Hi, just wanted to get some opinions and experiences on the Reynolds 46 Aero and Knight Composites 35 clincher wheelsets regarding ride quality, braking performance and how they would fare on flat rolling terrain vs 6-8% climbs. Interested in both but can't decide which one. Mainly riding in flat, rolling terrain 90% of the time with some short punchy climbs.
I'm also wondering if there are any significant aero differences between a 46mm and 35mm profile?
Thanks for all responses!
Reynolds 46 Aero or Knight Composites 35
Moderator: robbosmans
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
I looked really closely at the Reynolds and decided they were the best option but, in the end, had to compromise on price and wentwith something else....good stuff about the Reynolds is that their design offers a greater aero benefit at speeds you're more likely to be doing more of the time. Also meant to handle cross winds well. Don't know about Knight but if I'd had the cash I would've gone for the Aero 46s...
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I don't have any experience of riding either wheel but I do have the Reynolds 58 Aero clinchers and I love them. They are noticeably faster on the flats than my Enve 2.2 (unfair comparison I know), although on the steep mountain climbs here in Japan, I prefer the 2.2. The braking surface on my 58's is really good and I never have any concerns when descending 8km of steep twisty mountain roads.
I can compare the big brothers, having owned a few sets of 58s and spent some time on the Knight 65.
The first surprise for me going from my Enve 4.5 tubular to 65 clincher was how smooth the Knights were (on a 23mm Conti and butyl tube). The ride quality was easily superior to the Enve and despite the extra ~350g I don't think the Knight gave up anything in terms of acceleration on flat or rolling terrain.
The next surprise was braking. The Knights are probably the best braking surface I've used in carbon. I'd put Reynolds as the next best and Zipp and Enve somewhere after.
Now, as far as acceleration, I've ridden very few wheels that ride as "light" (or handle wind as well) as the Reynolds aero series, however, their fault would be ride quality. These things are stiff. And the clincher internal width is so narrow that I find it a bit challenging to get much relief on clinchers. If you're not considering tubulars, is vote for the Knight. If you're willing to give tubs a try - I'd probably encourage the Reynolds... and by that I mean buy my 58s so I can try the 46
The first surprise for me going from my Enve 4.5 tubular to 65 clincher was how smooth the Knights were (on a 23mm Conti and butyl tube). The ride quality was easily superior to the Enve and despite the extra ~350g I don't think the Knight gave up anything in terms of acceleration on flat or rolling terrain.
The next surprise was braking. The Knights are probably the best braking surface I've used in carbon. I'd put Reynolds as the next best and Zipp and Enve somewhere after.
Now, as far as acceleration, I've ridden very few wheels that ride as "light" (or handle wind as well) as the Reynolds aero series, however, their fault would be ride quality. These things are stiff. And the clincher internal width is so narrow that I find it a bit challenging to get much relief on clinchers. If you're not considering tubulars, is vote for the Knight. If you're willing to give tubs a try - I'd probably encourage the Reynolds... and by that I mean buy my 58s so I can try the 46
Thanks for all your responses! They're all really helpful.
Finally someone who's ridden the Knights! Do you think the Knight 35s will ride as nicely as the 65s? I'm going for clinchers definitely and by uncomfortable (for Reynolds) do you mean a bumpy hard ride?
It looks like it's still a tough choice between these two. Coming off stock wheels, I'm not really sure what to expect from these big boys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Imaking20 wrote:I can compare the big brothers, having owned a few sets of 58s and spent some time on the Knight 65.
The first surprise for me going from my Enve 4.5 tubular to 65 clincher was how smooth the Knights were (on a 23mm Conti and butyl tube). The ride quality was easily superior to the Enve and despite the extra ~350g I don't think the Knight gave up anything in terms of acceleration on flat or rolling terrain.
The next surprise was braking. The Knights are probably the best braking surface I've used in carbon. I'd put Reynolds as the next best and Zipp and Enve somewhere after.
Now, as far as acceleration, I've ridden very few wheels that ride as "light" (or handle wind as well) as the Reynolds aero series, however, their fault would be ride quality. These things are stiff. And the clincher internal width is so narrow that I find it a bit challenging to get much relief on clinchers. If you're not considering tubulars, is vote for the Knight. If you're willing to give tubs a try - I'd probably encourage the Reynolds... and by that I mean buy my 58s so I can try the 46
Finally someone who's ridden the Knights! Do you think the Knight 35s will ride as nicely as the 65s? I'm going for clinchers definitely and by uncomfortable (for Reynolds) do you mean a bumpy hard ride?
It looks like it's still a tough choice between these two. Coming off stock wheels, I'm not really sure what to expect from these big boys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A buddy of mine has a relationship with Knight (they're fairly local to me) so he spends a lot of time on the 35s and 65s. He describes the ride of the 35s as "sublime" but he also keeps a set of tubulars around for his super responsive setup for crits. He was actually interested in my Enve 4.5s for that purpose but changed his mind after riding them - and I'd agree!
The deeper Reynolds have a very stiff ride. On the 58 clinchers, I ran 25mm cotton tires and latex tubes - which helped - but they're still noticeably more harsh than my 303 clinchers. My 58 tubulars are better than the clinchers. I'd expect 46s to be more compliant (which is why I want a pair). I'd also expect the Reynolds to spin up and hold speed better than the Knights but not by much.
Honestly, coming off of stock wheels, I would advise you to not expect too much out of a 35mm wheel depth. The "aero" benefit will likely be imperceptible. I've only recently acquired shallower depth carbon wheels (in tubular) because I've got the aero benefits covered with the 58s. As far as clinchers in the 202/2.2/35 category, I think you can get every bit of the same performance out of an alloy wheel for a lot less money - they just don't look as cool.
Edit: I should probably make that last comment a little less dogmatic. I was shocked at how comfortable the Knight 65s are and so I'd expect the 35s to be beautiful. Additionally, I'd put the Knight braking on par, in the dry, with some alloy setups I've had. So you're not really giving up the braking power of alloy - you're just paying a lot more for it. And that wide setup will, in my opinion, ride smoother than older style narrow alloy clinchers.
The deeper Reynolds have a very stiff ride. On the 58 clinchers, I ran 25mm cotton tires and latex tubes - which helped - but they're still noticeably more harsh than my 303 clinchers. My 58 tubulars are better than the clinchers. I'd expect 46s to be more compliant (which is why I want a pair). I'd also expect the Reynolds to spin up and hold speed better than the Knights but not by much.
Honestly, coming off of stock wheels, I would advise you to not expect too much out of a 35mm wheel depth. The "aero" benefit will likely be imperceptible. I've only recently acquired shallower depth carbon wheels (in tubular) because I've got the aero benefits covered with the 58s. As far as clinchers in the 202/2.2/35 category, I think you can get every bit of the same performance out of an alloy wheel for a lot less money - they just don't look as cool.
Edit: I should probably make that last comment a little less dogmatic. I was shocked at how comfortable the Knight 65s are and so I'd expect the 35s to be beautiful. Additionally, I'd put the Knight braking on par, in the dry, with some alloy setups I've had. So you're not really giving up the braking power of alloy - you're just paying a lot more for it. And that wide setup will, in my opinion, ride smoother than older style narrow alloy clinchers.
-
mike001100
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:26 am
I have Reynolds 46s, old ones (2015 spec) and they are the fastest wheel I have ridden, compared to 303s, Rovals (40 something and 60 something)
leerides wrote:After much deliberation, I decided to go with the Reynolds 46 Aero, mostly due to a lot of happy feedback on this wheelset.
Thanks again for all your responses! Can't wait to bring them out for a ride!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did You get them?
Aero 46 rimbrakes / clinch or tubs are still produced by Reynolds for 2017?
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
