tomoscotto

Currently im set on a Giant TCR Advanced 1 (when it is released)

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-AU/...ad/2328/32040/

And building up a set of racing wheels.

Dura-ace Hubs 24/18, it says aero... it would be fine to run standard spokes wouldnt it?

Velocity Aerohead Rims (ti-grey)

Green Aluminum nipples

In terms of spokes, im unsure as what to choose.

DT Revolution (butted 283g)

DT Aerolight (bladed and butted but more costly 278g)

DT Aerospeed (Bladed 355g)

Some people say that the aero benefits are unproven, and so on and so forth. What are your experiences?

asgelle

https://www.zipp.com/LinkClick.aspx?f...A%3d&tabid=140

531Aussie

Unless you want super-light mountain goat wheels, go for one of the aero options

CrimsonKarter21

Sapim CX-Ray, FTW.

brians647

+1, best option w/low spoke count (IMO).

I also enjoy building with aero spokes more because you can monitor spoke twist much easier.

jim6b

Very interesting white paper. Did you find it confusing that one graph, drag, was in PSI and the other, rotational engery, was in watts? It would seem a direct comparision would be most informative. Is there a standard for converting PSI to watts?

The reason I describ it as a white paper is that the graphs are only from 0 to 30 degrees axial. This is not the entire range cross winds blow. They can also blow from 30 degrees all the way to 150 or more depending on your definition. I would like to see the data comparing round spokes to blade types in the full range. Then we would have a more complete picture of the wheel's drag and the rotational energy needed to spin that wheel.

asgelle

Yaw is apparent wind, not crosswind. Yaw angles greater than 30 degrees are extremely rare. Over 90 degrees virtually unheard of.

urbanknight

I was very unhappy with the Revolution spokes. They are very finicky. The Aerolite spokes cost more but are easier to build with, stronger, and more aero. Same with C X-ray as mentioned above.

BananaTugger

DT Aerolite > Sapim CX-Ray.

jim6b

No. Yaw is not apparent wind.

Agreed, apparent wind is not crosswind.

However, rarity of apparent wind angles in excess of 30 degrees is a realitive term. The lower bike speed the more common the occurance. Needless to say, far more riding is done at lower speeds. In any event, it would be interesting to see how bladed spokes performed beyond their laminar flow separation angle. At that point ovals are underperforming simple round DT spokes. That would present an unimpressive graph, a disadvantage if one is marketing oval spokes. At what, four times the price.

Coyote2

I had training wheels with Revolutions 32x 3x front and rear; the front has held up just fine, the rear would not stay true for more than a few miles. If you go with Revolutions in 24r/18f, I'll bet that your rear wheel will be a nightmare and the front wheel may not stay true either.

If you use the Revs, at least increase the spoke count a bit and use heavier spokes (Competitions or other 14/15 gauge) on the rear drive side.

I also have a wheelset with Aerolites, front wheel is 20 spokes radial, rear is 24 spokes with 16 laced 2x on drive side and 8 laced radially on non-drive side, and it is holding up pretty well. But with the hubs and rims you are using, you can't use such a lacing pattern, so again, increase the spoke count if you use Aerolites.

By the way, DT Aerolites and Sapim CX-Ray have the same profile, i.e. they are the same gauges and butting. There is no reason (an earlier post notwithstanding) to choose one over the other aside from the cost: the CX-Rays cost significantly less.

damocles1

+47

BananaTugger

Here is why I think DT Aerolite spokes are better than Sapim CX-Ray spokes:

Aerolites are much more resilient. Look what I can do with an Aerolite spoke:



The same vice + plier action on a CX-Ray led to a spoke with no head, as the material is much more brittle. On a wheel, the stretchiness of the Aerolites makes it more durable and less prone to pulling when someone sticks a pedal or skewer in your wheel, as the spoke will be more likely to bend than pull out the nipple or break at the head.

The nipples that DT specifies are a little softer than the Sapim nipples. Not enough to make them more likely to get rounded off when working with them, but enough to make tensioning an easier go.

Note the dimension of the spoke elbows:



The Aerolite's elbow is shorter, bringing the spoke closer to the hub flange than the CX-Ray. On most hubs, the spoke will actually rest on the hub flange, improving durability by distributing stress more evenly. In order to have the same spoke/hub flange contact with the CX-Rays, you would have to use a head washer. Otherwise, the CX-Ray spoke will kind of float beside the flange, and it will transfer all of its stress to the head and spoke hole on the hub.

If you are building a wicked pair of race wheels and you have a cash, use Aerolites.

tomoscotto

thanks for the help guys,

i know that the front hub is not radial approved, has anybody had any problems of doing radial lacing?

That is a dura-ace front hub

531Aussie

VERY instersting post

Has Bike Forums had a definitive thread on the 'benefits' of aero spokes?

I've also read the stuff on the Zipp site, and it sounds pretty convincing (especially the below diagram ), but maybe they're in bed with Sapim; who knows?!

Val23708

at any angle besides perpendicular to the wind, a round spoke has a oval cross section. slice thick spaghetti diagonally if you're skeptical.

also, zipp is full of all kinds of BS.

531Aussie

^ Yeah, ya gotta wonder, and at the very least, it's obviously wise to be cautious, if not skeptical.

Like, I find their claims on dimples a bit odd, coz the bottom line is, indepedant tests show that (for eg) dimpled 404s don't exactly blow away other similar wheels, even the wheels which use the older non-dimpled 404s. But i find their claims on Sapim CX-Rays a little more interesting, because Zipp don't make those spokes, but who knows?

heads up!

Don't be drawn into the light weight the DT Revolutions. Those things flex like wet noodles.

531Aussie

yeah, I agree, they're totally not worth it, but I'm sick of being hammered by the weight weenies. They save about 90g per wheel over 32 spokes

I built a front CXP33 with a while ago, just to see what the fuss was about, but yeah, I thought they were too flexy. My set of thirty-two 292m Revolutions was about 154g; a set of same-size Champions are about 242g, and a set of same-size 2mm/1.8mm/2mm spokes are about 195g, so, in my opinion, it's not worth it. You only save about 90g, but get a flexier wheel, where you can get the shock absorbing benefits of 2mm/1.8mm spokes, but still have a reasonably stiff and strong set of spokes

Coyote2

Yup, yes, yeah.

531Aussie

do you agree, or are you gunna hammer me?

I assume by your other post you tend to agree with me?

urbanknight

Yes, Revolutions seem to save almost 100g on a set of wheels, but so do Aerolites if you can afford them. If I can't afford them when I do my next build, I'm going to forget the 100g and use Competitions.

Soil_Sampler

Super lightweight & rigid alloy axle
*Radial lacing compatible*
Smooth rolling
Double Contact Sealing
Regular Hole: 24/28/32/36H
Aero Spoke Hole: 18/24/28/32/36H
Weight: 188g (59g QR)

https://bike.shimano.com/catalog/cycl...=1154540753923

roshea

It's an interesting diagram and I don't argue with the reasoning, but do Zipp (or anyone else) have any REAL DATA on how that translates into watts saved?

Coyote2

Hey man, I agreed three times!