What's with all the carbon clinchers??

[Dead Man]

Last I knew, carbon clinchers were to be avoided, of all material/type combinations, for several reasons... but not least of all from exploding tubes on descent and beads slipping off hooks in corners. Also... the cancelling effect of buying a more expensive/better riding/lighter weight rim/wheelset just to ride a heavy/poorly riding tire... like, why bother?

I know you see them here and there, despite this. I don't judge people, and just assume a dude knows the problems and drawbacks, and uses a carbon clincher intelligently for specific reasons. But lately, I've been seeing TONS of them - ebay, here, CL - even saw some Lightweights in clincher at my LBS the other day. A $7000 carbon clincher? WTaF? What's the point of dropping 7 gees on a wheel just to be stuck on clinchers??

What's the deal? Am I just out of the loop, and carbon clinchers are now awesome? And if so, how so?

Thanks

-B

[AngryScientist]

just to ride a heavy/poorly riding tire...

carbon wheels aside, yes - you are out of the loop. i would challenge anyone to ride good 320tpi veloflex clinchers with latex tubes back to back with the same tubular tires blindfolded and tell the difference. Good clincher tires are pretty darned good these days, and a good clincher tire rides better than a mediocre tubular tire any day of the week and twice on sunday.

with that out of the way, you're the guy who built a totally unreliable set of lightweight tubular wheels that repeatedly comes untrue and breaks spokes, paired to a set of tubular tires that the tread come un-glued and punctures often, lol.

[FlashUNC]

1) People don't want to glue tires. But...
2) People want carbon.

3) Suddenly disc brakes are en vogue on the road.

[AngryScientist]

1) People don't want to glue tires. But...
2) People want carbon.



correct. i think people really dig the look and feel of a deep section wheel. they do look cool, are reasonably light and sound cool when you go fast - woosh wooosh woosh.

i have both carbon tubulars and carbon clinchers. they both have their place in the world.

[batman1425]

There are some competitive options for clincher tires out there that are getting very close to the ride characteristics of tubulars, especially if you use latex tubes. That and a lot of folks don't want to be bothered with the process for tubies. I could ride tubulars every day if I wanted to, but clinchers are just more convenient for me (an lots of riders) in most situations.

Early iterations of carbon clinchers were prone to failure, largely due to softening of the brake track under hard/extended braking. The force that a clincher tire bead exerts on the rim wall is something tubular rims don't see and early examples didn't solve this problem very well.

That said, there have been big improvements in structural designs that are stronger and dissapate heat better, as well as better resins with much higher Tg's (glass transition temp, where the resin chances phases from solid to liquid) so they can withstand much higher temperatures before structural integrity is compromised. Result is much more reliable wheels, with a substantially reduced risk of failure.

[Dead Man]

with that out of the way, you're the guy who built a totally unreliable set of lightweight tubular wheels that repeatedly comes untrue and breaks spokes, paired to a set of tubular tires that the tread come un-glued and punctures often, lol.

But dayum they ride sweet...

[bloody sunday]

clinchers make the world go round as it were.

the technology has improved a great deal. I ride Zipp 3/404's daily with zero problems.

[AngryScientist]

Pop Quiz:

i would rather dive into a crit corner @ 30mph on:

:D:D

(A)

http://www.wheelbuilder.com/images/D/vit-corsa-speed-650.jpg


(B)

http://i844.photobucket.com/albums/ab6/bkb0000/IMG_28561_zpsil0cwchw.jpg

[bloody sunday]

shots fired

[Dead Man]

Hey.. I was doing 50mph and hitting corners at crit Gs+ on that VERY tire, at De Ronde Portlandia.

Barge cement is good stuff, man.

[Dead Man]

So for those of you who ride tubular AND carbon clincher - why? What are their respective uses, for you?

[ptourkin]

I rode my Enve 2.2s with the new Corsas for the first time this morning and loved the ride. The 25s are almost 28 on the wide rims.

The new brake track is excellent. Braking sounds different but happens at the same rate as my alloy HEDs. I'm a convert.

My carbon tubular 3.4s are for less mountainous rides where I can get sagged home if something catastrophic occurs in the tire dept.

[AngryScientist]

So for those of you who ride tubular AND carbon clincher - why? What are their respective uses, for you?

i have both yes. if the question is fast rides that are relatively flat, clinchers have no disadvantage. my carbon tubulars are in fact quite a bit lighter at the same depth, so they are better at rides where climbing is involved.

there is no question that it is more convenient for me to put a new tube in a clincher on a ride and carry on without messing with spare tires or sealant on the road.

the other major advantage to clinchers is tire swapping. once you commit to gluing a 23c tire to a tubular, it's pretty much on there until it punctures or wears out. i routinely swap different tire widths on the clincher wheels in 2 minutes to suit different riding conditions.

[ripvanrando]

So for those of you who ride tubular AND carbon clincher - why? What are their respective uses, for you?

I just returned from a ride on my vintage Masi topped off with Veloflex Vlaanderen tubulars and the ride quality compared favorably to 28 mm Schwalbe Pro One Tubeless and Compass 32 mm Stampede Pass Extra Legere clinchers. Very nice ride. Why ride tubulars on the old bike? It would be wrong otherwise.

Why not run tubies on a new bike?

I cannot see ANY meaningful advantage to tubulars over modern tubeless road tires whereas tubeless clinchers have lower rolling resistance and are considered virtually flatproof and given that there are no tubes inside them, the mythical exploding tube scenario is off the table.

[benb]

Good clinchers pretty much universally test out better than just about any tubular when the annual rolling resistance lab tests come out. It's usually a pretty decent advantage too.

(The the tubular folks say the test is flawed just like all the other tests because tubulars must be faster cause they're more supple and it feels like they're faster and the pros use them or something.)

[eBAUMANN]

so....this a tubular vs clincher argument?

if you are racing and can afford a race-only wheelset, go tubular, they are lighter.
that said, I dont really think the ride differences (v 320tpi clinchers) are all that noticeable on pavement.

if you dont race, there isnt much reason to ride tubulars unless you dont mind carrying a spare tire with you on every ride...they are a (relative) pain in the ass to install and are still fairly expensive compared to clinchers (but they are getting cheaper). not to mention a flat (or 2) would be all it took to end your ride.

so...carbon clinchers. i have been riding carbon clinchers on-off for the past 5-6 years...and ive never had an issue beyond sub-par braking and squealing brake pads. so it kinda depends on what kinda riding you do.

if i lived in the mountains i would have a set of lightweight alloy clinchers and that would be that.

if you live in the flatlands, carbon clinchers are great, just try em out, they ride great and braking is fine for 95% of riding situations.

if you live somewhere in between, try em, you might wonder why you didnt sooner.

that said, BUY A RIM FROM A COMPANY THAT PUT A LITTLE MONEY INTO R&D, particularly in the braking dept. Reynolds, Zipp, Enve, Campy/Fulcrum are all great options.

another great thing is how many good used options there are out there at the moment. you can pretty easily find a set of high end carbon clinchers for around the cost of a custom alloy set, so if you are curious, try em out! the demand is high enough that if you dont like em there are probably 5 people you know already who would be interested in taking them off your hands.

[bloody sunday]

so....this a tubular vs clincher argument?

if you are racing and can afford a race-only wheelset, go tubular, they are lighter.
that said, I dont really think the ride differences (v 320tpi clinchers) are all that noticeable on pavement.

if you dont race, there isnt much reason to ride tubulars unless you dont mind carrying a spare tire with you on every ride...they are a (relative) pain in the ass to install and are still fairly expensive compared to clinchers (but they are getting cheaper). not to mention a flat (or 2) would be all it took to end your ride.

so...carbon clinchers. i have been riding carbon clinchers on-off for the past 5-6 years...and ive never had an issue beyond sub-par braking and squealing brake pads. so it kinda depends on what kinda riding you do.

if i lived in the mountains i would have a set of lightweight alloy clinchers and that would be that.

if you live in the flatlands, carbon clinchers are great, just try em out, they ride great and braking is fine for 95% of riding situations.

if you live somewhere in between, try em, you might wonder why you didnt sooner.

that said, BUY A RIM FROM A COMPANY THAT PUT A LITTLE MONEY INTO R&D, particularly in the braking dept. Reynolds, Zipp, Enve, Campy/Fulcrum are all great options.

another great thing is how many good used options there are out there at the moment. you can pretty easily find a set of high end carbon clinchers for around the cost of a custom alloy set, so if you are curious, try em out! the demand is high enough that if you dont like em there are probably 5 people you know already who would be interested in taking them off your hands.
this man knows what he's talking about

[batman1425]

given that there are no tubes inside them, the mythical exploding tube scenario is off the table.

If you are referring to the carbon clincher blow out issues - that wasn't a fault of the tube per say - rather that the design of the rim requires a rigid wall that can withstand the pressure of the bead pushing out. A tubeless tire would fail in the same way on an overheating, delaminating/softening carbon clincher.

If you mean a tube popping because it got too hot from lack of adequate heat dissipation with carbon rims and expanded to the point of rupture - I've heard of that happening, too, but much, much, much less frequently - and I'm skeptical that was the actual failure mode. I think the tire would blow off the rim long before the tube expanded enough internally to rupture - though I don't have exhaustive evidence to support that.

[Russian bear]

Rolling resistance test don't even test tubulars hardly anymore since carbon clinchers have taken over the market. Clinchers are a little faster yes. Clinchers on a properly wide tire are also more aero than tubulars just because of the shape you end up with at the front. The difference is marginal and doesn't matter for your average person.

Having said all that, I daily ride tubulars and love them. Racing included. I like the added safety of the tire staying on the rim after it flats as well. 1245g for the wheelset 50mm deep is pretty awesome too.

I'm probably going to pick up some carbon clinchers here soon though for the second bike. If I want to ride somewhere far out of town (5-8 hour ride) there are large pockets of no cell phone reception here in the desert where I don't want to risk going, even though I have sealant and a spare. Also hey, need some pit wheels ;)

[ripvanrando]

There is not a lot of rolling resistance data on tubular tires.

Here is some drum data for Challenge tubulars. One tubular tire has more rolling resistance than two modern clincher tires. Where tubular tires shine is on chip seal but wider clinchers also tranmit less energy into the rider's tissue resulting in a similarly fast roll. YMMV

http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/12/bikes-and-tech/resistance-futile-tire-pressure-width-affect-rolling-resistance_355085

[eBAUMANN]

Having said all that, I daily ride tubulars and love them. Racing included. I like the added safety of the tire staying on the rim after it flats as well.

OK i always hear people talk about this but how many of you have actually had your clincher tire come off your rim when it goes flat?

I got a FRONT flat on a set of carbon clinchers with a vittoria corsa SC tire and latex tube descending Col de la Madeleine, coming around a sweeping right hand turn (not a switchback) at around 40mph. I was able to safely come to a stop and no damage was done to the tire, the rim, or me in the process.

To be perfectly honest, Ive seen more rolled tubulars than I have rolled clinchers...

[benb]

The weight advantages of Tubulars probably don't matter for the every day person either, the whole argument is mostly silliness.

Then there is the weight penalty of carrying an extra tubular vs carrying a clincher tube, you should account for that for non-racing usage too. You probably have to factor in that you might need a heavier/bigger saddle bag to carry a whole tire unless you've got some other wrap/strap/whatever solution.

The rolling resistance probably doesn't matter for the average rider at least if you're comparing a fast tubular with a fast clincher. I feel like it's pretty damn easy to feel the difference between fast tires and commuter tires, etc.. but I doubt any of the really fast tires would make much difference for me on a day to day basis vs the others.

The braking advantage of an aluminum rim still gives a huge advantage in the situation I view most important, when a car pulls out in front of me unexpectedly... you need that whether or not you live in the mountains. None of the carbon rims seem to be able to beat that regardless of whether they offer any performance benefit in a non-braking situation unless they are disc rims and then all the weight benefits are probably gone. If I ride a 1500g aluminum clincher with say DA or Record calipers are there any carbon disc rims (tubular or clincher) that weigh less than that including the rotor and caliper?

[benb]

OK i always hear people talk about this but how many of you have actually had your clincher tire come off your rim when it goes flat?

I got a FRONT flat on a set of carbon clinchers with a vittoria corsa SC tire and latex tube descending Col de la Madeleine, coming around a sweeping right hand turn (not a switchback) at around 40mph. I was able to safely come to a stop and no damage was done to the tire, the rim, or me in the process.

To be perfectly honest, Ive seen more rolled tubulars than I have rolled clinchers...

Sounds like an epic save regardless of what was going on with equipment. Nice riding. :banana:

[Dead Man]

No - it's not a tubular v clincher thread. It's a "do carbon clinchers not suck?" thread.... definitely not interested in tubular v clincher.

The last question I was asked was to determine WHAT uses people who sport have for each... in other words, why have both, if not "just because?" "Just because" is also a valid answer, if that's all it is. But hopefully someone has more specific reasons.

[Lionel]

No - it's not a tubular v clincher thread. It's a "do carbon clinchers not suck?" thread.... definitely not interested in tubular v clincher.

The last question I was asked was to determine WHAT uses people who sport have for each... in other words, why have both, if not "just because?" "Just because" is also a valid answer, if that's all it is. But hopefully someone has more specific reasons.

They do suck, that is compared to their tubular equivalent. The latest carbon clincher I tried was the new specialized roval 60mm or so wheelset that comes with the Venge ViAS. God, that wheelset was awful.

The reason why people ride them is for the deep carbon rim look.

[eBAUMANN]

Sounds like an epic save regardless of what was going on with equipment. Nice riding. :banana:

Ha, thanks, it was really pretty un-remarkable, as flats from punctures tend to lose air relatively slowly, which gave me just enough time to slow down before it got super dangerous (thank you zipp braking surface and eebrakes). Made for a nice photo as well ;)

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1667/26663871895_bf9e25f07d_b.jpg

So, what if you hit a pothole or some other road garbage that causes a pinch flat and a more rapid air release? Well, if you hit something severe enough to pinch flat your tire at a speed high enough that you cant stop fast enough, you will probably be counting yourself lucky to have the lack of air in your tire as your only problem.

[eBAUMANN]

No - it's not a tubular v clincher thread. It's a "do carbon clinchers not suck?" thread.... definitely not interested in tubular v clincher.

The last question I was asked was to determine WHAT uses people who sport have for each... in other words, why have both, if not "just because?" "Just because" is also a valid answer, if that's all it is. But hopefully someone has more specific reasons.

The reasons people like carbon clinchers:

1) carbon performance/weight in a non-tubular package that can realistically be your "one wheelset to rule them all"
2) aesthetics - no silver braking surface! it looks good, hard to deny it.

[benb]

Let's not forget the part where they empty your wallet, that always sucks.

[ripvanrando]

I use latex tubes with sealant (Caffelatex or Orange) and have never had a tire lose pressure so fast that I could not stop safely and usually the sealant stops the leak with maybe 40 psi remaining. I had a flat the other day leaning it into a corner at 35 mph. 5-8 mm gash. Lost most of the air but pumped the tire back up and was on my way.

[eBAUMANN]

Let's not forget the part where they empty your wallet, that always sucks.

If you are patient, the deals are out there, trust me, especially for reynolds wheels, there are so many of em on the 2nd hand market its crazy, and they are great wheels! even assault/dv46/dv3k/etc rims from 6 years ago have pretty decent braking performance in my (fairly comprehensive) experience with them.

[redir]

I don't really see the point in having carbon wheels period, if you are not going to race. Having said that if you do race and want carbon wheels then you should be on tubulars. The end logic there is that I agree. Why pay all that money for a good race set of wheels to just ride on clinchers?

I know Veloflex masters are the best clinchers ever made. I use them almost exclusively now. But they are not as good as their Veloflex tubular counterpart. And there is no convincing anyone but yourself otherwise :D

BTW I can't tell a difference between latex or butle tubes.a

[eBAUMANN]

I don't really see the point in having carbon wheels period, if you are not going to race.

Well I dont really see the point in having a carbon frame period, if you are not going to race.

:fight:

[R3awak3n]

why even have a bike at all, if you not going to race

[Grant McLean]

The weight advantages of Tubulars probably don't matter for the every day person either, the whole argument is mostly silliness.


The 'weight' issue matters on the wallet. I just can't bring myself to spend
big bucks on carbon clincher wheels, like say 404 zipps that weigh 1700 grams.
These wheels are great, but something in your head says "why are these still
so heavy?" when they cost that much. The tubular wheels are 300 grams lighter,
which really makes me think wheels like shimano C24's are for mortals,
and carbon tubulars are for racers.

-g

[eBAUMANN]

The 'weight' issue matters on the wallet. I just can't bring myself to spend
big bucks on carbon clincher wheels, like say 404 zipps that weigh 1700 grams.
These wheels are great, but something in your head says "why are these still
so heavy?" when they cost that much. The tubular wheels are 300 grams lighter,
which really makes me think wheels like shimano C24's are for mortals,
and carbon tubulars are for racers.

-g

Again, it all depends on the type of riding you tend to do.

If you do a lot of climbing on your rides, the weight of your wheels will be more important to you than the aerodynamics of your wheels.
Whereas if you live in florida, light wheels are kinda pointless, and aero wheels are probably a ton of fun.

404's are aero wheels, designed for crits and circuit races without a ton of climbing.
404's FEEL fast, they FEEL like they weigh much MUCH less than what it says on paper...and when it comes down to it, the FEEL is everything.
FEEL is the reason we ride carbon frames and carbon wheels and tubulars (or not) in the first place.
Because we like the FEEL.

#feels

[Ralph]

In the not too distant past, there was no real advantage in a carbon clincher over an aluminum clincher. The design of the rim itself didn't allow the benefit of lighter weight like a carbon rim in a tubular design. Aluminum rims of the same shallow depth were usually lighter and braked much better. it's fairly easy to ride a set of 1400-1500 gram 35 mm depth aluminum clincher wheels, not so easy (or cheap) to to that on 50 mm or more carbon clincher wheels. Or at least in the recent past.

Carbon really shines in the tubular design. It's extra strength per weight can be taken advantage of in carbon fiber.

But....I'm not really up to date on latest wheels. I just know for clincher wheels I see no point in carbon. And for tubular wheels.....carbon is way to go. And this is my opinion.

[eBAUMANN]

...it's fairly easy to ride a set of 1400-1500 gram 35-50 mm depth aluminum clincher wheels, not so easy (or cheap) to to that on carbon wheels...

Can you link us to one set of 1400-1500g 35-50mm aluminum wheels?
Because I cant remember ever seeing a set of alloy wheels that light/deep.

[Mark McM]

I cannot see ANY meaningful advantage to tubulars over modern tubeless road tires whereas tubeless clinchers have lower rolling resistance and are considered virtually flatproof and given that there are no tubes inside them, the mythical exploding tube scenario is off the table.

Would you care to share why you believe that tubeless clinchers have lower rolling resistance? A clear advantage in rolling resistance has yet to show up in any quantitative test.

And what is this "mythical exploding tube scenario" you speak of? Inner tubes can't "explode" unless the tire has already come off the rim, which is usually due to an installation error.

I assume that the "flatproof" quality you are referring too is for tubeless tires with sealant. Sealants were originally developed for, and are still used in, inner tubes, so in that regard a standard clincher can often be just as "flatproof". And regardless of sealant, a tubeless clincher with a large tear behaves no differently than any other flat clincher (except that it is often messier, with the tear spewing sealant).

[Ralph]

Can you link us to one set of 1400-1500g 35-50mm aluminum wheels?
Because I cant remember ever seeing a set of alloy wheels that light/deep.

Check out Campy Zonda, Eurus, and Shamil. Zonda's 1550 grams and less than $400 in UK. Others in 1400+ gram range, but cost more. Don't need rim strips for further weight savings. Just don't see how any 35 MM deep carbons clinchers beat wheels like this.

[EDS]

Check out Campy Zonda, Eurus, and Shamil. Zonda's 1550 grams and less than $400 in UK. Others in 1400+ gram range, but cost more. Don't need rim strips for further weight savings. Just don't see how any 35 MM deep carbons clinchers beat wheels like this.

Well, in fairness the Campy wheels are not that deep - the front is around 26mm deep and the rear 30mm - so not examples of the 35mm deep aluminum clinchers you referenced previously.

Zipps newest 303 NSW clincher wheels, which are 45mm deep, allegedly weight 1425g for the set.

[eBAUMANN]

Check out Campy Zonda, Eurus, and Shamil. Zonda's 1550 grams and less than $400 in UK. Others in 1400+ gram range, but cost more. Don't need rim strips for further weight savings. Just don't see how any 35 MM deep carbons clinchers beat wheels like this.

Zonda - $353 - 1550g (claimed) - 23mm front rim, 30mm rear
Eurus - $642 - 1482g (claimed) - 26mm front, 30mm rear
Shamal Ultra - $780 - 1425g (claimed) - 26mm front, 30mm rear
Shamal Mille - $959 - 1426g (claimed - 23mm front, 27mm rear

None of these wheels are deeper than 30mm, let alone 35mm.

The only 35mm alloy wheel campy makes is the Scirocco, which weighs in at a claimed 1725g.

[Ralph]

And some of the guys I ride with show up on lastest cheap carbon 50 MM deep wheels, weighing about 1700 grams or so, and the hub bearings look like something out of a look pedal they are so small and few. Hubs wear out quick, etc. So you have to shop carefully for a good wheel. More to a wheel than the rim.

[Dead Man]

Zonda - $353 - 1550g (claimed) - 23mm front rim, 30mm rear
Eurus - $642 - 1482g (claimed) - 26mm front, 30mm rear
Shamal Ultra - $780 - 1425g (claimed) - 26mm front, 30mm rear
Shamal Mille - $959 - 1426g (claimed - 23mm front, 27mm rear

None of these wheels are deeper than 30mm, let alone 35mm.

So why the crap don't these come in tubular variety, shaving at least 100g off and making me want to buy them?

Frustrating that lightweight tubular alloy does not exist. If I could ride a decently strong, somewhat aero, sub 1400g alloy tubular wheelset, I'd never buy anything else.

[FlashUNC]

So why the crap don't these come in tubular variety, shaving at least 100g off and making me want to buy them?

Frustrating that lightweight tubular alloy does not exist. If I could ride a decently strong, somewhat aero, sub 1400g alloy tubular wheelset, I'd never buy anything else.

Because they didn't sell.

[Lionel]

unlike carbon alum tubular rims are not lighter than their clincher counterpart. The shamal ultra tubular and clinchers are the same weight. I still ride the tubular version because weight is not the only reason to ride tubs.

[benb]

The 300g difference even between a 1700g carbon/alu clincher and the 1400g carbon tubular is not even going to make a difference if you're doing hillclimbs unless you're like 5% body fat and your arms have just about disappeared and you're worrying whether you're going to win the race or come in second in the pro/top notch category.

[Grant McLean]

The 300g difference even between a 1700g carbon/alu clincher and the 1400g carbon tubular is not even going to make a difference if you're doing hillclimbs unless you're like 5% body fat

For some reason, i don't think that will be Zipp's next ad campaign.

-g

[Dead Man]

The 300g difference even between a 1700g carbon/alu clincher and the 1400g carbon tubular is not even going to make a difference if you're doing hillclimbs unless you're like 5% body fat and your arms have just about disappeared and you're worrying whether you're going to win the race or come in second in the pro/top notch category.

Aggregation of marginal gains works for amateur racers too, bro. It's not just the 300g of wheelweight (as if that wasn't enough - it is), it's ALL the weight-savings, AND the climbing fitness, AND the stiffness of your components, AND the single-digit body fat percentage. Why do all those things, then sport 1700g wheels?

Kinda drives me crazy when people make this assumption, any time component weight comes up. Hey - I'm actually over weight this season. Guess I should buy heavier wheels than I need to, because there's no chance I could lose the extra weight, right? For spite.

[Dead Man]

I didn't realize Shamals came in tubular... kind of a bummer there's no weight savings, though

[Mark McM]

Can you link us to one set of 1400-1500g 35-50mm aluminum wheels?
Because I cant remember ever seeing a set of alloy wheels that light/deep.

Well, it's not quite inside your spec, but it's close:

The American Classic 420 Aero (https://amclassic.com/index.php/wheels/420-aero-3.html)wheels are 34 mm deep and 1530 grams.

[Likes2ridefar]

Aggregation of marginal gains works for amateur racers too, bro. It's not just the 300g of wheelweight (as if that wasn't enough - it is), it's ALL the weight-savings, AND the climbing fitness, AND the stiffness of your components, AND the single-digit body fat percentage. Why do all those things, then sport 1700g wheels?

Kinda drives me crazy when people make this assumption, any time component weight comes up. Hey - I'm actually over weight this season. Guess I should buy heavier wheels than I need to, because there's no chance I could lose the extra weight, right? For spite.

Buy what you want, but if you think youll be faster With the lighter of those two mentioned wheelsets, youre fooling yourself. Although the fooling may actually make a difference?

[benb]

Buy what you want, but if you think youll be faster With the lighter of those two mentioned wheelsets, youre fooling yourself. Although the fooling may actually make a difference?

Hey if he's doing Mt. Washington, Ventoux, Evans, Mitchell, and he can average 300 watts all the way up the hill the wheelset might gain him 10 seconds. (Assuming a 10km climb @ 13%, rider puts out 300 watts and one wheelset saves 300g over the other.)

Last time I did Mt. Washington Tyler Hamilton won, he beat me by 23 minutes. I haven't been able to sleep all these years cause I stay awake every night wondering if I could have beat him if I had sprung for carbon tubulars.

[batman1425]

There several good options for quality sub 1500g carbon clinchers spanning the price spectrum. Yep, you can go 200+ grams lighter for the tubular version of each of these wheels, but I would wager that at or below 1500g is more than sufficient for all but the very top end racers.

Enve SES 4.5 - claimed 1,448g
Reynolds Aero 46 - claimed 1505g
Zipp 303 NSW - claimed 1425g
Easton EA90SL (38mm) - claimed 1475g
Boyd 44 - claimed 1,475g

Sure, they have a significant price premium over top of the mark aluminum clinchers at the same weight like Hed Ardennes, Ksyrium, Pacenti SL23 custom build, etc. But that difference gets a lot smaller on the used market where there are great deals to be had on well cared for examples. You are getting a substantial aero advantage at nearly the same weight and for wheels from the guys withe big R/D dollars to spend (Enve, Reynolds, Zipp), the braking performance is getting REALLY close to aluminum wheels.

If you are committed to clinchers, I don't see a negative, aside from price and like I and others have said - the used market has lots of good deals for these.

[shovelhd]

I posted a picture here of me winning a race by a tire width. I won't post it again for obvious reasons. I was OTF for a significant part of the race. Do I think the wheels made a difference? Yes, I do, but not because I had them and others didn't.

[shovelhd]

BTW I love my generic custom wide carbon clinchers.

[simonov]

They do suck, that is compared to their tubular equivalent. The latest carbon clincher I tried was the new specialized roval 60mm or so wheelset that comes with the Venge ViAS. God, that wheelset was awful.

The reason why people ride them is for the deep carbon rim look.

Maybe part of the reason those wheels sucked is the crappy brakes on the Venge ViAS.

I have Fulcrum Zero Nites (aluminum) and Fulcrum Zero Carbons. The carbons are much wider with a deeper front and better aero profile while being lighter. They also feel livelier and have excellent braking. Hubs and spokes are the same. Unless I lived in the mountains, I'd pick the carbons over the nites all day, every day. Carbon clinchers don't suck. Some wheels suck and some wheels don't.

[batman1425]

BTW I love my generic custom wide carbon clinchers.

I know what you mean, but I like the dichotomy of that statement. :beer:

[Lionel]

I didn't realize Shamals came in tubular... kind of a bummer there's no weight savings, though

They may not be in the campy line up that much longer because as Flash says they are not selling. Too bad as they are an awesome wheelset.

[sandyrs]

So why the crap don't these come in tubular variety, shaving at least 100g off and making me want to buy them?

Frustrating that lightweight tubular alloy does not exist. If I could ride a decently strong, somewhat aero, sub 1400g alloy tubular wheelset, I'd never buy anything else.

Get R-Sys tubulars on closeout.

[shovelhd]

I know what you mean, but I like the dichotomy of that statement. :beer:

Yeah. That was for the Rose Bowl bika Masters haterz.

The rims were generic but the hubs and spokes were specified.

[sailorboy]

Check out Campy Zonda, Eurus, and Shamil. Zonda's 1550 grams and less than $400 in UK. Others in 1400+ gram range, but cost more. Don't need rim strips for further weight savings. Just don't see how any 35 MM deep carbons clinchers beat wheels like this.

I can tell you for sure that my set of reynolds assault clinchers (about 35mm) beat all of those wheels above about 21mph in terms of energy used, and it gets better the faster you go. The biggest advantage I've experienced is in racing situations where either sitting in or pulling through in a paceline feels waaay easier to me than when I have those alloy completely non-aero wheels on my bike. Just riding around and don't care how fast you're going or how many watts you're spending? then maybe there is no advantage. Do I feel slightly silly with them on my bike when commuting to work? maybe, but that doesn't make them any less fun and that's all that matters at this point for me.

[FlashUNC]

They may not be in the campy line up that much longer because as Flash says they are not selling. Too bad as they are an awesome wheelset.

I've got the Shamal Milles in clincher and honestly, there's not need for this wheel to come in tubular. Its way nice as a clincher.

[Lionel]

I've got the Shamal Milles in clincher and honestly, there's not need for this wheel to come in tubular. Its way nice as a clincher.



I have it in clincher too. The tubular version is just better because it is tubular....

[FlashUNC]

I have it in clincher too. The tubular version is just better because it is tubular....

You just love sniffing glue.

[Lionel]

You just love sniffing glue.



As a matter of fact I do

[adrien]

Well, I just bought carbon clinchers. Tried a bunch, too. They certainly don't all feel the same. Boyds don't feel at all like Novembers don't feel one bit like Zipps that don't feel or even sound like Enves. They are certainly not all that comparable once you've ridden them a while.

I didn't want sew-ups, because it would be too much new for me. I don't care about 200-300 grams of difference. I don't race unless you count my own mortality. I know how to fix a clincher. I have lots of tires and tubes and several saddle bags with flat kits. I don't want to learn how to stretch tires and do something I won't admit to my wife with them in the dryer the night before.

I wanted carbon because I wanted the feel. Yup. I have no idea whether they are faster. They look cool, they sound even cooler, and I'm vain. They also feel cool and very planted, and I like the way they make the bike feel like it can carry more speed in rollers. And because I got them made locally I could get the R45s in blue, because I think they are pretty, and because I got new 2016 rims they have a textured braking surface and make yet another cool noise when I'm stopping. The whole thing is a feedback extravaganza. Yippy. I'm having fun on my zippy grown up spaceship. Adventure!

No clue whether I'm faster. No shame from the sew-up folks. Just nice new wheels to make the bike feel extra special, because I can.

Alloy set remains for the climbing routes, and for the winter, and for the epic-y crapfests I seem to still enjoy.

Did I mention they look cool?

[ANAO]

Hey.. I was doing 50mph and hitting corners at crit Gs+ on that VERY tire, at De Ronde Portlandia.

Barge cement is good stuff, man.

You were hitting crit corners @ 50 mph? Who are you, Eric Marcotte?

[livingminimal]

I'm taking apart a H+ Son Archetype <-> DT 240 disc wheel set to build those hubs to a 60mm Nextie TUBELESS set of carbons wheels that I will probably run 28mm Hutchinson sectors on and bomb through all kinds of weird **** through. Purely because I like the way it'll look/sound. I no longer have racing delusions of grandeur.

[timto]

What rims did you end up with?

Well, I just bought carbon clinchers. Tried a bunch, too. They certainly don't all feel the same. Boyds don't feel at all like Novembers don't feel one bit like Zipps that don't feel or even sound like Enves. They are certainly not all that comparable once you've ridden them a while.

I didn't want sew-ups, because it would be too much new for me. I don't care about 200-300 grams of difference. I don't race unless you count my own mortality. I know how to fix a clincher. I have lots of tires and tubes and several saddle bags with flat kits. I don't want to learn how to stretch tires and do something I won't admit to my wife with them in the dryer the night before.

I wanted carbon because I wanted the feel. Yup. I have no idea whether they are faster. They look cool, they sound even cooler, and I'm vain. They also feel cool and very planted, and I like the way they make the bike feel like it can carry more speed in rollers. And because I got them made locally I could get the R45s in blue, because I think they are pretty, and because I got new 2016 rims they have a textured braking surface and make yet another cool noise when I'm stopping. The whole thing is a feedback extravaganza. Yippy. I'm having fun on my zippy grown up spaceship. Adventure!

No clue whether I'm faster. No shame from the sew-up folks. Just nice new wheels to make the bike feel extra special, because I can.

Alloy set remains for the climbing routes, and for the winter, and for the epic-y crapfests I seem to still enjoy.

Did I mention they look cool?

[Climb01742]

Well, I just bought carbon clinchers. Tried a bunch, too. They certainly don't all feel the same. Boyds don't feel at all like Novembers don't feel one bit like Zipps that don't feel or even sound like Enves. They are certainly not all that comparable once you've ridden them a while.


+1
Having ridden all those, would dig hearing your impressions. Thx.

[adrien]

Ended up with Enve SES45. I pretty much decided not to think about price because the bike is pretty much the dream bike, and I didn't want to end up feeling like I compromised. So, here's the impressions. all models were roughly 50mm. Ridden 20-200 miles each.

Boyds -- I liked these, but not as much as I wanted to. Relatively low-key personality, almost like they were trying not to be noticed. Whooshed along happily, braking was meh but very progressive. Rode them a while and thought I wasn't all that sure I wanted carbon any more. They seemed like they muted a bit too much for me personally.

November Rails -- most planted feeling of all of them. Very odd sensation -- I found myself thinking of time trial bikes, and it felt almost like there was an iron ball in the tire at the contact patch, bringing the CG of the bike down. I really liked the feeling, but at times it felt so planted it wasn't as lively at changing direction as I had hoped. Braking was ok, but not great. Not as good in the wind as I had hoped.

Zipps -- I think they were 404s. Will ask my buddy who has since sold them. These felt a little fragile to me. I could tell they were hollow and didn't feel as nailed down as the Novembers, but also felt faster, made a cool noise. They did not feel like 2.5x the Novembers, which were my front runners, and I didn't like the hubs much.

Enves -- rode a loaner set of 4.5s and knew within a mile. These were the only set that felt just as lively as my hand made Ambrosio rims and the bike felt nimble again at low speeds, but just as planted as the Rails about 15. I also knew I could have them built locally, so some of the issues I had had with wheels in the past (and things like a quick hub check after they loosen up, etc.) I knew I could have handled by my local mech as part of the process. So I ordered them up, got the bonus of the new brake track, and they have been fantastic so far.

[cmbicycles]

Pop Quiz:

i would rather dive into a crit corner @ 30mph on:

:D:D

(A)

http://www.wheelbuilder.com/images/D/vit-corsa-speed-650.jpg


(B)

http://i844.photobucket.com/albums/ab6/bkb0000/IMG_28561_zpsil0cwchw.jpg
I dunno, I'd shy away from tread peeling tubulars same as the next guy, but probably be more worried about a clincher wheel with no spokes ;)

[regularguy412]

So for those of you who ride tubular AND carbon clincher - why? What are their respective uses, for you?

I bought Easton EC90SL's to replace a worn out set of Campy Record Chrono tubs. I went with the 38's because A) wasn't sure if I'd like a deeper rim and B) I got em on close out $1,045.00 shipped (reg price $1899.00) and C) claimed weight of 1250 grams for the set. To go much lighter in a 38-50mm section rim would've had to drop a LOT more coin. I've ridden them for 5 years-- mostly like everyday wheels , but not really since I have a 2nd bike and that one has AL clinchers.

Fast forward to this year. I found some Mercury M5 clinchers on sale/on sale back around Christmas. Marked down to $899.00 (reg price $2400.00) and on an additional 10% discount so I got em for $809.00 plus shipping. The rim bed is slightly wider internally than other clinchers, so I can run 23's at about 10 psi lower than normal without risking pinch flats. The rim shape/profile is slightly different than the Eastons. The M5s are more toroidal and the Eastons are more or less just a regular V-shape -- sharper point at the inner surface of the rim where the spokes attach. The M5s have a more rounded profile -- which is supposedly a bit more aero than a plain V.

I like the M5's a lot. They don't spin up quite as fast as the Eastons. I can definitely tell the difference in that regard when climbing long climbs with the M5s. The Eastons seem to climb better , that is, they seem to allow me to keep a better rhythm on a climb. (And I surely need it cuz I'm no climber). The M5s definitely roll better on the flats, especially when the speed gets up to and over 24mph. Neither wheel set seems to get 'heavy' as the speed really ramps up,, say around 30+.

So for me, the M5 clinchers are more of a work horse, flats to rolling hills wheel and the Eastons I use more for long rides or where there is more climbing.

Mike in AR:beer:

Disclaimer: I am late to this discussion and didn't read all the posts.

[oldpotatoe]

Well, I just bought carbon clinchers. Tried a bunch, too. They certainly don't all feel the same. Boyds don't feel at all like Novembers don't feel one bit like Zipps that don't feel or even sound like Enves. They are certainly not all that comparable once you've ridden them a while.

I didn't want sew-ups, because it would be too much new for me. I don't care about 200-300 grams of difference. I don't race unless you count my own mortality. I know how to fix a clincher. I have lots of tires and tubes and several saddle bags with flat kits. I don't want to learn how to stretch tires and do something I won't admit to my wife with them in the dryer the night before.

I wanted carbon because I wanted the feel. Yup. I have no idea whether they are faster. They look cool, they sound even cooler, and I'm vain. They also feel cool and very planted, and I like the way they make the bike feel like it can carry more speed in rollers. And because I got them made locally I could get the R45s in blue, because I think they are pretty, and because I got new 2016 rims they have a textured braking surface and make yet another cool noise when I'm stopping. The whole thing is a feedback extravaganza. Yippy. I'm having fun on my zippy grown up spaceship. Adventure!

No clue whether I'm faster. No shame from the sew-up folks. Just nice new wheels to make the bike feel extra special, because I can.

Alloy set remains for the climbing routes, and for the winter, and for the epic-y crapfests I seem to still enjoy.

Did I mention they look cool?

POTD-good for you!!

[saab2000]

I own two sets of carbon wheels - a set of ENVE 1.45 tubulars and a set of ENVE 3.4 SES clinchers. Both are nice wheels. The clinchers are not light. They're not crazy heavy either but there's not much difference between them and a set of clinchers, if any.

The rims are in the 400 gram range or even higher. I don't remember the exact figure.

Are carbon rims a lot stiffer?

The reason I ask is that I'd rather have low profile wheels for my daily riders. I don't really care about the aero benefits when riding alone but I enjoy not being buffeted around when it's windy. My 1.45s are especially bad in the wind.

Given that carbon clinchers are nearly the same weight as aluminum clincher rims is the only advantage stiffness? That's not a bad thing, but I'm not seeing a weight advantage to carbon clinchers, at least not the low profile ones.

[chiasticon]

the main advantage of riding deep carbon wheels is aero, period. is it nice to have them be light too? sure. but that doesn't mean they're worthless if they're a little heavy (and to be fair, we're talking in the area of 1500 grams for a pair of 50mm carbon clinchers, that's not really *heavy*). as stated already, if you're mostly riding flat to rolling terrain, deep wheels are awesome and I don't think you give up much if they weigh a bit more. once you hit the hills, you may be cursing them, but you might not; depends what type of rider you are. maybe you never had a chance of being first in the group up the climb (super light wheels or not), but you can crush it on the flats (aero wheels or not). the mountain goats in your group with 1300g low profile wheels will be cursing you with aero wheels.

as for racing, I know a lot of guys that love 'em because they'll do a mid-week crit and one or two on the weekend. they just leave their "race wheels" on the bike and don't have to swap brake pads, etc to do other rides. nor do they have to carry a heavy tubular tire or worry about not having time to repair/glue a new one a day or two before a race. they can also ride to/from local races with just a standard clincher repair kit on them.

in short, it's not just about weight.

[Dead Man]

the main advantage of riding deep carbon wheels is aero, period. is it nice to have them be light too? sure. but that doesn't mean they're worthless if they're a little heavy (and to be fair, we're talking in the area of 1500 grams for a pair of 50mm carbon clinchers, that's not really *heavy*). as stated already, if you're mostly riding flat to rolling terrain, deep wheels are awesome and I don't think you give up much if they weigh a bit more. once you hit the hills, you may be cursing them, but you might not; depends what type of rider you are. maybe you never had a chance of being first in the group up the climb (super light wheels or not), but you can crush it on the flats (aero wheels or not). the mountain goats in your group with 1300g low profile wheels will be cursing you with aero wheels.

as for racing, I know a lot of guys that love 'em because they'll do a mid-week crit and one or two on the weekend. they just leave their "race wheels" on the bike and don't have to swap brake pads, etc to do other rides. nor do they have to carry a heavy tubular tire or worry about not having time to repair/glue a new one a day or two before a race. they can also ride to/from local races with just a standard clincher repair kit on them.

in short, it's not just about weight.

But even with all that said, isnt it still about the weight? If it was just aero, we could make deep rims out of alloy and they'd be cheap and brake well and work just as well as carbon. The reason carbon makes aero possible is because it can do it light enough to be something anyone would ride.

I mean.. Why do carbon wheels exist at all? Its for better strength:weight.

[stien]

Just a data point: I was really, really happy to have an alloy braking surface (HED Jet) during the 3 mile neutral roll out (15 mph) down a climb last weekend. Then really happy to have all the aero that let me move up in the pack while just tucking during long descents.

Have I mentioned I love the faring combo? And I can beat the snot out of it because it's just an Ardennes rim.

[zap]

But even with all that said, isnt it still about the weight? If it was just aero, we could make deep rims out of alloy and they'd be cheap and brake well and work just as well as carbon. The reason carbon makes aero possible is because it can do it light enough to be something anyone would ride.

I mean.. Why do carbon wheels exist at all? Its for better strength:weight.

That would be too heavy. I think the original Campy Shamal deepish section al rim was around 650g.

There is a sweet spot between aero and weight. Quality carbon clinchers are in that zone.....coupled with superior rolling resistance and ease of removal (for my bad thumbs).....it's all good.

[ivanooze]

The Times they are a changing

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[shovelhd]

Just a data point: I was really, really happy to have an alloy braking surface (HED Jet) during the 3 mile neutral roll out (15 mph) down a climb last weekend. Then really happy to have all the aero that let me move up in the pack while just tucking during long descents.

Have I mentioned I love the faring combo? And I can beat the snot out of it because it's just an Ardennes rim.

Sounds like Quabbin. I was doing inspections at the start and judging at the line.

[christian]

I ride carbon clinchers on my XC MTB. I think they're fantastic for that application.

On my two primary road bikes, I'm riding on one of three wheelsets:
- Campagnolo Neutron tubulars (Colnago)
- Campagnolo Record/Mavic Reflex tubulars (commute and most rides on Hampsten)
- Campagnolo Record/Mavic Open Pro clinchers (dirt road rides on Hampsten)

If I were to buy carbon wheels, I'd get tubulars. The weight difference between tubulars and clinchers would outweigh any perceived difference in complexity of tire changes. My tubular experience is that you glue them on, ride them to the cords, and swap them. I've performed two on-road tire replacements and they were non-events.

[Mark McM]

But even with all that said, isnt it still about the weight? If it was just aero, we could make deep rims out of alloy and they'd be cheap and brake well and work just as well as carbon. The reason carbon makes aero possible is because it can do it light enough to be something anyone would ride.

I mean.. Why do carbon wheels exist at all? Its for better strength:weight.

I believe it is harder to make a deep aluminum rim than you imply. Currently, aluminum rims are made by starting with straight extrusions, and then curling (bending) them into hoops. The deeper the cross section, the more difficult it is to curl them into hoops without crimping/crinkling the cross section - particularly if the cross section has very thin walls. The deepest extruded aluminum rims I've seen are about 42 mm deep.

Conversely, carbon rims can be molded directly into their final shape, so they can easily be made as deep as desired.

That being said, there are several models of 'hybrid' carbon/aluminum, in which a deep carbon cross-section is bonded to shallower aluminum extrusion. Although heavier than a pure carbon rim, this rims can be lighter than a pure aluminum rim, while keeping the advantages of both types of rim (carbon section can be made with a very aerodynamic shape, but has aluminum brake tracks and clincher sidewalls for consistent braking and reliable tire retentions).

[ceolwulf]

I believe it is harder to make a deep aluminum rim than you imply. Currently, aluminum rims are made by starting with straight extrusions, and then curling (bending) them into hoops. The deeper the cross section, the more difficult it is to curl them into hoops without crimping/crinkling the cross section - particularly if the cross section has very thin walls. The deepest extruded aluminum rims I've seen are about 42 mm deep.



Conversely, carbon rims can be molded directly into their final shape, so they can easily be made as deep as desired.



That being said, there are several models of 'hybrid' carbon/aluminum, in which a deep carbon cross-section is bonded to shallower aluminum extrusion. Although heavier than a pure carbon rim, this rims can be lighter than a pure aluminum rim, while keeping the advantages of both types of rim (carbon section can be made with a very aerodynamic shape, but has aluminum brake tracks and clincher sidewalls for consistent braking and reliable tire retentions).



This might be the way I will go. Campy Bullet 50s perhaps. They're very heavy compared to full carbon and especially to carbon tubulars. But when your total elevation gain on a ride is usually in single digits it's not that big a deal. Also that way no need to change brake pads when switching from/to alloy wheels.

[stien]

Sounds like Quabbin. I was doing inspections at the start and judging at the line.

Yes indeed, we chatted at the line while I waited for the wife to finish. Harlan on bikeforums.

[thirdgenbird]

This might be the way I will go. Campy Bullet 50s perhaps. They're very heavy compared to full carbon and especially to carbon tubulars. But when your total elevation gain on a ride is usually in single digits it's not that big a deal. Also that way no need to change brake pads when switching from/to alloy wheels.

I've got a pair of 50mm red wind xlr wheels (fulcrum version of bullet ultra) in the classifieds.

[phutterman]

Just a data point: I was really, really happy to have an alloy braking surface (HED Jet) during the 3 mile neutral roll out (15 mph) down a climb last weekend. Then really happy to have all the aero that let me move up in the pack while just tucking during long descents.

Have I mentioned I love the faring combo? And I can beat the snot out of it because it's just an Ardennes rim.

Sorry to revive this, but...

I just killed a set of cheap Taiwanese full-carbon rims on a steep descent stuck behind a car (stupid, but I was braking smart, e.g., not dragging) and when I finally had the road to myself, let myself pick up more speed than I'd have liked and had to brake hard into a corner and pushed them over the edge. Got down safely (gingerly) but the rims were ruined. So clearly some user error there, but my friends on Boyd and Reynolds rims in the same boat didn't kill theirs.

So I find myself in the position of needing/wanting new race wheels, and this time around with the coin and desire to buy exactly what I want rather than what's cheap/available.

As I'm looking into it, I'm finding the weights much closer than I'd have expected. Hed Jet 4 Plus FRs look to be 1643g for the set, and I'm seeing 1690g for non-NSW Zipp 404 clinchers (which I'd have expected to be closer to 1500g before I started looking into it).

I know (as above) there are options sub-1500g. But I'd thought the faired arrangement and accompanying advantages in terms of braking and ease of use (that is, being able to be lazy and not swap pads) couldn't possibly be worth the aesthetic and weight tradeoffs, but now I'm not so sure. But of course the recent scary experience with carbon brake surfaces colors my thinking here a lot, too.

[sandyrs]

Sorry to revive this, but...

I just killed a set of cheap Taiwanese full-carbon rims on a steep descent stuck behind a car (stupid, but I was braking smart, e.g., not dragging) and when I finally had the road to myself, let myself pick up more speed than I'd have liked and had to brake hard into a corner and pushed them over the edge. Got down safely (gingerly) but the rims were ruined. So clearly some user error there, but my friends on Boyd and Reynolds rims in the same boat didn't kill theirs.

So I find myself in the position of needing/wanting new race wheels, and this time around with the coin and desire to buy exactly what I want rather than what's cheap/available.

As I'm looking into it, I'm finding the weights much closer than I'd have expected. Hed Jet 4 Plus FRs look to be 1643g for the set, and I'm seeing 1690g for non-NSW Zipp 404 clinchers (which I'd have expected to be closer to 1500g before I started looking into it).

I know (as above) there are options sub-1500g. But I'd thought the faired arrangement and accompanying advantages in terms of braking and ease of use (that is, being able to be lazy and not swap pads) couldn't possibly be worth the aesthetic and weight tradeoffs, but now I'm not so sure. But of course the recent scary experience with carbon brake surfaces colors my thinking here a lot, too.

If you're concerned about aesthetics HED makes Jets with a black Exalith-like braking surface now.

https://hedcycling.com/jet/jet-black-wheels/jet-4-black

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn9Rk-Fb1hE

[stien]

Sorry to revive this, but...

I just killed a set of cheap Taiwanese full-carbon rims...

Get the Jet 6 Plus. They are awesome. I ride the old style 23mm and my wife has the 25 (Plus). I have an aero frame and she doesn't, but her wheels are more aero so it's close.

I would take the weight penalty with the aero benefit of the 6 vs 4 the every day. It's just a flimsy carbon faring.

[mike mcdermid]

I believe it is harder to make a deep aluminum rim than you imply. Currently, aluminum rims are made by starting with straight extrusions, and then curling (bending) them into hoops. The deeper the cross section, the more difficult it is to curl them into hoops without crimping/crinkling the cross section - particularly if the cross section has very thin walls.


This is exactly correct there are ways to circumvent this but in essence its not worth the extras

I used to design carbon rims well the technology and methodology behind them

you haven't seen the best way of doing it yet, but it exists and eliminates all the problems with current manufacturing it gives alloy toughness with carbon weight ,and yes the third element cost, even if it was cheap they wouldnt let that out of the bag

[chiasticon]

As I'm looking into it, I'm finding the weights much closer than I'd have expected. Hed Jet 4 Plus FRs look to be 1643g for the set, and I'm seeing 1690g for non-NSW Zipp 404 clinchers (which I'd have expected to be closer to 1500g before I started looking into it).

I know (as above) there are options sub-1500g. But I'd thought the faired arrangement and accompanying advantages in terms of braking and ease of use (that is, being able to be lazy and not swap pads) couldn't possibly be worth the aesthetic and weight tradeoffs, but now I'm not so sure. But of course the recent scary experience with carbon brake surfaces colors my thinking here a lot, too.yeah Zipp FC's got porkier a year or so back. hub redesigns and I think they're using heavier spokes too. not sure if the rims changed. but even the tubulars got heavier. a set of 303 FC tubs is 1390 grams now. used to be like 1200 about 3-4 years ago.

[phutterman]

I would take the weight penalty with the aero benefit of the 6 vs 4 the every day. It's just a flimsy carbon faring.

Noted, and thanks for the feedback on them. I'm moderately small/light (145lbs) so I felt a little bit of unsettling being blown around on my old 50mm wheels. They were U-ish-shaped, but definitely not Hed-aero so prob worse in crosswinds. But maybe a Jet 4/6 mix would get me a little more stable feel.

Good observation about the black brake surfaces, too, sandyrs. I'm not *too* worried about it but black would look better to me if/while it lasts.

Definitely leaning toward Jets at the moment, and my impression is they should compare favorably in aerodynamics to other faired designs like Cosmics and C50s. And I'm all shimano, so Boras are out.

[Wayne77]

Carbon is a material. So is aluminum. They both come in clincher and tubular format. Some are heavy and some are not. Neither material has a monopoly on heaviness or lightness. or pretty vs not. or aero vs not. Material vs Material threads are pointless. Pointless threads are fun though so here goes:

I have Reynolds 46mm deep carbon tubulars. I race them usually. Sometimes I train on them. Sometimes I commute to work on them. Oh the horror. I love how light they are. I love them when I feel like I'm flying because of my sick carbon tubulars. they feel awesome. I despise them when a non stans-repairable hole occurs in a brand new Veloflex tubular I just bought and I have to wrench them off and put my p.o.s. pre-glued spare on, knowing I've got an evening of sniffing glue ahead of me. I love them but I hate them.

Then somehow the prospect of re-gluing a new tire isn't so bad because I know I can switch over to my Enve 3.4 clinchers at home without changing the freaking brake pads and then continue my ride. Maybe I'll put off gluing a new tire for a few days. About the pads. yes it only takes a minute or two to switch pads. But its still lame. I stick the Enves on and go for a long ride (all the time the little voice in my head saying "oh no, these are heavier, you must be going slower"). Then I get home and somehow I see a bunch of PRs in the uploaded ride.

It sucked when, during a long Gran Fondo style race I tore a clincher tire on my aluminum neutron wheels and the wheel support car rolls up and I grab someone else's checked carbon wheel and then put it back. Every wheel in the car is a carbon wheel but I have my brake pads embedded with metal grit and I just don't have the heart to destroy the brake tracks on someone other guys back up wheel he so graciously checked in for neutral wheel support.

It sucks when I get a little pin hole flat in my tubular during a race and I think "Thank my lucky stars I have Stans in there". Then the little hole continues to jet out the milky crap all over my frame and I stick my thumb over the little hole praying that eventually some little particle will seal the leak. It does and I try to chase back on. But then it doesn't and I hear the hiss again. Crap. Where's the wheel car? Oh yeah...its way up there following the guys who are actually in the race still. Yeah the outcome probably wouldn't have changed if I had been on my Enve clinchers. But I'd be in a much better mood knowing I was going to be out the cost of a patch. Oh well. Yes, there is a middle ground where a hole is just big enough to make a tubular sealing up with Stan's questionable, but totally fine on a clincher tire / patched tube or new tube. Oh well. Equipment fails. We move on.

I love the look of deep wheels with no brake track. I could care less with shallow wheels. In fact I prefer the look of aluminum shallow wheels over ultra shallow cf wheels. Ambrosio Nemesis..Mmmmmm. The only deep wheels that are not CF that I like the looks of are Mavic Carbones. Because they are Carbones. Apparently that aesthetic preference for a deep / solid colored wheel with no brake track is somehow lower on the totem pole compared to other aesthetic choices cyclists in the know make these days.

[phutterman]

Well said.

Oh and one more specific question, in case anybody happens to know off the top of their head: are Jets tubeless compatible? If (as they suggest) they're based on C2 or C2+ (Belgium/Belgium+, right?) rims then they should be, right, or am I crazy/misreading that? Edit again: did the research myself and the pluses definitely are. That's another big selling point for me. There are certainly some other tubeless-compatible race/aero wheels but not tons.

[steveoz]

If I could pop my 2 cents in...the OP was asking if carbon clinchers suck..I was (maybe still am..) a bit of a retrogrouch...aluminum rims like Open Pro or MA2 were all I wanted...but slowly I've evolved...got a set of custom built Hed wide rims..and really liked them...then a "big box" store with a generous return policy had a super sale on their Reynolds built "house brand" carbon clinchers...with a generous return policy and a two year Reynolds warranty (and no rider weight limit) I figured "what have I got to lose" (I'm in S Fla so mountain descending failure isn't an issue with me) and while it's not been a thousand miles yet I really like them - I like them a lot! They're light, they speed up nicely and just "feel" fast..I don't race so there's no other issue for me other than enjoying the ride.

[DFORD]

the best crr tires are all clinchers now. carbon clinchers have become nearly as light as tubulars.

[oldpotatoe]

the best crr tires are all clinchers now. carbon clinchers have become nearly as light as tubulars.

I really don't mean for this to become a clincher vs tubular debate and thread drift but crr is not one of the reasons to ride/race/use tubulars.

[Mark McM]

I really don't mean for this to become a clincher vs tubular debate and thread drift but crr is not one of the reasons to ride/race/use tubulars.

While it is true that triathlon and road racing are not at all the same thing, it is interesting to note that many, if not most, pro triathletes are now using clincher tires. In addition to having lower rolling resistance, many clinchers are also more aerodynamic than tubulars.

[AngryScientist]

many, if not most, pro triathletes are now using clincher tires.

so we put that in the clincher "con" category then. :D:D

[FlashUNC]

When in Rome...

http://www.kgsbikes.com/images/dmImage/xLargeImage/2149919757_e2e47fa374_b1.jpg