Hyperon Ultra Two vs Bora Ultra Two for all-around wheelset

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
Westbank
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 4:39 pm

by Westbank

Hello,

I'm currently shopping for a carbon tubular wheelset that I will use for training and racing. I'm down to two candidates; the Hyperon and the Bora.

Anyone has data on those wheelsets ?

Any personal feedback ?

by Weenie


solarider
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 9:08 pm

by solarider

I have owned both. Go Hyperon.

More serviceable, lighter to spin up to speed (it's all about rotating weight), prefer 'normal lacing' to G3, unless you are going really fast you won't notice the aero difference.

Also, Hyperons are classics. With the advent of wider rim profiles, the Bora narrow knife-edge rim might soon look out dated, and possibly be replaced.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 6717
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

Hyperon

User avatar
JKolmo
Posts: 384
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:00 pm

by JKolmo

I have both. If forced to sell one set I would keep the Hyperons. More allround and classic as mentioned.

User avatar
tommasini
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Central USA
Contact:

by tommasini

The Hyps are listed at 1230 grams vs 1310 for the Boras.

The only advantages I see is that this 80 grams is at the rim or the lower profile if you would ride in very gusty wind alot. So for instance if your riding involved repeated accelerations or slower paced steep climbing then consider going with the lighter rim. If your riding is more steady speed over average routes then I'd go the Boras for the much better aero qualities.

I was debating myself between a new set of Bora 80 vs Bora Ultra 50 for all around use. Aero was a definite priority as it's only mildly hilly here, I no longer care to jump into square course crits (when you turn 50 you finally decide it's just not worth the added risk to be around gonzo 20 somethings in the last few laps making totally careless decisions...), and the group rides and road races tend for the most part to be pretty steady pace......with sprints few and far between and even then they tend to start from a long way out so then it's more a matter of holding a better top speed. In my case I finally pushed aside the idea of the 80's because with those it was like 200 grams added to the rim weight (versus Bora Ultra 50) yet the aero gain was only estimated to be a couple of watts (80 vs 50). Not worth the tradeoff.
Last edited by tommasini on Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
cerro
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

by cerro

For which bike?
/jonas l
http://cerrol.wordpress.com (my cyclingblog)

fdegrove
Tubbie Guru
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 2:20 am
Location: Belgium

by fdegrove

Hi,

More serviceable, lighter to spin up to speed (it's all about rotating weight), prefer 'normal lacing' to G3, unless you are going really fast you won't notice the aero difference.


More serviceable? Same hubs. Only the Hyperons carry a lot more spokes to adjust than the Boras which I personally find quite a bit quicker to service spokewise. That said I never have to touch Campa wheels that much.

I had (and stil have) two sets of Boras (one Ultra the other Ultra Two) before acquiring a second hand set of Hyperons which I bought to replace some aging Neutrons (tubular of course).
While I haven't ridden the Hyperons that much yet the first impression is that although technically very similar to the Neutrons they're much more like lighter Boras without the aero.

Just as in Tomassini's location it's hilly atround here but nothing the Boras can't handle (provided the rider is in good enough shape).
The irony is however that the much heavier Neutrons are much easier to climb with than either Bora or Hyperon. So, go figure...

For what I do I don't really need the Hyperons. I guess I'll mostly fit them whenever I really need to climb or whenever the wind is blowing too hard for the Boras (rarely happens and I bet the Hyperons will get blown around just the same).
So, all in all the Hyperons are nice but for my use the Boras are a much better choice.
I wouldn't really train on them though, well, not in a large group anyway.

I can see the Hyperons do better than Boras in a typical Belgian style crit though.

Guess I didn't help much..... :oops:

Ciao, ;)
Being a snob is an expensive hobby.

Johnnysmooth
Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Beantown

by Johnnysmooth

Not campy, but I have Reynolds DV 46 and MV 32's
If I had to give up one, would let go of DVs as I find the MVs to provide a more comfortable ride over distance. Also, the extra depth of rim doesn't really come into play until you're up to speed. Also wind, shallower dish far easier to control.
It only hurts if you think.

User avatar
elviento
Posts: 1235
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:09 pm
Location: In the industry
Contact:

by elviento

Like Cerro said, which bike? Hyperons wouldn't look too great on a RB1000, would it?

That said, Hyperons are a bit more exclusive and will score you some style points. Boras are more commonly seen but functionally the difeerence in aero is worth the 80 grams additional weight.
Fast falcons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3mTPEuFcWk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
www.falcobike.com
Facebook: falcobikeglobal

Franklin
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:09 am

by Franklin

Westbank wrote:Hello,

I'm currently shopping for a carbon tubular wheelset that I will use for training and racing. I'm down to two candidates; the Hyperon and the Bora.

Anyone has data on those wheelsets ?

Any personal feedback ?


Why not a more sensible, cheaper set? I'd hate to crash a set of carbon wheels due to the costs. A pair of mavic/ambrosio rims, sapim spokes and some Hope* hubs are much cheaper, not that much heavier and you won't be broke if you end up in a pile-up/hit a pothole at 50+ kmph/ride in the wet and get grid in your brakes.

* Just an example, there are many good light hubs, even for reasonable prices. And even if you go the CK/DT way, hubs usually survive the crash.

User avatar
tommasini
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Central USA
Contact:

by tommasini

Westbank - look for a PM regarding some watts calculations/estimates that I used recently relative to Bora's.

fdegrove
Tubbie Guru
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 2:20 am
Location: Belgium

by fdegrove

Hi,

Would you mind sharing it with the Eastbank (aka the rest of us) as well ?

TIA, ;)
Being a snob is an expensive hobby.

User avatar
tommasini
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Central USA
Contact:

by tommasini

The HED online calculator I once used is now offline....and when I used it a few times a while ago I wasn't comparing Bora's to Box rims so I can't remember those results. (BTW if it comes up again, my understanding is that the Zipps on there are pre-firecrest). http://www.hedcycling.com/aerodynamics.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Only guessing on watts saved between box and Bora (I'd look at an average based on 0, 5, and 10 degrees yaw. I'll throw a guess out there that there is an average of 15watts difference.

Then using rough calculations gleemed from Mark Cote (aero Gruru) posting over on slowtwitch.com forums and elsewhere, if we are talking 15 watts at 30 mph (30 mph is what the HED graph is basd on) that equals about .44 mph faster, Now at 25 mph those 30mph watts saved has to be redefined which equates now to a little more than 8 watts at 25 mph or about .35 mph faster. Then at crusing speed of 20 mph, the equation gets you to about 4 1/2 watts saved which is about .28 mph faster.....those mphs increased speed is there thoughout the ride.......again I'm not an aero guru spouting exact watts saved figures but I did dig into the Mark Cote's calculations a bit a I feel reasonably close for basic comparison purposes. (FYI - some other sources like Velo/VeloNews have in the past offered time savings for watts saved that seem a bit generous compared to others. I know they'd have good sources but I decided to pick a source that was well respected but who's results were a bit conservative - so that way I hopefully would actually experiance the suggested end result).

In my case I wasn't in the market for Hypers but rather comparing Bora 50's with 80's , so I used some other Zipp data (for watts saved) comparing their pre-firecrest 404's to 808's (4 watts difference at 30 mph) and then drew some basic conclusions - which was that for my purposes the Bora 50 is a light, aero everyday/every condition race/ride workhorse at the speeds I tend to play at (20 mph cruising, 25 mph races/group rides, 30 mph sprints)....and based on the group riding/racing dynamics I get involved with that my experiance tells me I will feel a much better acceleration from the Bora 50's since the 80's are about 200 grams heavier at the rim. So while extra deep rims might look trendy they weren't for me.

fdegrove
Tubbie Guru
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 2:20 am
Location: Belgium

by fdegrove

Hi,

I think you're right on the money. 8)

Grazie mille, signore Tomasini. :thumbup:

Ciao, ;)
Being a snob is an expensive hobby.

Yashnoon
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:20 pm

by Yashnoon

tommasini wrote:.....


Great analysis!

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post