And I think that's the key point a lot of people miss when they become infatuated with aero wheels.

I don't agree. First, Because it depends on the time frame that's measured, by which I mean the wheels will not make you 1mph faster continuously over the course of a ride, but yet at any given moment, you could be going 1mph faster or more.

It all depends on what you do with the aero advantage; do you want to save energy (watts) or do you want to have more energy to put into going faster? Do you want to parcel out the extra energy over the course of a ride, or do you want to be fresher for a single, explosive effort?

I think that failing to understand that aero advantages are working for the rider all the time is the key point people miss. In this thread we've seen the claims that one has to be traveling at certain high speed averages to take advantage, as if it's only the ride total numbers that matter, and not that hard 5 minute effort that gapped you off the front and made you the first person into the regroup area, or that intense 45sec effort that let you nose across the finish first simply because you had that bit more energy and that bit less drag when you went digging.

Wheels are not some magic potion, but when you're putting it all together in your moment of truth, you need them on your side. Unless of course one just doesn't ride that hard, which clearly many here don't.

Aero advantages are working for the rider all the time - actually no, most of the time is more accurate - but what people fail to realize, especially casual riders like most of the people here inquiring about aero wheels, is that these "advantages" are so minuscule it's almost hard to quantify it or even justify spending $X,XXX on aero wheels to improve your performance on your club rides.

If you're getting them for the head turning & showstopper effect then please proceed, your LBS or online retailer of choice will absolutely appreciate the monetary contribution. However if you're CAT 4 or lower and think aero wheels is a missing piece in the puzzle .... then no, just no.

Ok. Let me make sure I understood you.

aero wheels provide an advantage that is so small it cannot be measured easily. Nobody understands this except for people who are Cat 3 or higher. People who don't race are especially mentally incapable of understanding this. Most of you who are reading this fall into this category. It is not worth spending $1000 or more unless you're a Cat 3 or higher. Then it is a critical missing link and becomes worth the money, even if you are a college kid who lives on Top Ramen. Thanks.

:lol: Thanks for clarifying.

Are you saying there's a moment where a shallow section rim is more aero than a deep section rim? Aside from stationary, I don't think so, and even if I'm wrong about that theoretically, I'd bet that in practice that moment doesn't exist out on the road; I've never seen anyone quantify aero-disadvantages, anyway. Lots of tests quantify aero advantages, though, so I don't know what you're talking about there.

As for casual riders, it's actually the slower riders who have the most to gain from aero wheels because they see higher yaw angles, and some wheels, like the Zipp 808s actually produce propulsion (negative drag) at wider yaw angles. Tour Mag's own tunnel data corroborated this, and Flo demonstrate this with their data as well. So again, I don't know what the basis for your claim here, is either.

Can you sketch out a scenario where a rider would be penalized (i.e. go slower and/or expend more energy) for using more aero wheels?

I think that you just don't thing the advantages are worth the cost to you, and that may be true, but it is not a legitimate basis from which to contend that aero benefits don't exist.

No, that's a simplistic, childish, and frankly irritating attempt at minimizing what I said, so no, you don't understand me - and based on the condescending tone of the way you wrote your message which seems intentional, I don't see a point in carrying a dialogue with you. Look at the way I've been discussing with Chaadster for an example of worth it dialogue.

Haha! Smack Ramen used to be the one when I was a kid! I've graduated to Maruchan; they've got classy flavors, like shrimp.;)

http://l.b5z.net/i/u/6101880/i/smackramen.jpg

A shallow rim isn't ever more aero than a deep section rim, I never mentioned anything about that.
I also never contended aero benefits don't exist - in my very first post on this I wrote about the the advantages of aero wheels.
All things being equal, a rider with deeper section wheels would be penalized more in a straight 90 degree crosswind. Tests quantify only the advantages because they're trying to sell you something.
The advantages are worth the cost depending on (1) the size of your budget, and (2) what you're hoping to achieve with the purchase.
If you have an unlimited budget, more power to you. If you believe it's worth it to be marginally quicker on your non competitive rides by using aero wheels when there are probably still many other areas of your cycling that can be improved (through training for example) for significantly better performance then more power (meter) to you.

Let's not forget the entire point of this whole thread, and that's OP.
First, OP to me seems to fall into the category of someone who is looking for an upgrade but not on an unlimited budget.
Second, OP doesn't also seem like the purpose of this upgrade is to win races or take advantage of "that hard 5 minute effort that gapped you off the front and made you the first person into the regroup area, or that intense 45sec effort that let you nose across the finish first simply because you had that bit more energy and that bit less drag when you went digginng." ... to quote you in post #62 .
Hence the entire purpose of me posting was to encourage OP to consider a wider range of wheel options besides aero wheels.... which is why, in my very first post, I heavily suggested OP rent an broad range of wheels.

Since good alloy nom-aero wheels can be lighter than deep aero wheels, the minimal aero benefits of the deep wheels are probably negated by the weight penalty.

As a recreational rider, who times his rides, I can say that I am not one iota faster on my Venge (which has aero wheels; bars; seat post; fork; and frame tubes) than on my Klein, which has no aero parts/no CF parts. (I didn't buy the Venge for it's "aero-ness"- but rather just because I like the way it looks- I wasn't expecting it to be any faster).

For serious racers, where a few seconds count; and where you want to be on a level playing field with your competitors, aero might provide some benefit.

For those who don't mind spending a lot of money for "fashion" and aesthetics.....if you like the aero look, then knock yourelf out- just understand that you're not buying performance- and after all, why would you want to? Personally, if I wanted to buy performance, I'd just get something with a motor. Since cycling is about human-powered vehicles; and the bicycle is already ridiculously efficient at transferring our our energy into linear motion, I want my performance to come from my body's increasing strength and endurance. My choice of bikes is mainly about aesthetics and feel.

You are faster but it's not enough to be apparent. Someone needs equipment and controlled conditions to measure that. All those things your Venge has quite a few watts difference per lots of studies

Exactly. It may technically be faster- but not to any noticeable degree, unless one is counting seconds. The Venge might save me 20 seconds on a 34 mile ride- who cares? It's imperceptable- and so negligible, that just a tad more effort on one hill alone, would accomplish the same thing on another bike. The only place it would matter, is in a race, where one is doing max effort continually, and that 20 seconds would mean the difference between winning or losing.

As I said, I bought the Venge just because I like it- but had I bought it with the hopes of it doing something for me, I would have been sorely disappointed. The only benefit, to a recreational rider like myself, is in the aesthetics.

right. ^^^

and who voluntarily goes on a 34 mile ride in order to save 20 seconds. might as well just walk the last 100 yards and call it good. or start 20 seconds earlier. :twitchy:

but i get why people spend all this money for nothing. (i saw a guy in a late model Corvette the other day, sporting some of the most gawdawful chrome rims you've ever seen. it was obvious to me the guy had some extra money left over after he purchased the car. he should have just bought a nicer car :lol:). i really do. i did it when i bought my first couple of adult bikes. i didn't know better is all. i remember i even bought some Phil Wood, and Campy record stuff. imagine that!

experience turns us into poor consumers, from a retailer's perspective, i guess. :lol:

Incorrect. The performance advantage of deeper wheels increases with yaw angle. It's the apparent wind angle that counts. Riding 25mph with a 10mph crosswind yields a yaw angle of around 22 degrees. Yaw angle decreases with rider speed. The only time you're likely to see a 90 degree crosswind is if you aren't moving. In the graph below the red line is from a set of Mavic Open Pros:

http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...5&d=1425770713

Nice graph, supports what you're telling me, thanks!

It was. I'm glad I irritated you.:thumb:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v8...psyireecpv.jpg

Glad to see you're an idiot.
If you're not contributing to helping OP you're useless to the thread. Try again.

Thank you…that was exactly my point to Seventwentynine earlier. Zipp's 808s also generate negative drag at higher yaw, providing, as I said earlier, actual propulsive force. As you rightly state, slower riders actually gain more aero advantage than faster riders because of the higher yaw due to slower speeds in the same wind conditions.

For terminological clarity (from CyclingPowerLab's site):

Given that most of us ride significantly faster than the meteorological wind is blowing, most of the time, the resistance wind tends to dominate. For example, if we ride at 40kph (24.85mph) with a 10kph (6.21mph) full-on sidewind (meteorological wind approaching at 90 degrees to our ride direction) the effective wind has a yaw angle of just 14 degrees. In fact modelling suggests that somewhere between 50 and 70 percent (let's say 2/3rds) of effective wind yaw angles experienced by a rider are lower than 10 degrees, the faster your ride, the higher this percentage. The same research suggests that a further 30 percent (let's say 1/3rd) of effective wind yaw angles are between 10 and 20 degrees. (http://www.cyclingpowerlab.com/Yaw.aspx)

He's not an idiot, he was making fun of idiot comments...there's a difference.

What was an idiot comment, that experienced riders are the ones who aero wheels are most advantageous for, or was it me calling him out for acting like a child and trying to caricature what I was saying. You're defending him so please elaborate.

No, better aero trumps less weight virtually always and definitely always in real world cycling.

If that was your point I didn't get it beyond the 808 propulsive force you mentioned.... for some reason the other poster did a significantly better job at providing some insight on the topic as a whole that I got better this time.

Looks like thread is done. Thanks for participating.

Buh bye.