Light Bicycle wheel rims?

[Hexsense]

Good that they're stepped into 2024 with the width, but damn that's an ugly rim.

I mean, WR50 already has 25mm internal width and 32mm external width. It was released in 2019 which is 5 years ago.
The new one up the game to (still) 25mm internal and 34-35mm external seems modest for the width increase. The headline is clearly their unique rim profile.

[alanyu]

Feel itchy to try the new Turbo profile.
https://www.lightbicycle.com/newsletter ... heels.html

Debating between just getting two Turbo 50mm rims to replace rims on my WR50 wheelset. Or to get the two Turbo 65mm complete wheelset and sell WR50 as complete wheelset.

How much drag saving were there between 50mm vs 65mm deep wheels normally?

If the shape is similar, 65 vs 50 usually saves 0.5 W at low yaw, but can be 10+ W at > 10 deg yaw.

[208]

Good that they're stepped into 2024 with the width, but damn that's an ugly rim.

I mean, WR50 already has 25mm internal width and 32mm external width. It was released in 2019 which is 5 years ago.
The new one up the game to (still) 25mm internal and 34-35mm external seems modest for the width increase. The headline is clearly their unique rim profile.

Yeah exactly what I mean. 32mm external is very 2019. 34-35mm seems the 2023+ way.

[ItalianEngineering]

Love my Carbon Ti hubs BUT at 90kg my advice is to avoid them. The alloy axles are soft and the inner bearing races, particularely the inboard bearing of the freehub, will cut into them. You will end up with noise that can only be solved with a new axle. I have had the problem at 75kg. The problem used to be worse when the axles were slightly undersized. Lately the axles are a snug fit so things are better but... DT Swiss for you IMO.

I wouldn't use carbon-ti hubs at any weight (I was around 64 kg at the time) unless the company addresses the weakness in the existing shell with a new design. From my inspection I think the aluminum shell had unintentional inconsistent wall thickness at the point of failure. They also lowered the maximum spoke tension twice after releasing the hubs (which LB said they were unaware of). I'm lucky to have experienced catastrophic failure while off the bike. I appreciate them trying to make cuting edge products but safety is #1, particularly for the front hub.

[Mr.Gib]

Good that they're stepped into 2024 with the width, but damn that's an ugly rim.

I mean, WR50 already has 25mm internal width and 32mm external width. It was released in 2019 which is 5 years ago.
The new one up the game to (still) 25mm internal and 34-35mm external seems modest for the width increase. The headline is clearly their unique rim profile.

Yeah exactly what I mean. 32mm external is very 2019. 34-35mm seems the 2023+ way.

Perhaps I am not following the argument here. Are we saying that 25mm internal and 34-35mm external is the preferred current dimensions? Doesn't that mean a bunch of additional carbon? It would make a nice strong rim edge, but I suspect it would mean an heavier rim. Further, I can't imagine a wider internal width for road use as most 28 - 32mm tires have barely enough tread for 25mm internal.

Maybe going even wider is something I have to get used to, but the WR50 with tires in the 30 - 32mm WAM range and tire pressure 55 - 65 psi seem to be all you could want for fast group riding, race, etc. The next step up in size for both tire and rim would be great for epic touring type rides and slower recreational riding, but would not be my choice for the faster stuff.

[emotive]

Good that they're stepped into 2024 with the width, but damn that's an ugly rim.

I mean, WR50 already has 25mm internal width and 32mm external width. It was released in 2019 which is 5 years ago.
The new one up the game to (still) 25mm internal and 34-35mm external seems modest for the width increase. The headline is clearly their unique rim profile.

Yeah exactly what I mean. 32mm external is very 2019. 34-35mm seems the 2023+ way.

Perhaps I am not following the argument here. Are we saying that 25mm internal and 34-35mm external is the preferred current dimensions? Doesn't that mean a bunch of additional carbon? It would make a nice strong rim edge, but I suspect it would mean an heavier rim. Further, I can't imagine a wider internal width for road use as most 28 - 32mm tires have barely enough tread for 25mm internal.

Maybe going even wider is something I have to get used to, but the WR50 with tires in the 30 - 32mm WAM range and tire pressure 55 - 65 psi seem to be all you could want for fast group riding, race, etc. The next step up in size for both tire and rim would be great for epic touring type rides and slower recreational riding, but would not be my choice for the faster stuff.

They are still 32mm wide at the bead, but flare out to 34mm mid rim for better aero.

[Mr.Gib]

I mean, WR50 already has 25mm internal width and 32mm external width. It was released in 2019 which is 5 years ago.
The new one up the game to (still) 25mm internal and 34-35mm external seems modest for the width increase. The headline is clearly their unique rim profile.

Yeah exactly what I mean. 32mm external is very 2019. 34-35mm seems the 2023+ way.

Perhaps I am not following the argument here. Are we saying that 25mm internal and 34-35mm external is the preferred current dimensions? Doesn't that mean a bunch of additional carbon? It would make a nice strong rim edge, but I suspect it would mean an heavier rim. Further, I can't imagine a wider internal width for road use as most 28 - 32mm tires have barely enough tread for 25mm internal.

Maybe going even wider is something I have to get used to, but the WR50 with tires in the 30 - 32mm WAM range and tire pressure 55 - 65 psi seem to be all you could want for fast group riding, race, etc. The next step up in size for both tire and rim would be great for epic touring type rides and slower recreational riding, but would not be my choice for the faster stuff.

They are still 32mm wide at the bead, but flare out to 34mm mid rim for better aero.

That's what I was thinking. But do we get any benefit if we are riding no bigger than 32mm WAM tires? The widest point on the WR50 and WR38 is 32.4mm. Rim edge is 32mm. WR65 seems to be straight 32mm.

What wheels on the market are 32mm at the rim edge and swell up to 34mm? Curious as I am in the market for another set.

Impressive weight for that new rim from LB but I find it heinous looking.

[208]

Yeah exactly what I mean. 32mm external is very 2019. 34-35mm seems the 2023+ way.

Perhaps I am not following the argument here. Are we saying that 25mm internal and 34-35mm external is the preferred current dimensions? Doesn't that mean a bunch of additional carbon? It would make a nice strong rim edge, but I suspect it would mean an heavier rim. Further, I can't imagine a wider internal width for road use as most 28 - 32mm tires have barely enough tread for 25mm internal.

Maybe going even wider is something I have to get used to, but the WR50 with tires in the 30 - 32mm WAM range and tire pressure 55 - 65 psi seem to be all you could want for fast group riding, race, etc. The next step up in size for both tire and rim would be great for epic touring type rides and slower recreational riding, but would not be my choice for the faster stuff.

They are still 32mm wide at the bead, but flare out to 34mm mid rim for better aero.

That's what I was thinking. But do we get any benefit if we are riding no bigger than 32mm WAM tires? The widest point on the WR50 and WR38 is 32.4mm. Rim edge is 32mm. WR65 seems to be straight 32mm.

What wheels on the market are 32mm at the rim edge and swell up to 34mm? Curious as I am in the market for another set.

Impressive weight for that new rim from LB but I find it heinous looking.

Many ride greater than 33 wam tyres, though...

Those ugly light bicycle rims a few posts up are 34 wide at the widest point, most of reserve wheels, roval cl/clx. I'm sure there are heaps more others know.

[Hexsense]

^
50mm rim is 34.5mm wide
65mm​ rim is 35mm wide
I suspect the upcoming 78mm will be wider (35.5-36mm?) and 40mm will be narrower (33.5-34mm?).
If true, then they really serious about their rim profile this time that the rim external shape scale up, rather than just elongated.

[mrlobber]

Farsports recently stole the show with their Hypers + carbon spokes, kudos to LB for coming back, these look very good. I wonder what the weights are going to be with their "new hubs" and carbon spokes, currently only standard builds available on their website, as far as I was able to found.

[TobinHatesYou]

Farsports recently stole the show with their Hypers + carbon spokes, kudos to LB for coming back, these look very good. I wonder what the weights are going to be with their "new hubs" and carbon spokes, currently only standard builds available on their website, as far as I was able to found.

What’s so good about the Hypers? Hyper 50mm are 30mm ext, 24mm int (hooked) and weigh 1320g with 20/20 carbon spokes.

My Light Bicycle WR50s are 32mm ext, 25mm int (hooked) and weigh 1360g with 24/24 CX-Rays laced to DT 240 hubs. With DT 180 or Carbon Ti X-Hubs, it would weigh around 1335g.

[mrlobber]

What’s so good about the Hypers? Hyper 50mm are 30mm ext, 24mm int (hooked) and weigh 1320g with 20/20 carbon spokes.

No, 50mm weigh 1210g in that config. With the show I meant not the rim width specs, which indeed aren't that uber, but the weight and that those carbon spoke builds seemed to gain pretty wide adoption finally (if WW, of course, is any indication )

[Hexsense]

What’s so good about the Hypers?

Weight.
LB carbon spoke wheels use a bit heavy hub and 21 of 4.5mm deep spokes.
Farsports use lighter hub and shallower (lighter) 20 carbon spokes.

Deeper carbon spokes might be more aero. But a lot more people pay attention to weight than how deep and aero the carbon spoke is.

[Gutonobre]

Love my Carbon Ti hubs BUT at 90kg my advice is to avoid them. The alloy axles are soft and the inner bearing races, particularly the inboard bearing of the freehub, will cut into them. You will end up with noise that can only be solved with a new axle. I have had the problem at 75kg. The problem used to be worse when the axles were slightly undersized. Lately the axles are a snug fit so things are better but... DT Swiss for you IMO.

N

Love my Carbon Ti hubs BUT at 90kg my advice is to avoid them. The alloy axles are soft and the inner bearing races, particularly the inboard bearing of the freehub, will cut into them. You will end up with noise that can only be solved with a new axle. I have had the problem at 75kg. The problem used to be worse when the axles were slightly undersized. Lately the axles are a snug fit so things are better but... DT Swiss for you IMO.

Thanks for the tip! Now I just need to figure out the ideal measure of the CX-ray spoke to use with the DT 240S.

[alanyu]

A detailed cross section of different parts published in Chinese community.

If it's not a X-flow type, all these shapes are not good:
1. The tip/valve part shape is extremely bad at Xwind stability. I have used similar shaped as that cross section, but narrower rims, the worst I have experienced regarding stability.
2. The spoke part shape is better but not ideal. The widest part is widened a bit too much compared to the track, which actually, reduces the optimal tyre width.

However, it's X-flow/shark fin type, so when the rim is spinning, no one knows how stable it is until he rides it.

As I posted, I will put the order purely for aesthetics. but my frame has been delayed and delayed, no idea when it can reach me...