New Vision light carbon clinchers
Moderator: robbosmans
I've managed to build carbon 50mm clinchers as low as sub 1150g (dash hubs, chinese generic 50mm carbon rims.....currently using farsports basalt ones) and CX ray spokes. Nice stiff wheels but the hubs have been unreliable (I'd consider using Extralites next time) and the rims I used initially were rubbish. It's been a long expensive process but it IS do-able. My current build for them is probably closer to 1200g but atleast they are lasting well
Updated: Racing again! Thought this was unlikely! Eventually, I may even have a decent race!
Edit: 2015: darn near won the best South Island series (got second in age
-group)..woo hoo Racy Theremery is back!!
Edit: 2015: darn near won the best South Island series (got second in age
-group)..woo hoo Racy Theremery is back!!
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
metanoize wrote:@airwise There are new customers who'll buy lighter gear, there is R&D and new designs coming out every year. The Disc investment is even a bigger investment. But you can keep waiting, progress doesn't wait.
I'm all for progress. I just don't see any with carbon clinchers and don't see a breakthrough on the horizon either. They do look great though.
airwise wrote:[After all, in the recent Tour test, something like a Campagnolo Euros was more effective over most terrain than something like an Enve Smart and that was without taking the braking into consideration.
Is there a link to this information?
Thanks
I think he's referring to the recent Tour Test (Link) that showed the Eurus as being right up there with deep section carbon wheels in terms of aerodynamics
But I'll again voice my skepticism about their test and their testing protocols:
Why are they testing with a clothed dummy, and loose ropes/wires bouncing around?
I also don't quite understand their open test environment. It's significantly different from the other open and closed return tunnels I've seen in that usually the test subject is still shrouded and the tunnel doesn't 'open' until after the air passes over them.
And why does their data diverge so significantly from the manufacturer data, as well as other independent tests?
http://tv.tour-magazin.de/video/Material-Test-im-Windkanal/9c26e363c916bdf4b7a9ace27f4525f0
But I'll again voice my skepticism about their test and their testing protocols:
Why are they testing with a clothed dummy, and loose ropes/wires bouncing around?
I also don't quite understand their open test environment. It's significantly different from the other open and closed return tunnels I've seen in that usually the test subject is still shrouded and the tunnel doesn't 'open' until after the air passes over them.
And why does their data diverge so significantly from the manufacturer data, as well as other independent tests?
http://tv.tour-magazin.de/video/Material-Test-im-Windkanal/9c26e363c916bdf4b7a9ace27f4525f0