutchinson Python, you are walking home, and you are out an expensive tire to boot. (just a single example, I could provide you with more)

Removing a damaged or worn tire: If the performance benefits are greater than a tubeless set up, (and everyone that has actually ridden mtb tubulars agrees that it is a better system for high performance), the little extra effort to clean up a rim will not be a consideration. Look at tubeless mtb tires as an example if you don’t believe it. There is no doubt that the tubed set ups are easier, less messy, and more convenient to use, but you don’t see people serious about performance running tubes anymore.

According to athletes and the Edge composites people I have spoken with, the benefit to running carbon rims is better ride quality, better durability. and less rotational/overall weight, in that order. Carbon rims are less likely to be damaged in Edge Composites testing. I also found this to be true with the athletes I worked with on the wheels I built up. Stan’s rims can be very light, but a similarly weighted carbon rim would exhibit no flex, whereas a Stan’s rim certainly will exhibit flex. (I am aware of where Stan’s rims are made and that factory isn’t known for making the stiffest aluminum rims in the first place) Is rim stiffness a factor? Certainly. So is the rest of the wheel build, but your final outcome is only as good as the components you choose to build with. Their is no doubt that a stiff, true rim will build a better wheel. Carbon can be controlled and can be made to be just that, in a much more consistent way than metal drawn through a die. Think about it: An aluminum rim extrusion goes through several convolutions before it is a hoop worth making a wheel out of. A carbon rim is molded in it’s final shape. Heck, the Edge Composites rim has it’s spoke holes molded right in them! No drilling required!

Okay, so a carbon clincher/tubular may not be for you, but I have no doubt that if the right tread patterns for the tubular are produced that you will see a whole lot of them under racers in the coming years. I have no doubt they can be made to work. I also know that the guys I talked to that have ridden them are salivating at the possibilities. If it is done right, it will be a home run. Of course, that is a pretty big “if” at the moment. We’ll see soon enough.

And when it’s time to remove the damaged or worn tire (lucky if you don’t kill that spendy tire in the first 8-10 hours of use), the tape is messier to remove than glue, because it breaks up into little bits. It wants to stick to the tire casing sometimes, and the rim other times. With glue, you can use a light solvent and “smooth” it out, leaving much of it on, and only needing a fresh wet topcoat on the rim.

First, to clarify, I have not ridden a carbon mtb rim, nor a mtb tubular. I am hypothesizing based upon my experience racing mtb clinchers and CX tubulars… Take my opinions w/ a grain of salt.

What is the huge benefit to using a carbon rim vs. extruded aluminum in MTB? Is it weight? Seen the weight of the Stans rims? Stiffness? Is that stiffness useful? Is stiffness provided to a mtb wheel via rim strength alone, or the quality of spoke build and hub flange width/height? Is carbon any more durable against rock chips and other damage from real world riding? How does that “gain” in stiffness translate into faster riding, when factoring in all the other variables like suspension and the need to swap out tread patterns at moments notice.

I will say the carbon rim looks cool. It at least has that going for it. And, if you make it deep enough, you could put some flashy brand stickers on it. Some folks are all over that kind of thing.

The wide rims make for steeper air compression, just before the tread is about to be banged on the rim.

With all the tubeless hype, I am still waiting for the firt tubeless tubular. A tubular with no solid butyl/latex air holder in it.

I see new materials outside the bike market that could be used to improve tires in ways rarely properl tried.

For the carbon rims and techy tires to become a success, a heavier alu rim alternatie will be required to reach more riders, bring up the tub numbers.

So I see a huge merit in persuing carbon clincher rims for MTB use. Lets get the weights and costs down with some market competition and development…..

As for tubulars, I am with Ken and Cloxxki - the cost/benefit ratio of a set of carbon rims with diabolically expensive tubulars of very limited tread and size choice to a well built traditional wheel with say some Racing Ralphs run tubeless, is just not worth it for most of us mere mortals who do not race at Pro level.

Pinch flat resistance is not the main benefit of tubulars at all. If you want pinch flat resistance simpy and inexpensively run tubeless!

UCI shoul ban tubulars.

It’s making a financial ivide between riders. Regular tires don’t do this, even offer unsponsored riders the “edge” (no pun intended) of choice.
Let’s suppose these $800/ea rims and their $150/ea? Tubs are going to proove to be worth it. That means multiple sets per rider. Perhaps easy to justify, but for many riders who ride hard and work little, impossible to afford, or even transport all to races.

So, ban tubulars. And the use of $$$$ carbon in rims. It’s offering a technical edge, but at a cost favouring the rich.

This is besides me totally digging the idea (been propagating it for years), and wishing to be elected test rider for this stuff.

VS. Stans rims/ wheels, I would go carbon anyday. Stans rims are OK at best, weights go back and forth as much as a politicians opinions in an election year, and the ride is nowhere the quality of a good carbon rim. Be looking for JHK on a set of carbon 29er wheels w/ Dugast XLs for Bejing if he finds himself on the starting line. If you want the best or what the pros use(Kobollski/ Nys, Frischy, & Swiss Power), then yes, you have to pay to play. I too lean towards clinchers/ tubeless for the tire choices, but make mine carbon for the superior ride quality. Edge 29er carbon wheels will be in around 1350g - 1400g

As far as tubular tape goes, opinions vary, but it isn’t really strong enough to counteract the extreme forces placed upon it due to heavy braking, side loads, and especially harsh moisture elements. The popular opinion of top racers and their mechanics agrees with this. Considering that it isn’t currently accepted as the “best” method for attaching CX tires, adding the significantly larger casing size variable of a MTB tire would surely exceed what the base tape and glue is capable of holding. With all the different types of race course terrains, and changing weather, it is important to have many options available to choose from in the days leading up to a race.

The expense of these tubular wheels and tires would eliminate the possibility to change out tread patterns at the last minute, due to the multiple day time requirement necessary to do a proper glue job.

I’m all for light wheels, but I would say a lighter clincher wheelset w/ a Notubes setup and a few tire choices would be more practical. For example, some of the new 26″ Stan’s race wheelsets that are around 1250g. Surely they could build a 29er rim for less than the 1650ish gram options they currently have.

Warning, if you thow a set on your bike to demo, bring the credit card or check book, because you will not take them off.

Dude: Yeah, pinch flats would be pretty much non-existent. That’s why roadies love them for those cobble stone events over in Europe.