Calnago wrote:Like I said... Lol
Are you going to prove it wrong or just continue your usual whining about disc brakes?
.
Moderator: robbosmans
MoPho wrote:
That's hardly a big difference and doubtful as being the cause for much of a drag penalty, if any. Besides, the rims are more aero without the brake track, so makes up for it. And lighter too. I am about to have a set of Enve disc wheels built up and the (supposed) weight is the same as the non disc version despite having a greater rim depth.
Of course the rotor adds a little weight and little aero penalty, but still a non issue for most peopleAnd the typical average speed in the races I do is 28 mph. That figure of 3 watts is for the most common conditions, not the more extreme conditions that decide races.
So is it a common conditions that you are you out in the wind the entire race, or are you drafting/in a peloton? These aero penalties are usually calculated in a wind tunnel that doesn't necessarily represent a race situation where you are surrounded by other riders
And lets not forget that the vast majority of cyclists don't race, your scenario doesn't apply to most people who are looking to get disc brakes
.
Cheetahmk7 wrote:
That average speed is rolling turns. So not all the time is on the front but a considerable amount still is. It's not a big difference (similar to the difference between a 808 and 404) but add it to an aero helmet, frame, handlebars, shoes, shaved legs, skin suit and it will add up to a noticeable difference.
I reckon most people choose carbon wheels for their looks. Add on disc brakes to get the braking back up to the level of an alloy braking surface and they may as well have chosen some FLO30 alloy wheels as the drag and weight would have to be pretty line ball.
Cheetahmk7 wrote:It's possible to make the brake track any shape that is needed. It doesn't have to be flat and vertical.
Calnago wrote:Cheetahmk7 wrote:It's possible to make the brake track any shape that is needed. It doesn't have to be flat and vertical.
+1 Exactl,y! Thank you for stating the obvious, to most. The shape of the brake track (or side of a wheel) is not dependent on whether its a rim brake or a disk brake. You still need a sidewall to hold the tire on. Someone is really drinking the KoolAid.
MoPho wrote:
Uhh, show me such a brake track that is other than flat and vertical yet still functions as a brake track with caliper brakes. Never seen such a thing, certainly not on any aero wheels
Funny how you don't question BS when it fits your argument
And really, someone who buys Colnagos shouldn't be accusing anyone of "drinking the KoolAid"
MoPho wrote:Calnago wrote:Cheetahmk7 wrote:It's possible to make the brake track any shape that is needed. It doesn't have to be flat and vertical.
+1 Exactl,y! Thank you for stating the obvious, to most. The shape of the brake track (or side of a wheel) is not dependent on whether its a rim brake or a disk brake. You still need a sidewall to hold the tire on. Someone is really drinking the KoolAid.
Uhh, show me such a brake track that is other than flat and vertical yet still functions as a brake track with caliper brakes. Never seen such a thing, certainly not on any aero wheels
Funny how you don't question BS when it fits your argument
And really, someone who buys Colnagos shouldn't be accusing anyone of "drinking the KoolAid"
.
Calnago wrote:
Uh.... Zipp, for one
@Cheetahmk7: Could you please edit your last post. It looks like you're quoting me as saying something ridiculous, when in fact it was MoPho. Thanks.
Calnago wrote:You don't know that Zipps brake tracks are angled out, for more aero? Hmmm.
The FLO 30's brake track starts at 24.00mm and reaches 25.82mm at the bottom. The max width of the wheel is 25.96mm with an overall depth of 30mm.