HED c2 v.s. Mavic open pro

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:11 am

by Kevin3182

looking to build up some handbuilts on alchemy ELF/ORC hubs. Would you all go with a mavic open pro or HED c2 clincher rim? I feel like people will lean toward the c2, but why? Ill be using them for everything from rainy rides to gravel to racing. Also will the alchemy hubs hold up to this use? and what spokes would yall go for? im new to the handbuilt wheel game so any advice is much appreciated.
Since that was a lot a questions... a recap!
1. Mavic open pro vs HED c2 clincher and why?
2. Will Alchemy elf/orc hubs hold up to everyday use (ie. gravel, rain, racing)
3. What spokes would you use?

User avatar
Posts: 2763
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:03 am
Location: Islip, NY

by ergott

1) The C2 rim is much better made. High, quality and won't click.
2) Yes
3) More info appreciated. With the C2 rims you aren't locked into 32 spoke count. How heavy are you?

Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:11 am

by Kevin3182

ah yes, i range between 170-180 lbs, so Im thinking 24 front 28 back? :noidea:

Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 6:59 pm

by elSid

I have the C2 tubulars built into a powertap wheelset, built 32/28 f/r with 14g non-butted spokes, as recommended by the lbs that built them.

I also have a tubular set built with Mavic's reflex rims, which are comparable to the openpro. My bikeshop said that these are a bit weaker than the Hed rims, and suggested 36/36 3x all around, again with 14g spokes.

I am not a wheelbuilder, but my LBS has a good reputation, so I trust their opinion. Since I weight 145-150 pounds, I would think 28/24 would not be strong enough for a 170-180lb rider

Posts: 729
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 1:23 pm
Location: uk

by SDP

36s ! ...must have no faith in wheelbuilding ability...at your size..28s....

Sent from my GT-I8160 using Tapatalk 2

Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:02 am

by 54x11

elSid wrote:I have the C2 tubulars built into a powertap wheelset, built 32/28 f/r with 14g non-butted spokes, as recommended by the lbs that built them.

Am I reading that correctly, more spokes at the front than rear? Why?

User avatar
jekyll man
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:23 am
Location: Pack filler

by jekyll man

A lot depends where you are.
I've got both, C2's on a 32h Powertap , which replaced a worn out Open Pro, and had loads of OP's built on various hubs, either for myself, or I've built for others.

Here in the UK, the C2's are damn nigh impossible to get hold of, and when you can, they're nearly twice the price of the Open Pro's. If you're going to be riding in crappy conditions , thats got to be a consideration if they're not going to last...

Mavics = readily available.

Weight wise, they are about the same. From memory they were about 435g each.

Build quality;I've only ever seen 1 of these masses of open pro's with "rattley" bits or eyelets ripping out. I'm sure there is poorer quality of both parts floating around out there, but by virtue of the mavics being a far greater seller, there are bound to be more of them.

Spoke count? Well its not too hard to get an OP in 28h, but the C2's although offered in various drillings, seemed impossible to track down..

The OP is easier to get a turbo tyre on too :lol:

Purely subjective stuff but- i'm sure i've seen a few posts on here about clearance with wider rims on various frames; might be worth checking first...
and also (as he ducks for cover) im not exactly sold on this wider is better philosophy. I couldnt really tell any difference in performance.
Cant comment on your choice of hubs, but the Alchemy's are rated highly on here.
I guess which spokes you use will be determined by which hubs you use, and spoke count and build pattern.

Happy not to have cleared anything up!! :roll:
Official cafe stop tester

Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:19 pm

by boolinwall

I use both with regularity. Open pro's are the latest and greatest rim technology from 1998. They are great at what they were designed for. To simply last forever and not weigh a ton. Most companies still can't make a shallow, double eyeleted rim that compares in weight and strength. That having been said. They're not very stiff (relative to other rims) And are as aero as a brick.
The C2's are a tad heavier than the open pro's. But more than make up for it in stiffness (acceleration, cornering) and have much better aerodynamics. Plus, you get to run your tires at lower pressure with no loss in speed. This makes up the difference in comfort between the two.
So I guess it comes down to performance or lasting forever. Double eyelets make a huge difference in wheel longevity. As does the added flex.
As far as spokes go. There's no reason not to go with a butted spoke. Nobody has ever had a spoke (a good spoke that is) break in the middle. I prefer Sapim Lasers myself. But others like DTcompetitions and revolutions. I personally found the revolutions hard to keep tensioned in the past. Not so much with the lasers.
Keep in mind that thinner spokes require more tension, increasing the likelihood of cracking a C2 rim. And don't be fooled into thinking that alloy nipples are a good place to save weight. In the front, yeah. But in the rear. What you save in weight isn't worth the headache a year later when you go to true the wheel. Brass nipples with prolock(DT) or poly-x (sapim).
Just my 2 cents. But I'm sure others will have their own ideas.

Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:19 pm

by boolinwall

A good point was also made on here about clearances. I couldn't use my C2 rear wheel on my Wilier LeRoi due to clearance issues. Different brakes have issues as well being opened up that far and expected to work correctly.

User avatar
Posts: 2693
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Location: Mississippi

by btompkins0112

I've had a couple sets of OPs laced to factory hubs in 32 and 36.......strong wheels. You can bomb down fire roads without a worry.

Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 6:38 pm

by drchull

I have both and would definitely go with the HEDs. I have a set for training wheels built up 32 spoke on CK hubs. They survived Flanders and Roubaix without a hiccough under my 200+lb corpulent ass. They are more comfortable than my tubulars with Michelin 25C tires and plain old butyl tubes. There are new C2s coming out this year that look even better.
As someone said above the OPs are the best of technology from 20 years ago. They are solid but not worth the cost. To me if you are going to go for old technology rims, especially box section I would probably pick the Ambrosios, more cache. There are many better rims though for better prices, some of which there are lots of topics for on this forum. H+son Archetype and pacenti come to mind.

Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:53 am

by uraqt

I was an open pro guy, until I tried DT 465. Not happy with my stan's 340 1gen at all.

Next build, I am thinking about using the hubs my stan's with DT440 rear asy and DT 415 front.


User avatar
Zen Cyclery
Shop Owner
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:27 am
Location: McCall, ID

by Zen Cyclery

The Open Pro and C2 aren't even in the same league. The finish on the HED is much nicer and overall, I think its a much better rim than the Mavic. Don't get me wrong. The OP is bomber, but the C2 is much better.

Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 6:59 pm

by elSid


Sorry, my mistake... I meant 32rear, 28front.

Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:19 pm

by boolinwall

Don't waste money on DT415's. The single eyelets are no match for the doubles. Not just in terms of strength either. The douple eyelets help stiffen the rim. Try Ambrosio Excelights if you're looking for a lighter box section. I have both as well (Yes,, I have a load of wheels) and prefer the Ambrosio's to the 415's.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post