True Confession: Aero Wheels? Meh.
02-22-17, 11:26 AM
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times
in
177 Posts
You are doing what others have complained about. I will add my disapproval. You are quoting a test of "aero" marketed wheels against the absolutely worst case non-aero wheel, something very few serious cyclists aiming for speed ride anymore. A more realistic test would be the aero wheels against a popular, general purpose wheel built around a 25 mm deep, V-section, 23 mm wide rim. That is the main choice that folks are making: a 45-55 mm rim or a 25 mm rim. We all know Mavic Open Pros have high drag. But nobody (much) cares. What we care about is the choice most of us have set up: 25 or 50.
If you compare FLO's aero 30mm rim to their 45mm rim you give up about 3.5 to 6W/wheel. Whether that's important is up to each individual. I'm good with the 30mm wheels and deeper wheels aren't going to make my cycling or racing more enjoyable.
02-22-17, 11:27 AM
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
Living in a mountainous place, I'll say light weight isn't the most important thing in a climbing wheel because it's also a descending wheel. It also needs to be strong, and to handle well.
02-22-17, 11:41 AM
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
I have 3 sets of wheels in rotation currently.
1) Stans Alpha 340/Bitex(BHS)hubs/CX-Ray spokes 1268g
2) Kinlin XC279 / Novatec 291 482 SB-SL hubs / CX-Ray spokes 1560g
3) Workswell 38mm / Novatec 291 482 SB-SL hubs / CX-Ray spokes 1568g
I have noticed that the 38mm Workswell hoops handle crosswinds better than either of the shallower wheelsets. I have no data to confirm this perception, but the difference is noticeable. The Stans hoops handle crosswinds slightly better than the Kinlin hoops.
1) Stans Alpha 340/Bitex(BHS)hubs/CX-Ray spokes 1268g
2) Kinlin XC279 / Novatec 291 482 SB-SL hubs / CX-Ray spokes 1560g
3) Workswell 38mm / Novatec 291 482 SB-SL hubs / CX-Ray spokes 1568g
I have noticed that the 38mm Workswell hoops handle crosswinds better than either of the shallower wheelsets. I have no data to confirm this perception, but the difference is noticeable. The Stans hoops handle crosswinds slightly better than the Kinlin hoops.
02-22-17, 11:51 AM
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,520
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20810 Post(s)
Liked 9,456 Times
in
4,672 Posts
02-22-17, 12:36 PM
#106
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
...
I personally prefer the feeling of ultra light sub 1100 gram climbing wheels. They just accelerate so well, which encourages me to attack more often. Its a feeling that you always notice, no matter the conditions. Super light wheels and sub 15lb bikes are just so much more fun to ride than aero.
I personally prefer the feeling of ultra light sub 1100 gram climbing wheels. They just accelerate so well, which encourages me to attack more often. Its a feeling that you always notice, no matter the conditions. Super light wheels and sub 15lb bikes are just so much more fun to ride than aero.
Your point that wind can make them hard to handle is a good one.
02-22-17, 12:38 PM
#107
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
Tires definitely make more of a difference, for me, than wheels ever did. Construction and proper pressures seem to make all the difference.
02-22-17, 12:40 PM
#108
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
It's all moot if you aren't racing and contending for a podium spot. If you are then 5-20W of power savings is worth something.
If you compare FLO's aero 30mm rim to their 45mm rim you give up about 3.5 to 6W/wheel. Whether that's important is up to each individual. I'm good with the 30mm wheels and deeper wheels aren't going to make my cycling or racing more enjoyable.
If you compare FLO's aero 30mm rim to their 45mm rim you give up about 3.5 to 6W/wheel. Whether that's important is up to each individual. I'm good with the 30mm wheels and deeper wheels aren't going to make my cycling or racing more enjoyable.
I know you're fixated on FLO's marketing claims, but notice the year models on those two wheels. FLO is trying to make the point that their "new and improved" wheels are indeed, new and improved. It's a marketing piece. I'm pretty sure any marketing piece FLO produces is going to "test" that their obsolete shallower wheels are less good than their new and improved models.
02-22-17, 12:55 PM
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Prescott, AZ
Posts: 125
Bikes: 1999 Trek 2000T 47cm, 2017 Ribble R872 Ultegra Di2 47cm, 2010 Trek Top Fuel 9.8 15.5in
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Tires are one of the best upgrades for sure, much bigger difference than wheels. Compare any popular training tire with the Corsa Speed or Grand Prix Supersonic and the difference is massive.
02-22-17, 01:00 PM
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Okay, but you are talking about stability, not speed, right. I would guess the deeper wheels are faster too, but we already knew that. What we are talking about is how much faster in the most common wind conditions. Actually I couldn't care less from a riding point of view, but am just discussing this as a technical problem.
When would the lighter set be the faster set?
The lighter set is quite aero and over 1# lighter than the other (and 2# on anything tubeless or clincher I've ever seen).
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
M5TFront.jpg
axFront.jpg
Last edited by Doge; 02-22-17 at 01:21 PM.
02-22-17, 01:04 PM
#111
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posts: 32,989
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene '04; Bridgestone RB-1 '92
Mentioned: 325 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11960 Post(s)
Liked 6,629 Times
in
3,477 Posts
__________________
See, this is why we can't have nice things. - - smarkinson
Where else but the internet can a bunch of cyclists go and be the tough guy? - - jdon
02-22-17, 01:11 PM
#112
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
02-22-17, 01:13 PM
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Cause I know you like the technical stuff...Here are two very tuned wheels ready to ride (sans skewer). When would the lighter set be the faster set. The lighter set is quite aero and over 1# lighter than the other (and 2# on anything tubeless or clincher I've ever seen).
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
Attachment 553724
Attachment 553725
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
Attachment 553724
Attachment 553725
02-22-17, 01:20 PM
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Not a trick question. Also not something there any tests on to disagree with. This is why I think the ability to guess based on understanding the principles, experience - and testing is so useful. I thought your liked guessing.
Up a hill - say 5%+ no question to go lighter.
On the flats - little question to go deeper.
But those lighter are so light and pretty aero I'm thinking they may be as good as the deeper on anything much over 2% or rolling. And they are easier to control. This is somewhat of a change. In the past low profile rims just didn't play the aero game well. Now they are playing as well.
My point is the gap is narrowing between where you would choose aero/high profile and lower profile.
Up a hill - say 5%+ no question to go lighter.
On the flats - little question to go deeper.
But those lighter are so light and pretty aero I'm thinking they may be as good as the deeper on anything much over 2% or rolling. And they are easier to control. This is somewhat of a change. In the past low profile rims just didn't play the aero game well. Now they are playing as well.
My point is the gap is narrowing between where you would choose aero/high profile and lower profile.
02-22-17, 01:31 PM
#115
Senior Member
You realize that depends entirely on the power, weight, and CdA of the rider? For ProTour level riders, more aero would definitely be better. Even a reasonably powerful Cat 1 would most likely be better of with the more aero.
Last edited by asgelle; 02-22-17 at 02:01 PM.
02-22-17, 01:46 PM
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,444
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4232 Post(s)
Liked 2,947 Times
in
1,806 Posts
Cause I know you like the technical stuff...Here are two very tuned wheels ready to ride (sans skewer).
When would the lighter set be the faster set?
The lighter set is quite aero and over 1# lighter than the other (and 2# on anything tubeless or clincher I've ever seen).
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
Attachment 553724
Attachment 553725
When would the lighter set be the faster set?
The lighter set is quite aero and over 1# lighter than the other (and 2# on anything tubeless or clincher I've ever seen).
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
Attachment 553724
Attachment 553725
02-22-17, 01:47 PM
#117
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
Tan sidewalks are ugly!
02-22-17, 02:31 PM
#118
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Not a trick question. Also not something there any tests on to disagree with. This is why I think the ability to guess based on understanding the principles, experience - and testing is so useful. I thought your liked guessing.
Up a hill - say 5%+ no question to go lighter.
On the flats - little question to go deeper.
But those lighter are so light and pretty aero I'm thinking they may be as good as the deeper on anything much over 2% or rolling. And they are easier to control. This is somewhat of a change. In the past low profile rims just didn't play the aero game well. Now they are playing as well.
My point is the gap is narrowing between where you would choose aero/high profile and lower profile.
Up a hill - say 5%+ no question to go lighter.
On the flats - little question to go deeper.
But those lighter are so light and pretty aero I'm thinking they may be as good as the deeper on anything much over 2% or rolling. And they are easier to control. This is somewhat of a change. In the past low profile rims just didn't play the aero game well. Now they are playing as well.
My point is the gap is narrowing between where you would choose aero/high profile and lower profile.
02-22-17, 02:52 PM
#119
Senior Member
The lighter set is quite aero and over 1# lighter than the other (and 2# on anything tubeless or clincher I've ever seen).
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
810g 50mm profile, 25mm wide rim. 25.6mm wide silk tire thin tread, width over widest area of spoke blade 62mm
550g 25mm profile (limit of not needing UCI approval) 20.5 wide rim, 22.5mm wide over tire, width over widest spoke blade 80mm
02-22-17, 02:59 PM
#120
Senior Member
02-22-17, 03:03 PM
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,466
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1531 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
4 Posts
gotta say - the upgrade to November Pacenti Ti's has been fabulous. That's up from some cheap shimano wheels.
It was a great and worthwhile upgrade. Now as for spending twice as much for the remaining 10% increase. No, no way.
It was a great and worthwhile upgrade. Now as for spending twice as much for the remaining 10% increase. No, no way.
02-22-17, 04:48 PM
#122
Chases Dogs for Sport
Thread Starter
ProTour level riders seem to disagree with you, for the most part. It surprises me how high a percentage of the time you see pro riders riding low-profile "non-aero" wheels in races. It would be interesting to hear their reasoning. I suspect that part of it is that the aero difference isn't really very big. If there's any reason to prefer a low-profile wheel, the reasoning has an easy time overcoming the rather minimal aero advantage. (Let's face it, a maximum 40-second difference in 40k, under ideal conditions, isn't much.)
And part of the indifference, as has been mentioned already, has to be that, with more aerodynamic low-profile wheels, the aero gap between deep wheels and shallow wheels has narrowed somewhat. ENVE's marketing materials on the SES 4.5 seem to echo this.
02-22-17, 05:27 PM
#123
Senior Member
I'd no more look to a pro rider for engineering than I would an engineer to race a three-week Grand Tour.
https://silca.cc/blogs/journal/17998...roubaix-part-1
https://silca.cc/pages/road-to-rouba...are-everything
https://silca.cc/blogs/journal/17998...roubaix-part-1
https://silca.cc/blogs/journal/17998...roubaix-part-1
https://silca.cc/pages/road-to-rouba...are-everything
https://silca.cc/blogs/journal/17998...roubaix-part-1
02-22-17, 05:56 PM
#125
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
How could a 1,350 g wheelset be 2 lb lighter than any clincher or tubeless wheelset you know of? I have built many 1,250 g clincher sets, and that was cheap and easy. If I were willing to really spend a little cash, I could knock another 100 g or more off the set with stupid light hubs.