Carbon Fiber wheels and braking

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride -- is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 09:55:36 -0700 (PDT), Mark Cleary
wrote:

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 11:51:20 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Saturday, September 26, 2020 at 7:17:40 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

CF has its place, but not with rim brakes, IMO. You can get a fine aluminum wheel with most of the same characteristics at the same or even lower weight. I got the CF version of a mid-aero wheel, the Roval C38 -- because it had a better hub (cheap from my son, too), and I appreciate the stiffness. Its on a disc bike. My son traded away his CF rim-brake wheels and got a nice aluminum pair from his friend the Mavic rep. He has CF Rovals on his disc bikes.
The bike I just sold had ProLite Bracianno 40 mm aluminum wheels on them and I weighed them and they weighed a little less than the 50 mm carbon wheels. Now if you don't mind paying a fortune, you can get lighter carbon rims but when I bought those ProLites they cost me $250. I could not tell the difference in speed between the 40 mm ProLites and the 50 mm SuperTeam.
So now let me throw another monkey in the cage. What would latex tubes do for the ride? I have never tried them and are they worth it? It seems they are not a puncture resistance and loose air much faster?
Deacon Mark

Well, is any "tube" puncture proof? But they are slightly lighter for
those that want super light.

I have them on one bike and "regular" tubes on another. Can't really
tell the difference.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 9/27/2020 7:18 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride -- is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.

That famous magazine blind test used otherwise identical
unmarked frames of various steels. The Columbus Thron was
chosen tops because the slightly heavier weight wasn't
noticed in riding but the stiffer ride was, especially climbing.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 17:03:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 1:38 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zondag 27 september 2020 om 18:55:38 UTC+2 schreef :
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 11:51:20 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Saturday, September 26, 2020 at 7:17:40 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

CF has its place, but not with rim brakes, IMO. You can get a fine aluminum wheel with most of the same characteristics at the same or even lower weight. I got the CF version of a mid-aero wheel, the Roval C38 -- because it had a better hub (cheap from my son, too), and I appreciate the stiffness. Its on a disc bike. My son traded away his CF rim-brake wheels and got a nice aluminum pair from his friend the Mavic rep. He has CF Rovals on his disc bikes.
The bike I just sold had ProLite Bracianno 40 mm aluminum wheels on them and I weighed them and they weighed a little less than the 50 mm carbon wheels. Now if you don't mind paying a fortune, you can get lighter carbon rims but when I bought those ProLites they cost me $250. I could not tell the difference in speed between the 40 mm ProLites and the 50 mm SuperTeam.
So now let me throw another monkey in the cage. What would latex tubes do for the ride? I have never tried them and are they worth it? It seems they are not a puncture resistance and loose air much faster?
Deacon Mark

Latex tubes are twice as expensive, they have less RR and they are more resistant to pinch flats than a butyl tube of the same weight. They loose air much faster, to an extent that you have to top them off every ride. Are they worth it? For most people not. I use them only on my as fast as possible aero bike.

Speaking of losing air: ISTM that I have to reinflate tires on certain
bikes much more often than others, despite roughly the same tire sizes.
For example, my fattest current tires, the utility three speed's 32mm
(actually 1 1/4") tires seem to need air more than any other.

I don't pay much attention when I buy an inner tube. I just get the
right size of whatever butyl tube brand is on the shelf. It makes me
wonder if there are significant differences in permeability based on
composition, etc. as opposed to thickness. Or if there could be.

Well, I bought some super duper light weight tubes, I assume real
rubber, as they were on sale, and I have them on one bike. They
require pumping every time I ride. I also bought, on sale, some
"butyl" tubes and have them on another bike and they do seem to
require pumping up less frequently.

Note, I usually buy tires and tubes when they are on sale and pay
attention to size, only. I run 23mm on the front and 25mm on the rear,
both at about 100 psi, and frankly I can't "feel" enough difference
between tires or tubes to pay any attention to it.

I did once lash out for a set of "gator" (I don't remember the make)
tires that were supposed to be bullet proof and had three punctures in
2 km so haven't invested in any more of "them sort of things" :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 5:25:35 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/27/2020 7:18 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride -- is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.

That famous magazine blind test used otherwise identical
unmarked frames of various steels. The Columbus Thron was
chosen tops because the slightly heavier weight wasn't
noticed in riding but the stiffer ride was, especially climbing.

Now run that test with my 1977 20lb custom made SP racing bike against my current 15lb SLR Emonda. The Trek is stiffer in the BB and the front end and more comfortable than the SP frame, in part due to the geometry and in part due to the slightly soft and light tail. It climbs and descends better than any custom steel frame I ever owned, and I had four or five. My C35 CF wheels with aluminum brake tracks are stiffer and lighter than my ho-made 32/36 hole ModEs or Fiamme Reds/Phil/freewheel wheels. 25mm Pro4s with latex tubes ride as well as Vittoria CX/CGs (although any overinflated tire rides like a rock). Bar bends and hoods provide a more comfortable perch for my hands, and the shallow anatomic bend makes for better control descending, and I don't have to sit down to shift or even take my hands off the levers.. And I have 22 f***** gears! I could, if necessary, live in one chainring.. No Detto bowling shoes with nail-on cleats, and one of the big improvements, padded handlebar tape. I do miss open back mesh gloves because it gave me that noticeable tan that other cyclists immediately recognized. I like the lightweight lycra jersey I wore today, and I love modern bibs rather than my old draw-string wooly shorts with dead animal crotch. I even like modern socks. I have wool jerseys too, but only one short sleeve, which I would have worn had it been cooler. The long sleeves come out in winter and later fall.

There are lots of old steel bikes I love to look at, but if I'm going out for a long ride and want to get home in reasonable time with enough energy to mow the lawn, I'm taking the modern bike.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 9/27/2020 9:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 5:25:35 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/27/2020 7:18 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride -- is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.

That famous magazine blind test used otherwise identical
unmarked frames of various steels. The Columbus Thron was
chosen tops because the slightly heavier weight wasn't
noticed in riding but the stiffer ride was, especially climbing.

Now run that test with my 1977 20lb custom made SP racing bike against my current 15lb SLR Emonda. The Trek is stiffer in the BB and the front end and more comfortable than the SP frame, in part due to the geometry and in part due to the slightly soft and light tail. It climbs and descends better than any custom steel frame I ever owned, and I had four or five. My C35 CF wheels with aluminum brake tracks are stiffer and lighter than my ho-made 32/36 hole ModEs or Fiamme Reds/Phil/freewheel wheels. 25mm Pro4s with latex tubes ride as well as Vittoria CX/CGs (although any overinflated tire rides like a rock). Bar bends and hoods provide a more comfortable perch for my hands, and the shallow anatomic bend makes for better control descending, and I don't have to sit down to shift or even take my hands off the levers. And I have 22 f***** gears! I could, if necessary, live in one chainring. No Detto bowling shoes with nail-on cleats, and one of the big improvements, padded handlebar
tape. I do miss open back mesh gloves because it gave me that noticeable tan that other cyclists immediately recognized. I like the lightweight lycra jersey I wore today, and I love modern bibs rather than my old draw-string wooly shorts with dead animal crotch. I even like modern socks. I have wool jerseys too, but only one short sleeve, which I would have worn had it been cooler. The long sleeves come out in winter and later fall.

There are lots of old steel bikes I love to look at, but if I'm going out for a long ride and want to get home in reasonable time with enough energy to mow the lawn, I'm taking the modern bike.

-- Jay Beattie.



+1
No one (except Mr Krygowski maybe) denies the superiority of
modern engineering of modern materials in modern designs.

Steel has its own virtues and adherents but where
performance and efficiency matter, carbon has surpassed it.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

AMuzi wrote:
On 9/27/2020 9:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 5:25:35 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/27/2020 7:18 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any
experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses
the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years
of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your
equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant
degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm
tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I
really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good
cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various
aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar
specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of
results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and
operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe
systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not
capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or
hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride --
is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a
lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no
experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would
want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment
similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me
that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake
wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.

That famous magazine blind test used otherwise identical
unmarked frames of various steels. The Columbus Thron was
chosen tops because the slightly heavier weight wasn't
noticed in riding but the stiffer ride was, especially climbing.

Now run that test with my 1977 20lb custom made SP racing bike against
my current 15lb SLR Emonda. The Trek is stiffer in the BB and the front
end and more comfortable than the SP frame, in part due to the geometry
and in part due to the slightly soft and light tail. It climbs and
descends better than any custom steel frame I ever owned, and I had four
or five. My C35 CF wheels with aluminum brake tracks are stiffer and
lighter than my ho-made 32/36 hole ModEs or Fiamme Reds/Phil/freewheel
wheels. 25mm Pro4s with latex tubes ride as well as Vittoria CX/CGs
(although any overinflated tire rides like a rock). Bar bends and hoods
provide a more comfortable perch for my hands, and the shallow anatomic
bend makes for better control descending, and I don't have to sit down
to shift or even take my hands off the levers. And I have 22 f*****
gears! I could, if necessary, live in one chainring. No Detto bowling
shoes with nail-on cleats, and one of the big improvements, padded handlebar
tape. I do miss open back mesh gloves because it gave me that noticeable
tan that other cyclists immediately recognized. I like the lightweight
lycra jersey I wore today, and I love modern bibs rather than my old
draw-string wooly shorts with dead animal crotch. I even like modern
socks. I have wool jerseys too, but only one short sleeve, which I would
have worn had it been cooler. The long sleeves come out in winter and later fall.

There are lots of old steel bikes I love to look at, but if I'm going
out for a long ride and want to get home in reasonable time with enough
energy to mow the lawn, I'm taking the modern bike.

-- Jay Beattie.



+1
No one (except Mr Krygowski maybe) denies the superiority of
modern engineering of modern materials in modern designs.

Steel has its own virtues and adherents but where
performance and efficiency matter, carbon has surpassed it.


++1

My steel Bianchi Volpe was a beautiful bike. The new owner loves it. But
no way would I swap my Tarmac for it.

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 05:49:36 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:27:21 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 10:58 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op zondag 27 september 2020 om 13:41:48 UTC+2 schreef :
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 5:41:44 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Op zondag 27 september 2020 om 01:37:53 UTC+2 schreef Frank Krygowski:
On 9/26/2020 7:07 PM, Mark Cleary wrote:
On Saturday, September 26, 2020 at 4:00:26 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Saturday, September 26, 2020 at 1:26:29 PM UTC-7, wrote:
I have always road basic aluminum clincher wheels. Every once in awhile I get an urge to try CF wheels. First of all is that a bad idea do they really do much better. Then there is the issue of needing to use the rim brake pad that is specific for carbon fiber wheels.

The big question is if the braking performance is a good a traditional AL rims? Anyone here running CF wheels with CF braking tracks and what do you think? In some ways maybe some aero wheels would be slightly better for the flatlands where I live but maybe not in the mountains of big hill rides. Would 38mm rims blow me all around it sure seems like 50 and above would.
Campagnolo makes some carbon fiber compatible brake shoes that you can put in your high end brakes and they brake almost as good as aluminum brakes and standard shoes. Now that sort of makes me nervous about the long term effects on carbon wheel brake track. But the Chinese brake shoes have pretty bad braking in comparison to aluminum. You get used to it and don't much notice that you're braking earlier.

When buying deep aero wheels do NOT get "tubeless" rims. Always get clincher only and not "bi" rims (supposedly either tubeless or clincher compatible). 50 mm aero rims do give you a noticeably longer coasting. So I guess the aero part is real. I'm now playing around with tires again so that I don't get flats. While Gatorskins have always protected me from flats they do have a wooden ride. I like Michelin Pro 4's but you can't get them right now I suppose because of the bike boom. So I am going to try Continental 4 Seasons which supposedly have as much flat protection as Gatorskins with a better ride. We'll see about that since I mounted a pair and they didn't seem that different to me. They are on my Lemond which is waiting for parts so I'll see.

Continental GP5000's wear really fast I suppose because they have such great traction. But that traction also had my bikes wandering all over the road with the changes in camber and road surface. This was bad enough that a section of road I used to descend at about 30, I was slowing to 25 or less.

Vittoria Corsa 2+ are very nice tires but they, like 4 Seasons, are frightfully expensive. So presently I am trying out the Michelin Power Endurance which is supposed to be a balance of traction and wear.
Lou seems to be telling me they are ****ty braking and therefore I need to simply get a disk brake bike right? Does that solve the problem or am I complete nuts?
It's not clear to me what problem you're trying to solve.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but it sounds like most of your riding is solo. If
so, are you trying to spend less time doing your favorite routes? Carbon
rims won't help that very much - maybe a couple percent. But why would
you want to do that?

If you're riding with friends and want to beat them to the next
telephone pole or whatever, those rims may somewhat increase the number
of such sprints you win. But it's a pretty expensive way to say "Ha!
Take that!" to a friend.

If you're road racing at an amateur level, it's much the same - an
expensive way to slightly increase your odds of winning a water bottle.

If you're racing at a higher level than that, don't worry about it. Just
ask your sponsor to buy them for you.

Don't worship technology for technology's sake. It's just another form
of mammon.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Mark asked some questions he liked answers to. He don't need a lecture from someone who has no experience with CF rims.

Lou
Well I pretty much expected that the answer is no not really any better. I am normally a solo rider and I do appreciate brakes that work well. My rim brakes do a fine job unless it is wet but even then they do work fine. I was just getting a bit antsy. Personally I am thinking about going to a disk brake road bike and have been looking at Lynskey R300. Not the lightest animal on the planet but nothing beats them in the price. Going to a disk brake with a bit wider tires for me would a huge change at least I think. I still run 23's but they are fine on the roads I ride. The wider stuff would make some roads easier. I guess what I appreciate more than anything is a real smooth quiet riding bike it that makes sense. I notice I road my Wilier GT last week 3 times and what really was apparent was that it is noisier than the TI Habanero by far. The CF seems to pick up the wind currents and the cables make noise shifting. I went back to my Habby and to me a pretty big difference.

Deacon Mark

You are right that a heavier Ti frame with smaller tubes is less of a resonance box as a CF frame with large aero tubes and is definitely a lot quieter. Be aware that high volume CF rims have the same effect, not as much as a CF frame but still. It was wet and windy today so I took my Ti disc gravel bike with 45 mm CF rims and 32 mm Continental GP5000 tires. It was an excellent ride, quiet, reasonable fast and with consistent braking. Concerning wider tires I found this article interesting. Confirms my experience. Low RR and comfort? You can pick one.

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance...000-comparison

There was a lot of interesting detail in that test and article. Their
diamond plate roller is certainly an improvement over a smooth one.

But they are still not modeling the energy losses from vibrating the
rider and bike frame. I suspect the differences between tire sizes would
be greater if that could somehow be accurately measured.

But I wonder whether rolling resistance is applicable to real life.
After all the rolling resistance of a, oh say 28mm tire, must vary
whether supporting a 120 lb rider or a 200 lb rider.

Perhaps the way to low rolling resistance is "loose weight"!

I think that ought to read "lose weight" :-(
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 1:48:39 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 1:30 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

You have personally not even seen in real life most of the stuff you're passing judgement on.
Wrong yet again.
You've performed no tests and you have calculated nothing since you have no real information about anything.
I haven't personally tested carbon fiber wheels. But the data and
information is out there.

But since you are so experienced with so much excellent equipment, why
don't you give us an estimate of how much the deacon's average speed
will change by switching to CF wheels?

I realize I'm asking a guy who once claimed his wheels or tires actually
made the bike accelerate when coasting on flat ground. But I'd like to
see your estimate anyway.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Frank, is there any bull**** you and the rest of your Democrat friends won't try to pass off to people who are usually themselves too honest to consider the fact that you are lying purposely to them because you have done nothing, been nowhere and are afraid that you'll be found out?

On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 5:25:35 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/27/2020 7:18 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 18:01:55 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/27/2020 5:21 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 10:21:33 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/27/2020 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, September 27, 2020 at 7:51:23 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Lou, I notice you get very testy any time I imply that the newest and
fastest and most advertised bike components may not be the best. Are you
on commission?

I doubt it. I think he is responding to your lack of any experience with the equipment you criticize. Meanwhile, Lou uses the stuff you criticize probably every day -- and also has years of using the stuff you use. Same here. I've used all your equipment. You haven't used mine, at least not to any significant degree. About to depart on CF/aluminum wheels (C35s), STI, 25mm tires -- one with a super poseur latex tube. I have CF bars that I really like. CF frame that I like a lot, too. It's quiet. Good cable management. Nothing slaps around.

Liking something is affected by personal taste, priorities,
personalities, fashion, advertising and more. You're right that I can't
tell how much I'd like your CF bike without trying it. I certainly can't
tell how much _you_ would like your CF bike.

But the OP was asking about something much more concrete. He asked how
much difference carbon fiber wheels would make for his riding. One
doesn't have to use CF wheels to know the difference will be small. The
data is out there. Do you really disagree?

There's this thing called "Engineering." Engineers get trained in
performing tests, making measurements, _interpreting_ the resulting data
and applying judgment to produce good results.

Can you imagine a world where the engineering rules included "You
haven't actually run that particular industrial machine, so you can't
help decide whether it would be a good investment for our factory?"

Yes. This is why pilots are trained in simulators for various aircraft. They all fly differently -- even planes with very similar specs. Same goes with bikes. They're not just a collection of results from some test frame.

Brake hood shape, bar bend, saddle design, shift lever location and operation, brake modulation, tire feel (yes feel), pedal and shoe systems all affect the way a bike rides -- and those things are not capable of easy expression in engineering terms. A modern CF or hydroformed aluminum racing bike -- which you do not own or ride -- is a lot different that a steel racing bike of yore, and to me, a lot more fun to ride. Its not just "marketing" as you frequently claim.

I would never take advice on a product from someone with no experience either owning it or maintaining/warrantying it. I would want to talk to someone who has used the product in an environment similar to mine. Riding with people who are in the industry gives me that opportunity, and that's why I never bought a CF rim-brake wheel. Too many hills and too much rain for a CF rim brake wheel.

Again, your argument is focusing on "feel" AKA "the way a bike rides."
I'm not claiming all bikes "feel" the same. I'm not claiming you,
personally, don't enjoy some bikes more than others. But again,
enjoyment and appreciation of "feel" is a very individual thing.

I've always wondered how much cost effects how well a bicycle "feels".
I mean, you just lashed out $7,000 for the new bike.... Of course it
feels good!

I expect you remember the test of the two bikes, one built of the most
expensive steel tubing and a second built from the cheapest. One
painted blue I think and the other pink, and horde of highly qualified
bicycle writers couldn't tell the difference between the two? In fact
several labeled the "cheap" bike as the best feeling.

Mark didn't seem to be asking about "feel." The impression that I got
was that he wanted to know if carbon wheels would make him significantly
faster. That _is_ an engineering question. The data's out there.

The answer is, any speed increase will be negligible unless you're in a
race. And even then, it's not likely to help very much.

I'll admit, I haven't dug for the data during this conversation. I'm
curious whether, for a typical solo recreational rider, the aero
advantage of carbon wheels can be negated by a floppy jersey.
That famous magazine blind test used otherwise identical
unmarked frames of various steels. The Columbus Thron was
chosen tops because the slightly heavier weight wasn't
noticed in riding but the stiffer ride was, especially climbing.

I remember that and I also remember thinking how full of **** they were upon descending and being bounced all over the road which didn't happen with STX or whatever the hell it was.