Roval CLX50 V Mavic Cosmic Pro Carbon SL C V Spin Koppenberg

srendell
srendell Posts: 15
edited May 2017 in Road buying advice
Self explanatory dilemma but

Rovals: Lightest, most expensive, perfect depth,not sure on braking

Mavics: Cheaper, not as deep/aero, great braking

Spins: cheapest, heaviest, least well known/harder to get service

Any pros or cons to add, or any advice on which to go for? :D

Comments

  • nicklong
    nicklong Posts: 231
    In terms of functionality, a bit of weight difference across all 3 won't make a tangible difference. The aero depth / wind tunnel credentials won't make a tangible difference. However, good braking will make a noticeable difference, especially in the wet.

    So, Mavics for me.

    (I have Reynolds for the same reason).
  • slowmart
    slowmart Posts: 4,516
    Have you thought of the CL40's cheaper and apart from the depth I believe the only difference are the wheel bearings with the CLX having ceramic bearings.

    Ive a pair of CL40's and they are a great set of wheels, light and tough, spin up quickly, hold their speed well especially when you pair the s works tyre with the wheels
    “Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”

    Desmond Tutu
  • srendell
    srendell Posts: 15
    Slowmart wrote:
    Have you thought of the CL40's cheaper and apart from the depth I believe the only difference are the wheel bearings with the CLX having ceramic bearings.

    Ive a pair of CL40's and they are a great set of wheels, light and tough, spin up quickly, hold their speed well especially when you pair the s works tyre with the wheels

    The CL 40's are apparently less aero than the new 32's and I think the ceramic bearing durability of the CLX is also worth a bit more.
    It's also pretty hard to get hold of CL wheels unless on a complete spesh bike.
  • Bobbinogs
    Bobbinogs Posts: 4,841
    srendell wrote:
    The CL 40's are apparently less aero than the new 32's and I think the ceramic bearing durability of the CLX is also worth a bit more.

    Don't worry, not going to try and bring too much common sense into this one but it may not be worth worrying too much about "less aero" as, more often than not, manufacturers will introduce wheelset revisions with "even more aero" words without actually confessing that they may have had to offset the yaw by 5 degrees to get a 2 watt improvement. So real world benefits are 2% of diddly squat.

    Regarding the ceramic bearings, really, they are not worth getting excited about, particularly when it comes to durability. Well built steel bearings, finely manufactured to a good tolerance with good seals and well maintained will outlast any fancy wheelset. Lots of text out there even disputing the performance benefits of ceramics. I am not trying the restart that debate but I wouldn't let ceramics become a main buying point or even a significant factor in the choice.
  • redvision
    redvision Posts: 2,958
    I have the Roval CLX 40s on my Sworks. In all honesty i don't rate them and as i am typing this i am questioning why i haven't sold them yet. They do look the part and sound great when at speed, but they definitely flex (and i only weigh 70kg so not exactly super heavy), and from my experience, they don't roll any where near as well as other wheels (namely fulcrum quattro carbons or Mavic Cosmic Carbone 40).

Categories