Is it tubeless?

[Bobbo_SA]

Just going back to the UST vs non-UST topic for a minute, UST as correctly defined before is a standard that includes the bead, casing and structure, it was developed by Mavic, and hence the problem, instead of making it an open standard, like say USB, they decided to be greedy and require manufacturers to "license" it. 

 

Thus, if say conti wanted to mark their tyre with a UST logo then they would have to pay Mavic a certain license fee, which the cost obviously gets passed on to us. This then caused many of the other manufacturers (Even conti dropped it after a while) to use many other logos and wordings to imply that although the tyre conforms to the UST standard, its not branded as such e.g. Tubeless ready, Snakeskin, protection, etc, etc, etc.

[Capricorn]

Thus, if say conti wanted to mark their tyre with a UST logo then they would have to pay Mavic a certain license fee, which the cost obviously gets passed on to us. This then caused many of the other manufacturers (Even conti dropped it after a while) to use many other logos and wordings to imply that although the tyre conforms to the UST standard, its not branded as such e.g. Tubeless ready, Snakeskin, protection, etc, etc, etc.

 

Small but important error that needs to be highlighted to prevent perpetuation of misleading information:  snakeskin has zero to do with sidewall porosity, neither does supergravity, or EVO 'technologies' from Schwalbe.

[Bobbo_SA]

Small but important error that needs to be highlighted to prevent perpetuation of misleading information: snakeskin has zero to do with sidewall porosity, neither does supergravity, or EVO 'technologies' from Schwalbe.

Agreed

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk