Velocite filament wound rims

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor

Calnago wrote:
vmajor wrote:As promised here are the updates from the Taipei Cycle Show.

- Venn 507 TUC (tubular) is ready. I optimized the tire bed for 25mm wide tubular tires so the radius of the bed is 12.5mm and I sunk it a little deeper (still within ETRTO). A 25mm tubular tire makes perfect contact with the tire bed, and creates an excellent aerodynamic profile. The tire is also very stable which limits shear on the glue and this !may! reduce the crr as there would be less energy loss


I don't really like the idea of sinking the tubular deeper into the rim. I can see how sinking it creates a better aerodynamic profile at the rim/tire interface contact point, but it also forces it to adopt more clincher like handling characteristics in the process. The rim comes further up the sides, thus further restricting the free lateral movement of the tubular from side to side. Basically it's at least to some degree forcing it into clincher from a handling perspective. I would rather concede the tiny aero advantage at the rim/tire interface to the clincher/wide rim crowd, but leave the tubular alone to be able to fully do what it's so good at, versus a clincher. If you're going to bury the tubular deeper into the rim, you 1) negate some of the handling benefits of the tubular in the first place, so why bother, and 2) increase the possibility of pinch flats which is a big advantage to a tubular. So, I don't see the point, frankly. I would much rather retain every bit of flexibility in the tubular to adapt to the road surface than gain a teensy bit of aero from burying it.


I understand. The main purpose of the sinking the tire bed deeper is to achieve the correct amount of tubular tire exposure to match the larger radius of the 25mm tubular tire. I did not want to keep the same depth as dictated by tradition when the norm was 20 to 22mm wide tubulars.

So with our design you get better aerodynamics and great tire stability when using larger profile tubulars.

spartan
Posts: 1349
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:52 am

by spartan

too much smoke and mirrors in the wheel industry.

so are the new curve g4's chinese or taiwan sourced?

https://www.curvecycling.com.au/collect ... -wheelsets

the prices on velocites site is quite high at 1500USD. for that money i can get proven campy bora one's.

http://www.velocite-bikes.com/velocite- ... elset.html
Current Rides:

2018 Madone SLR DISC DI2 9XXX
2017 Giant TCR Advanced SL 0 DI2 9150

by Weenie


User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor



For Venn look here: http://www.velocite-bikes.com/?subcats= ... cts.search

Velocite RT50 use rims from an outside supplier and my own design triplet hubs, and just went on special :)

V.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

vmajor wrote:
Calnago wrote:
vmajor wrote:As promised here are the updates from the Taipei Cycle Show.

- Venn 507 TUC (tubular) is ready. I optimized the tire bed for 25mm wide tubular tires so the radius of the bed is 12.5mm and I sunk it a little deeper (still within ETRTO). A 25mm tubular tire makes perfect contact with the tire bed, and creates an excellent aerodynamic profile. The tire is also very stable which limits shear on the glue and this !may! reduce the crr as there would be less energy loss


I don't really like the idea of sinking the tubular deeper into the rim. I can see how sinking it creates a better aerodynamic profile at the rim/tire interface contact point, but it also forces it to adopt more clincher like handling characteristics in the process. The rim comes further up the sides, thus further restricting the free lateral movement of the tubular from side to side. Basically it's at least to some degree forcing it into clincher from a handling perspective. I would rather concede the tiny aero advantage at the rim/tire interface to the clincher/wide rim crowd, but leave the tubular alone to be able to fully do what it's so good at, versus a clincher. If you're going to bury the tubular deeper into the rim, you 1) negate some of the handling benefits of the tubular in the first place, so why bother, and 2) increase the possibility of pinch flats which is a big advantage to a tubular. So, I don't see the point, frankly. I would much rather retain every bit of flexibility in the tubular to adapt to the road surface than gain a teensy bit of aero from burying it.


I understand. The main purpose of the sinking the tire bed deeper is to achieve the correct amount of tubular tire exposure to match the larger radius of the 25mm tubular tire. I did not want to keep the same depth as dictated by tradition when the norm was 20 to 22mm wide tubulars.

So with our design you get better aerodynamics and great tire stability when using larger profile tubulars.

That doesn't make sense does it? I would automatically assume that in a wheel designed around a 25mm tubular, the radius would match a 25mm tubular, and not a 20-22mm tire. Who would purposely factor in a rim bed radius for a 20-22mm tire if the rim is being designed for a 25mm tubular? I don't think anyone would, and if they did then they'd be doing it wrong.

The radius for a 25mm tubular is larger than the radius for a 22mm tubular. Thus, for the same rim width, a 22mm would actually sit lower (sink deeper) than a 25mm. I get that a 25mm radius carved out of wider rim will sit deeper than a 25mm radius carved out of narrower rim, but that should be the only reason that it is deeper in my opinion. To sink it deeper than that, just creates the situation I just described. Or am I missing something?
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor

Calnago wrote:That doesn't make sense does it? I would automatically assume that in a wheel designed around a 25mm tubular, the radius would match a 25mm tubular, and not a 20-22mm tire. Who would purposely factor in a rim bed radius for a 20-22mm tire if the rim is being designed for a 25mm tubular? I don't think anyone would, and if they did then they'd be doing it wrong.

The radius for a 25mm tubular is larger than the radius for a 22mm tubular. Thus, for the same rim width, a 22mm would actually sit lower (sink deeper) than a 25mm. I get that a 25mm radius carved out of wider rim will sit deeper than a 25mm radius carved out of narrower rim, but that should be the only reason that it is deeper in my opinion. To sink it deeper than that, just creates the situation I just described. Or am I missing something?


You'd be surprised about things not making sense making it into production.

It is not sunk deeper than what is needed for a 25mm tire, but that also means that you should not use the old school narrow tubulars with the 507 rims, and it means that 507 rims would work very well with CX tubulars too as they would interface better than on the rims where compatibility with narrow tubulars is still a consideration.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Ok... so in the end it sounds like you didn't sink it any deeper than say, a new Campy Bora would be, also designed around a 25mm tubular. Or any rim for that matter that is designed around a 25mm tubular. That's ok, and fine, and what I would have expected and wanted.

Oh, and I would most definitely NOT be surprised about things that don't make sense making it into production. That ship sailed long ago.
:beerchug:
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

romalor
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 3:56 pm

by romalor

vmajor wrote:External nipples: soon. We are collecting more data. I do not want spoke hole cracks in field even if external nipple sized holes pass our machine testing.

Venn Rev 507 (Rev = filament wound technology) are available now. Have a look at the photo album I shared. There are some photos of it.


Nice I can't wait !
I probably will match the 507 on the back with a 35 on the front .
It suits my riding style and places better I think
I know 5mm is nothing and more of a mental thing but I would have chose 45 mm front and rear if possible :oops:

I contacted FSE to have their answer on cycling tips about theirs rims but I think you're right and the website sounds lot of Bullshit

User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor

Well, we have the Alter 44 TCC rim which is 44mm deep. Not filament wound, but uses a very good manual layup process that we call CTL:

http://www.venn-cycling.com/index.php/rims/ctl-rims

romalor
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 3:56 pm

by romalor

I have VENN 35 TCD and I believe in the filament wound technology
so I would feel like a step back even if I am shure they' re great ;)

User avatar
Tomstr
Posts: 572
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 5:04 pm

by Tomstr

romalor wrote:
I contacted FSE to have their answer on cycling tips about theirs rims but I think you're right and the website sounds lot of Bullshit


To be honest, the ride review doesn't come across as solid. Their review for the Shimano Dura-Ace C50 is much more in-depth. I'm guessing something is up but I'm not sure what. They may have taken their commercial model a bit too far.
Ride it like you stole it

User avatar
mpulsiv
Posts: 1340
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:17 pm

by mpulsiv

Tomstr wrote:
romalor wrote:
I contacted FSE to have their answer on cycling tips about theirs rims but I think you're right and the website sounds lot of Bullshit


To be honest, the ride review doesn't come across as solid. Their review for the Shimano Dura-Ace C50 is much more in-depth. I'm guessing something is up but I'm not sure what. They may have taken their commercial model a bit too far.


Let's not derail this thread.
So, let's get this straight. http://fse.bike registered their domain ~ 2 years ago. The wheels are not filament wound. Headquarters is in Tennessee, USA that import Chinese wheels?
Racing is a three-dimensional high-speed chess game, involving hundreds of pieces on the board.

:arrow: CBA = Chronic Bike Addiction
:arrow: OCD = Obsessive Cycling Disorder

User avatar
VTR1000SP2
Posts: 941
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:21 pm

by VTR1000SP2

How would one purchase the 507 rims?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor

To buy our rims send us a message here: http://www.venn-cycling.com/#contactus

User avatar
vmajor
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:09 am
Location: Beringen, Belgium
Contact:

by vmajor

bruto wrote:soon on GCN? :)


Now on GCN :)

https://youtu.be/X9uMLzHg_J4?t=3m14s

glepore
Posts: 1264
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:42 pm
Location: Virginia USA

by glepore

mpulsiv wrote:
Tomstr wrote:
romalor wrote:
I contacted FSE to have their answer on cycling tips about theirs rims but I think you're right and the website sounds lot of Bullshit


To be honest, the ride review doesn't come across as solid. Their review for the Shimano Dura-Ace C50 is much more in-depth. I'm guessing something is up but I'm not sure what. They may have taken their commercial model a bit too far.


Let's not derail this thread.
So, let's get this straight. http://fse.bike registered their domain ~ 2 years ago. The wheels are not filament wound. Headquarters is in Tennessee, USA that import Chinese wheels?


So, it seems that either we have the basis for a class action on the behalf of anyone that buys an FSE wheel or the basis for a libel suit. :popcorn:
Cysco Ti custom Campy SR mechanical (6.9);Berk custom (5.6); Serotta Ottrott(6.8) ; Anvil Custom steel Etap;1996 Colnago Technos Record

by Weenie


Post Reply