Princeton Carbonworks wheels

[Ypuh]

At least they look good and the pricing at $2.200 with WI hubs seems reasonable. Only the brake track seems forgotten.

In The Netherlands we have a brand FFWD (also in WT Pro racing) and they are very neat. Look good, good built quality (laced up in The Netherlands), great warranty, but the braking performance was downright scary at times. As soon as 3 drops came out of the sky, I was in the back of our group meeting new people and start braking 30 meters earlier when a corner came up (not kidding).

I've upgraded to the newer Zipp's. Altough the name Showstopper sounds like a marketing gimmick, it actually works. I still try to avoid rain with these wheels, but if it happens I feel a bit more confident. They also pass the 'look' test more than the FFWD's.

[FlatlandClimber]

I am just now reading that a lot of effort was put into getting the Wake/Blur combo to MVDP for today's TT (https://cyclingtips.com/2021/06/the-900 ... -der-poel/).
With him and Ineos riding these in flat TTs, I am really wondering:
Are these THAT fast?
The front wheel doesn't look nearly as fast as Aerocoach TITAN or a Tri-Spoke.
What they look to me doesn't really matter, but I just can't fathom the Wake 6560 be nearly as fast a 80mm deep or a multi-spoke wheel.

Stability might be an argument, but Ineos rode the 100mm deep Titans in last year's mega windy TT and Ganna didn't seem to have issues with it.
Also, they are UCI legal again, with the new hub design.

Are there any reliable tests/ white papers or anything?
What are your opinions?

[FlatlandClimber]

Funny how MVDP and most of Ineos were on AEOX Titans

[mrlobber]

With him and Ineos riding these in flat TTs, I am really wondering:
Are these THAT fast?
What are your opinions?

Even the Aerocoach Titan might not always be the fastest, also by AC own charts (Hed 9+, for instance, is ever so slightly faster at yaw angles from 2 to 5 deg).

Sometimes I wonder on the wheel choices too, however, I start suspecting this might be even more individual than previously thought, so maybe pros (those, who test), do have more data at their disposal. Myself, as an example, I've alternated between gen1 Aeox100 (the Titan predecessor) and Enve 6 on the front (with the same Corsa Speed 2.0 tyre), and in races I've ALWAYS been faster on the Enve to the point I've now binned the Aeox altogether (on a P5 Rim, which theoretically is the same Aerocoach test their wheels on).

But in this case regarding Princeton, it's a total mystery except if actually it was a "partisan" marketing by Princeton, as I can't see any reason why that wheel would be faster either.

[bikewithnoname]

Could weight be a factor?

The course wasn't exactly pan flat. The 6560 is 660gms whereas the Aerocoach Titan and tri spokes are 1kg +/- a few grams. Less rotating mass and a little less aero might be the right formula for that course.

[FlatlandClimber]

It's still a over 50kph average TT. Very unlikely that that was the train of thought.
Rolling hills usually don't really favor light weight much. You have to carry less weight up (while still going 40kph, so aero drag is still massive), but have also less potential energy going down again.

Aaaand, everyone was using Titans, including Ineos, JV, and Van der Poel.

[ichobi]

The smallest guy in Ineos was using the deepest wheel (carapaz). If you buy the ‘stability’ story, this clearly isn’t. May be some riders just prefer the feel when turning shallower wheels? I for one prefer that to a deep wheel in fast corner. Doesnt have to be wavy wheels though.

Another thing is that Princeton probably couldnt afford to pay Ineos to do partisan marketing and such. If Shimano, which is one of if not the largest entity in cycling couldn’t do it, how could Princeton?

I find it baffling that Shimano wouldnt make some blacked out custom wheels for Ineos to their requested spec. They could easily do all these if they so wish. All i can think of is that they dont really care the high end road market all that much.

[NovemberDave]

I find it baffling that Shimano wouldnt make some blacked out custom wheels for Ineos to their requested spec. They could easily do all these if they so wish. All i can think of is that they dont really care the high end road market all that much.

This is a great question and point. When we talk about the "high end road market," that can mean a few things. What percent of overall bike spending is influenced by what happens in a Tour time trial? Almost none is my guess. Shimano could do a bunch of different molds since they're "only" about $6000 or so these days, and spend a bunch of engineering time and resouces on doing it, but they probably recognized that this part of the business is just throwing cost at something that fails to give a return. Look at all of the resources that were used to get one set of wheels to MVDP for the time trial, and the front (more important wheel) wasn't even used. They probably overlaid the wind conditions against the course and said "wind angle x is going to be more important than wind angle y and so we will use the 90mm deep wheel." This assumes your equipment testing/knowledge matches up precisely with what actually happens, and that your prediction parameters meet what's encountered on course. You could literally spend infinite money chasing this, and not see a business benefit.

Add to the above that you now have maybe 6 different "TT front wheels." How do you articulate that all to the customer, how do you keep them available in your supply chain? If you are doing it just to have your sticker on the wheel, then you get all of that benefit just by making your teams rebrand their wheels to Shimano. Any product used that's not a product that's available to your customers through your distribution is a negative to you. So it's no benefit to have a bunch of wheels that your teams use but that you don't sell.

Perhaps these super advanced wheels drive innovation that reaches the whole market. My guess is that it doesn't. At some point in prducts like this, getting something means giving something else up. The 90mm deep wheel was thought to be better for the Stage 5 TT, where in different conditions the Princeton wheel might have been better. Of the very small audience of people who pay attention to and buy this stuff, how many do you suppose have the resources to test performance of multiple variables and also to predict what variable will best match a given day's conditions? Basically, none.

So I would disagree that any of this is stuff that they could "easily" do, and I'd also disagree that they don't care about the "high end road market." But in all likelihood that there is a realm where the payback for doing these exponential efforts to make products that are of no commercial benefit.

This was an interesting time trial in that there were a lot of meaningful small time differences - MVDP kept the jersey by a very narrow margin. Usually time trials are nowhere near that close. The 2016 Olympics TT tracked more closely to the norm - Cancellara could have used 32h box section wheels and still won, according to any benefit that's ever been shown in wheel comparison studies. This is not to say that equipent doesn't matter, but it is to say that correlating "this person won because of the identifiable benefit shown here" is not generally credible.

[ichobi]

Thanks for the nuanced discussion from a business perspective. Considering the average product life cycle for a time trial bikes is at least 5-6++ years or more, I agree with much of what you said. TT is probably the smallest segment in cycling industry. It is most likely calculated that a reputation lost on the pro level tt stage means very little to the brand such as Shimano. Considering that for years literally most tt enthusiasts don’t run shimano wheels in tt race anyway, having new unbranded and probably not going to be on their normal product line would be a net lost rather than gain in most measures.

[FlatlandClimber]

Shimano wheels are not really the most sought after aftermarket wheel out there. I don't really know anyone who ever bought these new and I never see them on any build on this forum either.
For TT, the narrow and shallow shape probably make them even less relevant.

[ichobi]

Shimano wheels are not really the most sought after aftermarket wheel out there. I don't really know anyone who ever bought these new and I never see them on any build on this forum either.
For TT, the narrow and shallow shape probably make them even less relevant.

There was a point in time where many pros favour the PRO tri spokes and discs (Dumolin and Dennis won the world's on one if memory serves me right. But that was tubular era. PRO as you know are shimano subsidiary. That's what I refer to rather than the Dura-Ace line of wheels.

[bruno2000]

So much for the 'Meilensteinkiller'...two weeks into the Tour and the Meilensein is back in the mountainstages with most riders.

[bilwit]

The smallest guy in Ineos was using the deepest wheel (carapaz). If you buy the ‘stability’ story, this clearly isn’t. May be some riders just prefer the feel when turning shallower wheels? I for one prefer that to a deep wheel in fast corner. Doesnt have to be wavy wheels though.

I think it is for stability, same reason why Kung had a shallow front as well. "Stability" is always relative to the individual. Even being the smallest, maybe Carapaz felt more comfortable with the deep rim than Thomas/Porte. I'm thinking they found that the Princeton is faster than a normal 60mm but more stable than 65mm. As to why MVP bothered with aquiring Princetons and then not using them, it was probably an on-the-day call based on the conditions. Maybe he was worried about the crosswinds but when it came down to it it wasn't nearly a factor so he ended up not using them.