Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:51 pm

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 12:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
Am i right to be disappointed already? Seems like they are finally incorporating 2004 rim technology with 2010 wheel dimension/design tech. Would others agree? Seems they shouldve had all-carbon rims down by now and gone w 19 mm internal like enve, reynolds, easton and probably zipp in near future...are these wheels outdated before they've even been released? Adhering to outdated safety standards for no reason given so many thousands of 19mm internal rims already being ridden with zero issues?
Am i missing something...

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm
Posts: 421
I agree with you man, it is puzzling, especially now that the same parent co. owns Mavic/Enve. They seem insanely attached to ISO standards, even though new information has come to light since the standards were developed. I have seen the suggestion that part of this ISO fixation is that they get a ton of OEM spec, and that bike companies don't want to spec non-conforming componentry. That all makes sense, except for all sorts of non conforming rims are specced by bike companies anyway, for instance Stans with their BST design, all of the hookless stuff, and the wider than ISO inner width models from everyone including Enve. Unless there is one particular bike co. that they don't want to lose, it just doesn't make sense.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:58 am 


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
That makes the most sense i can see...what a shame though they look like nice wheels otherwise esp for the pricr but already outdated....doh

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm
Posts: 421
And what's more, the "matched wheel/tire combos" only improve performance when tires tires are better than the competition. Based on the blacked out labels on their sponsored riders' tires, matching brings fewer benefits than proper treads/casings/compounds.

I say all of this not as Mavic hater, but as a former Mavic rim fan who is saddened by them becoming kind of lame.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
Yeah me too i was kind of psyched to consider getting back on to mavic wheels but now im telling myself to get over it and look elsewhere

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 4:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 8:32 am
Posts: 745
Location: Adelaide, Australia
I actually really like the specs of the 2017 Mavic stuff. I personally don't see a reason to go bigger than 17c internal, but I'm a lighter rider and usually ride 23/25mm tyres anyway. Perhaps they're sticking to 17c internal for frame clearance, caters for a larger audience and doesn't cannibalise the sale of Enve wheels. Agree that the tyres aren't great.

FWIW Aren't Zipp still using a 16/17c internal rim width on their carbon clinchers?

_________________
I write the weightweenies blog, hope you like it :)

My SwiftCarbon Ultravox

My Velocite Selene

Disclosure: I'm sponsored by Velocite, but I do give my honest opinion about them (I'm endorsed to race their bikes, not say nice things about them)


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
Zipp is creeping wider, 17 is their standard fot last 6 yrs or so. The mavic wheels were designed and even advertised way before any deal w emve i really think theyrr just not in the current ballgame trending or performanc-wise.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
Though the oem arguement makes sense but evem there a lot of manufacturers are allowing for wider clearance frame/fork wise

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm
Posts: 421
gitsome wrote:
Though the oem arguement makes sense but evem there a lot of manufacturers are allowing for wider clearance frame/fork wise

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk


Yes, most current frames and forks are trending toward more clearance. There are certainly a lot of existing bikes out there from the past 20yrs that might have limited clearance, and therefore be excluded from some of the new wider offerings, but since when are component companies concerned about leaving riders of older bikes out in the cold? It's new "standards" city in this industry!


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
Well i hear you but then by default those riders all have every single wheel made until now to choose from...newer and modern bikes and components and riders gain from improvements and innovation isnt that how it works?
Seems like even from a marketshare mavic will lose new sales other them oem if they dont get witht the times much faster. Seems myopic to me, kind of like Look designing 795 that cant take wide wheels and insist their proprietary components always better...maybe its french thing?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm
Posts: 3343
gitsome wrote:
Am i right to be disappointed already? Seems like they are finally incorporating 2004 rim technology with 2010 wheel dimension/design tech. Would others agree?

Not really, no. There are still lots of high end brand name wheels with comparable inner and outer widths, the same set of tyres inflated noticeably higher volume on demo Mavics than on my current generation Bora 35s, despite being supposedly the same width. The Cosmic / Ksyrium SLs are very competitive on weight for full carbon clincher vs some much more expensive rivals, and with absolutely fantastic braking. Easily the best I've ridden barring disc. That said, they're not the stiffest wheels around, and I would swap out the tyres as well. On balance, except for heavy, high power riders I'd be happy to recommend them to friends.

Also, the Enve/Mavic ownership is basically irrelevant. All of Mavic's current range was designed well before the Enve acquisition, and both Enve and Mavic reps have said there are no plans to merge the engineering departments at all. Enve's tech will stay in Utah, Mavic's tech will stay in Annecy. Only customer service and distribution will be streamlined - like Enve HQ taking over Mavic customer service in the USA market.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Posts: 713
Location: nyc
I agree they look great otherwise especially at the price, just feels like 19mm becoming more the standard and offers wider range possibilities and being used currently so the mavics will be at the backend of the evolution/limited in what they offer. 19 seems to be increasingly popular standard.
Interested how volume of same tire can be different given same internal width, is this proven or just perception? Maybe one or othrr is not a true 17mm?
I for one really like 23 tire on widest rim, and have read somewhere its the peferable combo for speed

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

_________________
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 10:12 pm 


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: 2017 Mavic
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm
Posts: 421
gitsome wrote:
Interested how volume of same tire can be different given same internal width, is this proven or just perception? Maybe one or othrr is not a true 17mm?

I for one really like 23 tire on widest rim, and have read somewhere its the peferable combo for speed


Yeah, without pics of calipers on both rims and calipers on the tire mounted to both rims at the same pressure it is really tough to say. Simply altering the pressure will change volume, due to the elasticity of the tire casing. One plausible rim difference is that the inner sidewall height of rims can vary, which will leave differing amounts of tire sidewall exposed above the beads, despite the same internal rim width. The more exposed tire sidewall there is, the more it can balloon outward.

An extreme example of this is that some of the Notubes rims are several mm shorter in sidewall height, whereas some of the hookless rim models seem to be made a bit taller than normal, perhaps to give a bit more margin for error before the tire blows off.

You are right that the narrowest tire on the widest rim is usually most aero, although aero doesn't necessarily equal "speed". From an aero perspective, a rim even wider than the tire would be best, but frame fitment and rim exposure to road damage can limit the possibilities a bit. Remember speed will also include a rolling resistance component, and in this case wider tires can reduce rolling resistance, both at the same pressure on smooth surfaces, and by lowering the pressure on rough surfaces, due to a reduction in "suspension losses". If you haven't already done so, check out Jarno's site here for some good comparisons of different widths of the same model tire: http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. 2017 mavic slc 40.vs Reynolds aero rims

in Everything wheels

gitsome

0

508

Thu Jan 26, 2017 7:20 pm

gitsome View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Anyone own or tested Mavic Comete Carbon Pro SL UST or Tubular 2017???

in Everything wheels

LRB23

3

498

Sun Jul 23, 2017 1:38 pm

LRB23 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Attachment(s) 2017 Mavic Cosmic Pro Tubular Set and S works Power 155. All new.

in For sale - Pictures are mandatory 22-3-13

89daytona

0

92

Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:56 pm

89daytona View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Attachment(s) 2017 Mavic Cosmic Pro Tubular Set and S works Power 155. All new.

in For sale - Pictures are mandatory 22-3-13

89daytona

0

197

Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:56 pm

89daytona View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Mavic Qr Titanium + Mavic Tubulars + Mavic Carbon Brake Pads - NEW

in For sale - Pictures are mandatory 22-3-13

elfuinha

0

87

Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:02 pm

elfuinha View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited