2017 Mavic

Everything about building wheels, glueing tubs, etc.
Post Reply
gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

Am i right to be disappointed already? Seems like they are finally incorporating 2004 rim technology with 2010 wheel dimension/design tech. Would others agree? Seems they shouldve had all-carbon rims down by now and gone w 19 mm internal like enve, reynolds, easton and probably zipp in near future...are these wheels outdated before they've even been released? Adhering to outdated safety standards for no reason given so many thousands of 19mm internal rims already being ridden with zero issues?
Am i missing something...

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

by Weenie


TheKaiser
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

I agree with you man, it is puzzling, especially now that the same parent co. owns Mavic/Enve. They seem insanely attached to ISO standards, even though new information has come to light since the standards were developed. I have seen the suggestion that part of this ISO fixation is that they get a ton of OEM spec, and that bike companies don't want to spec non-conforming componentry. That all makes sense, except for all sorts of non conforming rims are specced by bike companies anyway, for instance Stans with their BST design, all of the hookless stuff, and the wider than ISO inner width models from everyone including Enve. Unless there is one particular bike co. that they don't want to lose, it just doesn't make sense.

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

That makes the most sense i can see...what a shame though they look like nice wheels otherwise esp for the pricr but already outdated....doh

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

TheKaiser
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

And what's more, the "matched wheel/tire combos" only improve performance when tires tires are better than the competition. Based on the blacked out labels on their sponsored riders' tires, matching brings fewer benefits than proper treads/casings/compounds.

I say all of this not as Mavic hater, but as a former Mavic rim fan who is saddened by them becoming kind of lame.

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

Yeah me too i was kind of psyched to consider getting back on to mavic wheels but now im telling myself to get over it and look elsewhere

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

istigatrice
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 8:32 am
Location: Australia

by istigatrice

I actually really like the specs of the 2017 Mavic stuff. I personally don't see a reason to go bigger than 17c internal, but I'm a lighter rider and usually ride 23/25mm tyres anyway. Perhaps they're sticking to 17c internal for frame clearance, caters for a larger audience and doesn't cannibalise the sale of Enve wheels. Agree that the tyres aren't great.

FWIW Aren't Zipp still using a 16/17c internal rim width on their carbon clinchers?
I write the weightweenies blog, hope you like it :)

Disclosure: I'm sponsored by Velocite, but I do give my honest opinion about them (I'm endorsed to race their bikes, not say nice things about them)

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

Zipp is creeping wider, 17 is their standard fot last 6 yrs or so. The mavic wheels were designed and even advertised way before any deal w emve i really think theyrr just not in the current ballgame trending or performanc-wise.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

Though the oem arguement makes sense but evem there a lot of manufacturers are allowing for wider clearance frame/fork wise

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

TheKaiser
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

gitsome wrote:Though the oem arguement makes sense but evem there a lot of manufacturers are allowing for wider clearance frame/fork wise

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk


Yes, most current frames and forks are trending toward more clearance. There are certainly a lot of existing bikes out there from the past 20yrs that might have limited clearance, and therefore be excluded from some of the new wider offerings, but since when are component companies concerned about leaving riders of older bikes out in the cold? It's new "standards" city in this industry!

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

Well i hear you but then by default those riders all have every single wheel made until now to choose from...newer and modern bikes and components and riders gain from improvements and innovation isnt that how it works?
Seems like even from a marketshare mavic will lose new sales other them oem if they dont get witht the times much faster. Seems myopic to me, kind of like Look designing 795 that cant take wide wheels and insist their proprietary components always better...maybe its french thing?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

wingguy
Posts: 3943
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:43 pm

by wingguy

gitsome wrote:Am i right to be disappointed already? Seems like they are finally incorporating 2004 rim technology with 2010 wheel dimension/design tech. Would others agree?

Not really, no. There are still lots of high end brand name wheels with comparable inner and outer widths, the same set of tyres inflated noticeably higher volume on demo Mavics than on my current generation Bora 35s, despite being supposedly the same width. The Cosmic / Ksyrium SLs are very competitive on weight for full carbon clincher vs some much more expensive rivals, and with absolutely fantastic braking. Easily the best I've ridden barring disc. That said, they're not the stiffest wheels around, and I would swap out the tyres as well. On balance, except for heavy, high power riders I'd be happy to recommend them to friends.

Also, the Enve/Mavic ownership is basically irrelevant. All of Mavic's current range was designed well before the Enve acquisition, and both Enve and Mavic reps have said there are no plans to merge the engineering departments at all. Enve's tech will stay in Utah, Mavic's tech will stay in Annecy. Only customer service and distribution will be streamlined - like Enve HQ taking over Mavic customer service in the USA market.

gitsome
Posts: 714
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 am
Location: nyc

by gitsome

I agree they look great otherwise especially at the price, just feels like 19mm becoming more the standard and offers wider range possibilities and being used currently so the mavics will be at the backend of the evolution/limited in what they offer. 19 seems to be increasingly popular standard.
Interested how volume of same tire can be different given same internal width, is this proven or just perception? Maybe one or othrr is not a true 17mm?
I for one really like 23 tire on widest rim, and have read somewhere its the peferable combo for speed

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
My wallet is the lightest thing on my bike.

by Weenie


TheKaiser
Posts: 511
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

gitsome wrote:Interested how volume of same tire can be different given same internal width, is this proven or just perception? Maybe one or othrr is not a true 17mm?

I for one really like 23 tire on widest rim, and have read somewhere its the peferable combo for speed


Yeah, without pics of calipers on both rims and calipers on the tire mounted to both rims at the same pressure it is really tough to say. Simply altering the pressure will change volume, due to the elasticity of the tire casing. One plausible rim difference is that the inner sidewall height of rims can vary, which will leave differing amounts of tire sidewall exposed above the beads, despite the same internal rim width. The more exposed tire sidewall there is, the more it can balloon outward.

An extreme example of this is that some of the Notubes rims are several mm shorter in sidewall height, whereas some of the hookless rim models seem to be made a bit taller than normal, perhaps to give a bit more margin for error before the tire blows off.

You are right that the narrowest tire on the widest rim is usually most aero, although aero doesn't necessarily equal "speed". From an aero perspective, a rim even wider than the tire would be best, but frame fitment and rim exposure to road damage can limit the possibilities a bit. Remember speed will also include a rolling resistance component, and in this case wider tires can reduce rolling resistance, both at the same pressure on smooth surfaces, and by lowering the pressure on rough surfaces, due to a reduction in "suspension losses". If you haven't already done so, check out Jarno's site here for some good comparisons of different widths of the same model tire: http://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post