I came across an interesting article at biketechreview regarding how bicycle wheel design relates to performance. The long and short of it is:

Roughly, the average rider power requirements on a course with a zero net elevation gain is broken down into:

1) 60% rider drag
2) 12% rolling resistance
3) 8% frame drag
4) 8% wheel drag
5) 8% bike/rider inertia.
6) .5% wheel inertia forces
~3% attributed to drivetrain and component flexing

I'm by no means suggesting this is gospel, but I find it to be an interesting perspective on what really matters. when bike and rider (sans wheels) are treated as one even a few pounds of weight make a pretty miniscule difference....until you're climbing.

Are you trying to say it would be more worthwhile to try to look like a fish than to have light and aero wheels?

Sounds too high. Of course, if by "average rider" he means a guy using an MTB with knobbies doing 12mph, then okay. A guy on 700*23 slicks doing 18mph will probably not have rolling resistance that high.

Don't forget to count the resistance of the hub bearings also. Considering the frame drag is 8%, 12% for rolling resistance doesn't sound too ridiculous.

Also, I'm not a physicist, but I would guess that rolling resistance decreases very little as speed increases. I think that since drag becomes much more pronounced at higher speeds you can't tell that the rolling resistance is there, but I think it still is. Just thinking out loud here.

^^^
Thing is, rolling resistance is directly proportional to speed. Drag grows exponentially (2x speed=> 2x roling res., but 4x aero drag) So at higher speeds rolling resistance becomes lower as a % part of the whole resistance package.

lol.

I agree that the rolling resistance seems high, but everything else seems in line.

that QR lever isn't that aero...they're kind of angled like elevators of an airplane...maybe that puts the rolling resistance to 11.8% instead of 12%...then again normal force would exert equal amounts right back...

"sometimes I pedal my bike so fast, it's like I'm on the air...above the floor." -Kid

even though the course was zero net elevation, wouldn't it matter if it was hilly or completely flat?

it would seem that the importance of weight on hill climbs is offset by aerodynamic drag on descents.