dokterd1

The advantage is little and meaningless unless you are racing for a living.
I have carbon and aluminum "system" wheels and at the end of the day still prefer the 3X for comfort.
If your hubs have quality bearings and a solid freehub mechanism, just hop on and ride.

cruiserhead

The point is that there is still a market for loose bearings and they exist in high level equipment. Dura Ace wheels being one.
They have a easier tightening system, not the double nut adjusting.
The reason is they have less rolling resistance than sealed bearings.

Whether someone thinks this value is worth it or not, is a seperate issue.

https://velonews.competitor.com/2009/...breaking_86692

achoo

The money quote from that article:

Useless tripe.

cyclezen

purely from a discussion point of view (and things which make sense to me)

faster wheels/lighter wheels/aero wheels/low spoke count

we all have to make decisions on what provides both 'value' and what fits within our 'value' system. For some 32x has a high level of value. For some, aero carbon rims are the deciding factor. For others a set of a Campy Record low flange with Trois Etoile and Record du Monde might be the ultimate wheel.
We make those distinctions, none are incorrect. Honestly, If I could get a modern 10 speed cassette on my Record hubs I would be in Pig Heaven.
We at this time, have an embarrassment of riches - there has never been a time when the variety and choice has been this diverse, with all the options being quite good. When I compare my original set of Normandy Tubular wheels, I'm convinced that the world of cycling gear has progressed nicely.

Sealed bearings (and this is purely supposition and observation)
'cartridge bearings' are captured within their tracks in a vertical fashion - with the 'intent' to be optimized with loads that are presented in this vertical axis. Add any load component off that axis and now the question is -'How do these bearings now adapt to this load? I sense that unless the tracks have angular components, they don;t adapt well.
Track straight and the load is mostly all vertical. A wheel has a very large circumference/diameter, so when you go off vertical, as in a curve or during the hard torque and swings from side to side in a sprint, the load goes measurebly off vertical. When one considers the bearing size and the leverage that a wheel puts on it when the wheel is leaned over, I would be surprised if the performance is the same.
I'm not sure if I've ever heard of studies done of wheels under a vector load off vertical...
Loose bearing hubs, with well designed angular races, by their nature, would prolly not see much variance of performance from vertical to some vector outside of that.
Loose bearings require some level of regular maintanance, skill in adjustment, but skillfully done, a wheel, may be tough to be surpassed.

... just sayin...

I've gotten over the retro-grouch thang of spoke count... I don;t think spoke count defines a good wheel. The combination of hub.rim.spoke.builder make the good wheel. I'm totally into the advantages of low spole count - but then I'm 170 lbs, not 220...

OP - maybe decide what fits within your framework of what constitutes 'wheel performance' and select accordingly. Ultimately the tire and tube choice you make might have a bigger influence.

wheels are great fun and worth experimenting with

cruiserhead

well put cyclezen

You are onto something with bearing tech
https://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Beari...down_2822.html

pdxtex

also, even if my "system" wheels were lovingly built by taiwanese robots, i still insist that the shop's wheel guy goes over them in a truing stand before i leave. i dont know beans about wheel building but off the shelf options now days are still way better then anything i grew up with. what mystifies me most however are > 500 dollar aluminum clinchers. im a hack who rides even hackier on the hackiest of roads and no way am i going to pay more then 300 bucks for wheels that are going to be thrashed by the end of the balmy portland winter. ill stick up for aksiums anyday. light no, tough, yes...cheap. yep.

ericm979

That slowtwitch article is somewhat inaccurate. Bikes use deep groove cartridge ball bearings, which can handle some side loads.... from wikipedia:


"
For single-row deep-groove ball bearings, SKF's documentation says that maximum axial load is circa 50% of maximum radial load, but it also says that "light" and/or "small" bearings can take axial loads that are 25% of maximum radial load.[SUP][3][/SUP]
For single-row edge-contact ball bearings, axial load can be circa 2 times max radial load, and for cone-bearings maximum axial load is between 1 and 2 times maximum radial load.[SUP][3]
"

[/SUP]
[SUP]A well designed hub with adjustable preload on cartridge ball bearings is just as good as cup and cone hubs.



[/SUP]

cyclezen

Thanks, will read it thoroughly, seems very interesting...

Ericm, do you have the URL for this Wiki article? I'd like to read the whole thing, and most good wiki articles have a slew of references for more detail on the assertions...

... I don;t think the assumption can be made that 'ALL' or even 'MOST' use of axial load cartridge bearings (designed to work under some level of 'axial' load) in bicycles is defacto. I would expect that their use will depend a lot on the manufacturer/assembler and the level at which the product is aimed.
I don;t know either way... Can't say I torn apart any wheels with cartridge, although I have fooled with plenty of BBs, and many of those have had what seemed to be plain old radial load bearings...
... it would seem that the bearing spec. issue would be a very worthwhile piece of info from any wheel manufacturer.
...and Shimano still seems to think that cup and cone is to their advantage (certainly not from a manufacturing/cost point of view)

rruff

Aero drag is proportional to V^3, so that is a meaningless number without a speed attached.

rruff

They are comparing bottom brackets with large diameter bearings with aggressive seals to little square taper spindles. Of course the former will have greater drag... at least with very little load and few break-in miles.

Cup-cone bearings have *more* drag than radial cartridges. This has been measured many times, and should be obvious anyway if the other variables are controlled. Cup cone bearings have angular contact which increases friction and bearing force.

A very important part of any of these evaluations is that the bearings need a few hundred miles to "break-in" when new. It makes a huge difference when the bearings have good seals and grease.

cruiserhead

Well, Shimano and Campy both have loose bearings. I am not really familiar with campy but they have options for ceramic bearings as well.
I think even for the bottom bracket they both use loose bearings.

I believe they use these because of the ease of rebuild, servicing and preload adjustment. You can easily add different bearings, lubricants, etc.
As well, they see these as the highest quality.
It's interesting to note that when they have a choice, the pros often build up with DuraAce hubs.

Although it is not under load, my old Record hubs spin so smooth compared to any of my new wheels. New DA hubs are soooo smoooth.
Interesting to note that people think sealed bearings are easy to just pop out and replace, but actually require special tools while loose do not.
Obviously, loose require more servicing.

Banzai

We already covered that.