Opinions on wheel weight article in Cyclist Magazine?

ugo.santalucia

Imposter, I can randomly take any of your posts and there is a good chance you are implicitly or explicitly saying that the counterpart is an idiot... it is a fact... otherwise you would not have people reporting you at an alarming rate.

Re. the topic: I am not convinced by the article. A good way to prove your point would involve a bit of wheelbuilding:
You need a good steady climb, let's say the Snake pass from Glossop, you need a fit rider, who can climb it three times with consistent effort and he doesn't need to know what the experiment is all about.
Three rims weighing 450/600/750 grams of similar profile will be built onto the same hubs and spokes and the climb will be attempted for twelve consecutive days, rotating the order of the wheelsets. To compensate for the rim weight difference, steel bolts adding up to the required weight will be put into the second water bottle.
You will then have a population of 36 data point, divided into three families. You will ignore the best and the worst times of each family and out of the 10 datapoints per family you will calculate the average and the standard deviation. IF the results are similar within a set value, then you have proved a point without the need of calculations and obviously approximations.
Additionally, you can build the rear wheels onto powermeters and take those numbers into account too, although I fear they will just complicate the data treatment and you will have to take into account small differences in calibration...

sloppyschleckonds

ugo.santalucia wrote:

otherwsie you would not have people reporting you at an alarming rate.

I'd love to read some of those no-mark reports.