School me on uber-light clinchers

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

BugsBunny7788
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 6:48 am

by BugsBunny7788

I'm not an expert but here are my thoughts...

For clinchers, I would stick with alumium rims instead of carbon rims. They aren't the lightest but the clincher design is better suited from a safety point of view with alumium. Carbon is not as suitable for the heating/resin heat/braking issues. Carbon is relatively better in this respect with the tubular design. Therefore, there arent that many uber light aluminium clinchers but I would think Fulcrum Racing Zero would be my pick from a bang for buck POV.

If you are merely crusing on flats and don't have heavy braking requirements - then by all means go with uber light carbon clinchers.

Again - I'm no expert and perhaps a little controversial (my POV) but its just an opinion I wish to share.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



kulivontot
Posts: 1163
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 7:28 pm

by kulivontot

<rant>
I don't think 1460g fulcrum racing zero qualifies for "uber light clincher"
I also don't think that any tubular qualifies by virtue of not being a clincher.
Aero and racing performance discussions also don't belong in a thread where op specifically asked about 1200-1300g clincher options. Literally 100's of other threads for pissing contests of tubie vs clincher, aero vs light, carbon vs alloy.
Please keep it on topic.
</rant>

BugsBunny7788
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 6:48 am

by BugsBunny7788

Kulivttot

Who put sh!t in your coffee this morning. And yeah - your just ranting mate!

Multebear
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 10:11 pm

by Multebear

kulivontot wrote:
Aero and racing performance discussions also don't belong in a thread where op specifically asked about 1200-1300g clincher options.



Just making sure that OP isn't in a delusion that lighter equals faster.

jamesbass
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 1:19 pm

by jamesbass

I notice that a lot of the light wheels have some kind of weight limit, usually 70-80kg. Could much more weight be shaved off for someone who is in the mid-50s? I wonder how low the weights would be if someone made wheels for people like me... Worth contacting the wheel manufacturers about? Or would that cost stupid money to do?

Multebear
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 10:11 pm

by Multebear

jamesbass wrote:I notice that a lot of the light wheels have some kind of weight limit, usually 70-80kg. Could much more weight be shaved off for someone who is in the mid-50s? I wonder how low the weights would be if someone made wheels for people like me... Worth contacting the wheel manufacturers about? Or would that cost stupid money to do?


If you choose some of the ligtest rims and build them with lets say 18/20 spokeconfig and light hubs, you would be able to get very low. Under 1.200 grams at least.

Making rims for very light riders in generel just isn't cost effective.

User avatar
sugarkane
in the industry
Posts: 1797
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:14 am
Location: SYD
Contact:

by sugarkane

jamesbass at that weight you could look at a 18/20 extralite, stans alpha or sl23 ( neither rims have a great life span though as they are not very tough ) and ti/super spokes.. that would be well sub 1200g wheel set. thing is though if your serious just get a pair of 202, Wr composite, or Enve 25 tubulars at laced to the extralites in 20/24 X-ray spokes at around 950 grams and never have a drama or break them...

fishey334
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:39 pm

by fishey334

xena wrote:I have 2 sets of clinchers both weigh around 1180grms the pair.
Set one I call my safe bet. They are very durable ,Stans rims AC hubs and rev spokes. These were built at Just riding along in the UK. 1182grms

MY set are Kinlin x200 rims sapim super spokes and dati sl hubs. These are very good but I do break the odd spoke even though the spoke count is higher. These are a wee bit lighter but more fragile.

I weigh around 80kilos [ low fat ]

Both were very cheap and definitely cannot tell the difference from some of the much more expensive production wheels I used to buy, mavic , topolino etc

Handbuilt is the way to go. I'm sure other WW will chip in.

The ultimate clinchers are fred Johnsons . You can get well under 800grms for a set . Awesome.


Wow thats awesome. 1200g Cool.


User avatar
mpulsiv
Posts: 1385
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:17 pm

by mpulsiv

Multebear wrote:True, but aero is the new light weight.


Not really. You'd need at least ~30mm "U" shape rim to yield aero advantage. Flo 30, Boyd Altamont and A33 Force are far from uber light. To build uber light wheelset, looks for shallow rims (e.g. ~20 mm).
Racing is a three-dimensional high-speed chess game, involving hundreds of pieces on the board.

:arrow: CBA = Chronic Bike Addiction
:arrow: OCD = Obsessive Cycling Disorder

Multebear
Posts: 1395
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 10:11 pm

by Multebear

mpulsiv wrote:
Multebear wrote:True, but aero is the new light weight.


Not really. You'd need at least ~30mm "U" shape rim to yield aero advantage. Flo 30, Boyd Altamont and A33 Force are far from uber light. To build uber light wheelset, looks for shallow rims (e.g. ~20 mm).


Don't pretend to disagree, when I know you don't :wink:

Besides that, my statement was related to the statement made by someone else, that this is weight weenies. Wanting to go light is fine, if it's just for the sake of looking at low figures on a scale. But if we're talking performance, then light weight might not be the answer everytime.

Post Reply