Mavic cosmic pro carbon SL clincher
Moderator: robbosmans
leungti1 wrote:I just bought a pair of these but very disappointed to find out these wheels weight 1570g vs. 1450g claimed (excluding tires/skewers)! I used two different scales and they show the same weight. Mavic is usually pretty good on weight but these are much heavier. Not sure if the weight comes from the rims or hubs. I suspect they found weakness in the rims and had to beef them up which resulted in higher weight. Anyone has the same issue?
I'm surprised to see that the Mavic Ksyrium SLR are really hard to beat, even for a lot of (high-end) carbon wheels. Their weight 1355 grams ...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
https://www.cycling-review.net
https://www.cycling-review.net
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
I just received my set of Cosmic Pro's and weighed them with tires and skewers... the front came out to 1110g vs 1080g (DA C35 with GP4000 23mm) and the rear wheel without the cassette but had tire and skewer 1280g vs 1220 (DA C35 also without cassette) wanted to go ride then so I didn't weigh them without the tires, skewers or tubes
wingguy wrote:New Zipp hubs are always coming.They came out this year, they'll come out next year, they'll come out the year after that. Then they'll all be recalled, then it starts all over again
Amen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Racing is a three-dimensional high-speed chess game, involving hundreds of pieces on the board.
CBA = Chronic Bike Addiction
OCD = Obsessive Cycling Disorder
CBA = Chronic Bike Addiction
OCD = Obsessive Cycling Disorder
leungti1 wrote:I just bought a pair of these but very disappointed to find out these wheels weight 1570g vs. 1450g claimed (excluding tires/skewers)!
If I'm reading what you did, it looks like your 1570g included the rim strips. See below, their contribution to the discrepancy is non trivial.
Here are my weights.
- Bare Wheels (F/R) ------ (657g/823g) 1480g
- Stock Rim Strips (F/R) -- (24.6g/24.4g) 49g
- Mavic Skewers (F/R) ----- (52g/56.5g) 108g
- Mavic Tires (F/R) ------ (217g/211g) 428g
- Mavic Tubes (F/R) ----- (131g/128g) 259g
The main sources of easily addressed extra weight were the stock rim strips, the stock skewers, and the stock tubes. I installed the following:
- Stans No Tubes rim strips 12g (-37g)
- Zipp Ti Skewers 55g (-53g)
- Continental Race Lite tubes 152g (-107g)
YMMV
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 pm
Interesting points here. I have also bought these wheels, and I am very pleased with them compared to the Reynolds assault slg they replaced. Braking is excellent, and they are very stable in wind.
I have two concerns though.
1. Why do Mavic say they should only be used with 25-32mm tubes, and fit the heaviest thickest tubes I have ever seen as standard? Concerned about heat?
2. Why do they insist only a 25mm tyre is suitable?
I currently have them fitted with Michelin pro 4 comps and continental light tubes. They seem OK, but I am nervous! Saved a whopping 186g verified though.
I have two concerns though.
1. Why do Mavic say they should only be used with 25-32mm tubes, and fit the heaviest thickest tubes I have ever seen as standard? Concerned about heat?
2. Why do they insist only a 25mm tyre is suitable?
I currently have them fitted with Michelin pro 4 comps and continental light tubes. They seem OK, but I am nervous! Saved a whopping 186g verified though.
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 pm
By the way, I weighed my front wheel at 692g with rim tape.
MadScientist wrote:Interesting points here. I have also bought these wheels, and I am very pleased with them compared to the Reynolds assault slg they replaced. Braking is excellent, and they are very stable in wind.
I have two concerns though.
1. Why do Mavic say they should only be used with 25-32mm tubes, and fit the heaviest thickest tubes I have ever seen as standard? Concerned about heat?
2. Why do they insist only a 25mm tyre is suitable?
I currently have them fitted with Michelin pro 4 comps and continental light tubes. They seem OK, but I am nervous! Saved a whopping 186g verified though.
It's a guess, but I suspect you are right on (1) ... some people buying these won't know what on earth they are doing and no punctures and less heat risk is a good thing as long as the heavy tubes aren't included in the marketing weight number right?
Personally I'd be happy riding them as you plan to, but that isn't a recommendation of course!
Those tubes are LOL heavy jeez
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 pm
Well, the Michelin pro 4 comp in 23mm measures up at 24.8mm, so I think I will be ok. Heat wise, don't brake downhill!
MadScientist wrote:1. Why do Mavic say they should only be used with 25-32mm tubes, and fit the heaviest thickest tubes I have ever seen as standard? Concerned about heat?
2. Why do they insist only a 25mm tyre is suitable?
Mavic are a very cautious and conservative company in a lot of respects. They adhere closely to industry standards from ETRTO - and (IIRC) ETRTO say that nothing smaller than a 25 should be used on a rim that has internal 17 width for tyre fit and security. Obviously a lot of other companies completely ignore this and nothing bad seems to be happening because of it, but Mavic stick to the letter of standard.
Vtrdaz wrote:Afternoon chaps,
I'm considering a pair of these myself over zipp 303's - does anyone have any more feedback on then?
In addition to the Cosmic Pro Carbon SL-C, I have a pair of Zipp 202 Firecrests with White Industries Hubs. My 202s are ~80 grams lighter than my Cosmic wheelset and while I climb a lot, I prefer the Mavics. In terms of personal preference I'm also liking the stock hubs on the Mavics. They engage quickly, but just be aware that when freewheeling the pawls do make a fair amount of noise (which I find helpful on the multi-use trails when coming up from behind walkers)
The area where the Cosmic Pro Carbon SL-C really shines over the Zipp Firecrest is the brake track. The SL-C brake track is substantially better. While I have seen a lot of positive reviews for the 303 NSW brake tracks, I don't have any direct experience wit them. Also the NSWs are $900 more than the Mavics. So if you're looking at the Firecrests, I'd say go with the new SL-C Cosmics.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com