Lightweight wheel suggestions

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Anyway, what do folks suggest for home-built light weight wheels?

Joseph

My experience is spokes pull out of American Classic hubs, and I'm relatively
light (127lb, a bit over my 124lb target weight...).

I recently bought a rear wheel from Speed Dream, which makes wheels to order,
and really like it: Velocity asymmetric rim and a White Industries 28-spoke hub.
900 grams, but solid and smooth.

For light, I'd go with sew-ups. You're probably using them for racing, anyway.

Dan

email hidden said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Anyway, what do folks suggest for home-built light weight wheels?

Joseph

At 160 lbs, he is still pretty heavy for a wheelset under 1400 gms.
Plus, any wheels of that weight (WITH skewers, most boutique or
lightweight wheel weights are listed WITHOUT skewers) are, IMO,
extremely sketchy unless you weigh 130 lbs. American Classic has some
magnesium-rimmed wheels that they list with a weight of 1100 gms or so
for the pair (w/o skewers) that they rate for up to 200 lbs.

Personally, I am at that weight and I wouldn't ride them. YMMV 😉

D'ohBoy

email hidden said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set.

1400g is verging on the insane. The lightest of the light Mavics are
around 1500 and Dura Ace's are 1700 or so. See this:

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=roadwheels

I do not endorse that site, but if you're into OCD and cycling, it's a
winner.

Quoted message said:

He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

Absolutely. I got in an argument with somebody over this a few nights
ago and slapped some figures in a spreadsheet. I ended up showing them
that normal strong wheels built with Aeroheads 32/28, Sapim Laser
spokes and some Campy hubs weighed the same as their boutique wheels,
but cost much much less.

Quoted message said:

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes.

The Sapim Laser spokes weigh the same amount as the CX-ray, but cost
1/3 as much. The CX-Rays are pretty cool and aero, though, and a wheel
built with them will still be less $$ than boutique kit.

Quoted message said:

Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Tubs are fun, but you can get some very light clinchers that are less
of a PITA. If I lived in Madison WI and could purchase my tubs at
Yellow Jersey, I'd think about running them. There's always Tufo
tubular-clinchers--which don't really save a ton of weight, but
they're idiosyncratic and might give a psychological edge--which is
what your buddy ultimately needs.

landotter said:

Tubs are fun, but you can get some very light clinchers that are less
of a PITA. If I lived in Madison WI and could purchase my tubs at
Yellow Jersey, I'd think about running them. There's always Tufo
tubular-clinchers--which don't really save a ton of weight, but
they're idiosyncratic and might give a psychological edge--which is
what your buddy ultimately needs.

Do they have them in red? Red tires feel faster.

Dan

On Feb 28, 11:22 am, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

Quoted message said:

landotter said:

Tubs are fun, but you can get some very light clinchers that are less
of a PITA. If I lived in Madison WI and could purchase my tubs at
Yellow Jersey, I'd think about running them. There's always Tufo
tubular-clinchers--which don't really save a ton of weight, but
they're idiosyncratic and might give a psychological edge--which is
what your buddy ultimately needs.

Do they have them in red? Red tires feel faster.

Dan

[valley dude] Shuh! http://www.biketiresdirect.com/information.asp?inf=tubclinch
[/dude]

In article
<[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims

I'm

Quoted message said:

not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Anyway, what do folks suggest for home-built light weight wheels?

Joseph

Zipp Team CSC wheels look like a good idea for durability and training.
28 2x front - 32 2x rear I think the set is about 1500 g. Something
similar and perhaps even more durable could be built up using Velocity
Aerohead (OC in rear) for about 50% of the cost I would think. Also uses
regular j-bend spokes so nothing fancy is needed for truing or repair.

Rick

Dan Connelly said:

landotter said:

Tubs are fun, but you can get some very light clinchers that are less
of a PITA. If I lived in Madison WI and could purchase my tubs at
Yellow Jersey, I'd think about running them. There's always Tufo
tubular-clinchers--which don't really save a ton of weight, but
they're idiosyncratic and might give a psychological edge--which is
what your buddy ultimately needs.

Do they have them in red? Red tires feel faster.

In fact Tufo does make red.

Real tubs are much lighter, much cheaper.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

email hidden said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Anyway, what do folks suggest for home-built light weight wheels?

Joseph

Two words: CARBON RIMS. Fairly generic off the shelf Open Pro rims
and Campagnolo Record hubs will get you around 1400 or so grams.
Maybe a bit more. 425 grams per rim, 250 rear hub, 120 front hub, 64
16/15 DB spokes and aluminum nipples at 5 grams per is 320, total of
1540 grams. Cose to 1400. Without skewers of course, add another 130
grams for official Record skewers. Subtract a few grams if going with
28 spoke wheels. Only way to get really light wheels, 1000-1100
grams, that are rideable, is to get carbon rims and tubulars. Search
the internet for stories about the lack of durability on the AC
magnesium wheels.

email hidden said:

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

There's an interesting article on the Cervelo site about when to go
aero and when to go light; basically, for the sake of a couple of
hundred grams, go aero for everything except a race up (but not back
down) the Alpe d'Huez. While the article references frames, the
conclusions apply even more to wheels.

Aero rims (really aero, not pretend aero) also means deep section and
carbon fibre, which gets you the double whammy of shorter and fewer
spokes for even more aero gains.

Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.

If your friend can't run to a deep section carbon wheelset, he's not
going to see much gain from anything less compared with a simple old
fashioned Open Pro (or Reflex), 28 Cx-Rays, Record/DuraAce/DT240 build

Open Pro on DT240s will be <1500g + skewers, at which point further
weight savings start to cost exponentially greater amounts of cash,
and if you actually wanted to go faster you'd choose the aero option
which will actually be slightly heavier

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

On Feb 28, 6:22 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

Quoted message said:

landotter said:

Tubs are fun, but you can get some very light clinchers that are less
of a PITA. If I lived in Madison WI and could purchase my tubs at
Yellow Jersey, I'd think about running them. There's always Tufo
tubular-clinchers--which don't really save a ton of weight, but
they're idiosyncratic and might give a psychological edge--which is
what your buddy ultimately needs.

Do they have them in red? Red tires feel faster.

Dan

That explains it! I have a blue bike with blue seat, tape and tires!
Redshift. It's all about the science, man.

Joseph

Kinky Cowboy said:

On 28 Feb 2007 07:44:09 -0800, "[email hidden]"

Quoted message said:

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

Quoted message said:

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

There's an interesting article on the Cervelo site about when to go
aero and when to go light; basically, for the sake of a couple of
hundred grams, go aero for everything except a race up (but not back
down) the Alpe d'Huez. While the article references frames, the
conclusions apply even more to wheels.

Aero rims (really aero, not pretend aero) also means deep section and
carbon fibre, which gets you the double whammy of shorter and fewer
spokes for even more aero gains.

Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.

If your friend can't run to a deep section carbon wheelset, he's not
going to see much gain from anything less compared with a simple old
fashioned Open Pro (or Reflex), 28 Cx-Rays, Record/DuraAce/DT240 build

That was my first pitch to him. Pick up some 50mm off-brand tubular
wheels on ebay for about $700. But he wants light, so I figure
anything other than a build like you suggest (That is to say Mavic
Kyserium ES or whatever) is a waste as you don't get more aero, you
don't get more lateral stiffness, you get funny parts, and they cost
more.

Quoted message said:

Open Pro on DT240s will be <1500g + skewers, at which point further
weight savings start to cost exponentially greater amounts of cash,
and if you actually wanted to go faster you'd choose the aero option
which will actually be slightly heavier

That is entirely my way of thinking, but around here most people are
hung up on weight.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.
I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

There's an interesting article on the Cervelo site about when to go
aero and when to go light; basically, for the sake of a couple of
hundred grams, go aero for everything except a race up (but not back
down) the Alpe d'Huez. While the article references frames, the
conclusions apply even more to wheels.

Quoted message said:

Kinky Cowboy <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Aero rims (really aero, not pretend aero) also means deep section and
carbon fibre, which gets you the double whammy of shorter and fewer
spokes for even more aero gains.
Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.
If your friend can't run to a deep section carbon wheelset, he's not
going to see much gain from anything less compared with a simple old
fashioned Open Pro (or Reflex), 28 Cx-Rays, Record/DuraAce/DT240 build

Quoted message said:

That was my first pitch to him. Pick up some 50mm off-brand tubular
wheels on ebay for about $700. But he wants light, so I figure
anything other than a build like you suggest (That is to say Mavic
Kyserium ES or whatever) is a waste as you don't get more aero, you
don't get more lateral stiffness, you get funny parts, and they cost
more.

Quoted message said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

Open Pro on DT240s will be <1500g + skewers, at which point further
weight savings start to cost exponentially greater amounts of cash,
and if you actually wanted to go faster you'd choose the aero option
which will actually be slightly heavier

Quoted message said:

That is entirely my way of thinking, but around here most people are
hung up on weight.

"off-brand tubular wheels on ebay for about $700"? You can build _new_
ones with tires for less than that.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

A Muzi said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote:
> A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
> light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
> boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
> around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.
> I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
> 24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
> not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
> tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.
There's an interesting article on the Cervelo site about when to go
aero and when to go light; basically, for the sake of a couple of
hundred grams, go aero for everything except a race up (but not back
down) the Alpe d'Huez. While the article references frames, the
conclusions apply even more to wheels.

Kinky Cowboy <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Aero rims (really aero, not pretend aero) also means deep section and
carbon fibre, which gets you the double whammy of shorter and fewer
spokes for even more aero gains.
Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.
If your friend can't run to a deep section carbon wheelset, he's not
going to see much gain from anything less compared with a simple old
fashioned Open Pro (or Reflex), 28 Cx-Rays, Record/DuraAce/DT240 build

Quoted message said:

That was my first pitch to him. Pick up some 50mm off-brand tubular
wheels on ebay for about $700. But he wants light, so I figure
anything other than a build like you suggest (That is to say Mavic
Kyserium ES or whatever) is a waste as you don't get more aero, you
don't get more lateral stiffness, you get funny parts, and they cost
more.

Kinky Cowboy said:

Open Pro on DT240s will be <1500g + skewers, at which point further
weight savings start to cost exponentially greater amounts of cash,
and if you actually wanted to go faster you'd choose the aero option
which will actually be slightly heavier

Quoted message said:

That is entirely my way of thinking, but around here most people are
hung up on weight.

"off-brand tubular wheels on ebay for about $700"? You can build _new_
ones with tires for less than that.

I meant off-brand 50mm+ deep aero section tubular carbon rim
wheelsets. Indeed nice non-carbon rim wheels can be built up for way
less than that.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

Hi All,

A riding buddy wants to get some better wheels than he has. He wants
light weight. Something under 1400g for the set. He was looking at
boutique wheels as that is more or less the only thing available
around here. My vote is for built-up wheels.

I was thinking American Classic hubs (light and not too expensive),
24/28 hole (he weighs only 160lbs) with Sapim CX-RAY spokes. Rims I'm
not sure. I think he is bitten by the weight bug enough to try
tubulars if that will get him light weight without extreme cost.

Anyway, what do folks suggest for home-built light weight wheels?

Given the problems I've seen and heard of with boutique hubs, I'd stick
with known-good ones like Dura Ace, Campy, and Hugi/DT. They may not be
the absolute lightest but they're darn close.

IRD makes a sub-400g rim with an asymmetric rear. This should help a lot,
especially with hubs that create more dish.

If you must, anyway.

Matt O.

Kinky Cowboy said:

Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.

I looked on Weight Weenies (a listing of real measured component
weights). Veloflex tubular tire, 240g. 275 for a Conti Sprinter. 23
section clincher tires (various, roughly tread-equivalent to the
Veloflex), figure 220g minimum for something with tread on it (open to
correction)., tube 90g, 12-20g for rim strip. You can get more
"extreme" differences but a 20mm clincher is not equivalent to a 23
section tubular unless you weigh 110lbs <g>. So, by my quick survey on
popular tires, with (for clinchers) non-latex inner tubes and real
rimstrips, a sewup weighs approx. 100g less than a really equivalent,
road-worthy clincher. Choosing carefully, you can take a pound, or
close to it (or maybe more), off the weight of a bike by using sewups,
including rims + tire weight, in the "durable, real" area-- IOW, no
superlight latex clincher tubes, or paper-thin, too-narrow tires, or
Reynolds Wrap rims.

There are different estimations of what this weight diff means IRT
"real world" performance when rolling resistance is figured in. From
what I've read, for a flat course, it might be very small-- "one
second", I've seen as an answer. For climbing, there is a small,
measurable difference in time-to-distance that, contrary to what has
been claimed in this ng, does not "get lost in the wash" of varying
course conditions or rider weight, etc., since it is a constant
factor. --D-y

On Feb 28, 1:35 pm, "[email hidden]"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
---snip---

Quoted message said:

I meant off-brand 50mm+ deep aero section tubular carbon rim
wheelsets.

---/snip---

This raises an interesting question. There have been plenty of folks
referencing the TOUR magazine aero wheel comparison, but does anyone
know of a comparison of un-aero (Open pro) to semi-aero (CXP33) to
kinda-aero (IRD Cadence Deep/Velocity Deep-V) to pretty aero (fill-in-
the-blank carbon 38mm) to really aero (fill-in-the-blank carbon 50mm)
rims? I'd like to build up a new set of lightish, aeroish wheels
before Lotoja this year (after 200 miles, every watt saved really adds
up), but am curious where the point of diminishing returns lies.

SYJ

A Muzi said:

"off-brand tubular wheels on ebay for about $700"? You can build _new_
ones with tires for less than that.

I just ran the numbers on my wheel building tool, (well... wheel
building PRICING tool, that is...) and for the following wheels:

Campy Record hubs
DT Swiss Revolution spokes (28F/32R)
Sun 19A-11A tubular rims
Alloy nipples

I came up with a combined weight of 1371 grams (which would include
skewers if the 117 / 231 gram weights are accurate) and a price of
under $400.

I'd say Andrew is VERY right on this one! Save $300 and get some
REALLY nice wheels, new.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

email hidden said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

Tubulars are no lighter than equivalent clinchers, so the weight
saving is only the 50 to 100g per rim differential, a notional
advantage which soon disappears when you factor in the lower rolling
resistance of the clinchers.

I looked on Weight Weenies (a listing of real measured component
weights). Veloflex tubular tire, 240g.

Conti GP Supersonic 23c, with Conti butyl tube, is 212g on my scale.
Veloflex Record 20c clincher fresh out of the box today is 15g less.
The rim tape (if you use one - veloplugs are lighter) will be about
the same as tub tape or glue, so no difference there.

Since you're trading a bit of casing and a base tape for a pair of
kevlar beads, it should be no surprise that making essentially the
same tyre with the same tube as either a tubular or a clincher yields
essentially the same total weight.

With a bike weight of 7.0kg and Cr of .005, I get 344W on the power
estimator at http://sportech.online.fr, cutting to 6.8kg and Cr=.006
gives 355W, both at 40kmh on level ground. Adding in a 5% slope and
cutting speed to 25kmh gives 452W for our notional clincher and 458W
for the tubular. Even powering up that slope, you'd need to save 1.5kg
from the bike weight to compensate for that 20% increase in rolling
resistance.

Just as you should choose your wheels for their aero characteristics
even at the expense of a few hundred grams of extra weight, you should
also choose your tyres for the lowest rolling resistance commensurate
with your desired comfort and durability criteria.

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Mark Hickey said:

A Muzi said:

"off-brand tubular wheels on ebay for about $700"? You can build _new_
ones with tires for less than that.

I just ran the numbers on my wheel building tool, (well... wheel
building PRICING tool, that is...) and for the following wheels:

Campy Record hubs
DT Swiss Revolution spokes (28F/32R)
Sun 19A-11A tubular rims
Alloy nipples

I came up with a combined weight of 1371 grams (which would include
skewers if the 117 / 231 gram weights are accurate) and a price of
under $400.

Make it an even 1400g with some brass nipples and you can wrap them
for me. :P