Shamal Mille ultra dark label v R-Sys SLR's

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

Moderator: robbosmans

RickDraper
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:41 pm

by RickDraper

Given the choice of either a pair of Campagnolo Shamal Mille's with the new brake track or some Mavic R-sys slr's what would people choose and why?

I have owned some Fulcrum racing zeros in the past and they were trouble free, I have little experience of mavics.

The wheels will be going on a Colnago c60 with SR.

wingguy
Posts: 4318
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

One of the best sets of hubs around on the Shamals - a lighter rim and overall weight, and stiffer, more responsive feel on the R-Sys, which you would expect for the extra cash!

Until this year I'd have said the Shamals were better looking, but the new 4D milling on the mavic rims is beautiful.

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



RedRacer
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:13 pm

by RedRacer

I vote for the 2015 Mavic Ksyrium SLR over the R-SYS model for the cost and aero advantage. I would probably take the Mavic over Fulcrum on looks and weight alone. Had Racing Zeros for two years (great wheels) but they are the only road hubs that ever let me down…..freehub malfunctioned 50 miles from home.

http://www.mavic.com/wheels-road-triath ... Ls4y0sSHwI

Geoff
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:25 am
Location: Canada

by Geoff

I have quite a few Mavic sets and Campagnolo sets. I personally think that the Campagnolo wheels are superior from the construction of the hubs alone. There is no substitute for angular contact bearings in a hub application. The other thing I like about the Shamal is the two-way fit. I am running a tubeless test right now and that wheel has been really quite good.


sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

+2

No question the Shamals. As far as alu spoked clincher wheels go, they don't come any better than Shamals

Hubs and aerodynamics are both superior to Mavic

It sounds like you don't want people to say "neither" ... so I'll say that if that was an option I'd choose neither

By way of example there is no logic to choosing Shamals over Zondas unless you attach a huge amount of importance to the black brake track (which does look very nice)
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

RedRacer
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:13 pm

by RedRacer

sawyer wrote:
No question the Shamals. As far as alu spoked clincher wheels go, they don't come any better than Shamals

Hubs and aerodynamics are both superior to Mavic



Is there any data to support the Shamals being more aero than the Ksyrium SLR or is it based on the ancient test that showed some Mavics to be very un-aero? No doubt the round carbon R-SYS spokes are bad for aero but the Ksyrium spokes look a lot like the Shamal's spokes and neither of them have aero rims, although the Mavic are smoother with the new 4D milling.

A part (spring IIRC) inside my Fulcrum Racing Zero (aka Shamal) freehub malfunctioned after ~1000 miles. My Mavic Ksyrium SLR hubs with many more miles are still working perfectly.

sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

RedRacer wrote:
sawyer wrote:
No question the Shamals. As far as alu spoked clincher wheels go, they don't come any better than Shamals

Hubs and aerodynamics are both superior to Mavic



Is there any data to support the Shamals being more aero than the Ksyrium SLR or is it based on the ancient test that showed some Mavics to be very un-aero? No doubt the round carbon R-SYS spokes are bad for aero but the Ksyrium spokes look a lot like the Shamal's spokes and neither of them have aero rims, although the Mavic are smoother with the new 4D milling.

A part (spring IIRC) inside my Fulcrum Racing Zero (aka Shamal) freehub malfunctioned after ~1000 miles. My Mavic Ksyrium SLR hubs with many more miles are still working perfectly.



You're an outlier in terms of hub experience ... it's not that Mavic hubs are unreliable, just that they aren't as smooth as Campag

Aside from the old data (which doesn't flatter Mavic, you're right) Mavic's have more front spokes, and fatter spokes, which, given the rims aren't all that different in shape and profile, very probably makes them less aero.

Disagree Mavic have smoother rim profile
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

wingguy
Posts: 4318
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

'Disagree Mavic have smoother rim profile'

Have you seen the new ones? The 4D milling is way different to the previous shape.

sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

It is way better yes. Shamal is also a U shape though.
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

wingguy
Posts: 4318
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

With squared edges and sharp ridges around the G3 groups. By any definition of smooth, the Mavics are it.

sawyer
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Location: Natovi Landing

by sawyer

wingguy wrote:With squared edges and sharp ridges around the G3 groups. By any definition of smooth, the Mavics are it.


You talking about the rims or hubs :wink:

The new rim shape looks far better, though I doubt the difference you refer to vs G3 surround will make much if any measurable difference to the aerodynamics.

What will likely make more difference - in the other direction - are the additional, big fat alu marketing spokes.

Both these wheelsets are overpriced marketing exercises however. If you want really good wheels, buy tubs, otherwise just buy Zondas / Shimanos / handbuilts which are as good or better than either of these
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:

wingguy
Posts: 4318
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

Like I said, it's not just the G3 grouping, the shamals have clear edges all around the wheel from the sides meet the flat centre. Sure, you can debate the aero effect but the Mavics are clearly smoother and that's all I picked you up on.

User avatar
dadoflam08
Posts: 951
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:25 am
Location: Southern Great Southern Land

by dadoflam08

I have both 2014 SLR's and Fulcrum Zero's (Shamals in Lamb's clothing) although not the Mille finish.

I would recommend the Campy wheels over the Mavics.

Apart from the new 2015 Mavic SLR rim shape which is now wider, rounder and lighter and the new Mille brake track of the Shamals I am assuming the basics of both wheels are unchanged.

The Mavic hubs run very well if maintained but the Fulcrum/Campy CULT hubs are superb and need less adjustment day-to-day.

In 2014 the Fulcrums were lighter - 1420g VS 1425g - but with the new rim the 2015 Mavics have dropped another 30g so there is now a bit of a difference in favour of the Mavics.

The ride quality and stiffness of the Fulcrum wins hands down compared to the Mavics - the Fulcrums are comfortably compliant vertically and quite stiff laterally - I don't get any brake rub when out of the saddle. The Mavics are harsher vertically - really noticeable when going over bumps - and softer laterally - I do get brake rub with them.

I got my Mavics because of the better all-black looks and excellent braking. With the new Mille/Nite finish available I am planning on buying a set of 2015 Zero's with Nite finish and selling the other two sets of wheels.
'83 De Rosa+'11 Baum Corretto+'08 BMC Pro Machine >6kg+'86 Pinarello Team +'72 Cinelli SC +'58 Bianchi+'71 Cinelli SC+'78 Masi GC+'83 La Redoute Motobecane+'94 Banesto Pegoretti+'88 Bianchi X4 +'48 Super Elliott+'99 Look Kg281+'18 Pegoretti

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



RickDraper
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:41 pm

by RickDraper

The Mavic's weigh 1295g I believe.

Post Reply