I can guarantee you that we are not (and would not) use the Far Sports rims in our designs. Our new stuff is all proprietary moulds from Taiwan and we have spent a lot of time testing different layups to make the strongest and best heat resistant rims. You will not find the rims on any other line.

_________________
http://www.boydcycling.com High performance wheels you can afford

That's an assumption that the knock off artists hope you'll make.

Zipps firecrest shape isn't as simple as keeping the sides flatter and rounding the inside edge of the rim...

They went through a lot of iterations and the design simply doesn't work nearly as well in cross wind or total aero performance without those blown up widths.


The spoke beds take a lot more effort from the big guys making this shape too...

_________________
charles@pezcyclingnews.com

Geoff posted some time ago, that people would run the wide Zipps/HEDs with the quick release open, and just close it when putting in a normal-width replacement wheel. Sounds like a nifty trick. Think he mentioned Dura Ace calipers, but might work for others too?

_________________
Bikes: Raceur, Beateur

By e-mail to their customers. Or at least, to me.
Here's the cut&paste below:

This is Smart. Sorry to trouble you again!

In the begining of 2013,our company have two new mould(U shape) for 50mm clincher wheels.

1,25mm wide 50mm deep clincher wheels(basalt brake surface)
Superlight 50mm clincher wheels(25mm wide,new U shape,basalt brake surface) +DT swiss 240s hubs+Sapim Cx-ray spokes=1470g(+/-30g)
[pics attached to post]

2, Alloy brake surface 50mm deep clincher wheels
Superlight 50mm clincher wheels(new U shape, alloy brake surface) +EDhubs+Sapim Cx-ray spokes=1450g(+/-30g)
[pics attached to post]

If you need more details, please feel free to let me know! I will sent them to you timely.


-------
Since they build their own wheels in house, I assume you can get a build of the new shape/cx-ray/edhubs for something a bit lighter than th eDTSwiss option. I replied asking if they will develop a rim with the new shape but lower profile (reminiscent of the 3.4's style)... like 40mm or so... I will let you know when I get that reply.

-----

@CharlesM

I agree with you in that the ZIPP and ENVE shapes (possibly even include Bontrager here) have been developed to the finite precision after years of testing and iterations, and they are probably the fastest out there.

That being said, I still would very much like to see a 4th party* test of all the latest shapes, including older shapes, from a wide range of manufacturers done and made available. For this test I'd like to see testing include the wheels insitu (on the bike, with rider) and the same tires for each where possible. I want to see included both new and older models from the following: ZIPP, ENVE, Xentis, Corima, Mavic, FarSports (who could also rep Boyd, Williams, Soul unless they really feel their shapes are not coming from FarSports-like origin and they developed their shapes themselves and that their shapes are distinct from their competitors in their class), HED, CarbonSports Lightweight, Reynolds, Madfiber, Shimano, Campagnolo/Fulcrum, American Classic, Kinlin, and Stans NoTubes.

*4th Party meaning having non-bias beyond the 3rd party. An org conducting the test that is not even in the industry of cycling in any way, including not being a news blog, not being a tech blog, not having any interest in cycling itself... just out there to test claims within any industry.

I can dream that'll happen, right?

_________________
Exp001

Thanks!

I'm also very eager to see if they release some 30-40mm depth in that shape. I'm a belieber.



I'll go wait by my inbox for their email...

I really want to believe you about that.

But, anyway, best of luck in the market as with any year! I do think that you provide excellent wheels to many cyclists, as do other providers such as Williams, Soul, and ROL, and so on...
I have recommended you (and the others, listed) to a few folks to look into as they were looking for affordable wheels but did not want to venture into the custom build arena.

_________________
Exp001

...actually, just thinking about how that test might be run:

Same rider, same clothes, same helmet, same frame/drivetrain/build around a track, with powermeter, and just swapping the wheels.

No Wind:
Rider is timed for 4 laps at a consistent wattage. Time difference is noted... which determines through calculation how one is more aero than another.
Brake test can also be done here: distance needed to come to complete stop if brakes are hit at the finish line.

Variable Wind:
Parts of the track have strategically placed fans producing wind, making for a consistent yaw as the rider circles the track Time difference noted.

Headwind:
Rider follows a vehicle with a fan producing wind, facing the rider. Consistent wattage on powermeter. Time difference noted.

...and so on.

_________________
Exp001

Pren, I think in the end, a pedaling dummy in the wind tunnel will give you more accurate results and faster too.

A person field testing on a track can discern small differences between products, but with such a massive amount of runs you are talking about, I think it would be hard. Field testing thrives on the person being conscious both of power output and position.

I wonder if a person were to design a wheel in the following way how good/bad it would be:
1. Find a NACA airfoil with a very circular leading edge thats a bit deeper than it is wide
2. Find a NACA airfoil that works well in low speed situations again fairly deep
3. At the widest point cut off the "tail" of each airfoil and mate them
4. replace the "circular" leading edge with a tire bed, a little deeper than traditionally used but not so much to risk damage to the wheel, a la Hed's first blunt rims
5. Place this shape in the point halfway up/down from the axle height of the rim (any given rim has almost an infinite amount of shapes horizontal to the plane of travel; i.e. just as a bike tube is more than 3:1 when measured in direction of travel, a bike rim is very differently shaped in the horizontal plane above and below the rims midpoint); and translate what the blunter shape should be at the mid point of the rim (if we derived a 4:1 back to back airfoil in steps 1-4, then it would likely be 3:1 at horizontal) (as an example, my hed 3 is 55/19 at the axle height; and ~68/19 half way up/down form the axle)
6. Make rim with 3:1 back to back airfoil shape, cutting off front 20mm for tire/rim bed...

I'm not certain this rim would be fast, but I'm guessing it would stack up

I think its unfortunate that those producing open mold type products have been very slow on the uptake of very available information to make their products faster. Most of the original time trial frames had tubes over 35mm wide and focused more on using identifiable elements from popular bikes than the elements that made those bikes fast(3:1 tubes under 30mm). Wheel design has not been that different from what I can gather.

Boom. We've got an update:
Smart (yes, that's his name, probably a direct translation from his Chinese name) over at FarSports sent me the tech drawings from the rims. They're attached.
Lookin' good.

Again, I'm very, very interested in having a 4th party review as stated earlier. I think NGNM's thoughts on it are great. I also think that, at this point, having such a test would really clear up the hype on both sides of the matter.

_________________
Exp001

Nice find PF.

But there's one thing missing.............(and you know......)

That would be promising under, let's say, 420-430g (for full carbon).

Louis

_________________
http://www.ccsalma.com

Lookin' Zippy!

@LouisN


Yep, I'm already on it. The conversation with Smart is still going... I'll have much more info in due time.

_________________
Exp001

The shapes not zipps... Especially the aly rim version. The inside (spoke bed)edge is more pointy (either on accident or because they couldnt make the rim bed strong enough with the more rounded shape) and the side walls getting closer together are counter to the Rounded but wider design trend(as well as not being wide relative to the majors).

As knock offs go, this probably could have been quite a bit better all round.

_________________
charles@pezcyclingnews.com

Megacomposites of Taiwan is showing wider rims in its latest catalog.

I have some of their (21)mm wide, 50mm deep, full carbon clinchers.

http://www.megacomposite.com.tw/