H Plus Son Archetype
03-12-14, 06:04 PM
#51
Mr. Dopolina
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,217
Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times
in
41 Posts
Bob, what I have been told is that as the extruder die wears, size of the opening increases, and the extrusion becomes heavier. This fits well with my experience in plastics molding and extrusion. As I understand it, most Al rim makers start with dies that give lighter than nominal weights and continue using those dies until the rims weigh the allowed amount over nominal. It is not as much about control as tolerance and philosophy. Companies that ship rims with +/- 20 g tolerance simply choose to run their dies that long to save money. They start them off really small and keep on going until +20g over nominal is reached. I have never had an overweight rim from Kinlin. Velocity is among the worst for wide weight tolerance IMO.
03-12-14, 06:11 PM
#52
Mr. Dopolina
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,217
Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times
in
41 Posts
Have you read up on them at all? They've done a lot of research and concluded that in most cases, aero trumps weight. Therefore they want to build wheels that maximize aero advantages, with a little bit of a weight penalty to keep prices down. Their wheels have been tested pretty extensively in wind tunnels and the data is impressive.
The Flo 30 in a clyde build with Sapim CX rays rated up to 240+ pounds at 1652g for $498.00 is a pretty good deal from the comparison shopping I did. Same weight as the Boyd Altamont clyde build, but at $152 less.
The Flo 30 in a clyde build with Sapim CX rays rated up to 240+ pounds at 1652g for $498.00 is a pretty good deal from the comparison shopping I did. Same weight as the Boyd Altamont clyde build, but at $152 less.
The weight vs aero work they did is seriously flawed. It assumes a steady effort and does not take into consideration the watts needed to accelerate the wheels hundreds of times during a typical road race or crit. They assume a steady effort like a TT or Tri.
Honestly, there is no reason the make a rim that heavy. Have a look at their direct competitors and ask why all of them manage rims of similar dimensions under 500g.
03-12-14, 07:11 PM
#53
Senior Member
Yes, I am familiar with the brand and the claims on their website.
The weight vs aero work they did is seriously flawed. It assumes a steady effort and does not take into consideration the watts needed to accelerate the wheels hundreds of times during a typical road race or crit. They assume a steady effort like a TT or Tri.
Honestly, there is no reason the make a rim that heavy. Have a look at their direct competitors and ask why all of them manage rims of similar dimensions under 500g.
The weight vs aero work they did is seriously flawed. It assumes a steady effort and does not take into consideration the watts needed to accelerate the wheels hundreds of times during a typical road race or crit. They assume a steady effort like a TT or Tri.
Honestly, there is no reason the make a rim that heavy. Have a look at their direct competitors and ask why all of them manage rims of similar dimensions under 500g.
03-12-14, 07:17 PM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,621
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Light and aero is better than heavy and aero. Heavy does not necessarily mean more durable, it just means heavy. It's not shocking that a company that is trying to sell heavy wheelsets is publishing research indicating that aero is the thing.
03-12-14, 07:34 PM
#55
Senior Member
Fwiw, the extra weight could make it more durable. And nobody is making FLO build their rims that way. As far as I know they are proprietary and they chose to make them that way.
Right, because somebody is
03-12-14, 07:39 PM
#56
Mr. Dopolina
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,217
Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times
in
41 Posts
I was addressing the data published (which is a race scenario) and pointing out what I believe to be a flaw. Nothing more.
03-12-14, 07:43 PM
#57
Mr. Dopolina
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,217
Bikes: KUUPAS, Simpson VR
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times
in
41 Posts
All of their direct competitors manage to make rims of roughly equal dimensions and proven durability for 70g +/- 20g lighter. If this was by choice it was a poor choice.
03-12-14, 07:51 PM
#58
Senior Member
You say you are familiar with them, yet fail to mention that their researches 'flaw' may not be of concert to their primary target?
03-12-14, 07:56 PM
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,621
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It is shocking how many people are concerned with weight who don't race crits or climb the kind of hills where it matters.
Fwiw, the extra weight could make it more durable. And nobody is making FLO build their rims that way. As far as I know they are proprietary and they chose to make them that way.
Right, because somebody is
Fwiw, the extra weight could make it more durable. And nobody is making FLO build their rims that way. As far as I know they are proprietary and they chose to make them that way.
Right, because somebody is
For me, riding a bike on a good set of light wheels is better than riding a bike on a set of heavy wheels. I put up with crappy not light wheels in the winter. Putting on the summer wheels on a day when the roads are dry and not caked in salt is a simple pleasure.
Almost 2000g for a 60mm carbon clincher? That's just dumb. There are many better choices.
03-12-14, 08:00 PM
#60
Senior Member
Tell me, Bob, when I am not racing crits how is this going to hurt me? If you wanted to pick on their wheels for having AL nipples or an all aluminum hub driver I'll agree. I consider those to be bigger flaws for typical road riders than 50 extra grams in a rim.
03-12-14, 08:03 PM
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
wut? I do race.. a good bit, but that is really not relevant.
For me, riding a bike on a good set of light wheels is better than riding a bike on a set of heavy wheels. I put up with crappy not light wheels in the winter. Putting on the summer wheels on a day when the roads are dry and not caked in salt is a simple pleasure.
Almost 2000g for a 60mm carbon clincher? That's just dumb. There are many better choices.
For me, riding a bike on a good set of light wheels is better than riding a bike on a set of heavy wheels. I put up with crappy not light wheels in the winter. Putting on the summer wheels on a day when the roads are dry and not caked in salt is a simple pleasure.
Almost 2000g for a 60mm carbon clincher? That's just dumb. There are many better choices.
03-12-14, 08:11 PM
#62
Senior Member
wut? I do race.. a good bit, but that is really not relevant.
For me, riding a bike on a good set of light wheels is better than riding a bike on a set of heavy wheels. I put up with crappy not light wheels in the winter. Putting on the summer wheels on a day when the roads are dry and not caked in salt is a simple pleasure.
Almost 2000g for a 60mm carbon clincher? That's just dumb. There are many better choices.
For me, riding a bike on a good set of light wheels is better than riding a bike on a set of heavy wheels. I put up with crappy not light wheels in the winter. Putting on the summer wheels on a day when the roads are dry and not caked in salt is a simple pleasure.
Almost 2000g for a 60mm carbon clincher? That's just dumb. There are many better choices.
03-12-14, 08:17 PM
#63
Senior Member
Don't sell yourself short.
Good for you, but my experience does not agree with yours. Going from 19 lb steel to 14 lb carbon with 1,270 g wheels I see absolutely no effect on my performance. Zero, zilch, nada, zippee-do-da. Riding your loop on a given day on both bikes would be a telling experiment. Maybe two days in a row, new bike first one day and second the next day. Average the results for each bike over the two days and compare. Personally I don't believe it.
03-12-14, 08:21 PM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,075
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
It is shocking how many people are concerned with weight who don't race crits or climb the kind of hills where it matters.
Fwiw, the extra weight could make it more durable. And nobody is making FLO build their rims that way. As far as I know they are proprietary and they chose to make them that way.
Right, because somebody is
Fwiw, the extra weight could make it more durable. And nobody is making FLO build their rims that way. As far as I know they are proprietary and they chose to make them that way.
Right, because somebody is
As I told Bob, if they are not for you then don't ride on them. Unlike you, I don't notice wheel weight so much, even when I am racing. I am not alone in this. Why is it so offensive for a company to offer wheels that push different features than what you are interested in? They've made their case of why it may matter to some and show their data to back it up. Let's see your data on how the extra rim weight is "a poor choice". Got anything other than 'you enjoy a lighter wheel"?
Non racers don't need data, enjoyment is a good enough reason.
Any aero advantage flo wheels may have in trade for their weight is useless to someone not racing.
03-12-14, 08:30 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Yeah, my posts might have also been confusing. I love riding the light bikes with very light wheel. I wouldn't trade them. I just don't see any performance improvements on my pancake flat routes here in Houston.
03-12-14, 08:32 PM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,621
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
03-12-14, 08:32 PM
#69
Senior Member
And when not racing, neither advantage is of much importance when it has little effect on the overall ride. What I am arguing is that when not racing neither 50 grams of weight or drag should concern someone when considering a wheelset that otherwise fills the needs. So they were designed for tri. That doesn't make them any worse for everyday riding than a wheel that was designed for crits.
03-12-14, 08:36 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,075
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
ive got a 1550g wheelset and one that's probably ~2000g. The first wheelset feels much better but I can't say it makes me faster. As a non racer, I don't care. The heavier set gets used for poor roads/weather and the lighter set gets used elsewhere.
my complaint with the flo rims is the price. Dt Swiss (for example) makes quality and consistent rims at the same or lower price point. Why bother with a small "engineering firm" with no stock and lead times?
But some do. All I am saying is that data doesn't need to exist to make the lighter option a more desirable product for many cyclists. Buy flo rims if you like, they look cool. Many of us will stick with lighter or more readily available options.
Last edited by thirdgenbird; 03-12-14 at 08:42 PM.
03-12-14, 08:37 PM
#71
Senior Member
Who needs to be more rigorous?
03-12-14, 08:41 PM
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,621
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'll just go back to my earlier post... there are many better choices. Those things are stupidly and unnecessarily heavy.
03-12-14, 08:45 PM
#73
I eat carbide.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Elgin, IL
Posts: 21,627
Bikes: Lots. Van Dessel and Squid Dealer
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1325 Post(s)
Liked 1,306 Times
in
560 Posts
Breezed through a lot of this so forgive me if I restate, etc.
H plus sons archetype - nice quality control. Cons:heavy for this class, anodized brake surface that will look like crap as it wears. Limited drilling options and inconsistent inventory. Have to buy in the US from "the devil"
A23 - saw someone say they used to be welded in Australia - incorrect. They have never had a welded joint. Aus or US. As for weight variance - they have been fighting extrusion quality since day 1 in the US. They are better than they have been but the quality for me is still way too inconsistent for me to waste my most expensive resource - time building and rebuilding when it's a bad rim. This combined with too many in the field that I have had customers experience extremely fast sidewall wear on...I just avoid it unless it's the only solution. Great weight. Crap shoot quality.
Kinlin xc279 great quality rim like all Kinlins. Cons - Weight. Weight. Weight.
HED c2 - nice rim. Great quality. Nice shot peened finish. Cons: expense, drilling option to only 24, hideous painted permanent graphics, inconsistent inventory
Pacenti sl23 - best rim in this class. Relatively low price, fantastic weight, great strength. Made by Sun Ringle - same as Stans. Seems a lot like the same alloy in Stan's but with much stiffer extrusion shapes. Fairly good quality control. Cons: inventory - they were out from August until a few weeks ago. Latest rims have changed - erd's are different, we have had 2 rim issues we caught during builds in the last week. They assure me this is totally unheard of but I am now hearing stories of spoke pull through in 24 and 32 spoke drillings. Anecdotal (seen 1 picture) at this point. A small handful of customers just can't seem to figure out how to get tires on these. I have hand mounted brand new continental tires on them multiple times to test for myself. Being tubeless friendly they run on the high side. Super wide at 24mm which everyone seems to want to buy regardless of any real solid data from any non-biased test (all tests are biased BTW you just have to figure out the tester's agenda)
Somewhere it was mentioned that I have logged weight discrepancies with Kinlin. Also discussion about weight variance in Flo?
....
1. Yes, I have noted weight variances in every rim that I have ever built with. With Kinlin when we used to build with Xr series people would ask for the 270 in order to drop some weight and yet the standard variance on the 300 and the 270 would give tolerance bands that would indeed overlap. It was common to have a "light" 300 that weighed less than a "heavy" 270.
These variances are a normal part of production. Take a statistics and statistical process control class for more background. Is it because if die wear? Sure. It's also extrusion pressure, temperature, material properties variance, etc. you want to make every rim the exact same weight? Go ahead. Start a rim company and do it yourself. Just throw away everything that is off slightly. Charge your customers for the difference. Have fun with that. Btw this is true of everything ever made by man. The tighter it's controlled the more expensive it was to make.
2. From what I understand about FLo they have chosen to run a aluminum braking surface as a selling point. I understand why they chose to do that- they like the tri market. Tri-market is petrified of full carbon clinchers and will overlook massive negatives like piggish weight rims. Especially if you make any claim regarding any sort of data. As a market they tend to not be as heavily made up of engineers or scientists as regular cycling is and are therefore much less skeptical of data.
A 2 piece rim made up of basically a box section rim with a big carbon tail glued onto it gives you that nice alloy braking surface but leaves you with a tank for a rim. For whatever reason this setup also makes for HUGE variances of the assembled rims. I have personally measured immense swings in weight between identical rims in this technology....whose rims? The old Zipp 404s. They used to be made the exact same way. The rims used to be in the 550-650g range each. Go back and look at the weights they would list on a set of those and you start to realize why their hubs sucked (as light as possible with tiny bearings for weight savings) and why they eventually had to figure out how to make a full carbon clincher that stayed together as all of their competitors had.
The largest discrepancy I have ever weighed was between 2 404 rims. 100g difference between identical rims. These were rims that were used on pcad's build.
Here's the deal - aerodynamics...believe what you want to. Everyone will have data showing that they are the best. If you put them all together and asked an impartial party which is actually best the answer will always....ALWAYS be, "it depends".
Wheel weight - time and time again there has always been a direct correlation between what a rider feels as a fast wheel and it's weight. I personally have always had the best success when I find the right blend of low weight without sacrificing stiffness. Weight is important. Saying aero always trumps it is stretching to make up for something. The only reason any company ever uses carbon is to allow us to build aero depth without adding all the weight that would come with building it that deep in alloy. It's not because we just like carbon, prefer the challenges that the braking poses,etc. it's to save weight. Only. If, in this case, Flo believes that aero trumps weight in all cases then they should build the whole rim in alloy. It would be much cheaper as well. Just sayin.
Sorry. Too long. Gotta go make more donuts.
H plus sons archetype - nice quality control. Cons:heavy for this class, anodized brake surface that will look like crap as it wears. Limited drilling options and inconsistent inventory. Have to buy in the US from "the devil"
A23 - saw someone say they used to be welded in Australia - incorrect. They have never had a welded joint. Aus or US. As for weight variance - they have been fighting extrusion quality since day 1 in the US. They are better than they have been but the quality for me is still way too inconsistent for me to waste my most expensive resource - time building and rebuilding when it's a bad rim. This combined with too many in the field that I have had customers experience extremely fast sidewall wear on...I just avoid it unless it's the only solution. Great weight. Crap shoot quality.
Kinlin xc279 great quality rim like all Kinlins. Cons - Weight. Weight. Weight.
HED c2 - nice rim. Great quality. Nice shot peened finish. Cons: expense, drilling option to only 24, hideous painted permanent graphics, inconsistent inventory
Pacenti sl23 - best rim in this class. Relatively low price, fantastic weight, great strength. Made by Sun Ringle - same as Stans. Seems a lot like the same alloy in Stan's but with much stiffer extrusion shapes. Fairly good quality control. Cons: inventory - they were out from August until a few weeks ago. Latest rims have changed - erd's are different, we have had 2 rim issues we caught during builds in the last week. They assure me this is totally unheard of but I am now hearing stories of spoke pull through in 24 and 32 spoke drillings. Anecdotal (seen 1 picture) at this point. A small handful of customers just can't seem to figure out how to get tires on these. I have hand mounted brand new continental tires on them multiple times to test for myself. Being tubeless friendly they run on the high side. Super wide at 24mm which everyone seems to want to buy regardless of any real solid data from any non-biased test (all tests are biased BTW you just have to figure out the tester's agenda)
Somewhere it was mentioned that I have logged weight discrepancies with Kinlin. Also discussion about weight variance in Flo?
....
1. Yes, I have noted weight variances in every rim that I have ever built with. With Kinlin when we used to build with Xr series people would ask for the 270 in order to drop some weight and yet the standard variance on the 300 and the 270 would give tolerance bands that would indeed overlap. It was common to have a "light" 300 that weighed less than a "heavy" 270.
These variances are a normal part of production. Take a statistics and statistical process control class for more background. Is it because if die wear? Sure. It's also extrusion pressure, temperature, material properties variance, etc. you want to make every rim the exact same weight? Go ahead. Start a rim company and do it yourself. Just throw away everything that is off slightly. Charge your customers for the difference. Have fun with that. Btw this is true of everything ever made by man. The tighter it's controlled the more expensive it was to make.
2. From what I understand about FLo they have chosen to run a aluminum braking surface as a selling point. I understand why they chose to do that- they like the tri market. Tri-market is petrified of full carbon clinchers and will overlook massive negatives like piggish weight rims. Especially if you make any claim regarding any sort of data. As a market they tend to not be as heavily made up of engineers or scientists as regular cycling is and are therefore much less skeptical of data.
A 2 piece rim made up of basically a box section rim with a big carbon tail glued onto it gives you that nice alloy braking surface but leaves you with a tank for a rim. For whatever reason this setup also makes for HUGE variances of the assembled rims. I have personally measured immense swings in weight between identical rims in this technology....whose rims? The old Zipp 404s. They used to be made the exact same way. The rims used to be in the 550-650g range each. Go back and look at the weights they would list on a set of those and you start to realize why their hubs sucked (as light as possible with tiny bearings for weight savings) and why they eventually had to figure out how to make a full carbon clincher that stayed together as all of their competitors had.
The largest discrepancy I have ever weighed was between 2 404 rims. 100g difference between identical rims. These were rims that were used on pcad's build.
Here's the deal - aerodynamics...believe what you want to. Everyone will have data showing that they are the best. If you put them all together and asked an impartial party which is actually best the answer will always....ALWAYS be, "it depends".
Wheel weight - time and time again there has always been a direct correlation between what a rider feels as a fast wheel and it's weight. I personally have always had the best success when I find the right blend of low weight without sacrificing stiffness. Weight is important. Saying aero always trumps it is stretching to make up for something. The only reason any company ever uses carbon is to allow us to build aero depth without adding all the weight that would come with building it that deep in alloy. It's not because we just like carbon, prefer the challenges that the braking poses,etc. it's to save weight. Only. If, in this case, Flo believes that aero trumps weight in all cases then they should build the whole rim in alloy. It would be much cheaper as well. Just sayin.
Sorry. Too long. Gotta go make more donuts.
__________________
PSIMET Wheels, PSIMET Racing, PSIMET Neutral Race Support, and 11 Jackson Coffee
Podcast - YouTube Channel
Video about PSIMET Wheels
Podcast - YouTube Channel
Video about PSIMET Wheels
03-12-14, 08:51 PM
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Breezed through a lot of this so forgive me if I restate, etc.
H plus sons archetype - nice quality control. Cons:heavy for this class, anodized brake surface that will look like crap as it wears. Limited drilling options and inconsistent inventory. Have to buy in the US from "the devil"
A23 - saw someone say they used to be welded in Australia - incorrect. They have never had a welded joint. Aus or US. As for weight variance - they have been fighting extrusion quality since day 1 in the US. They are better than they have been but the quality for me is still way too inconsistent for me to waste my most expensive resource - time building and rebuilding when it's a bad rim. This combined with too many in the field that I have had customers experience extremely fast sidewall wear on...I just avoid it unless it's the only solution. Great weight. Crap shoot quality.
Kinlin xc279 great quality rim like all Kinlins. Cons - Weight. Weight. Weight.
HED c2 - nice rim. Great quality. Nice shot peened finish. Cons: expense, drilling option to only 24, hideous painted permanent graphics, inconsistent inventory
Pacenti sl23 - best rim in this class. Relatively low price, fantastic weight, great strength. Made by Sun Ringle - same as Stans. Seems a lot like the same alloy in Stan's but with much stiffer extrusion shapes. Fairly good quality control. Cons: inventory - they were out from August until a few weeks ago. Latest rims have changed - erd's are different, we have had 2 rim issues we caught during builds in the last week. They assure me this is totally unheard of but I am now hearing stories of spoke pull through in 24 and 32 spoke drillings. Anecdotal (seen 1 picture) at this point. A small handful of customers just can't seem to figure out how to get tires on these. I have hand mounted brand new continental tires on them multiple times to test for myself. Being tubeless friendly they run on the high side. Super wide at 24mm which everyone seems to want to buy regardless of any real solid data from any non-biased test (all tests are biased BTW you just have to figure out the tester's agenda)
Somewhere it was mentioned that I have logged weight discrepancies with Kinlin. Also discussion about weight variance in Flo?
....
1. Yes, I have noted weight variances in every rim that I have ever built with. With Kinlin when we used to build with Xr series people would ask for the 270 in order to drop some weight and yet the standard variance on the 300 and the 270 would give tolerance bands that would indeed overlap. It was common to have a "light" 300 that weighed less than a "heavy" 270.
These variances are a normal part of production. Take a statistics and statistical process control class for more background. Is it because if die wear? Sure. It's also extrusion pressure, temperature, material properties variance, etc. you want to make every rim the exact same weight? Go ahead. Start a rim company and do it yourself. Just throw away everything that is off slightly. Charge your customers for the difference. Have fun with that. Btw this is true of everything ever made by man. The tighter it's controlled the more expensive it was to make.
2. From what I understand about FLo they have chosen to run a aluminum braking surface as a selling point. I understand why they chose to do that- they like the tri market. Tri-market is petrified of full carbon clinchers and will overlook massive negatives like piggish weight rims. Especially if you make any claim regarding any sort of data. As a market they tend to not be as heavily made up of engineers or scientists as regular cycling is and are therefore much less skeptical of data.
A 2 piece rim made up of basically a box section rim with a big carbon tail glued onto it gives you that nice alloy braking surface but leaves you with a tank for a rim. For whatever reason this setup also makes for HUGE variances of the assembled rims. I have personally measured immense swings in weight between identical rims in this technology....whose rims? The old Zipp 404s. They used to be made the exact same way. The rims used to be in the 550-650g range each. Go back and look at the weights they would list on a set of those and you start to realize why their hubs sucked (as light as possible with tiny bearings for weight savings) and why they eventually had to figure out how to make a full carbon clincher that stayed together as all of their competitors had.
The largest discrepancy I have ever weighed was between 2 404 rims. 100g difference between identical rims. These were rims that were used on pcad's build.
Here's the deal - aerodynamics...believe what you want to. Everyone will have data showing that they are the best. If you put them all together and asked an impartial party which is actually best the answer will always....ALWAYS be, "it depends".
Wheel weight - time and time again there has always been a direct correlation between what a rider feels as a fast wheel and it's weight. I personally have always had the best success when I find the right blend of low weight without sacrificing stiffness. Weight is important. Saying aero always trumps it is stretching to make up for something. The only reason any company ever uses carbon is to allow us to build aero depth without adding all the weight that would come with building it that deep in alloy. It's not because we just like carbon, prefer the challenges that the braking poses,etc. it's to save weight. Only. If, in this case, Flo believes that aero trumps weight in all cases then they should build the whole rim in alloy. It would be much cheaper as well. Just sayin.
Sorry. Too long. Gotta go make more donuts.
H plus sons archetype - nice quality control. Cons:heavy for this class, anodized brake surface that will look like crap as it wears. Limited drilling options and inconsistent inventory. Have to buy in the US from "the devil"
A23 - saw someone say they used to be welded in Australia - incorrect. They have never had a welded joint. Aus or US. As for weight variance - they have been fighting extrusion quality since day 1 in the US. They are better than they have been but the quality for me is still way too inconsistent for me to waste my most expensive resource - time building and rebuilding when it's a bad rim. This combined with too many in the field that I have had customers experience extremely fast sidewall wear on...I just avoid it unless it's the only solution. Great weight. Crap shoot quality.
Kinlin xc279 great quality rim like all Kinlins. Cons - Weight. Weight. Weight.
HED c2 - nice rim. Great quality. Nice shot peened finish. Cons: expense, drilling option to only 24, hideous painted permanent graphics, inconsistent inventory
Pacenti sl23 - best rim in this class. Relatively low price, fantastic weight, great strength. Made by Sun Ringle - same as Stans. Seems a lot like the same alloy in Stan's but with much stiffer extrusion shapes. Fairly good quality control. Cons: inventory - they were out from August until a few weeks ago. Latest rims have changed - erd's are different, we have had 2 rim issues we caught during builds in the last week. They assure me this is totally unheard of but I am now hearing stories of spoke pull through in 24 and 32 spoke drillings. Anecdotal (seen 1 picture) at this point. A small handful of customers just can't seem to figure out how to get tires on these. I have hand mounted brand new continental tires on them multiple times to test for myself. Being tubeless friendly they run on the high side. Super wide at 24mm which everyone seems to want to buy regardless of any real solid data from any non-biased test (all tests are biased BTW you just have to figure out the tester's agenda)
Somewhere it was mentioned that I have logged weight discrepancies with Kinlin. Also discussion about weight variance in Flo?
....
1. Yes, I have noted weight variances in every rim that I have ever built with. With Kinlin when we used to build with Xr series people would ask for the 270 in order to drop some weight and yet the standard variance on the 300 and the 270 would give tolerance bands that would indeed overlap. It was common to have a "light" 300 that weighed less than a "heavy" 270.
These variances are a normal part of production. Take a statistics and statistical process control class for more background. Is it because if die wear? Sure. It's also extrusion pressure, temperature, material properties variance, etc. you want to make every rim the exact same weight? Go ahead. Start a rim company and do it yourself. Just throw away everything that is off slightly. Charge your customers for the difference. Have fun with that. Btw this is true of everything ever made by man. The tighter it's controlled the more expensive it was to make.
2. From what I understand about FLo they have chosen to run a aluminum braking surface as a selling point. I understand why they chose to do that- they like the tri market. Tri-market is petrified of full carbon clinchers and will overlook massive negatives like piggish weight rims. Especially if you make any claim regarding any sort of data. As a market they tend to not be as heavily made up of engineers or scientists as regular cycling is and are therefore much less skeptical of data.
A 2 piece rim made up of basically a box section rim with a big carbon tail glued onto it gives you that nice alloy braking surface but leaves you with a tank for a rim. For whatever reason this setup also makes for HUGE variances of the assembled rims. I have personally measured immense swings in weight between identical rims in this technology....whose rims? The old Zipp 404s. They used to be made the exact same way. The rims used to be in the 550-650g range each. Go back and look at the weights they would list on a set of those and you start to realize why their hubs sucked (as light as possible with tiny bearings for weight savings) and why they eventually had to figure out how to make a full carbon clincher that stayed together as all of their competitors had.
The largest discrepancy I have ever weighed was between 2 404 rims. 100g difference between identical rims. These were rims that were used on pcad's build.
Here's the deal - aerodynamics...believe what you want to. Everyone will have data showing that they are the best. If you put them all together and asked an impartial party which is actually best the answer will always....ALWAYS be, "it depends".
Wheel weight - time and time again there has always been a direct correlation between what a rider feels as a fast wheel and it's weight. I personally have always had the best success when I find the right blend of low weight without sacrificing stiffness. Weight is important. Saying aero always trumps it is stretching to make up for something. The only reason any company ever uses carbon is to allow us to build aero depth without adding all the weight that would come with building it that deep in alloy. It's not because we just like carbon, prefer the challenges that the braking poses,etc. it's to save weight. Only. If, in this case, Flo believes that aero trumps weight in all cases then they should build the whole rim in alloy. It would be much cheaper as well. Just sayin.
Sorry. Too long. Gotta go make more donuts.