#1
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
a few grams on the front is feelable ....centripetal force known or felt as gyroscopic...loose engineering but that's the feel.
carbon wheel$ wear out internet is prob replete with mudslinging n various forms of engineering data that I will not look for....... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
"John B." wrote in message ... I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? -- cheers, John B. As you say the time diffeence on a TT is measurable but on a Sunday ride then it really depends on the wheels whether I can tell the difference. I have standardised on Shimano wheels for TT, summer events, and summer training and those are Dura Ace C50, Dura Ace C24 and RS80 C24. The C50s are measurably faster than the C24s for TT. Also for TT I put disc covers on the rear C50 which increases the weight but the bike is again measurably faster due to the further improved aero. The DA C50s weigh 1670gms, DA C24 1380gms and RS80 1530gms. I will choose the DA C50s for relatively flat spoertives and the DA C24s for tackling events in the Alps, Pyrenees or Dolomites. Based on my TT experience I "believe" (no comparative data) that the lighter wheels benefit me on the long relatively steep climbs and as I will be needing to brake on the descents aero is a lot less important whereas where there is the opportunity for some long relatively flat fast cruising I go for the DA C50s to take advantage of the better aero. That said I would not claim to be able to tell the difference between these wheels on the summer bike on a 50 mile "Sunday ride" when they all have the same tyre and tube combinations on. I can however tell the difference going the other way. If I have my winter training wheels on which are Open Pro rims on Ultegra hubs. These weigh in at 1880gms. The bike definitely feels more sluggish. In this case the wheels are both heavier and less aerodynamic than any of the Shimano sets. On of the big differences is the spoke count and type. The Open Pros are 32/32 standard whereas all the Shimanos are 16/20 bladed. This affects both the weight and the aero. Graham. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
Spiff !
graham, switched from round to aero spokeson same rim/tire/bike ? Results ? Subjective results carbon-metal 50 miles patchy road surface ? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
On 10/9/2016 8:21 PM, John B. wrote:
I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? I've never used carbon wheels, but I did something similar once, long ago. As a birthday gift, I was given a set of spoke covering wheel discs. They were nylon fabric stretched over an aluminum hoop, with clips that fastened them to the spokes. I was pretty enthused because I'd attended a Human Powered Vehicle (AKA streamlined bike) workshop where the presenters demonstrated the aero benefit. Spokes really do churn the air a lot! Anyway, I installed those on the rear wheel of my (then) only bike, the one I used for commuting, touring, time trials, etc. In those days, most of my rides home from work were treated as time trials. I recorded the times and killed myself trying to go fast. Suffice to say I could never detect a difference in those times, nor in the way the bike felt. This doesn't mean the discs didn't help. Indeed, I did install them for a while when I did a time trial or a century ride, because I was sure they made _some_ difference. But the difference certainly didn't change the riding experience. Ultimately, I just stopped using them. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
On Sunday, October 9, 2016 at 5:21:54 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? -- cheers, John B. How is it that carbon rims are more aerodynamic? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
Doug Landau wrote:
On Sunday, October 9, 2016 at 5:21:54 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote: I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? -- cheers, John B. How is it that carbon rims are more aerodynamic? They are not by default but you can get a more aerodynamic rim with less weight penalty. That is the whole deal. -- Lou |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
"Graham" wrote in message ... "John B." wrote in message ... I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? -- cheers, John B. As you say the time diffeence on a TT is measurable but on a Sunday ride then it really depends on the wheels whether I can tell the difference. I have standardised on Shimano wheels for TT, summer events, and summer training and those are Dura Ace C50, Dura Ace C24 and RS80 C24. The C50s are measurably faster than the C24s for TT. Also for TT I put disc covers on the rear C50 which increases the weight but the bike is again measurably faster due to the further improved aero. Unless you're going all out to save weight on anything you can, the only significance of wheel weight is; "unsprung weight" if you have suspension. And probably then, only if you have proper damping such as you'd find on an engined vehicle. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
On 10/10/16 11:21, John B. wrote:
I had always assumed that lighter wheels were faster but I have been reading recently that wheel weight, in the amounts usually encountered in bicycle wheels is largely superficial and the aerodynamic factor is far more important, thus the common "carbon wheel" is normally heavier but being more aerodynamic is faster. Since the wind resistance does increase by the square with doubled road speed this does seem reasonable, but sometimes what seems true isn't what things actually feel like in actual use. Has anyone gone from light weight aluminum alloy rims to carbon rims which are more aerodynamic but heavier? And if so what has your experience been. I suspect that on a, say 10 mile time trial, the carbon rims might prove beneficial but how about on a, say 50 mile "Sunday ride"? A pair of Zipp 404 wheels are both light and aerodynamic. Whether weight is an issue for you, is whether you have many hills and how steep? In a race sprint, I'd want both aero and light. -- JS |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Wheels
On 2016-10-10, Doug Landau wrote:
How is it that carbon rims are more aerodynamic? For some years now, all the aerodynamic innovation has been on carbon rim design, rather than alu rim. The carbon material is also more amenable to producing the dimpled design that seems to be more aero than a smooth surface. http://www.zipp.com/technologies/aerodynamics/ablc.php -- Gregory S. Sutter Mostly Harmless http://zer0.org/~gsutter/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
C-Record headset & wheels, other Campy wheels, XT/Mavic mtb wheels,Cannondale frame... | zip27514 | Marketplace | 0 | July 2nd 08 05:24 AM |
[wheels] road racing wheels recommendation | lechu | Techniques | 41 | May 8th 07 01:51 AM |
Standard 'training wheels' versus midprice 'race wheels' | flyingdutch | Australia | 8 | May 16th 05 04:13 AM |
700c wheels on frame meant for 27" wheels | kak61 | Techniques | 5 | January 8th 04 02:15 PM |
Trade: Mavic GP4 tubular wheels w/ Dura-Ace hubs for clincher wheels | Praveen Srinivasan | Marketplace | 0 | August 10th 03 10:20 AM |