Bull****. Complete and utter bull****.

I just went through this while debating on Buying Dura Ace over Ultegra C35 wheelset. The price difference was about double. I went with the Ultegra because most of my riding doesn't have repeated accelerations in them. It is mostly solo with fairly steady pace group rides. The extra cost just was not going to justify the weight difference.

I put 1800+ miles on a set of Zondas installed this spring and they are still straight as an arrow. I'm about 175 lbs. Make sure you check out Merlin Cycles.

Wow I did not expect to come home to 50 responses. Thank you everyone for sharing their thoughts and opinions on this.

To be honest I don't have the aspirations or discipline to become an elite cyclist. However that does not prevent me from spending a small fortune on something I personally enjoy. I bring up the weight in relation to performance gains to discern for myself if by factual evidence (or rather the sage guidance of BF) that any gains will be nullified by being overweight. At that point I probably would be:

1. Paying an exorbitant amount for close to ZERO performance gain
2. A buyer of the latest tech marketing jargon
3. Looking/feeling great in carbon

Nothing wrong with 1-3 for a myriad of reasons and in particular #3 IMO. I think carbon is a cool product in terms of science/technology, appearance, and what I envision my future build to have. It's what my dream bicycle would have as a component but I wanted to understand peoples thoughts on weight in relation to net performance gains.

This brings me to my second question in relation to carbon wheels specifically. What I'm taking away from this dialogue in this thread is that weight savings contribute to performance gains and decreased aerodynamic drag is a byproduct of design. From a physics/engineering perspective are these lighter carbon wheels maintaining the same or greater level of stiffness (to prevent/mitigate power loss) and durability compared to alloy/heavier wheel sets given equal rider weight parameters? I thought the lighter you go with these wheels there are certain technical compromises that must be made usually at a cost of comfort / durability / price.

This is why I created the original post to understand carbon wheels a bit better. I certainly don't want to fall into the "A fool and his money are soon parted" hole. To tie it all back to the original post then I should be okay with purchasing a carbon wheelset that is considered heavier and perhaps not the flagship model. Which by default would be me purchasing purely for personal preference (which is okay) rather than performance gains unless it's slightly lighter than say my alloy wheels at 1735G.

Thanks everyone from BF. You've all been such a great resource over the years since I found this site in 2008.

Partly the reason why I even bothered to open up this thread is that attached on the skewers Campagnolo gives out are weight guidance/recc's printed little sheets. This got me thinking about the big what if question of weight / carbon wheels vs. me thought. I chose them over the Zonda's because it seemed everything was the same aside from the weight savings at quite the price increase.

I figured I will be okay with the heavier set for my budget but wanted to see if carbon (due to it's different structural nature) things are on a different plane.

Not sure where you're shopping for these, but eg. Merlin shows the 2 wheelsets only separated by roughly $100 in price, while saving 175 grams going to the Zonda. I heard some folks opine that any incremental purchase that saves more than 1 gram per dollar of cost makes perfect sense.

EDIT: noticing on Ribble they have CX version of Scirocco's as well, at lower cost than the road version.. you may want to consider as I think they seal the hubs better on CX editions of the wheelsets.

DA hubs are a lot better than Ultegra hubs...that's where some of that $$ is going.

In terms of how they function, not really. The biggest difference is the freehub body on Dura Ace is made of titanium. I blew my Dura Ace free hub up this summer and the replacement cost quote was $300.00 for the body. The mechanic told me Ultregra was about $60.00. They are the piece of the hubs that are not interchangeable.

Any gains are independent of your being overweight. The difference in properties between two sets of wheels are not changed by your weight.

There's a lot to unpack here, and I don't really know where to start, but I do think it's important to make one point absolutely clear: performance gains derive from your effort, not the equipment.

You could have the lightest, most aero bike in the world, but if you're not pedaling it, it's not going anywhere.

If you enjoy going out and putting in hard efforts, and improving those efforts in terms of distance, speed, and time, then there is no reason not to avail yourself of the designs and tech that will help you do more...to the extent you can afford to.

And that's the crux of the question: how much is having the equipment which maximizes the results of your efforts worth to you?

Some here want to answer that question for you. They want to get into your business and tell you how you don't deserve the best equipment because you're not an "elite cyclist" or a "racer," because, well, your desires are simply not worth as much as theirs are. It's a load of crap, all that.

Despite what the haters say, there is no legitimate question about whether aero wheels can confer benefits. They do...period. The questions revolve around how you ride, what you want, and what you're willing to pay for.

Do a casual 5 mile out-and-back down a crowded esplanade? Deep carbon wheels are awesome for that; they roll and look good. Is rolling and looking good worth $1.5k to you? If so, that's the only thing that matters.

Do hard efforts on a regular 32 mile loop and like seeing your accomplishments in Strava? Deep carbon wheels are awesome for that, too; they'll help you eek out extra speed when you're hammering, and help you hold speed when you're recovering. Is saving a second on your favorite segment and moving up the leaderboard worth $1.5k to you? If so, that's all that matters, but the wheels still look good, too.

The bottom line is that you are very likely to realize benefits, and very unlikely to lose anything, by going with an aero wheel set, so why not equip yourself if you can afford it?

If letting other people-- jealous, self-loathing people-- tell you what you what your expectations should be, what you deserve, and how you should spend your money is important to you, then forget the wheels. Just f*** it all and drink up the Hater-ade at their bitter party.

The complete rear hub can be purchased for about $230.

I would buy the complete hub, and replace it myself.

You should be able to find the freehub for less than the hub. I know I can.

Shimano Dura-Ace FH-9000 11-speed Freehub Body Unit - Modern Bike

Shimano Dura-Ace 7850, XTR M985/975/970 10/9-Speed Titanium Freehub Body Unit - AEBike.com

I was just pointing out that his shop is gouging him by charging more for the part, than the cost of the complete hub.

I used to be 20-30 pounds over weight, and made the choice to ride my bike more and eat healthier and I lost the weight and kept it off.

Just saying...

Nice accomplishment.

You failed to mention how your choice of wheels affected your ability to choose to ride your bike more and eat healthier and lose the weight and keep it off.

Because it'd be nice to understand, you know, the relevance.

People, people ... buying nicer parts for one's bike need not have anything to do with fitness, performance, or even logic. We all know this. Let's move on.

I found it even cheaper than that. Free. Shimano replaced it on warranty.

Oh. So you threw out an MSRP quote for a warranty repair. I don't think I understand the point of that other than to obfuscate the discussion.

If the weight is basically the same between a set of aluminum and CF wheels, what's the difference in riding them? I see some cheap CF wheel weighing 1900-2000GM and expensive aluminum wheel down in the 1400GM range, so CF isn't be default lighter. I've looked at some aluminum wheels that are around 1400 grams with a 30MM profile and some CF wheels with a 38MM profile at about 1650 grams. What would be the benefit of the heavier CF wheels, they certainly seem to be more desirable?

The CF wheelset would be more aero and look sexy.

I generally expect stiffness to be the benefit to CF but have read much about light CF wheels flexing. I don't know where spoke count and such comes into play with stiffness (not knowing is the reason for the question) but when would the aero gain over come these wheels being 15+% heavier?

You did that on your own by trying to show how smart you are. The original conversation was differences between whether or not Dura Ace was that much better than Ultrgra. I mentioned the free hub to show a lot of the difference is the use of expensive parts and not necessarily function. The quote was what the shop gave. You played yourself. Now go put your big boy pants on and run along.

Um, just what are you on about? I responded to the guy who found the whole hub for less than that bull**** number you spewed.

Big boy pants? Really? Guys like you really turn this place into a cesspool. Get over yourself.

To be clear, it is not that carbon is more aero than aluminum, but rather that at a certain rim height, carbon will make a lighter rim than aluminum, and that generally, deeper rims are more aerodynamic.

Now, to the question of when does aero benefit overcome a 15% weight penalty, the answer to that is "always." Aero trumps weight, even on hilly courses. The exception to prove the rule would be on a ride which is only a climb, but who does those?