Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Stongest rim for Clydesdales ever!

How many other bigger cyclists are geeking out over the new Velocity B43 rim that is coming available soon?

These are massively strong rims that rival anything ever produced other than industrial rims for something like a Worksman.

They are triple walled, available in a variety of drills, will come in colors (much like the Deep-V) have a deep aero profile and will probably look much to hip to be on the bike of a big fat cyclist.

Am I the only BFC that is looking forward to these boat anchors?

http://www.velocityusa.com/default.asp?contentID=699

[Edit - Velocity in their wisdom have foregone the Clydesdale/tandem/triple/quad/quint market instead focusing exclusively on bike pole players and 700c tricksters - translation, no braking surface on the B43]

First time I've heard of them. Something I would consider should my current rim fail.

Cost?

EDIT: I've seen some prices from $75-$140. That seems pretty low.

It's a roadie rim. It will go to about 32c. Touring rims like the Mavic A17 will still be a better choice. I'd like to try their Synergy rim; it should be strong enough for most clydes.

My Mavic CXP22's have handled nearly 3000 miles without problem. No truing, no tension issues.

That is one heavy rim at 770g, about 250g heavier and 13mm more rim depth than the Deep V. If I was going to tour or have a tandem built, I would consider them.

If I was going to tour or have a tandem built, I would consider them.

If I was touring, the last thing I'd want is an ultra-deep section rim. They're heavy, they transfer all the road vibration to the rider, and in a crosswind they're a p.i.t.a. to control, especially after multiple long tiring days on the road.

Eighth-Inch is pushing the B43 and the Chukker (sp?) to the fixie polo crowd: Super strong, and available in really high spoke counts so a polo ball can't get through. For that application they make sense... but 1440g before you even add a single other wheel component? Yikes! A pair of DT Swiss RR1.1 double eyelets is 930g, and Open Pros are shy of 900g (IIRC). That's like saving yourself the weight of a rear hub when compared to the B43 rims.

Ok, Im not a weight weenie, but I also don't want to carry around an extra wheels worth of weight. I guess my question is how much of a difference does 200g really make? 200 grams is less than a half pound. I weigh #320. A half pound of wheel that would be basically indestructable doesn't seem like I would even notice it except maybe the first time I have to carry it up the stairs.

if this means I'd never have to tension or true my wheel for years, where the hell do I sign up? especially at $70 per wheel?

Ok, Im not a weight weenie, but I also don't want to carry around an extra wheels worth of weight. I guess my question is how much of a difference does 200g really make? 200 grams is less than a half pound. I weigh #320. A half pound of wheel that would be basically indestructable doesn't seem like I would even notice it except maybe the first time I have to carry it up the stairs.

if this means I'd never have to tension or true my wheel for years, where the hell do I sign up? especially at $70 per wheel?

It's easy to overlook the detriment of a super-heavy wheelset if you're comparing it to the weight of the engine. I weigh 250 pounds, and it's pretty common for me to joke with some of my lighter riding partners about the weight of my bike, with it's racks and bags and fenders and such. But there are big benefits to shaving mass off the wheels. While at speed, a rotating mass will offer some conservation and maintain its momentum, but in getting up to speed and (especially) climbing, it takes extra effort to turn a heavier wheel.
At some point, there's an energy savings vs. maintenance costs payoff... and it's a personal decision to make. (Says the guy who invested in a 640g hub which adds 2.5W of resistance. :p) All parts have an ROI to consider. For racers, it's lightweight carbon and titanium duking it out on a cost per weight savings basis. For us Clydes, it usually comes down to a strength vs. weight contest: We don't want to ride a 40 pound anchor on wheels, but we don't want it to fall apart under us, either.

For racers, it's lightweight carbon and titanium duking it out on a cost per weight savings basis. For us Clydes, it usually comes down to a strength vs. weight contest: We don't want to ride a 40 pound anchor on wheels, but we don't want it to fall apart under us, either.

And for me it's a bit of both, not only don't I want the 40 lb anchor, but I want significantly less, because while I'm the biggest part of my speed issue in triathlons, I still want to quit worrying about my damn rear wheel.

Not interested, other options are heavy enough already. See little reason to sacrifice 200 grams for more sidewall depth. Leaving them for the fg-polo crowd.

1/2 pound? My (full) water bottles weigh more. I'll take 2 please!

I'm not climbing many hills, or racing anyone, so I could care less what my components weigh. I want durability and longevity.

1/2 pound? My (full) water bottles weigh more. I'll take 2 please!

I'm not climbing many hills, or racing anyone, so I could care less what my components weigh. I want durability and longevity.

Yes, but, there is a bit of difference between a static 1/2 pound of water located low on you frame and 1/2 pound of rotating weight at the outer circumfrance of a rotating gyro . ;-) Even though I'm a clyde, if there is one place I'm going to look for weight savings it's on my wheels, by looking for wheels that are "strong enough" for my unique matrices of durability to performance concerns.

Yes, but, there is a bit of difference between a static 1/2 pound of water located low on you frame and 1/2 pound of rotating weight at the outer circumfrance of a rotating gyro . ;-) Even though I'm a clyde, if there is one place I'm going to look for weight savings it's on my wheels, by looking for wheels that are "strong enough" for my unique matrices of durability to performance concerns.

It really comes down to your personal riding style. For a touring rider who may be 100 miles away from the nearest bike shop, a 36 spoke wheel that can stay true enough for use with 4 broken spokes may be way, way, way more important then saving a gram or two, rotating or not. Heck you might want a heavier flat resistant tire on it as well. Another group that would be interested here, is the commuter crowd, popping a spoke on the way to work, and being able to just tie it off and keep going, to fix it when you get home is also important.

Of course if you race, and getting there 4/100ths of a second faster is the most important thing and if your willing to take the risk that a popped spoke will end your race, then then you want the lightest wheels possible. Then again you probably don't want a heavy touring bicycle either:D At least not on race day, although I would bet (If I were a betting man) that most pro racers have a heavy steel training bike that they ride most of the time, saving the Carbon for race day.

What is refreshing about this, is that someone is actually building rims that are not racing oriented. It's a growing market, and as gas prices head up again (it's the beginning of the summer gouging season :notamused:). Expect more people to be interested in touring and commuting by bicycle again.

It's a roadie rim. It will go to about 32c. Touring rims like the Mavic A17 will still be a better choice. I'd like to try their Synergy rim; it should be strong enough for most clydes.

It's a hipster rim for bike-polo and fixed gear stylings not a roadie rim. From the profile it doesn't even appear to be designed for brakes.

It really comes down to your personal riding style. For a touring rider who may be 100 miles away from the nearest bike shop, a 36 spoke wheel that can stay true enough for use with 4 broken spokes may be way, way, way more important then saving a gram or two, rotating or not. Heck you might want a heavier flat resistant tire on it as well. Another group that would be interested here, is the commuter crowd, popping a spoke on the way to work, and being able to just tie it off and keep going, to fix it when you get home is also important.

Of course if you race, and getting there 4/100ths of a second faster is the most important thing and if your willing to take the risk that a popped spoke will end your race, then then you want the lightest wheels possible. Then again you probably don't want a heavy touring bicycle either:D At least not on race day, although I would bet (If I were a betting man) that most pro racers have a heavy steel training bike that they ride most of the time, saving the Carbon for race day.

What is refreshing about this, is that someone is actually building rims that are not racing oriented. It's a growing market, and as gas prices head up again (it's the beginning of the summer gouging season :notamused:). Expect more people to be interested in touring and commuting by bicycle again.

For both touring and commuting there are options that will do exactly what you're talking about(tie of the spokes and ride, even with clyde weight on them) at 200 grams less weight, A719, Deep V, etc. That's all I'm saying.

I just don't see a 770 gram, 43 mm deep profile rim, that appears to lack braking surfaces, as being aimed at the touring or commuting crowd. I don't doubt that these will build up into an incredibly strong wheel. I just see the added 200 grams for a deep 43mm profile as wasted weight when there are already incredibly strong rims aimed at those market segments that are doing a very admirable job.

Who knows, if I get the overwhelming urge to build up some uber-clyde aero wheels (now there's an oxymoron for ya'), these might find there way onto them. Until then,.......... meh.

For both touring and commuting there are options that will do exactly what you're talking about(tie of the spokes and ride, even with clyde weight on them) at 200 grams less weight, A719, Deep V, etc. That's all I'm saying.

I just don't see a 770 gram, 43 mm deep profile rim, that appears to lack braking surfaces, as being aimed at the touring or commuting crowd. I don't doubt that these will build up into an incredibly strong wheel. I just see the added 200 grams for a deep 43mm profile as wasted weight when there are already incredibly strong rims aimed at those market segments that are doing a very admirable job.

Who knows, if I get the overwhelming urge to build up some uber-clyde aero wheels (now there's an oxymoron for ya'), these might find there way onto them. Until then,.......... meh.

Looking at the site, there is no photograph, so it's hard to tell if it has braking surfaces or not, if the rim itself has not been released yet, then it's tough to tell, the drawing may be a quickie to show the depth rather then an exact technical drawing. One wonders though with deeper rims, how do you reach the screw for the nipple, do they use extra long nipples, extra long screws or do the holes go through to the inner most layer, and if that is the case, doesn't the hole cost a lot of the strength?

I don't know in my books the more options the better.....

"...the B43 is the ultimate rim for tricking, and bike polo..."

That part made me immediately suspicious. More like "the B43 is the ultimate rim for tricking and bike polo because all those guys will know how much you paid for them"

It's a fad thing where something catches the eye of the market and then it gets over-designed way beyond what is practical. It was only a matter of time before a company had to out V the deep V, and ironically, it's the original creator of the deep V itself.

Mark my words, it's only a matter of time before we see the cycling equivalent of this:
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/4360/052409097.jpg

Funny, those rims aren't very deep but they seem to be holding up pretty well.

Pretty sure we've already gone "there".
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2287/2465299937_86c318fe33.jpg

One wonders though with deeper rims, how do you reach the screw for the nipple, do they use extra long nipples, extra long screws or do the holes go through to the inner most layer, and if that is the case, doesn't the hole cost a lot of the strength?

I'm not sure about the B43, but in the case of other deep section rims there's 2 ways they go about it:

Option 1 is the old carbon deep section clincher type, where the spoke nipples are actually seated like they would be for a regular rim, and the carbon deep section is only drilled to allow passage of the spoke. So the spoke length is much longer than what you're seeing protruding from the rim.

Option 2 is for deep aluminum and newer, structurally more sound carbon rims, and the nipples are seated like a tradition rim, closest to the hub. This shortens the spoke length, and strengthens the wheel.

Pawwwwleeeease God, don't ever let those two photos cross-breed.

It's a roadie rim. It will go to about 32c. Touring rims like the Mavic A17 will still be a better choice. I'd like to try their Synergy rim; it should be strong enough for most clydes.

Oh my goodness no. Any real Clydesdale (I'm not talking about wanna be Clydes hovering around 200lbs) will prove to much for the Synergy. The Deep-V, Dyad, and Chukker are all much stronger rims for heavy riders.

It cracks me up when people who are a gram or two over 200lbs start commenting in a Clydesdale forum regarding a new rim available in 48 drill being too heavy. Let me put it to you simply. Being over 200lbs doesn't make you a Clydesdale. If you're worried about rim weight you're not a Clydesdale. If you want the most freakin' strong rim you can get your hands on for your rear rim, no other considerations being relevant, you're a Clydesdale.

Also post your weight when commenting in this thread. That way other cyclists can establish a context for your comments.

A 206lb, or 217lb, or even a 231lb cyclist can ride on paired spoke wheels.

A real Clydesdale isn't worried about saving weight, even from the best place to save it, the outer rotating mass of the wheelset. No, a real Clydesdale just wants a wheel that doesn't fail every ride so THEY can lose weight.

As posted by a 6'7" 375lb Clydesdale.

If I was touring, the last thing I'd want is an ultra-deep section rim. They're heavy, they transfer all the road vibration to the rider, and in a crosswind they're a p.i.t.a. to control, especially after multiple long tiring days on the road.

Yea, very true, I have the deep v's and catch the wind on my wheels on occasion.

Yea, very true, I have the deep v's and catch the wind on my wheels on occasion.

You sure it's the wheels :D

Oh my goodness no. Any real Clydesdale (I'm not talking about wanna be Clydes hovering around 200lbs) ranting clipped


1. Settle down.
2. 200 pounds (Clydes) 150 pounds (Athenas) are the minimum requirements. It's from a long standing competitive classification which started with triathlons (IIRC) and has been adopted by many sports that have been typically dominated by smaller, lighter athletes.
3. Real Clydesdale? It's a broad category, dude. Not everyone here needs a 3.4 pound pair of rims like the B-43. As a wheelbuilder, I'll go as far as saying that no one needs those rims.
4. Some of us 'fake' Clydes are interested in saving weight on our rigs, whether it's by using a strong, lighter weight, mid-profile handbuilt wheel or choosing the lightest, strongest components we can get. I, for one, am not interested in riding a hilly 400k on a rolling boat anchor.

So you've got your contextual reference: I'm 6'6" and 250 pounds.
My 4 wheelsets are as follows:
- 1991 Wolber T410 Alpine 32h, laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to a 1991 105sc front and a 2008 IRO high flange fix/fix rear.
- Alex DA16 32h laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to Deore hubs
- 1987 Araya 26 x 1.5 single wall 36h laced 3 cross with stock stainless on no-name hubs
- DT Swiss RR1.1 32h laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to a SON28, coupled with an Open Pro/Ultegra 32h machine built 3 cross with 14/15db spokes, hand tensioned/stressed/trued after 100 miles.

I've never popped a spoke. I've never pringled a rim. My most recent failure was actually the bead starting to bow out because I've worn the braking surface down too thin, and the wheel needs rebuilt. I'm using the same spokes and hub for the build.

"...the B43 is the ultimate rim for tricking, and bike polo..."

That part made me immediately suspicious. More like "the B43 is the ultimate rim for tricking and bike polo because all those guys will know how much you paid for them"

It's a fad thing where something catches the eye of the market and then it gets over-designed way beyond what is practical. It was only a matter of time before a company had to out V the deep V, and ironically, it's the original creator of the deep V itself.



Actually I think they were out deep V'd by these first. http://shop.hplusson.com/product/formation-face

Strangely enough the B43 is a mm deeper than the formation face that it came out after.

I really like my rear 32 hole rear 24 front SL42 combo FWIW. It built nicely and has yet to spontaneously detonate. "shill he's a shill ,burn the shill" I payed full price and have been very happy so far. In 10,000 miles I'll be qualified to give a full review. The wind does make things a little more interesting at times but not OMG scary.

The wind does make things a little more interesting at times but not OMG scary.

The only times that I've considered the wind to be "OMG scary" in regards to deep section rims are when it's intense, Tacoma Narrows kind of wind; or if you're really really tired.

1. Settle down.
2. 200 pounds (Clydes) 150 pounds (Athenas) are the minimum requirements. It's from a long standing competitive classification which started with triathlons (IIRC) and has been adopted by many sports that have been typically dominated by smaller, lighter athletes.
3. Real Clydesdale? It's a broad category, dude. Not everyone here needs a 3.4 pound pair of rims like the B-43. As a wheelbuilder, I'll go as far as saying that no one needs those rims.
4. Some of us 'fake' Clydes are interested in saving weight on our rigs, whether it's by using a strong, lighter weight, mid-profile handbuilt wheel or choosing the lightest, strongest components we can get. I, for one, am not interested in riding a hilly 400k on a rolling boat anchor.

So you've got your contextual reference: I'm 6'6" and 250 pounds.
My 4 wheelsets are as follows:
- 1991 Wolber T410 Alpine 32h, laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to a 1991 105sc front and a 2008 IRO high flange fix/fix rear.
- Alex DA16 32h laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to Deore hubs
- 1987 Araya 26 x 1.5 single wall 36h laced 3 cross with stock stainless on no-name hubs
- DT Swiss RR1.1 32h laced 3 cross with DT Champion 2.0 to a SON28, coupled with an Open Pro/Ultegra 32h machine built 3 cross with 14/15db spokes, hand tensioned/stressed/trued after 100 miles.

I've never popped a spoke. I've never pringled a rim. My most recent failure was actually the bead starting to bow out because I've worn the braking surface down too thin, and the wheel needs rebuilt. I'm using the same spokes and hub for the build.

250lbs is well within the safety range of almost every piece of the lightest featherweight cycling kit available. Other than avoiding ti spindle pedals, and the lightest version of a lightning crank you can ride whatever you want.

For crying out loud you haven't even found the need to move up to 36 drill rims.

There are too distinct groups here. Those that associate themselves with Clydesdales and those that need special service equipment. You can ride anything and everything you want, with very limited exceptions. Even when I was playing basketball competitively I could noticeably deflect the bottom bracket of high end steel bike.

No one needs rims like a B43? Huh, well considering my 700c 48h Dyad won't even support me, without failing within five miles of any ride, what do you suppose I use to build up my tandem? Going from my 375lbs to the 570lbs we'll have on the bike necessitates a very very strong wheel.

My rant stands. There are clydesdales, and there are real Clydesdales. You're not a Clydesdale, you're just a big cyclist. I've been a big cyclist, now I'm a Clydesdale. There is a Huge difference.

OK everyone RELAX..... this was a post about a rim, not about who is a "real" clyde. don't blow a vein over a rim. it aint worth it. This from a uber clyde :) starting riding weight of 526lbs at 6'5" current weight 468.

No one needs rims like a B43? Huh, well considering my 700c 48h Dyad won't even support me, without failing within five miles of any ride, what do you suppose I use to build up my tandem? Going from my 375lbs to the 570lbs we'll have on the bike necessitates a very very strong wheel.

Find a better wheelsmith.
If a 48h, wide touring rim isn't holding up underneath you, then there's one of two situations:
- Inferiour build quality
- Stop doing stair drops with it
I'll assume that you're not hucking loading docks and flights of 10 stairs.

mtnbke,

I have no idea how good your wheelsmith is. But, like others, I can only recommend you start with a search for an excellent one. They make all the difference. If you can't get a full ride out of a 48 spoke road wheel, and you're not absolutely nailing every railroad crossing, pot hole and curb you can find, somethings amiss with your wheel's build.

Anyhow, I hear your frustration, as I'm sure everyone else does.

If you could please, try not to insult some of us for only weighing,.....oh,......about 132kg. If you could do that, we will be much more inclined to attempt to help. If you only want to hear responses from folks that are heavier than you, just state so up front, and ignore the rest of us.

Its official the B43 rim does NOT have a braking surface!

I rec'd the email confirming this directly from Velocity (not Velocity USA) themselves.

So anyone know where i can buy one of these new velocity rims. Sorry to hack this post but i am looking for the 26" version the Velocity Chukker but figured if they have the B43 they will have the chukker.

Look on Velocity USA site, they have online retailers. Every Bicycle Tire can get any Velocity rim as well. I ordered my Deep V's rims from them when I had some built up. Great service.

So anyone know where i can buy one of these new velocity rims. Sorry to hack this post but i am looking for the 26" version the Velocity Chukker but figured if they have the B43 they will have the chukker.

I'm waiting on the 700c version of the Chukker myself.

I keep thinking about a B43 and setting up Mafac canitlevered brakesto align about where the cross brace in the rim is. Super crazy powerful brakes, bombproof wheel. Perfect for Clydesdales...

Just no braking surface. Silly Velocity.

I'm waiting on the 700c version of the Chukker myself.

I keep thinking about a B43 and setting up Mafac canitlevered brakesto align about where the cross brace in the rim is. Super crazy powerful brakes, bombproof wheel. Perfect for Clydesdales...

Just no braking surface. Silly Velocity.

Please stop before you injure yourself. If you're going to set up a brake on that rim, do it at the bead seat where the metal is thicker, and fatigue failure wouldn't catastrophically collapse the wheel. At least there, you'll have the bowing effect at the bead (from the tire pressure) as an indicator if you've worn the metal too thin. If you wear it thin at the mid-wall, there's absolutely no indication before failure (cannot measure with calipers as you can at the bead wall), and the failure you're looking at is wall collapse; which would detension the spokes and crumple the entire wheel.

Mafac canitlevered brakes

You seem to be very impressed with Mafac brakes. Which ones in particular are you referencing? You brought them up with regard to tandem braking as well. The Mafac's I remember were center pull affairs that were "acceptable" at best.

You seem to be very impressed with Mafac brakes. Which ones in particular are you referencing? You brought them up with regard to tandem braking as well. The Mafac's I remember were center pull affairs that were "acceptable" at best.

Nope. MAFAC old school wide profile cantis were the bomb. Paul Neo-Retros and Velo-Orange Grand Crus are design copies on the original MAFAC rim-crushing awesomeness. I currently use Tektro CR720s, which overall design-wise are dissimilar, but the geometry is the same.

Nope. MAFAC old school wide profile cantis were the bomb. Paul Neo-Retros and Velo-Orange Grand Crus are design copies on the original MAFAC rim-crushing awesomeness. I currently use Tektro CR720s, which overall design-wise are dissimilar, but the geometry is the same.

Thanks. I looked them up. Makes more sense now. Not anything like the old center pulls I was remembering.

Pawwwwleeeease God, don't ever let those two photos cross-breed.

I'm a little slow getting to this, but, Yo! Fred! You're too late!

http://blondefab.googlepages.com/amazonblonde36er

http://blondefab.googlepages.com/SNB10225.JPG/SNB10225-full.jpg

But there are big benefits to shaving mass off the wheels. While at speed, a rotating mass will offer some conservation and maintain its momentum, but in getting up to speed and (especially) climbing, it takes extra effort to turn a heavier wheel.

Please define "big benefits" and show us where these "big benefits" are. From Analytic Cycling (http://www.analyticcycling.com/) modeling, even if I try to wildly vary the wheel mass/rotational inertia parameters (i.e., 10 lbs vs. 5 lbs total wheel weight plus double the rotational inertia for the heavier wheel), at the end of a 3-mile 8% climb, the two riders are only apart by less than 300 ft or a minute. I'm not sure I'll call that "big" if you're not racing.

Running the numbers on the same site, taking some realistic models into account, there's upwards of a 2 minute difference in a 15 mile climb at 7%. Throw 3 of those onto a 400k course and you're looking at saving nearly 6 minutes. Add in the rest of the rolling hills on a course and it could be closer to 10 minutes.
When you're counting on minutes to get you from one control station to the next on a tough brevet, every minute counts. If a control closes at 22:00 and roll in at 22:01 for a DNF, I'd call that a "big" difference.

Hey! Those look pretty bidass, maybe you can help me. I am looking for something like that WITH a braking surface...