New Wheelsmith 50x24mm Carbon Clinchers

mattbell
mattbell Posts: 203
edited December 2013 in Road buying advice
Has anyone managed to get their hands on these yet? How are they?
«13

Comments

  • Sammyw23
    Sammyw23 Posts: 627
    Ooh yeah I am keen to know too! Tempted.com
    Cervelo P3
    Bianchi Infinito
    Cannondale CAAD10
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    Why would you want deep rims and wide rims? One or the other... Unless you plan to use them for cyclocross with 35 mm tyres, you just carry around unnecessary weight...
    left the forum March 2023
  • EKIMIKE
    EKIMIKE Posts: 2,232
    For the same reasons you'd want a deep or a wide rim exclusive of each other. The deep bit for the 'aerodynamics'. The wide bit for the ride/shape of the tyres/pseudo-tubular effect a la A23, Archetype e.t.c.

    There's also the supposedly improved aerodynamics of the deep part being wide. All the big boys doing it - Mavic, Zipp, Hed, Bontrager.
    Canyon Endurace CF 2014 | Canyon Ultimate CF 2010
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    EKIMIKE wrote:
    For the same reasons you'd want a deep or a wide rim exclusive of each other. The deep bit for the 'aerodynamics'. The wide bit for the ride/shape of the tyres/pseudo-tubular effect a la A23, Archetype e.t.c.

    ok, so the same concept of a BMW X6... big, fat, yet aerodynamic... :mrgreen:
    left the forum March 2023
  • EKIMIKE
    EKIMIKE Posts: 2,232
    Apparently. Not sure if there's much engineering or scientific merit to it. But it's what they're selling. Could just be a fad?
    Canyon Endurace CF 2014 | Canyon Ultimate CF 2010
  • mattbell
    mattbell Posts: 203
    ugo.santalucia wrote:
    Why would you want deep rims and wide rims? One or the other... Unless you plan to use them for cyclocross with 35 mm tyres, you just carry around unnecessary weight...

    If you look at all the new Zipp, Enve, Bontrager rims they're all a lot wider. The supposed aerodynamic gain. Also they're probably stronger!
  • displacedaussie
    displacedaussie Posts: 356
    Supposedly the wider rims helps the airflow reattach to the back of the rim, especially when using wider tyres and when the wind is coming from an angle. I don't have a wind tunnel or the data to really verify that, but it kind of makes sense, and Zipp/Enve/Bontrager are all doing it these days, so maybe it is better aerodynamically.
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Indeed. Hed and now Shimano do 23mm clinchers and wider tubs. Flo clinchers are wider and have good aero profile. I'm looking at a 50-60mm front for the TT bike and these could be a contender.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    mattbell wrote:
    ugo.santalucia wrote:
    Why would you want deep rims and wide rims? One or the other... Unless you plan to use them for cyclocross with 35 mm tyres, you just carry around unnecessary weight...

    If you look at all the new Zipp, Enve, Bontrager rims they're all a lot wider. The supposed aerodynamic gain. Also they're probably stronger!

    They've been going on for years trying to convince us they were very strong... do they need to be stronger? If yes, then they have been lying for years, if no, then they don't need to be stronger.
    I have the feeling a 50 mm deep carbon clincher is already quite heavy and if you make it into a 24 mm wide one, then it becomes a heavy fat boy to carry around... as these things cost roughly 200-600 pounds per piece, it seems to me a lots money to end up with a heavy set of boots.

    .. .and now I can go back to practice my 3 leading 3 trailing lacing pattern... 8)
    left the forum March 2023
  • thegreatdivide
    thegreatdivide Posts: 5,807
    Zipp Firecrest are 26.4mm at the brake track, so very wide.
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    thegreatdivide wrote:
    Zipp Firecrest are 26.4mm at the brake track, so very wide.

    Really? Am I wrong in thinking that many frames are not even that wide at the BB intersection?
    left the forum March 2023
  • thegreatdivide
    thegreatdivide Posts: 5,807
    For some frames it is.
  • Sammyw23
    Sammyw23 Posts: 627
    Derek is quoting around 1450g for the 24mm wide 50mm clinchers. I wouldn't call that heavy. I'd call that a good light/aero balance?
    Cervelo P3
    Bianchi Infinito
    Cannondale CAAD10
  • smidsy
    smidsy Posts: 5,273
    Sammyw23 wrote:
    Derek is quoting around 1450g for the 24mm wide 50mm clinchers. I wouldn't call that heavy. I'd call that a good light/aero balance?

    What about with spokes :lol:

    I'd call that optomistic!!!

    Plus by the time you add rim tape and scewers you will be well over that.
    Yellow is the new Black.
  • thegreatdivide
    thegreatdivide Posts: 5,807
    smidsy wrote:
    Sammyw23 wrote:
    Derek is quoting around 1450g for the 24mm wide 50mm clinchers. I wouldn't call that heavy. I'd call that a good light/aero balance?

    What about with spokes :lol:

    I'd call that optomistic!!!

    Plus by the time you add rim tape and scewers you will be well over that.

    I'll go with what Derek says. He's got a better idea of the weight than you.
  • foggymike
    foggymike Posts: 862
    http://www.cycledivision.co.uk/product- ... id138.html

    These were in a cycling weekly test last week too - also very light (1430g) for £700 but not with the wide rim. Look a bit like these Chinese import/ebay wheels that seem all the rage on here. Anyone tried them?
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    ugo.santalucia wrote:
    thegreatdivide wrote:
    Zipp Firecrest are 26.4mm at the brake track, so very wide.

    Really? Am I wrong in thinking that many frames are not even that wide at the BB intersection?

    Not wrong, some frames can't handle that width (my Plasma being one of them). Hed Stingers are 28mm these days...
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • EKIMIKE
    EKIMIKE Posts: 2,232
    Some light-weight brakes don't get on with the wide rims either.
    Canyon Endurace CF 2014 | Canyon Ultimate CF 2010
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    Sammyw23 wrote:
    Derek is quoting around 1450g for the 24mm wide 50mm clinchers. I wouldn't call that heavy. I'd call that a good light/aero balance?

    Surely he knows, all I know is that a 50 mm Gigantex tubular is roughly 420 grams... Clinchers are typically nearly 100 grams heavier, these might be more if they are even wider.
    44 sapim cx ray of around 260 length with alloy nipples are give or take 220 grams... Hubs are sold as 290 for the set... I struggle to believe any claim under 1500 grams... But then again, Maths never add up when it comes to wheels and as you point out is still a very low weight, if confirmed...
    left the forum March 2023
  • thegreatdivide
    thegreatdivide Posts: 5,807
    http://www.wheelsmith.co.uk/news/96-new ... -clinchers
  • smidsy
    smidsy Posts: 5,273
    Ok so you've confirmed the claim - we need 'evidence' that they build to under 1500g.

    And remember I was including rim tape and scewers.
    Yellow is the new Black.
  • thegreatdivide
    thegreatdivide Posts: 5,807
    Give it a few more posts and I'm sure Derek will be on here. He's good at popping onto BR and quashing forum speculation.
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    smidsy wrote:
    Ok so you've confirmed the claim - we need 'evidence' that they build to under 1500g.

    And remember I was including rim tape and scewers.

    We don't really need evidence... noboday has to give evidence... it's not a trial... YET... :twisted:

    As for Wheelsmith, I am sure he is delighted we talk about his wheels, one way or another, it's all free advert... :wink:
    left the forum March 2023
  • smidsy
    smidsy Posts: 5,273
    Ok point taken.

    Just as a comparison my American Classics 420 Aeros are quoted by AC as 1560g and they are actually over 1600g. :evil:

    Also in my other passion - the manufacturers of motorcycles have been misleading folk for ever. They quote a weight of a motorbike and then when you look at the small print it is a dry weight (i.e no fluids in it, oil water, coolant etc) and some even leave out the air in the tryes. :shock:

    Same with BHP figures, they quote 'at the crank' figures which are typically 10 - 20 bhp more than what is actually generated by the time it gets to the rear wheel.

    I am not actually criticising Wheelsmith specifically - it just miffs me that manufacturers (general) quote things that are not always entirely relevant when you analyse it further.

    Anyway rant over. :x
    Yellow is the new Black.
  • napoleond
    napoleond Posts: 5,992
    The wheels Derek has built up for me were bang on the weight he said they'd be.
    Insta: ATEnduranceCoaching
    ABCC Cycling Coach
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,788
    Anybody who thinks wide = less aero and wide = heavy needs to brush up on their engineering :wink:
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    inseine wrote:
    Anybody who thinks wide = less aero and wide = heavy needs to brush up on their engineering :wink:

    Not heavy, but they must be heavier that the equivalent narrower rim... with carbon one can cut the number of lay ups and reduce wall thickness, to avoid adding weight, but 20-21 mm clinchers are already pretty shaved on the side walls, I am not so sure there is any room for further reductions... or maybe there is and the result is a rim which is still very stiff, if not stiffer being wider, but also more vulnerable in an impact...
    To be honest I have no idea what they do at Gigantex, as I have handled a dozen of their rims and they were all tubulars.

    In alloy clinchers, where I am a bit more at home, the 23 mm version of a 20 mm rim is significantly heavier.
    Aerohead tips my scale at 415 grams, while A 23 which is the same thing but wider is 450
    left the forum March 2023
  • sniff-the-breeze
    sniff-the-breeze Posts: 28
    Hi!
    Please can i hi jack this for some advice, being as we are onthe topic of aero!
    Q1: at what speed/average speed do they become advantageous??
    I.e. I typically ride 50-60miles with 800-1000m of climbing, none of which is smooth or steady, it's gernaly all short and sharp? I average around 18-18.4mph for these rides. Roughly i am at around 19-21mph on the flats, sometimes more.
    Do deep section wheels simply allow me to travel faster for a given power, or is there a threshold that below they are a dissandvantage, or above they are an advantage??
    Q2 tubs v clinchers - Bearing in mind i never race, how puncture relaible are tubs? I have been told that the ride is SO much better, that if your are careful about pressures, puntures are less likely tha clinchers, and they can be replaced as quickly as changing a tube by the side of the road.
    I am tempted, but who carries two tubs around?? Carrying two tubes is easy!

    Thoughts and advice please!

    Sniff
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    Q1- You'll see more benefit with lighter wheels than aero wheels. Keep in mind that wattage savings quoted by wheel manufacturers are typically for 1hr+ TT at over 40kph.

    Q2- Stick to clinchers out here. If you lived on the continent with amazing roads then tubs would be great, but they're just not worth the ballache (if you're no racing) in the UK.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • ugo.santalucia
    ugo.santalucia Posts: 28,310
    Grill wrote:
    Q1- You'll see more benefit with lighter wheels than aero wheels. Keep in mind that wattage savings quoted by wheel manufacturers are typically for 1hr+ TT at over 40kph.

    Q2- Stick to clinchers out here. If you lived on the continent with amazing roads then tubs would be great, but they're just not worth the ballache (if you're no racing) in the UK.

    I tend to agree...
    I do ride tubulars, but never on wet days... there are parts of the coutry where it is rare to puncture... less traffic, less debris on the road, less broken glass, no flint washed from the verges...
    left the forum March 2023

Categories