Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:46 am

All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm
Posts: 3332
TheKaiser wrote:
F45 wrote:
wingguy wrote:
On any other ring drive system there is nothing pushing the rings together when you're coasting, only when you're pedalling.


Do you have an example in mind of a ring drive like this? I heard American Classic has a full disengagement drive but I haven't actually looked at it.


I'd be curious to know what he has in mind too, as King calls their system a "ring drive" if I remember correctly and the seem to have a bit of drag as well, although some of that will be due to their seals, and their buzzing sound demonstrates that there is still a rubbing between the engagement rings when freewheeling.


The CK system works as below with spiral splines pushing the rings against each other when the freehub is driven. When it's freewheeling the rings will still pretty much sit against each other but they won't be pushed together. On the Zipp system their own video posted above shows the magnets constantly pushing the rings together while freewheeling, so you've got the normal ring drive friction... but more. I don't understand in what way that is ever going to function in a lower drag fashion than any other freehub design. It simply isn't any more disengaged than any other design, and there are many more points of contact between the rings at all times while freewheeling than there are with a normal pawl design.

Image


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:48 pm 
Offline
Shop Owner
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 313
Location: California
wingguy wrote:
nemeseri wrote:
very weird noise from the freehub

I don't understand the Cognition freehub. Or should I say, I don't think it works the way they claim it works. Spinning the freehub by hand the magnets clearly don't make the drive rings fully disengage from each other the way they're supposed to, and it is much, much draggier than a normal 177 spring and pawl freehub. With an NSW clamped into a slatwall wheel hook you can use the friction in the freehub to spin the wheel up to a good 10 or 20 rpm. With a 177 hub there isn't enough to make it move at all.


I got a chance to ride the 404NSW for a bit and I was blown away by the rear hub. Initially, I thought it was pretty gimmicky, but my butt dyno sensed a big difference compared to a normal hub while coasting and going downhill.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:48 pm 


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm
Posts: 3332
A big difference?

How much resistance is the rubbing of a normal freehub pawl supposed to contribute to a freewheeling bike anyway? Lost in the noise, I'd have thought :noidea:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:40 pm
Posts: 588
wingguy wrote:
A big difference?

How much resistance is the rubbing of a normal freehub pawl supposed to contribute to a freewheeling bike anyway? Lost in the noise, I'd have thought :noidea:


When I first got the wheelset I thought that there was some difference, but since then I'm pretty sure it was just my mind. I'm not saying that it's not working - it might save watts - but I don't feel the difference.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:02 am 
Offline
Shop Owner
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 313
Location: California
wingguy wrote:
A big difference?

How much resistance is the rubbing of a normal freehub pawl supposed to contribute to a freewheeling bike anyway? Lost in the noise, I'd have thought :noidea:


There was a significant difference when A/Bing the 404NSW compared to a normal 404 Firecrest in terms of perceived drag and slow down when coasting. I guess the next evolution of the test is to do a double blind...


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:09 pm
Posts: 150
I have a pair of 404 NSWs and they are not worth the cost difference between them and a set of Firecrest 404s. I got my 404 NSWs around 50% US retail costs by buying from the UK. But still, 404 Firecrests can be had so cheaply. Unless you really need the weight savings, the 404 NSWs just eat up brakepads faster

PERCEIVED difference is minimal. Only in accelerations in race do I feel like I am benefiting at all... So for the majority of riders, not worth it

_________________
BMC SLR01 2015
Redline Conquest Team


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:06 pm
Posts: 252
Location: Lower Saxony - Germany
https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/01/13/ro ... es-brakes/

According to Specialized's own tests, the 454 is less aerodynamic than the 1.415gr (real weight) Roval CLX 50...

Image

And another review: http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/cate ... iew-51031/

Sample came in 1.578gr sans skewers...

_________________
Infos on wide tires, rims and aerodynamics


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:41 am
Posts: 278
Beaver wrote:
https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/01/13/roval-components-introduces-wide-tubeless-super-light-clx-50-carbon-wheels-axles-brakes/

According to Specialized's own tests, the 454 is less aerodynamic than the 1.415gr (real weight) Roval CLX 50...

Image

And another review: http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/cate ... iew-51031/

Sample came in 1.578gr sans skewers...

a graph without Y axis scale numbers? so typical Specialized.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:06 pm
Posts: 252
Location: Lower Saxony - Germany
It just looks better without numbers. :) Tour Magazine stated 15 watt difference at 45km/h for a very aerodynamic wheelset compared to a non aerodynamic one (e.g. Aksium vs. Zipp 808). The graphs above will only be a few watts apart. But I like the looks, the weight and the 21c rim of the Roval CLX 50.
Enve also just updated the 3.4 SES to 21mm: http://enve.com/products/new-ses-3-4/

_________________
Infos on wide tires, rims and aerodynamics


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:55 pm
Posts: 2590
Location: Vienna, AUT
I am just here to wait for the next Zipp recall...

:popcorn:


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:45 am
Posts: 583
Beaver wrote:
It just looks better without numbers. :) Tour Magazine stated 15 watt difference at 45km/h for a very aerodynamic wheelset compared to a non aerodynamic one (e.g. Aksium vs. Zipp 808). The graphs above will only be a few watts apart. But I like the looks, the weight and the 21c rim of the Roval CLX 50.
Enve also just updated the 3.4 SES to 21mm: http://enve.com/products/new-ses-3-4/


have you seen the latest Bike Radar deep wheel test on Youtube?

They are claiming 40W difference between No1 and No10 wheelset (all similar deep depths). I'm struggling to get my head around that one.....

_________________
5 star and bespoke cycle tours in Majorca

Cycling related videos and reviews


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:26 pm
Posts: 997
The comboned totals were additive of 5 and 12.5 yaw, as you can't have both together the combined drag difference should be divided by 2. This the biggest difference is 49 w/2 =24.5w saving between best and worst. Still seems like a lot.

_________________
Evo 5.02kg SL3 6.77 Slice RS 8.89 viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110579" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:45 am
Posts: 583
Indeed. Shame they didn't test a basic shallow wheel as a control. Because if they're finding 40w between the same depth wheels, that would imply at least anither 40 over normal wheels.
So 80watts just by slapping some deep wheelson? I don't think so.

_________________
5 star and bespoke cycle tours in Majorca

Cycling related videos and reviews


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 5:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:40 pm
Posts: 588
cyclespeed wrote:
have you seen the latest Bike Radar deep wheel test on Youtube?

They are claiming 40W difference between No1 and No10 wheelset (all similar deep depths). I'm struggling to get my head around that one.....


That youtube review is worth a separate thread. 20-40W difference seemed to be insane at first. The test with a real rider was very-very far from being a good test (I believe every test should be done with a pedaling leg/hip only mannequin ala tour mag). Although the reviewer pointed out that they achieved the differences at 30 mph instead of the usual 40 kmph. What is a big difference indeed.


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 5:17 pm 


Top
   
 
 Post subject: Re: Zipp 454 NSW reviews
PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm
Posts: 3332
NiFTY wrote:
The comboned totals were additive of 5 and 12.5 yaw, as you can't have both together the combined drag difference should be divided by 2. This the biggest difference is 49 w/2 =24.5w saving between best and worst. Still seems like a lot.

Incorrect. At 5 degrees of yaw alone, the claimed gap from best to worst at that angle was 37w.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Space for a Wahoo mount with Zipp SL Sprint + Zipp SL 70 Aero setup?

in Road

Shrike

0

170

Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:08 am

Shrike View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Carbonsports Lightweight RENNBÜGEL drop bar - any reviews?

in Road

Johnny Rad

1

737

Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:56 am

KCookie View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Saevid Alien Saddle...Reviews/Experience

in Road

Squashednuts

11

942

Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:04 pm

bm0p700f View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Proper Negative Reviews For Boutique Parts

in Road

KWalker

9

1388

Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:03 am

Ahillock View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Berk list reviews/opinions & round vs oval rails

in Road

Lightweenie

5

936

Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:52 am

Lightweenie View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Clean39T, Google [Bot], Hapsmo911, phm8147, vanillaflyweight and 38 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