Light Bicycle wheel rims?

[PaulJ]

Has anyone done any ultra lightweight builds of the AR56 disk?

My current set come in at 1539g (not flyweiggt) with Cx-Ray's and Novatec D411SB/D412SB hubs.

But has anyone looked into an ultra light build using fly-weight or their ultra-light rim options and using DT180s or the new Lightbicycle NONPLus hubs and CX-Super spokes? By my math a build like that should come in at around ~1300g which is something I am very interested in investigating. As a 62kg rider I do not think I will have any major durability concerns for such a light build.

I don't get any options on the site for a fly weight AR56, is that definitely something which is available? AR55 is available in fly weight, they're slightly thinner (21mm internal, 28mm external at the tyre interface increasing to 30mm max). More of a blunt U shape profile vs the more V shape of the AR56. I'm currently looking at both, and leaning more towards the AR55 for the weight benefit.

LightBicycle is VERY accommodating to custom builds.If you look at the standard, flyweight vs heavy duty blog post on the website they list a weight for the flyweight AR56. They dont list the Ultra-light though. Although they dont strictly offer it in their wheel builder configurator I am sure if you spoke to Yoko or any of the other customer service people with regards to a custom build I am sure they can accomodate you. If you are a light rider like me 60ish KG I am sure an ultra lightweight or flyweight should be able to handle it.

Ok, thanks for the info - yes, sub 70kg even at my heaviest so plenty of safety margin for the fly weight. I think I'm leaning towards the AR55 shape anyway, I feel like the U shape is more modern and might handle crosswinds better than the more V shape of the AR56. But it's good to know they can accomodate custom builds, thanks!

[alanyu]

Why do people always have wrong idea about the shape...

At a similar width, U (old Zipp, Vision, etc.) is both slower and much more victim to Xwind than curved-V (Bontra, Shimano, etc.). UV (DT) is fastest, stability in between (on the more stable side).

[Usedtobefaster]

Hi, what's the clearance like with the AR56s on your Felt AR Advanced?

I'm interested as currently hesitating on pulling the trigger on a set of either the WR65s or Turbo 65s for my Felt AR Advanced build.

Would you like some pictures? I can grab some for you? Just ask what location you would like me to grab and Ill send em over. I dunno if I would do the Turbos though. Ive never been convinced on the wavy rim fad and from everything I have seen they are usually generally worse than regular rims in aero with regards to similar width and have a tendancy to stall unpredictably.

Its a shame I REALLY think LB should think about brining more 30 outer wide rims to the market. I would jump on a set of 60+ deep 30 wide wheels.

Pictures of clearance between wheel and chainstays would be really useful although I'd also be interested in one showing the whole bike.

I'm also somewhat unsure on the benefits of "wavy" rims but have not found much solid data on it either way. You mention unpredictable stalling, if you have a link to an article or review where this is covered I'd be interested to see it.

Thanks

I tried PMing you. But I can't figure out where to attach the pictures.

So here are some pictures of my Felt. Please excuse the state of my bike garage.

Some context. Obviously these are the AR56 disk rims. 30mm wide externally 23 internally.
They are shod in GP5000 standards in 25mm. At this point they are quite old at 7000km. So they are probably as stretched as they are going to get at around 28.3mm WAM. when they were younger (1000-2000km) they were a wee bit narrower at 28WAM according to my calipers.

And yes that is a less than stellar touch up on my chain stay where my chainrings ate my dropped chain

1000113490.jpg
Downtube clearance. Could drive a bus through there. Will happily eat a 30+
1000113489.jpg
Fork clearance. Also plenty of clearance. Will pass a 30+
1000113488.jpg
Chainstay BB clearance.
1000113484.jpg
Seatstay clearance.
1000113483.jpg
Rear wheel cutaway clearance.
1000086838.jpg

Thanks for sharing those. Clearance looks good most places, tightest at the chainstay BB area but I think a mm either side should be ok so have ordered a set of WR65s for mine.

Bike looks Really like that colour way, I've got the black and white version.

[PaulJ]

Why do people always have wrong idea about the shape...

At a similar width, U (old Zipp, Vision, etc.) is both slower and much more victim to Xwind than curved-V (Bontra, Shimano, etc.). UV (DT) is fastest, stability in between (on the more stable side).

That's just what the majority of information online seems to say. UV = fastest, U = next best, V = slowest and most susceptible to cross wind instability.

The AR55 aren't a blunt parallel sided 'U', they have the widest section further from the tyre like modern DT Swiss, Swisside etc seem to have. The AR56, while still rounded, looks more like an older 'V' shape to me with the widest point where the tyre meets the rim. Perhaps both fall into the 'UV' category, I don't know. It would be interesting if there was any data behind either profile.

Rim profiles.JPG (28.1 KiB) Viewed 1996 times

[alanyu]

Why do people always have wrong idea about the shape...

At a similar width, U (old Zipp, Vision, etc.) is both slower and much more victim to Xwind than curved-V (Bontra, Shimano, etc.). UV (DT) is fastest, stability in between (on the more stable side).

That's just what the majority of information online seems to say. UV = fastest, U = next best, V = slowest and most susceptible to cross wind instability.

The AR55 aren't a blunt parallel sided 'U', they have the widest section further from the tyre like modern DT Swiss, Swisside etc seem to have. The AR56, while still rounded, looks more like an older 'V' shape to me with the widest point where the tyre meets the rim. Perhaps both fall into the 'UV' category, I don't know. It would be interesting if there was any data behind either profile.

1. Learn to read

2. Google the cross section of my examples

[PaulJ]

Why do people always have wrong idea about the shape...

At a similar width, U (old Zipp, Vision, etc.) is both slower and much more victim to Xwind than curved-V (Bontra, Shimano, etc.). UV (DT) is fastest, stability in between (on the more stable side).

That's just what the majority of information online seems to say. UV = fastest, U = next best, V = slowest and most susceptible to cross wind instability.

The AR55 aren't a blunt parallel sided 'U', they have the widest section further from the tyre like modern DT Swiss, Swisside etc seem to have. The AR56, while still rounded, looks more like an older 'V' shape to me with the widest point where the tyre meets the rim. Perhaps both fall into the 'UV' category, I don't know. It would be interesting if there was any data behind either profile.

1. Learn to read

2. Google the cross section of my examples

1. Don't be so condescending

2. If you're going to bring such a colossal dose of superiority to a discussion, at least put some effort in and provide some insight.

[alanyu]

Why do people always have wrong idea about the shape...

At a similar width, U (old Zipp, Vision, etc.) is both slower and much more victim to Xwind than curved-V (Bontra, Shimano, etc.). UV (DT) is fastest, stability in between (on the more stable side).

That's just what the majority of information online seems to say. UV = fastest, U = next best, V = slowest and most susceptible to cross wind instability.

The AR55 aren't a blunt parallel sided 'U', they have the widest section further from the tyre like modern DT Swiss, Swisside etc seem to have. The AR56, while still rounded, looks more like an older 'V' shape to me with the widest point where the tyre meets the rim. Perhaps both fall into the 'UV' category, I don't know. It would be interesting if there was any data behind either profile.

1. Learn to read

2. Google the cross section of my examples

1. Don't be so condescending

2. If you're going to bring such a colossal dose of superiority to a discussion, at least put some effort in and provide some insight.

I have already given you the examples. It's your attitude not reading correctly and not to use these examples.

[toxin]

Dunno where you're getting the U is fastest thing from. Pretty well established a good curved V is faster.

Though I was under the impression U is better for stability.

[Alastair2308]

So between AR55 and AR56 which is best?

[goroldM]

I have to choose a rim for a REAR wheel.

Options are AR56 and WR50.

I would ride both with 32mm nominally wide GP5000 STR tires 90% on pavement and 10% on gravel.

My evaluation:

Pro AR56
+ More aero because of the better rim profile and the bigger rim depth.

Pro WR50
+ Better in side winds because of the bigger width and the lesser depth. But it's the rear wheel so it doesn't matter too much.
+ My tires will be wider (by about 0.3-0.4mm I guess) on the WR50 vs the AR56 because of the 2mm wider inner width.

Neutral: it's not clear who the winner is when it comes to rim durability:
+ Vertical impacts / bottoming out: WR50 is a Falcon Pro rim which has higher impact resistance, i.e. if you ride your wheel into a rock or a pot hole at high speed the WR50 is less likely to break.
+ Side scrub: The difference in width between the tire (~34.7/35mm actual tire width) is 1.7mm bigger on the AR56 (30mm external ) vs the WR50 (32.4mm external). So if you scrub against a rock with your tire it is more likely that this rock will also scrub (harder) against the WR50. The shape of the AR56 is also better in this respect because it's widest part is near the tire so less side wall is exposed to "rock scrub". On the other side the Falcon Pro finish of the WR50 might hold up better against side scrub.
+ Weight: basically the same (10g advantage for the AR56).

Did I forget something? Which one would you choose (leaving looks and price aside)?

[Hexsense]

I have to choose a rim for a REAR wheel.

Options are AR56 and WR50.

I would ride both with 32mm nominally wide GP5000 STR tires 90% on pavement and 10% on gravel.

My evaluation:

Pro AR56
+ More aero because of the better rim profile and the bigger rim depth.

Pro WR50
+ Better in side winds because of the bigger width and the lesser depth. But it's the rear wheel so it doesn't matter too much.
+ My tires will be wider (by about 0.3-0.4mm I guess) on the WR50 vs the AR56 because of the 2mm wider inner width.

Neutral: it's not clear who the winner is when it comes to rim durability:
+ Vertical impacts / bottoming out: WR50 is a Falcon Pro rim which has higher impact resistance, i.e. if you ride your wheel into a rock or a pot hole at high speed the WR50 is less likely to break.
+ Side scrub: The difference in width between the tire (~34.7/35mm actual tire width) is 1.7mm bigger on the AR56 (30mm external ) vs the WR50 (32.4mm external). So if you scrub against a rock with your tire it is more likely that this rock will also scrub (harder) against the WR50. The shape of the AR56 is also better in this respect because it's widest part is near the tire so less side wall is exposed to "rock scrub". On the other side the Falcon Pro finish of the WR50 might hold up better against side scrub.
+ Weight: basically the same (10g advantage for the AR56).

Did I forget something? Which one would you choose (leaving looks and price aside)?

Why is WR65 (fly weight) not in the choice?
It's rear wheel so crosswind stability doesn't matter. It's as wide as WR50 but deeper than AR56.

[goroldM]

I have to choose a rim for a REAR wheel.

Options are AR56 and WR50.

I would ride both with 32mm nominally wide GP5000 STR tires 90% on pavement and 10% on gravel.

My evaluation:

Pro AR56
+ More aero because of the better rim profile and the bigger rim depth.

Pro WR50
+ Better in side winds because of the bigger width and the lesser depth. But it's the rear wheel so it doesn't matter too much.
+ My tires will be wider (by about 0.3-0.4mm I guess) on the WR50 vs the AR56 because of the 2mm wider inner width.

Neutral: it's not clear who the winner is when it comes to rim durability:
+ Vertical impacts / bottoming out: WR50 is a Falcon Pro rim which has higher impact resistance, i.e. if you ride your wheel into a rock or a pot hole at high speed the WR50 is less likely to break.
+ Side scrub: The difference in width between the tire (~34.7/35mm actual tire width) is 1.7mm bigger on the AR56 (30mm external ) vs the WR50 (32.4mm external). So if you scrub against a rock with your tire it is more likely that this rock will also scrub (harder) against the WR50. The shape of the AR56 is also better in this respect because it's widest part is near the tire so less side wall is exposed to "rock scrub". On the other side the Falcon Pro finish of the WR50 might hold up better against side scrub.
+ Weight: basically the same (10g advantage for the AR56).

Did I forget something? Which one would you choose (leaving looks and price aside)?

Why is WR65 (fly weight) not in the choice?
It's rear wheel so crosswind stability doesn't matter. It's as wide as WR50 but deeper than AR56.

Good question!

My rationale is:

Pro WR65 (vs the other two options)
+ More Aero. But the biggest aero gains (2/3 or so) are made with the front wheel.

Con WR65 (vs the other two options)
+ 70g/80g heavier (rear only) if we assume the standard WR65. The fly weight wouldn't be strong enough I guess for my 95kg/110lbs system weight.
+ Durability: it neither has the bigger tire/rim width differential advantage of the AR56 (see above) nor the Falcon Pro finish advantage of the WR50.
+ Slight side wind penalty but like you say it's neglectable because it's the rear wheel.

[jdms2k]

Can I remove the white "Light Bicycle" logos from my AR46 rims? I'd love a more stealthy look.

[ubers]

wrong spot

[PaulJ]

So between AR55 and AR56 which is best?

This is what I'm keen to know. Using DT Swiss as an example, seeing as they have already been mentioned, the top half (in the orientation below) looks closer to the AR55 in that the widest point isn't where the tyre meets the rim but closer to half way down the profile, but the bottom half is clearly more similar in shape to the AR56.