I "feel you", as they say. SHimano is by no means infallible. They make mistakes as well. But I think that compared to most other bike component companies out there, they do right most of the time. Whenever I'm researching different components from different companies, I always ask, "Why did Shimano do it this way? Especially if it's heavier?" They almost always have a good answer.

Take Ultegra hubs, for example. It's hard to find an Ultegra hub with fewer than 24 holes drilled. I think the lowest most good bike shops will sell is 28. Why? And why wouldn't Shimano save a few grams and make aluminum freehub bodies? The answers: Because saving weight in those two places grossly compromises durability.

The other source I always look to is Sheldon Brown. He has never once led me astray. The Gospel according to Sheldon states that 28 spokes is the limit for the front wheel for most riders under normal riding conditions. He recommends getting 36 on the rear and 28 on the front rather than 32, 32.

Bicycling magazine, and many many posters on here talk about how much more aerodynamic low spoke counts are, especially on the rear wheel. For the most part, it's hogwash. The rear wheel is subject to so much turbulence to begin with, I haven't seen any data that shows, with a rider in the saddle, that fewer spokes on the rear is more aerodynamic. (That isn't to say that a solid rear wheel wouldn't make a difference.)

What I continually see is that the rim depth is key to aerodynamics. And according to most of the tests out there, you need about 33mm rims to get some kind of laminar flow over the rim at high speed.

So, if I had a spare $250 bucks, my wheelset would be:

Niobium alloy 33 mm rims, 28 spoke front, 36 rear, Ultegra front hub, Tiagra/105 rear, double-butted spokes.