light wheels vs. light frame

[siena01]

Could someone shed some light for me ...

What is the difference in bike feel between a slightly heavier frame (say lugged steel) with a really light set of wheels (like Topolinos) versus a really light frame (aluminum with carbon or a Peg Marcelo steel) with a set of of standard wheels (28 or 32h)? Is it safe to assume that going light everywhere is the ideal? I'm talking about a racing/training/all-around bike here and my theory is that when one is talking about FEEL things like inertia and momentum (and not just weight) enter into the equation ...

[CNote]

The basic difference is that with static weight (e.g., the frame, fork, etc.), the rider just has to work to move it forward. On the other hand, with rotational weight (e.g., wheels, cranks, pedals, shoes), the rider has to push the weight in circles as well as forward. Therefore, a rider theoretically expends less energy and needs to produce fewer watts to push a wheelset that has dropped 100 grams, as opposed to a frame that has dropped 100 grams.

Upon second glance, does this have anything to do with what you're asking?

[yeehawfactor]

i do believe, and someone will correct me if i'm wrong-that it depends. of course fit is first. but in a time trial i believe that having a frame that would fall under the uci limit if built up with lightweight wheels is advantageous as it allows you to run heavier yet more aerodynamic wheels. since most tts are relatively flat you can carry a bit more momentum that way..

[William]

Reducing rotational weight is where you get the biggest bang for your buck. A lighter wheel set means that every time you accelerate, or bring it back up to speed say on rolling terrain, you expend less energy. You constantly do this through a ride or race. The only other place where you can get more benefit is to loose excess body weight.

William

[siena01]

CNote,

Yeah, we are definitely talking about the same thing. If I am reading your reply correctly it sounds like it is more beneficial to cut weight in components that rotate than ones that don't.

Basically, the question was asked because I am a small and light climber kinda guy trying to determine what the optimum bike setup (again, an all-around racing and training bike) is for myself. Being 135 pounds means bike weight is a key issue yet durability and longevity are important, too. In a nutshell I am trying to determine if a lugged steel frame with Topolinos would provide a superior ride to that of a really light frame with standard wheels. I remember another poster on this forum describe his Merckx Corsa with ultra light wheels as the finest riding bicycle he had ever had.

Eric

[Marco]

what we mean when we talk about "light" or "ultra-light" wheels? Are you thinking the Speed dream, Alchemy, Joe Young, Oddsnends, 1,400-1,550 gram route or something beyond?

Too Tall: you are the wheel man. What say you?

[zap]

Na, light wheels are under 1200 grams. I have a set that weighs 1140 and use it wherever, whenever with a bike that weighs less than 14.7 lbs. Great fun.

Siena-Why topolinos? Their not all that light and have the aerodynamics of a bus.

For the same money you can get Nimbles.

:beer:

[Marco]

what is 1,200 grams that is worth riding and safe for everyday use?

[Jack Brunk]

Reynolds Cirro tubular wheelset.


Jack

[zap]

That and in my case, ac hubs with Zipp 303 tub rims. Have about 2500 miles so far on this set.

You could use Tune or DT hubs as well. And you could use Zipp 303 Pave rims which would bring you up to 1200 g and go cyclocross racing. Saw someone use a set last November with Dugast Cyclo tubbies glued to them.

[siena01]

By light I meant Topolinos or DT RR 1.1. These aren't ULTRA light, I know, but I was trying to balance lightweight and durability. If there is a better/tougher/faster wheel for doable money let me know ...

And, sorry Jack, but I'm going to stay with clinchers.

[Todd Owen]

I use Campy neutron wheels on my steel Serotta CSi frame and can notice a huge difference in climbing and feel vs a set of cxp33 rims with campy hubs. My legend Ti with the same neutron wheels however should be illegal as the Ti frame and wheels is incredible.

[Jack Brunk]

siena01,

No problems. My thinking was the same as yours just a year ago. Now I will only use tubs.

Jack

[saab2000]

Mr. Todd Owen,

Thanks for whetting my appetite! My new Merckx Ti (admittedly not a Legend) will be using some Nucleons. It is all built up and waiting to be ridden when winter starts to subside. Sounds like it will be great. I am really looking forward to using these Campagnolo wheels, which should be more or less the same as the Neutrons.

Saab2000

[wanderingwheel]

I think that light wheels make a much bigger difference than a light frame. I have ridden a couple pairs of Zipps and thay are a lot of fun and very fast. However, I'm a little weak guy and deep section wheels, even medium depth 303's, are a handful in a cross wind. I also never liked the fact that light wheels deccelerate just as fast as they accelerate, or at least the ones that I've ridden. I'm a very "punchy" climber and I actually like wheels with a little bit more heft (1400 grams is great) that carry thier speed better. It is possible that I climb faster on the lighter wheels, but I like the ride of the heavier wheels.

I've ridden Topolinos and I've found them to be decidedly average compared to traditional wheels.

Sean

[siena01]

Sean,

It sounds like you and I have a lot in common. I'm a fairly small dude myself but like you consider myself rather "punchy" especially when climbing. Given what you said about 1400g being about right for you I think I will lean toward a more traditional wheelset ... DT RR 1.1 with Hugi 240s or perhaps Ambrosio Excellights with Chris King hubs. Probably can't go wrong with either of those.

Eric

[dgauthier]

Sean,

(. . .) I think I will lean toward a more traditional wheelset ... DT RR 1.1 with Hugi 240s or perhaps Ambrosio Excellights with Chris King hubs. Probably can't go wrong with either of those.

Eric

While you're weighing pros and cons, check out this page:

http://www.bsn.com/Cycling/tubulars.html

The author makes several good points:
1. The weight of the rim is more important than the weight of the hub.
2. Light rims with more spokes are better/stronger/faster than heavy rims with fewer spokes.
3. Tubular rims are lighter than clincher rims of equal strength.

At your weight, your options for lightweight rims open up considerably. Consider sticking with clinchers for training, and going with tubulars for racing. (Traditional builds are so cost effective, you could get 2 wheelsets for less than the cost of 1 set of boutique wheels.) For a guy like you, the Ambrosio Chrono F20 tubulars (340 grams!) may be bombproof, especially traditionally laced 3x with 32 or even 36 spokes. Check with your local wheelbuilders and see what they say.

[Ken Lehner]

The difference in the amount of energy to accelerate a bike with heavy wheels and a bike with light wheels is nearly immeasurable. For instance, compare accelerating out of a corner in a criterium. Given a pair of wheels that are 500g heavier, starting at 10m/sec and with 350-550 watts, here is the result:

"At the end of 100m Standard Rider is ahead by 0.01s and 0.08 m."

(from analyticcycling.com)

Woo-hoo, .08%. Get a heavier wheel that is more aerodynamic, and you'll come out ahead every time. Unless the wheel is accelerating (meaning you are changing speeds), there is no extra energy used in keeping a heavier wheel rotating. And it has to be a serious acceleration to be measurable.

Unless you are climbing long 7%+ grades, weight is way overrated.

[Ray]

The difference in the amount of energy to accelerate a bike with heavy wheels and a bike with light wheels is nearly immeasurable. For instance, compare accelerating out of a corner in a criterium. Given a pair of wheels that are 500g heavier, starting at 10m/sec and with 350-550 watts, here is the result:

"At the end of 100m Standard Rider is ahead by 0.01s and 0.08 m."

(from analyticcycling.com)

Woo-hoo, .08%. Get a heavier wheel that is more aerodynamic, and you'll come out ahead every time. Unless the wheel is accelerating (meaning you are changing speeds), there is no extra energy used in keeping a heavier wheel rotating. And it has to be a serious acceleration to be measurable.

Unless you are climbing long 7%+ grades, weight is way overrated.
I've seen this refutation at least a zillion and a half times and I believe it. But it sure doesn't FEEL that way. I don't know what it is or whether it would make even 1/10th of a seconds difference in a race, but light wheels sure feel like they accellerate quicker when you jump on the pedals. If I raced, I'd look at the data more. Since I don't, I like what feels faster (hey, if you don't got real speed, you better get some imagined speed) and light wheels do.

I'd do a double blind test, but I might fall off,

-Ray

[mls]

I would go w/a dt wheelset 28f 32r on a
nice traditional frameset at your lbs.
if you went w/oversize al w/something
like zipp 303s i think the ride would be
a bit harsh for an all around bike.
w/the 1st bike you would be fresh
for that last up hill sprint the 2nd you
be thinking is it over yet

[Serotta PETE]

Look at Joe Young wheels....He builds a great set of wheels. Additionally the DTs are very very nice.

Pete

[toaster]

For climbing the big deal is mass, bike mass and body mass since you're lifting it uphill against gravity. So, a light frame and a small, light rider is number one.

Rotational weight matters most the further away from the rotating parts' center. On wheels, the rim, tube and tire weight matter more than the hubs' weight. Again with climbing you're lifting the rotating parts (wheels, gears, cranks, pedals, shoes) against gravity so light rotational weight helps.

Now on the flats, all the above helps but to a much smaller degree (especially the faster or more powerful you are). Once you are moving along air resistance is harder to overcome than slightly heavier wheels and frame. So to a strong time trialer weight means less than aerodynamics. One would spend more money on all the aero equipment for the bike and accessories and the various manufacturer's priorities would be first on aero benefit and then making the part as light and as strong as possible.

So, in summary, once you have a lightweight racing bike money spent on training or coaching will pay off better than additional lighter and more expensive bike bits. Also, slow riders benefit more with acquiring less mass (bike, wheels, parts, body) and faster riders benefit more with aero parts unless both are going up steep hills where both will benefit from less bike mass (rotating and static) in different amounts depending on power.

[dgauthier]

The difference in the amount of energy to accelerate a bike with heavy wheels and a bike with light wheels is nearly immeasurable. For instance, compare accelerating out of a corner in a criterium. Given a pair of wheels that are 500g heavier, starting at 10m/sec and with 350-550 watts, here is the result:

"At the end of 100m Standard Rider is ahead by 0.01s and 0.08 m."


You are correct.

Similar results are obtained when controlling for wheel *inertia*. Running the criterium test with wheels of the identical weight, but half the inertia (wheel with light rims and heavy hubs would have lower inertia - that is, they would spin up faster) yields only a 9 centimeter (.09 m) advantage. Running the crit test with identical wheel weight and inertia but half the wheel *aerodynamic drag* yields a 45 cm advantage.

So, reducing wheel aerodynamic drag by any percentage yields 5 times the improvement one would obtain reducing wheel inertia or wheel weight by the same percentage.

Thanks, Ken. You've opened my eyes.

[saab2000]

I do not dispute facts. But aero data is obtained in a lab and racing does not take place in a lab.

I have raced fast criteriums which involve accelarating hard and often. I am sure an aero wheel helps, but with the air stirred up a lot by a large pack of riders, I think it becomes somewhat murky.

Back in 1990 I was racing in a pro/1/2 race here in the US and just missed the final selection because of a crash on a hill. I was riding what at the time was considered an aero wheel and surely more aero than my normal training wheels. There is no doubt in my mind that I could feel that they were aero. I seemed to be able to get several miles per hour more than normal at the top end and we were hauling a$$ to catch the leaders. At 42 - 45 mph, aero surely makes a difference.

I also raced in the Downer Ave. criterium that year and that involves a corner where the riders slow to about 18 mph, I can assure you that accelerating from 18 to 35 mph takes some energy and doing it 60 times wears a rider out. Those few watts each lap can make a big difference at the end of a race.

Both aero and weight make a difference in the real world.

[jerk]

once again saab is right.....aero is great for the majority of courses.......don't forget that often times a more aero rim is also stiffer so it will perform better when cornered hard as well....light wheels only very rarely are preferable to aero wheels.....they often "feel" faster because they spin up quicker and can be a benefit in hill climbing, or for really slow riders where the aerodynamics aren't really going to matter anyway....don't forget too that aerodynamics matter little when one is drafting in a group....check out those pictures of lance on his shallow section race xxx lites while his team mates pull him around on aluminum rimmed deep section wheels.......the jerk thinks you should have your cake and eat it too. get some adas and enjoy the best of both worlds!

jerk

[saab2000]

My cake will be my Nucleon tubulars mounted to my new/used Eddy Merckx Majestic Ti.

[CJH]

Hi!
Check this out for some interesting reading reg. lighweight, aero wheels, bike etc. I wonder what makes a bigger difference, the latest aeroooo wheels or just riding in the drops?! Anyway judging from what's being ridden on the velodrome etc. the benefits of say aero wheels far outway the benefits of ultra lighweight wheels...

http://www.diablocyclists.com/pauldec00.htm

Another interesting site is: http://www.analyticcycling.com/ if one wishes to get scientific about it there's alot of info to take in...

[jerk]

My cake will be my Nucleon tubulars mounted to my new/used Eddy Merckx Majestic Ti.


you need some icing pal....let's get you some dugasts on those hoops.
jerk

[vaxn8r]

Keep in mind 2 drawbacks of aero wheels. First is comfort. True deep rim aero wheels ride harshly and will take their toll on your ability to be fresh late in a longer ride. Secondly, wheels can be too stiff to corner effectively. They will bounce the rear end out of corners making the bike harder to control.

[Ray]

light wheels only very rarely are preferable to aero wheels.....they often "feel" faster because they spin up quicker and can be a benefit in hill climbing, or for really slow riders where the aerodynamics aren't really going to matter anyway
THAT explains it. :) I've always loved the feel of light wheels and I'm certifiably slow and I'm all the time climbing hills - BOTH CRITERIA ARE MET! I rarely average more than 15-16 mph in the hilly area where I live and am not afraid of the occasional 14 mph ride either, so I'm the perfect candidate for light wheels. Maybe I'll try some aero wheels the next trip to the beach where I do the occasional flat 40 miler. I hate flat rides though - I think if I lived in Florida I'd probably give up riding.

-Ray

[Too Tall]

Prescription for you: Aero, light, durable and great ride comfort - Nimble Fly laced in 16/25 = 1225g. Tubs of course. www.nimble.net

Yes, I am a cheerleader for Nimble.

[zap]

These days you can get light aero wheels. Just look at Zipp, Reynolds, Lightweight and ADA. So you can have your cake and icing.

One more thing. Nobody produces the same wattage through the entire pedal stroke. I don't think these formula's take this into account.

I believe Saab explained the real world situation very well.

One poster mentioned that a big tubed al bike with aero wheel would be stiff.

Not so. My Klein Q Pro Carbon with Zipp 280 tubular rims is the best riding bike I have for the country roads outside Washington, DC. More comfy than that Ti thingy with regular Mavic Open 4 clincher rims.

[mls]

zap I had a pr of 303s and thought they were stiffer
than traditional wheels and the 1 and only al bike I
tried was a cdale 3.0 that was harsh I realize al bikes
have gotten better but if I weighed 135lbs and was
looking for an all around bike i would go lugged steel
w traditional wheels. plus the price of zipps and
the fact he wants clinchers. I hope this doesnt sound
to defensive sorry if it does

[sspielman]

I agree with the spirit of Saab's earlier comments. In most situations, and aero wheel would provide greater benefits than a light wheel. The problem comes in trying to QUANTIFY the benefits. Many times in the rush to attach a number to some benefit, highly impressive engineering analyses are performed...only to neglect the fact that we ride in the real world. The term "real world" has been known to infuriate engineering types, because every forseeable factor can never be accounted for. It is for this reason that I believe that the analytic cycling website exaggerates the benefit of aero wheels. Another interesting factor in the selection of lightweight or aero is something inherent in the nature of racing; the maximum benefit from equipment selection is often not derived from the entire event, but the most critical moment. If the main feature of a race is a knee-breaking gradient, give me a set of light wheels so I can attack.....if the main feature of a race is windswept flats, give me a set of Cosmic Carbones so that I expend less energy trying to get from one echelon to the next.

[zap]

mls-you bring up a good point regarding lighter riders and equipment choices. In many ways I'm envious of lighter riders, but frame and wheel selection is different from those that weigh 30+ lbs more.

My wife rode a Look Monoblade many years ago and thought it rode like a steel joist design to support an aircraft carrier's flight deck. I don't think Look changed the layup from one size to the next. Whats OK for heavier riders clearly will not work for lighter ones. I doubt Cannondale (or Klein) changes al tubing between sizes either.

My wife has deep section 650c Campy Shamal SL's and their her favorite/fastest wheels. Three years ago, I slapped on a ck/cxp33 wheelset and after her first ride on them, she complained how slow they felt. Also, her tig CSI must do a great job smoothing out the ride as she does not complain about the stiff Shamals at all.