Originally Posted by bigfred

If we're talking about 'perceptions', no objective evidence is required. The fact that one rider percieves a difference is evidence enough, regardless of whether another rider percieves the same or not.

If we are talking about actual physical differences. The real world difference(time climbing a given grade) for wheels of differing weights is easily calculated, as has been demonstrated on this forum and many others time and again. The same is true for the aerodynamic advantage of deep section wheels.


But, if we're talking about rider perception. I would disagree with Banzai's assumption that it is simply a construct of acoustic feedback. That may or may not be the case with some hollow carbon rims that have very unique acoustic signatures. But, in the case of aluminum clinchers, isolated, from the road by pneumatic tires there is certainly more than acoustics influencing rider perception of ride qualities. Certainly one rim dragging on brakes brakes as a consequence of lateral flex is not a construct of acoustic feedback. Nor, would cornering traits of that rim compared to others be a construct of acoustic feedback. The decrased gyroscopic effect of lighter rims and nipples and how that influences how the bike feels as one stands and sways on climbs or attempts to accelerate is not going to be a constuct of accoustic feedback.

But, since we're talking about perceptions and Banzai was the one to forward the hypothesis. Perhaps he should provide the objective evidence that proves his assertion.