So you feel that the aero advantage of a 38 or 50 rim profile will be more beneficial than 200-300 grams weight savings of a lower profile of say a 22 or 27 for general riding by someone, like me, who is wanting to improve speeds of varied road riding over distances of 30+ miles?

Guys like you get beat at bars on the regular.

Take this article for what it is.. but there are arguments in this direction anyway.
FLO Cycling - The Great Debate - Aero vs. Weight

Lame. Even dumber than "big boy pants".

Care to try an even better insult involving my mother, father, or sister?

dksix asked."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 heavier 38mm carbon hoop would likely be more aero than the lighter 30mm aluminum hoop.

Who does those? Anyone that competes in hill climb TTs.

BTW, if the DH portions of your races include any tight turns that require braking, lighter wheels could be beneficial because they slow down + accelerate quicker.

Trolls have families?!!

I read somewhere that aero is an advantage on an incline at 12mph or higher. Zipp has the philosophy that aero trumps weight.

If you run the numbers you'll find the difference is negligible. Even in a crit with 100 corners and associated accelerations it's not faster to go with lighter wheels over more aero.

In a crit, aero isn't a big deal either.

People get caught up in the "savings" of aero and lightweight wheels.
I don't know how many beginning racers I've heard buy into the hype and think all these marginal gains will lead to a win or huge advantage.

There are only four major pieces that will give you noticeably improved performance:
1. Position on the bike. Part of this is up to god-given anatomy, part is flexiblity, part is proper fit for racing
Your body is the biggest aero determiner BY A HUGE, HUGE MARGIN.

2. Wearing aero kit. They use sails to move ships, not get aero on a bike.
Marginal gain, but the largest of anything else you can do.

3. Training. Boring but true. Focus on the love of cycling, and racing if you want to get faster.

4. Strategy. Learn racing. Dumb and aero will get you lantern rouge everytime. Smart will win races, keep you in the pack when over your head, let you hang with better cyclists, enjoy the sport by being involved mentally

You buy a bike and parts for your own comfort and enjoyment.
You focus on the 4 fundamentals if you want to be faster.

Umm. . .yeah it definitely is. High speeds, flatter courses, potential to be in a break. . .and even when you are in the pack you are still seeing fast wind speeds. Crits are perfect for aero wheels.

Not if you don't want to win...

Edit: riders often forget (or don't know) that aero wheels, position, clothes etc also provide help when you're in the draft. Saving 10-20W during the course of a race will leave you fresher at the end.

Thanks Coach, but I've won several races over the years, and never used deeper than a 32mm hoop in a crit.

Well then I guess your point has been conclusively proven.

As well as Coach proved his.

Winning crits is more about tactics, than having the more aero wheels.

An aero shaped 32mm rim is aero, and it's more aero than a box 18mm rim.

I remember when aero wheels started to be used more at the velodrome. Guys where able to ride a cog smaller with the same amount of snap as the lower gear. Now, it is standard race equipment if you want to be competitive.

deeper doesn't necessarily mean more aero.

People race and win on Ksyriums all the time.
They are about as aero as fat albert on a hippo, but they are great wheels.

Wheels and bike are marginal gains. Basically meaningless for 90% of people.

But how many have you lost by a bike throw? Sucks. . .doesn't it? Wheels won't make the difference between winning and being pack fill, but they give an advantage and that is what we were talking about. Wheels can give that difference between a few podium spots.

I ran across this a while back. The question that this always generated in my mind was what assumptions were made regarding wind direction in the analysis (which will affect YAW angle which has a huge effect on aero results). Does anyone know?

dave

The classic argument for marginal gains on products. This is why you see some believer show up at a crit with 808s and a tt helmet... that's why you see disappointed watt-counting aero kool-aid drinkers once they hit the road.
It's a red herring argument that ignores a lot of realities of bike racing, and I'm guessing you know this.

Besides this being a sidetrack of what this thread is really about, anyone serious about racing pretty much will use deep section carbon wheels nowadays. It's almost a moot argument. If they don't, it doesn't really matter.

No one said it does. I was challenging your implication that 32mm deep rims are not aero.

I've lost plenty due to a poorly timed huck, but I've seen far more breakaways fail, and leave it's participants OTB.

I'm not anti-aerowheel, but there are times when they are more beneficial than others.

Aerodynamic advantages are real. That is not a red herring.