Hyperon Ultra Clinchers vs Bora One 35...

[PNW]

I was looking and couldn't find a thread on comparisons. I've read the catalog on Campy's website discussing specs and their out of 10 rating system. It appears that the Hyperon is a 10 in every category but aerodynamics (6) and a (9) in comfort which every other carbon wheel they make is rated. I was just on the catalog for a reference.

I picked up a set of Hyperon Ultra's from a fellow forum member and absolutely am in love with them...paired with a set of gum wall Vittoria Corsa G in a 25.

Obviously other than aerodynamics due to a deeper rim and wider rim, would the 35s be worth the switch over for a summer/dry weather set of wheels? My good buddy who races just grabbed a set of Bora 35s and absolutely loves them but I will not be racing and will have a nice set to use for group rides, climbing (when I choose to do a lot...not there yet), dry weather, summer/fall days.

I'd love some input..I've never ridden a set of 35s but am eyeing a tubular set. Just wondering which of the two is a better All-around set?

Thanks !

[FlashUNC]

I have a set of the 50s and the Hyperons. I hear the 35s are fantastic. The aero you do notice at speed.

But man...the Hyperons are an amazing wheel, aero be damned.

[PNW]

I have a set of the 50s and the Hyperons. I hear the 35s are fantastic. The aero you do notice at speed.

But man...the Hyperons are an amazing wheel, aero be damned.

I agree, absolutely love them and if I had the extra $$...I'd pick up a set of 50s in addition LOL. I mean, I'm not honestly concerned with being "aero" as much but the Hyperons seem to do amazingly well on flats too. They seem to the best all around rated wheel in the catalog.

[Mzilliox]

I was talking to a buddy of mine and told him that while i love the 35s, if i let a set go it will be the bora 35s before the hyperons. There are days here that are windy enough that i have wished i had not chosen to ride the Boras. theres never been a day i wished i had not chosen the hyperons. as far as climbing, there isn;t a better climbing wheel out there in some opinions. i haven't ridden enough to say, but they are my best climbers with my chris king/pacentis prob second best. I just did the hardest climb in our area supposedly today on the boras, im gonna hit it again tomorrow on hyperons, will report back.:hello:

[pdmtong]

On paper the Bora are a more "modern" wheel - improved brake track and wider rim. Yes, at speed the taller section will be more aero and faster.

People love their Hyperons. LOVE THEIR HYPERONS. No one complains about those wheels and they have the classic look which goes great with a wide range of frames.

That said the Bora 35 spin up fast and carry speed in a completely unexpected way. Many folks on this board (including me) have the new Bora 35 and they all report the same results - great wheel.

I rode a pair of Bora 50 recently - very very fast.

one of each...YOLO !

[Lovetoclimb]

you should DEFINITELY buy the Boras and get rid of those terribly non aero slow Hypersons. Just sell them to me for a small fee and be done with them!

[KJMUNC]

Recently picked up a pair of Hyperon Ultras as well and they are amazing wheels, but definitely different than the Boras. The Hyperon's spin up incredibly fast but there's no sense of rotating momentum or carried speed.....while the Bora wheels might spin up a tad slower they feel like they're flying once you're up to speed, especially over rolling terrain and flats.

I ultimately sold my Bora wheels as I was done with tubulars, but I miss their speed (or at least the sense of it).

Both are amazing and have way more potential than I'll ever need, but they're fun to ride!

[ultraman6970]

Dang, the 2 wheels I want to try!!!

One day :D

[Lionel]

one of each...YOLO !

Right answer

[PNW]

Recently picked up a pair of Hyperon Ultras as well and they are amazing wheels, but definitely different than the Boras. The Hyperon's spin up incredibly fast but there's no sense of rotating momentum or carried speed.....while the Bora wheels might spin up a tad slower they feel like they're flying once you're up to speed, especially over rolling terrain and flats.



I ultimately sold my Bora wheels as I was done with tubulars, but I miss their speed (or at least the sense of it).



Both are amazing and have way more potential than I'll ever need, but they're fun to ride!



For me super fast speed isn't a concern really. I'm cycling as a hobby and for fitness but wanted to sets of wheels!

I have Pacenti's to WI T11's for my daily set and the Hyperon's as a good weather/dry set.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PNW]

I am just wondering since I'm not racing and not needing that type of speed, are the Hyperon's are a great all around set? Being super aero isn't the biggest concern for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FlashUNC]

I am just wondering since I'm not racing and not needing that type of speed, are the Hyperon's are a great all around set? Being super aero isn't the biggest concern for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. Your wonders can cease. And get the tubular version.

[PNW]

Yes. Your wonders can cease. And get the tubular version.



I already have a set and they are clinchers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FlashUNC]

Its worth the swap. If they're your nice day wheels anyways, why compromise with carbon clinchers?

[huck*this]

Its worth the swap. If they're your nice day wheels anyways, why compromise with carbon clinchers?

Very wise statement. High end wheels should only be purchased in tubs. Try and you will see why

[Lionel]

it's good to see that campy still make the hyperon. The Bora 35 is more aero and lighter but still.

[PNW]

Very wise statement. High end wheels should only be purchased in tubs. Try and you will see why



Tubulars drop some serious grams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pdmtong]

Very wise statement. High end wheels should only be purchased in tubs. Try and you will see why

my Bora One 35's are (gulp) clinchers but the Bora 50 I tried were tubulars...

as fast as the 35s are...those 50's at 95psi OM F G ... it's like someone bolted a wattage pack to my a $ $

[wooly]

my Bora One 35's are (gulp) clinchers but the Bora 50 I tried were tubulars...



as fast as the 35s are...those 50's at 95psi OM F G ... it's like someone bolted a wattage pack to my a $ $



That's some funny *****

[Mark McM]

I was looking and couldn't find a thread on comparisons. I've read the catalog on Campy's website discussing specs and their out of 10 rating system. It appears that the Hyperon is a 10 in every category but aerodynamics (6) and a (9) in comfort which every other carbon wheel they make is rated. I was just on the catalog for a reference.

The Campagnolo rating system is meaningless. Most of the qualities they propose to rate are too vaguely described to be useful. And any claim that one wheel is more "comfortable" than another is completely bogus.

[Mark McM]

I have a set of the 50s and the Hyperons. I hear the 35s are fantastic. The aero you do notice at speed.

Are you saying that you can notice that you are riding a small fraction of a mile per hour faster with one wheel over another? Because even the most aero of wheels can only increase speed by a only a fraction of a percent. Most tests of Just Noticeable Differences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-noticeable_difference) in bicycle performance have shown that the vast majority of humans can not notice the magnitude of difference in speed that aerowheels can provide.

[FlashUNC]

Are you saying that you can notice that you are riding a small fraction of a mile per hour faster with one wheel over another? Because even the most aero of wheels can only increase speed by a only a fraction of a percent. Most tests of Just Noticeable Differences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-noticeable_difference) in bicycle performance have shown that the vast majority of humans can not notice the magnitude of difference in speed that aerowheels can provide.

https://riversofeden1.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/not_again_616.jpg

[ultraman6970]

It depends a lot of the rider and the bike Mac... with some wheels you notice that something is going on but as it happens with cars and a oil change, some people feels them, other ones cant even feel when riding with a flat tire, and I know a couple that did not know where driving with a flat tire.

[nmrt]

That was an interesting read, Mark. Thanks for posting it.
Now I really wonder my JDN is for my wheels. But I guess it does not really matter to many recreational cyclists like me. If I feel that I am going faster, I must be going faster. :D

Are you saying that you can notice that you are riding a small fraction of a mile per hour faster with one wheel over another? Because even the most aero of wheels can only increase speed by a only a fraction of a percent. Most tests of Just Noticeable Differences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-noticeable_difference) in bicycle performance have shown that the vast majority of humans can not notice the magnitude of difference in speed that aerowheels can provide.

[Mark McM]

It depends a lot of the rider and the bike Mac... with some wheels you notice that something is going on but as it happens with cars and a oil change, some people feels them, other ones cant even feel when riding with a flat tire, and I know a couple that did not know where driving with a flat tire.

Some comments (http://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Thoughts_on_science_perception_4571.html) from Josh Poertner, an engineer formerly with Zipp wheels:

We ran blind wheel tests a couple of times a year at Zipp to benchmark competitive wheels and our own prototypes, and we also found that blinded riders were generally unable to tell the difference between stiffness and inertia, had no reliable feedback on weight, lateral stiffness, or comfort in general, and in the end were generally only able to pick out the aero wheels because they were riding laps around a closed park environment using power, so the more observant ones would notice speed differences. In the end, we sort of determined that when riders didn't know what they 'should' feel, they really struggled to find differences in stiffness, compliance and weight between frames or wheels.


Referencing the final sentence above, Campagnolo provides their rating system - otherwise riders wouldn't know what they 'should' feel.

[Clean39T]

That was an interesting read, Mark. Thanks for posting it.
Now I really wonder my JDN is for my wheels. But I guess it does not really matter to many recreational cyclists like me. If I feel that I am going faster, I must be going faster. :D

The feels is 9/10 of the law.

[PNW]

I guess I am just asking which would be a better all-around set...didn't mean for this to turn into something else. Is the 35 a bad climbing wheelset? I don't do much climbing but when I do, will they be good?

[bfd]

I guess I am just asking which would be a better all-around set...didn't mean for this to turn into something else. Is the 35 a bad climbing wheelset? I don't do much climbing but when I do, will they be good?

OK, I'm looking for another wheelset and am now intrigued by the Hyperon. So, who sells them? I don't see them on at any of the normal mail order places or maybe I missed it?

Also, what is the going price for a wheelset?

Thanks!

[FlashUNC]

Are you saying that you can notice that you are riding a small fraction of a mile per hour faster with one wheel over another? Because even the most aero of wheels can only increase speed by a only a fraction of a percent. Most tests of Just Noticeable Differences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-noticeable_difference) in bicycle performance have shown that the vast majority of humans can not notice the magnitude of difference in speed that aerowheels can provide.

I never said faster. But I appreciate the projection nonetheless.

So what differences do I notice? They maintain speed a little better up short rises, probably due to weighing a bit more than the Hyperons and having some of the flywheel effect. And consequently they tend to spin up a bit quicker downhill, I'm assuming for that same reason.

But they ride harsher and are the devil in unexpected wind gusts, so they're not perfect.

If its a flat, fast-ish group ride with little crosswind, I see the appeal.

But sure, no one can tell any difference about anything. Let's just ride wood wheels and spoon brakes again.

[lhuerta]

I guess I am just asking which would be a better all-around set...didn't mean for this to turn into something else. Is the 35 a bad climbing wheelset? I don't do much climbing but when I do, will they be good?

You are over-thinking it....if you already own a pair of Hyperons then skip the Bora 35s and get the Bora 50s. The 35s are great but the 50s will yield a more notable difference. The 35s will be slightly stiffer and wind up quicker (mostly due to G3 spoke pattern) compared to the Hyperons, and they weigh only about 30 gm less, but the difference between these two wheels is negligible (i.e. duplicating existing wheelset). While the 50s are notably stiffer and provide a significant aero advantage, and actually still weigh less then the Hyperons.

For comparison, Hyperons weigh in at about 1215-1220 gm , Bora One 35 (1185 gm) and Bora One 50 (1210 gm)....all real weights for tubulars (not what mfr lists).

I realize u r considering clinchers which will will provide a wider bead with the Boras, but even considering that, the 35s are still to close to Hyperons.

Ultimately, the cool factor for what rings your bell is all that really matters.

[PNW]

You are over-thinking it....if you already own a pair of Hyperons then skip the Bora 35s and get the Bora 50s. The 35s are great but the 50s will yield a more notable difference. The 35s will be slightly stiffer and wind up quicker (mostly due to G3 spoke pattern) compared to the Hyperons, and they weigh only about 30 gm less, but the difference between these two wheels is negligible (i.e. duplicating existing wheelset). While the 50s are notably stiffer and provide a significant aero advantage, and actually still weigh less then the Hyperons.

For comparison, Hyperons weigh in at about 1215-1220 gm , Bora One 35 (1185 gm) and Bora One 50 (1210 gm)....all real weights for tubulars (not what mfr lists).

I realize u r considering clinchers which will will provide a wider bead with the Boras, but even considering that, the 35s are still to close to Hyperons.

Ultimately, the cool factor for what rings your bell is all that really matters.

I am just wanting a training/winter set which I have...and a do it all carbon set for the summer/dry weather. I don't want an additional third set (50s). Just seeing if the 35 is worth moving to from the Hyperon.

[OtayBW]

Ultimately, the cool factor for what rings your bell is all that really matters.That seemed to be my read on it.

[Mark McM]

I never said faster. But I appreciate the projection nonetheless.

If not faster, than what is this aero difference you feel?

So what differences do I notice? They maintain speed a little better up short rises, probably due to weighing a bit more than the Hyperons and having some of the flywheel effect. And consequently they tend to spin up a bit quicker downhill, I'm assuming for that same reason.

The Bora One 50s weigh about 140 grams more than the Hyperion Ultras. Let's say that the weight is completely on the rim, so it has the effective inertia of twice its mass (280 grams). Say also that the entire bike+rider has a mass of 80,000 grams. The difference in inertia between these wheel sets is 0.35%. Do you believe that you can notice a difference in inertia of 0.35%?

Here's another question for you - 280 grams is about the same weight as a half-full water bottle. Do you notice that your bike holds speed better when you have a full water bottle vs. a half-full water bottle?

But they ride harsher and are the devil in unexpected wind gusts, so they're not perfect.

I don't know in what way you feel that the wheels are "harsher", but as difference in vertical compliance between wheels is inconsequential, it can't be that.

Here's another quote from the Josh Poertner article above:

Similar result with wheels, turns out that the 32 spoke box section Amrosio rims the teams swore by had about 50% higher vertical stiffness than the 303…yet the riders swore up and down that the 303 was 'too stiff' until we blinded them, at which point the opinions became nearly random with a slight bias toward the carbon wheel as more comfortable, yet with the riders preferring the carbon wheel only willing to proclaim it because they are all certain that it was the aluminum one.


But sure, no one can tell any difference about anything. Let's just ride wood wheels and spoon brakes again.

You may believe that you can detect these differences, but you don't really know. And you won't know for sure until you've done a blind test. As noted above, when others have done blind tests, they discovered that they couldn't actually detect things they thought they could.


Now, I'm not saying one set of wheels aren't faster, or spin up quicker, than another set. Just that the differences are so small that human senses can't reliable sense them.

[FlashUNC]

https://media.giphy.com/media/Fml0fgAxVx1eM/giphy.gif

[Lionel]

Whoever has hyperon and Bora 50 and cannot notice the difference cannot feel much on a bike. They feel fairly different. The delta between hyperon and 35 is not as easy to detect, they feel much more similar.

[ultraman6970]

This means that I wont feel the difference between a 15 bucks bib vs a rapha or asos one? what a bummer... thanks for saving me mi mony! :D

[Mark McM]

Whoever has hyperon and Bora 50 and cannot notice the difference cannot feel much on a bike. They feel fairly different. The delta between hyperon and 35 is not as easy to detect, they feel much more similar.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much. I fully believe that you believe that you can discern these differences. But so many times in the past it has been shown that human perception is influenced by many factors, and humans can fool their own senses into believing they can detect things when they really can't. That's why the scientific standard for testing human perception is the blind test.


Many expert wine testers believe they can detect the differences between excellent and poor wines (and even the difference between a red and a white wine), but blind testing have shown that they usually can't:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/frontal-cortex/does-all-wine-taste-the-same


Many believe that Stradivarius violins have their own unique sound quality that can not be duplicated. But when distinguished violin soloists were asked to pick out Stradivarius violins from other modern violins in a blind test, they couldn't.

http://www.thestrad.com/blind-tested-soloists-unable-to-tell-stradivarius-violins-from-modern-instruments/


Likewise, Zipp did blind testing of wheels with European professional racers and other bicycle industry riders (see link above), and they couldn't tell them apart either.

[Lionel]

Whatever, I do not need to read studies and the math of all of this to feel what I feel. I regularly switch between hyperon, 35 and 50. It's quiet easy to tell in a blind test between hyperon and Bora. But I don't ride blind folded, it's dangerous.

[Kirk007]

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

Me thinks there's more to life than engineering data and analytics. My perception is my reality and I'm quite comfortable with that, blind tests be damned; I don't need engineers trying to explain every nuance of my experience. As has been said about ecosystems - too complex for humans to ever understand or even know what they don't know, so I believe it is with much of the human experience. The analytical quest to reduce it to mathematic precision is to me simply anal.

[nmrt]

I think that is exactly what Mark is saying -- thinking something does not make it a fact. There may be more to life but we do not know for sure until we know for sure. ;)

Or, as I say: the heart likes what the heart likes. I dont give a damn if it is actually faster. :beer:

Me thinks there's more to life than engineering data and analytics. My perception is my reality and I'm quite comfortable with that, blind tests be damned; I don't need engineers trying to explain every nuance of my experience. As has been said about ecosystems - too complex for humans to ever understand or even know what they don't know, so I believe it is with much of the human experience. The analytical quest to reduce it to mathematic precision is to me simply anal.

[Kirk007]

-- thinking something does not make it a fact.


YEs and I guess I should be happy we now live in a time and country when facts don't matter - I can happily believe my own little reality :banana:

[Ralph]

Looking at what the tour riders are using.....doesn't look like any special wheels.

[mcteague]

Wow, for a minute there, I thought I was reading an audio forum!

TIM

[FlashUNC]

Next we'll hear that in a blind test riders can't tell the difference from a penny farthing and that new fangled safety bicycle.

[nmrt]

Nah --- it'll be the day when a test tells us that we cant tell the difference between a moots rsl and a huffy from walmart both similarly equipped.
just kidding...
...or am i? ;)

Next we'll hear that in a blind test riders can't tell the difference from a penny farthing and that new fangled safety bicycle.

[Clean39T]

As has been said about ecosystems - too complex for humans to ever understand or even know what they don't know, so I believe it is with much of the human experience. The analytical quest to reduce it to mathematic precision is to me simply anal.


Especially when the precision is only there to defend the making of a profit..

[Kirk007]

And what the data doesn't tell you nor does any blind test is what effect if any the appearance or subjective belief about a bike, a wheel, a car etc. has on human behavior and hence conduct and experience. Teams talk about the effect of the yellow jersey on team performance in the tour. When I'm driving our mini cooper I typically drive differently than when driving the Honda Element, even though both are perfectly capable of delivering me to my destination at the same speed and hence elapsed time. If I take out the Pegoretti with shamal tubulars I typically ride differently, and have a different experience than if I'm on my winter fender bike with 32 spoke wheels and 32mm tires (but similar weight and geometry). Now put a robot on those two bikes and have it ride the same course at a set power output and probably speed etc would be very similar, perhaps a nondetectable difference for a human. But when all the senses are allowed to be used, and the mental impact of our choices allowed consideration, well .....

Eliminating sensory input in order to "prove" that our perceptions are inaccurate - what's the point? It's like turning off half your brain. How many chose to go on a first date without showering and wearing dirty ratty clothes? How many have a favorite suit or tie or shirt or .... that just makes them feel better when wearing it?

So much of life is art and sensory perception - why dismiss that by attempting to show through math and analytics that someone's perceptions are wrong? If someone feels faster on Bora 50s than hyperons it might just be that they are despite little quantitative difference in the wheels themselves. Or maybe they just feel faster and enjoy the experience more. Is either reality less legit to the user? The need to consistently try to burst that bubble -- what's that about?

[Mzilliox]

yaya, but which wheels to chose? Bora 35 or hyperon? haha. :crap::crap:

pick one and go ride, you are already way ahead of the game with either. no sense in dissecting them to pieces when they are both great wheels.:beer:

[Mark McM]

So, are you okay with someone trying to convince others that something is true, when it is objectively not true? Particularly if that someone has ulterior motives for creating the untrue perception? (Those ulterior motives don't have to be simple monetary rewards, although they often are).

That "bubble bursting" you refer to actually goes both ways. For example, when Lionel said, "Whoever has hyperon and Bora 50 and cannot notice the difference cannot feel much on a bike," is also an attempt at bubble bursting.

[FlashUNC]

So, are you okay with someone trying to convince others that something is true, when it is objectively not true? Particularly if that someone has ulterior motives for creating the untrue perception? (Those ulterior motives don't have to be simple monetary rewards, although they often are).

That "bubble bursting" you refer to actually goes both ways. For example, when Lionel said, "Whoever has hyperon and Bora 50 and cannot notice the difference cannot feel much on a bike," is also an attempt at bubble bursting.

Yup, those nefarious internet bike nerds providing perspectives and feedback that was solicited by someone.

A veritable hive of scum and villainy.

[godukes]

FWIW: I have ridden a ton of good wheels, ENVE 3.4, Bora, Zipp and can say without hesitation the Bora 35 is the best all-around wheel. It's light, it's stiff, the hubs roll great and it's just a fanatic wheel.

I have no doubt the Hyperon is awesome, too.

You really want the best of the best: go tubular.

[fuzzalow]

I only ride wheels that I have designed and built myself. I do not dispute the aero superiority of deep profile wheels have built up a pair of Zips years ago.

And yet every one of these wheels discussions reads like arguments over whatever your favorite rock band is, or perhaps on a more higher plane, like the debates had between Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak over The Beatles versus Bob Dylan as immortalized in Silicon Valley folklore.

In the world of cycling hobbyists and afficionados all wheels are good and the only bad wheel is one that leaves you stranded or costs you bridgework. IMO.

[Kirk007]

So, are you okay with someone trying to convince others that something is true, when it is objectively not true?

The problem I have with your perspective is that your "objective truth" is largely irrelevant to most people here (and it assumes that these studies are in fact true. As a lawyer I have prepared and cross examined hundreds of technical experts and in my experience the hardest words for many of them to utter are "I don't know" and "I can't explain it." My view - the fact that it cannot be reduced to a unit of measure or a mathematical theory does not mean a phenomena or sensation does not exist. Others, including many of those experts I mention, seem to live their lives by their "objective truth" that if they cannot measure it then it is false). Sad.

Moreover the OP asked for opinions/experiences and I think its safe to assume that he knows that not everyone does double blind tests to inform their subjective experience.

Recognizing the irony of stating this: it's not about the wheel (and its objective laboratory measurements); its about the experiences of using the wheel. You trade a laboratory result and amateur double blind experiments for all the subjective experiences of very experienced riders. I do the opposite. Vive la difference.

[OtayBW]

As a lawyer I have prepared and cross examined hundreds of technical experts and in my experience the hardest words for many of them to utter are "I don't know" and "I can't explain it." My view - the fact that it cannot be reduced to a unit of measure or a mathematical theory does not mean a phenomena or sensation does not exist.This sounds like the 'engineer vs scientist' paradigm (as I view it...). I'm glad to have a firm footing in one, but not the other....:rolleyes:

[bshell]

Interesting reading.

Perception and feelings have their place --like when you feel awesome wearing your new action slacks, but we need reproducible evidence when it comes to the important/critical issues in life.

Lots of resistance to that these days.

[Kirk007]

but we need reproducible evidence when it comes to the important/critical issues in life.

Lots of resistance to that these days.

Agreed, to a degree, my qualifications being (1) we need to recognize that in many cases we don't know what we don't know therefore we are often making decisions on incomplete information, and the threshold for what is sufficiently settled will continue to be used to advocate for positions reflecting other interests, and similarly (2) many of the most important/critical issues in life will involve human subjectivity and moral/ethical positions that are not reducible to hard evidence - abortion, given our current state of known science, strikes me as one of these.

Other current controversial (in some circles) issues like climate change, the effect of habitat loss on species, the importance of maintaining a full biotic community - on these types I am solidly in the camp of accepting the prevailing scientific view, although that undoubtably reflects my bias.

Thank goodness what high end bike wheel/component/frame to use comes no where close to an important/critical issue.

Anyway enough opining on the internet; the 10,000 STP riders have now left the Seattle area this morning by 7:30 and are far enough down the road that most other roads/pathways will be relatively bike free - time to ride my lightweight, go fast wheels

[Lovetoclimb]

Anyway enough opining on the internet; the 10,000 STP riders have now left the Seattle area this morning by 7:30 and are far enough down the road that most other roads/pathways will be relatively bike free - time to ride my lightweight, go fast wheels

But which wheels!? Hyperons or Boras!? Will you ride blindfolded!? So many unanswered questions!

[jr59]

Interesting read indeed. At what point do we as humans stop noticing the differences that can be detected in a lab?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mark McM]

The problem I have with your perspective is that your "objective truth" is largely irrelevant to most people here (and it assumes that these studies are in fact true. As a lawyer I have prepared and cross examined hundreds of technical experts and in my experience the hardest words for many of them to utter are "I don't know" and "I can't explain it." My view - the fact that it cannot be reduced to a unit of measure or a mathematical theory does not mean a phenomena or sensation does not exist. Others, including many of those experts I mention, seem to live their lives by their "objective truth" that if they cannot measure it then it is false). Sad.

Moreover the OP asked for opinions/experiences and I think its safe to assume that he knows that not everyone does double blind tests to inform their subjective experience.

Recognizing the irony of stating this: it's not about the wheel (and its objective laboratory measurements); its about the experiences of using the wheel. You trade a laboratory result and amateur double blind experiments for all the subjective experiences of very experienced riders. I do the opposite. Vive la difference.

You've thrown up a number of strawmen, so let's put those aside first: I never said that if you can't measure it in a lab, it isn't real -there are plenty of things we know to be real that can't be measure with instruments. Nor did I say that human's can't sense things that instruments can't detect. And I did not say that there are no differences between wheels.

What I have said is that human senses can often be deceived, and that often peoples belief in their power to detect things is beyond their actual abilities. The recognized standard for discovering people's actual abilities to sense things is the blind test. The blind test does it best to eliminate all other variables that might bias a person's perception, and leaves just the stimula of interest in the test. The only true test of a person's ability to detect differences between products is a blind test.

That human senses can be subconciously biased/decieved is well accepted, and there are even fields of study devoted to this. Take the taste of wine, for example: Everyone knows that white wine and red wine tastes different right? Well, maybe only if the tasters can see the color of the wine. In the previously linked article, subjects were asked to taste two wine samples, a red and a white, and then describe the taste. What they didn't know was that they two samples actually came from the same bottle of wine, but one had red food coloring added to make it look red. All of the subjects described the wines in the typical ways that distinguish red wines from white, and none of them detected that they were in fact the same wine.

So too, bike riders can be biased/deceived by advertising language and common beliefs about how different kind of wheels feel. Common words used to describe deep rim wheels are "aero", "fast", "harsh" or "hold speed well", where as shallow rim wheels are often described as "responsive" or "light", "comfortable" or "spin up fast". But when riders have ridden wheels in blind tests, they found that they couldn't reliale detect any differences between them.

I've been a professional wheel builder, and built many wheels with a variety of different rims, hubs, numbers and types of spokes, etc. Everything from 16 spoke deep carbon rims, to 36 spoke very shallow lightweight aluminum tubular rims. I've also owned and ridden a wide variety of different types of wheels. When I first started riding, the wheels I used were the 32 spoke shallow aluminum rim wheels that were standard back then. When I first rode a set of deep section aero wheels, they seemed harsh and uncomfortable. But were they really? Or did they feel that way because that is what everyone said they should feel like? Or maybe it was because such wheels were intended for time trialling, and back then everyone inflated their tires to 120 psi for time trials? Later, I got another set of deep section wheels, that had deeper heavier rims than the first. One might think that these wheels should be harsher still, and yet my first sensation is that they gave a smoother ride than even wheels with shallow rims. What was going on? probing my observations a little deeper, I also discovered that my senses were telling me these wheels were quieter than others (maybe due to to having fewer and narrower spokes?). Maybe the quiet was fooling my hands and butt to feel that the wheels were smoother?

In any case, after riding many, many wheels, in a variety of different situations, and knowing that humans senses can easily be deceived, (and also investigating and studying the actual mechanical properties of wheels) I've lost the ability to 'detect' most of the supposed differences between many wheels - most likely largely because I'm not expecting much difference. Sure, I can still feel different tires, and I can detect if a wheel is unusually heavy or flexy, and can detect if a wheel is out of round, and quite often wheels sound different, but most well designed and built wheels are similar enough that it is very, very difficult, if not impossible, to detect the differences between them at the saddle. As far as things like "spin up faster", or "hold speed better"? Sometimes I find that my shallow lightweight wheels hold speed better, and my heavier, deeper aero wheels spin up faster - the bigger factors are things like how much rest I've been getting, or what day in my riding schedule it is. The differences due to the wheels is down in the noise.

Given the relatively small difference in overall properties of a bike that can be attributed to the wheels, differences between wheels will most often be below people's threshold of Just Noticeable Differences. Therefore, I am very skeptical when people ascribe significant changes in bike performance when swapping wheels. In fact, I probably won't believe them if they haven't done some type of blind test.

As far as the value of subjective experience. Yes, absolutely, our subjective experiences are what matter most to us, and this can not be underestimated. But on the other hand - you can only go so far (and not usually far at all) in applying someone else's subjective experience to your own. Maybe someone was in a happy place in their life when they used a set of wheels, which made their experience better ... maybe they were in an unhappy place, and everything seemed bad to them. Even when attempting to apply a subjective review, you need a common point of reference.

[FlashUNC]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

[Mark McM]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Sorry to keep beating a dead horse, but ...

It's actually appropriate that Gaslighting is brought up in this thread (but maybe not the way it was iintended). A common tactic for product marketers is to promote an atmosphere of doubt and confusion, so that they may introduce their own version of reality in attempt to influence people to buy their products. A good example is Campagnolo's wheel "comfort" rating. No information is given about how this rating is assigned, nor what differences in ratings are supposed to mean. It appears the main reason to create this rating is to cast the impression that wheels are a meaningful source of bike comfort, and differences in rating values are significant. How are we to know if this is true?

Other bike companies are also interested in comfort, of course. For example, Cervelo has a write-up on Ride Quality (https://www.cervelo.com/en-us/Engineering-Field-Notes/Engineering-Fundamentals/Ride-Quality) on their web page (noteable for this discussion is that Cervelo does not sell wheels, so may have little motivation to exxagerate their affect on comfort). While Cervelo admits that "comfort" is difficult to define, they do say this:

Dynamic comfort refers to the experience of the bicycle in motion. This system is enormously complex, but there is one measureable element that does correlate well with perceived comfort: Vertical compliance, which is the deflection (movement) in a vertical plane that can be measured as a response to an input. Simply put, vertical compliance represents the bike’s ability to react to a bump in the road.

To that end, they have measured the influence of various bicycle components on vertical compliance, and provided the data in these graphs:

https://ponbic-p.azureedge.net/en-us/cdn/media/images/engineering/fundamentals-images/ride-quality-1.png?w=1280&q=70&hash=091578E60B62CEA0F039803C8399648E8FD56AF0

Cervelo's data correlates well with other published compliance measurements.

According this data, wheels provide very little influence on vertical compliance, and in fact their compliance is just a fraction of that provided by the handlebar tape and the seatpost. Since the wheels provide just a few percent of the vertical compliance, the difference between wheels may be just a fraction of a percent. This is hardly significant (heck it may even be less than the difference caused by tire pressure changes during a ride). The loss of compliance from even the stiffest wheels can be mitigated by a tire pressure change of a psi or two. I know that I can't tell the difference between 90 psi and 91 psi - can you?

So what of Campagnolo's "comfort" rating? They may indeed correctly indicate which of their wheels are more or less compliant than their other wheels. But since wheel compliance is very small and relatively insigificant to begin with, compliance differences due to wheels with different "comfort" ratings may add up to a whole lot of nothing. Wheels are not where one should start when looking for changes in ride comfort.

[OtayBW]

Sorry to keep beating a dead horse, but ...

It's actually appropriate that Gaslighting is brought up in this thread (but maybe not the way it was iintended). A common tactic for product marketers is to promote an atmosphere of doubt and confusion, so that they may introduce their own version of reality in attempt to influence people to buy their products. A good example is Campagnolo's wheel "comfort" rating. No information is given about how this rating is assigned, nor what differences in ratings are supposed to mean. It appears the main reason to create this rating is to cast the impression that wheels are a meaningful source of bike comfort, and differences in rating values are significant. How are we to know if this is true?This is an example of marketing by features and benefits as the company chooses to define it for their wheels. This is not at all an example of gaslighting, IMO...

[Kirk007]

New complication: New Boras per Campy: The incorporation of AC3 represents a significant performance advantage that raises the level of a wheel that already stood out amongst its competition. Under dry conditions the new technology increases braking performance 3% over the previous Bora while increasing the gap with its closest competitor by over 6%. However, when the conditions are insidious and rain has the competition worried, AC3 allows the Bora to excel. While the previous edition of the Bora offered results far beyond those found on competitors’ wheels, the AC3 technology increases braking performance an astounding 43% over past Campagnolo models. The powerful braking of AC3 represents a nearly 55% performance gap over that of its closest competitor making for a rather significant advantage when the heat of the race is on. This new technology will be found throughout the Bora family of wheels and offer the next level of Campagnolo Bora performance on both clincher and tubular versions of the iconic wheelset. AC3 technology will be found on Bora 35, 50 and Bora Ultra TT and will start giving a winning advantage to both professional and amateur riders alike later this Spring.

There 'ya go, that settles it I'm sure.

[PNW]

New complication: New Boras per Campy: The incorporation of AC3 represents a significant performance advantage that raises the level of a wheel that already stood out amongst its competition. Under dry conditions the new technology increases braking performance 3% over the previous Bora while increasing the gap with its closest competitor by over 6%. However, when the conditions are insidious and rain has the competition worried, AC3 allows the Bora to excel. While the previous edition of the Bora offered results far beyond those found on competitors’ wheels, the AC3 technology increases braking performance an astounding 43% over past Campagnolo models. The powerful braking of AC3 represents a nearly 55% performance gap over that of its closest competitor making for a rather significant advantage when the heat of the race is on. This new technology will be found throughout the Bora family of wheels and offer the next level of Campagnolo Bora performance on both clincher and tubular versions of the iconic wheelset. AC3 technology will be found on Bora 35, 50 and Bora Ultra TT and will start giving a winning advantage to both professional and amateur riders alike later this Spring.

There 'ya go, that settles it I'm sure.

When is this going to be incorporated?

[Kirk007]

When is this going to be incorporated?

They are now listed on some of websites, like ProBikeSupply but not yet in stock. They announced the same time they announced the disc brake gruppos and disc brake wheels. The new Bora One 35 discs are showing up as available on line so I would think they will be available soon (I recall hearing that the Shamal alloy disc wheels would be available in September).

For those of us in the PNW, the improved braking surface in wet conditions may be worth holding out for, even if these are intended for summer wheels.

[Mark McM]

A thought comes to mind regarding the AC3 Bora wheels:

At the same time that bike industry is doing its best to convince us that disc brakes are the way of the future, it's interesting that many companies are introducing new and better rim sidewalls to improve (rim) braking. Also at the same time, some companies are introducing different concurrent versions of their high-end bikes - both a disc brake version and a rim brake version (examples: Giant's 2018 TCR Advanced SL (rim) and 2018 TCR Advanced SL Disc; Trek 2018 Emonda SLR 8 (rim) and 2018 Emonda SLR 8 Disc; Cervelo S3 (rim) and S3 Disc). Is the industry looking to a future where both types of brakes will coexist, or are they just hedging their bets because they don't know which way the market will end up going?

[Kirk007]

A thought comes to mind regarding the AC3 Bora wheels:

Is the industry looking to a future where both types of brakes will coexist, or are they just hedging their bets because they don't know which way the market will end up going?

My guess - many and certainly one like Campy see rim brakes being here for a long time to come particularly for the high end niche that it caters to with wheels like the Bora - lots of resistance to change, lots of users willing to have multiple bikes specializing - disc for wet weather, maybe wider tires; rim for the go fast sunny day bike so yeah I think they'll play both markets. I haven't bothered to check but I wonder if the Bora disc gets the new AC3 treatment.