# Neuvation wheels dangerous?



## Joemero (Jul 19, 2008)

I have a set of Neuvation M28 Aero 2 wheels, after a recent tuneup my LBS said the rear one had a weird creaking noise and that I shouldn't trust this brand. They claimed that their quality has diminished lately and that even one of their own employees had a serious accident when his front Neuvation wheel spokes came loose and almost stabbed him when he fell.

With that said, I like the weight and roll on these wheels, but am concerned of something similar happening to me when I'm descending at 55 mph or something like that. Have any of you had a similar experience?


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Joemero said:


> one of their own employees had a serious accident when his front Neuvation wheel spokes came loose and almost stabbed him when he fell.


If that's what was actually said, it's not only funny, but also utter and complete nonsense. How on earth (and this should also be asked of the person who made that statement), can anyone get almost stabbed by a loose spoke when falling?


----------



## Joemero (Jul 19, 2008)

wim said:


> If that's what was actually said, it's utter and complete nonsense. How on earth (and this should also be asked of the person who made that statement), can anyone get almost stabbed by a loose spoke when falling?


Apparently the front wheel buckled from the spoke or spokes coming loose, and when he fell forward because of this he landed on the front wheel....

Yeah I know it sounds like nonsense, IT WAS ACTUALLY SAID, all I wanna know if I should trust these wheels, If anybody has had a bad experience or not.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

Did your buddy at the LBS suggest anything they have in stock that you should replace them with?

This sounds like a load of [email protected] to me. I've got two sets of Nuevation wheels. I've had the M28's the longest (1.5 years) and they've been fine. I commute on them. I'm big (200 lbs), but not hard on wheels. Maybe yours has a defect. Have the LBS show you what's wrong with it. A supposed creak and an unfounded rumor isn't a real problem IMO. One thing Nuevation does has a reputation for is great customer service. If there is something wrong, they will go out of their way to fix it.


----------



## FBinNY (Jan 24, 2009)

Low spoke count wheels have been known to fail suddenly. This can happen when a single spoke snaps putting undue stress on it's neighbors and causing them to snap in a cascade effect. Not unlike regional blackouts when the loss of a transformer overloads the neighboring circuits.

That said, it's rare in wheels with steel spokes and more likely with carbon spokes, because steel spokes have more elastic range and tolerate overloading better in the short term.

Without comment on Neuvation either way, because I have no first hand knowledge of their quality, I suspect the dealers comments were simply smoke, panning what they no longer sold. In any case creaking in your rear wheel isn't an indicator of anything wrong with your front wheel.

Continue riding the wheels but keep an eye out for any change such as more creaking, mis-alignment, loose spokes, and any broken spokes. You might also want to visit another shop to locate and correct the cause of the noise in the rear.

BTW- the single biggest danger of low spoke count front wheels isn't sudden collapse, but trapping small critters, usually squirrels in the spokes and suffering a header, so keep your eyes open.


----------



## Joemero (Jul 19, 2008)

pmf said:


> Did your buddy at the LBS suggest anything they have in stock that you should replace them with?


Yeah, they stopped carrying Neuvation wheels and suggested some Mavics...


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

Joemero said:


> Apparently the front wheel buckled from the spoke or spokes coming loose, and when he fell forward because of this he landed on the front wheel....
> 
> Yeah I know it sounds like nonsense, IT WAS ACTUALLY SAID, all I wanna know if I should trust these wheels, If anybody has had a bad experience or not.


I have had good and bad experiences with Neuvation. I've used them for years as backup/winter wheels. I refuse to buy any of the Aeros because I broke spokes on them several times and they go horribly out of true when that happens(I couldn't ride home). Additionally, I think they are a bit generous on how much weight the aeros can support over time. Sure, they'll support heavy riders for a while but more times than not, there are rim cracks at some point with those type of riders. I do have a pair of the traditional m28 laced wheels(regular spokes and 24/20) and they are decent for a back up set. Basically, I look at Neuvations as a disposable wheelset that will last for a little while but not long term. I feel they do have great customer service. Also, I think for what you get, they are actually slightly overpriced.

FYI- I weigh 190


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

Mavic......the wheel company that brought us the "R-Sys Exploding Wheel System." I think I'd stick with the Neuvations and, maybe, find another LBS to service my bike.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

Joemero said:


> Yeah, they stopped carrying Neuvation wheels and suggested some Mavics...


I bet you that the profit margin on Mavic wheels is quite a bit higher than Nuevations. Why would a bike shop even carry them when consumers can buy them wholesale over the web? The whole concept is good wheels at a low price because you skip the middle man.


----------



## ultraman6970 (Aug 1, 2010)

Thats the reason i do all my stuff at home since i'm 12 y/o. If somebody is going to BS me then that should be me.

Have you heard the noise yourself? It could be spokes not the rim, if the bike is carbon the creak could come from several places. Even the Quick Release.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

cdhbrad said:


> Mavic......the wheel company that brought us the "R-Sys Exploding Wheel System." I think I'd stick with the Neuvations and, maybe, find another LBS to service my bike.


We have an R-sys with two busted spokes in the shop right now. Not only did the guy finish the Elite cross race with it, but it is still mostly true and rideable. How do you think a Neuvation would spin with 2 busted spokes?

Those wheels are as durable, or more, than 99% of other wheels on the market. One well publicized failure does not a bad product make. Recall had effect, and now the R-Sys are solid. If you have more exposure to the product, or have seen more catastrophic failures, do let me know. But I know a ton of guys with them, and have sold quite a few sets, and I've seen nothing that would indicate an issue with these wheels.


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> We have an R-sys with two busted spokes in the shop right now. Not only did the guy finish the Elite cross race with it, but it is still mostly true and rideable. How do you think a Neuvation would spin with 2 busted spokes?
> 
> Those wheels are as durable, or more, than 99% of other wheels on the market. One well publicized failure does not a bad product make. Recall had effect, and now the R-Sys are solid. If you have more exposure to the product, or have seen more catastrophic failures, do let me know. But I know a ton of guys with them, and have sold quite a few sets, and I've seen nothing that would indicate an issue with these wheels.


 Do you feel they're good for heavier riders?


----------



## Joemero (Jul 19, 2008)

ultraman6970 said:


> Have you heard the noise yourself? It could be spokes not the rim, if the bike is carbon the creak could come from several places. Even the Quick Release.


I have heard the noise, the wheels were used previously by a much heavier rider, around 300 lbs. I weigh 190, I think it might be from the spokes. just want to be careful & not be dropping the hammer in a crit or high speed descent & have a bad experience


----------



## bahueh (May 11, 2004)

wheels wear out. spoke tension gets off. It happens. Neuvation will be more than happy to replace or re-string your hub with a new rim, etc. Just email him. 
and find a new LBS...yours is completely full of sh*t and openly trying to rip you off.

how does one get "almost stabbed"?


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

All I know is that I have a lot of wheels, none are Mavic, and none I purchase in the future ever will be. I used to ride Heliums, but those were the last Mavics I had and that was a long time ago.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

Joemero said:


> I have heard the noise, the wheels were used previously by a much heavier rider, around 300 lbs. I weigh 190, I think it might be from the spokes. just want to be careful & not be dropping the hammer in a crit or high speed descent & have a bad experience


Ouch! The highest spoke count they have is 20/24, right? I think neuvations weight limit is 220 or 250, they're just not appropriate for a 300lbs guy. Id tear the hubs apart and see if anything broke, thats beyond their intended usage.


----------



## Peanya (Jun 12, 2008)

Most (bad) cycle shops will run down Neuvation. They're sold directly only, so if they said they sold them in the past, that's a flat-out lie. 
In all fairness, they're good (not great) wheels that are light and have a great price. Comparing them to Mavic, I'd say comparable in performance, but the Mavic wheels definitely look a LOT nicer.


----------



## beeristasty (Jan 1, 1970)

I have a similar wheelset that I purchased on closeout from Supergo back in the day (RIP). A few companies (Performance, Neuvation, etc) contract out to a distributor and re-brand them and/or had slight variations between their offerings. 

Anyways, with the "Korso" wheelset, I was pedaling along one day on my and heard a ping and then my rear wheel stops spinning. Turns out a section of the rear hub flange around the spoke holes almost completely sheared off the hub body. I did get a few years of low/moderate miles out of them. I definitely got my money's worth for what I paid, but I wouldn't trust them again. 

If the current front hub flange design is similar to my Korso rear wheel's flange design, I could see, with the same high tension and less supporting spokes, a front wheel's flange shearing away in the same spot, which could cause the spokes to be exposed.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

beeristasty said:


> If the current front hub flange design is similar to my Korso rear wheel's flange design, I could see, with the same high tension and less supporting spokes, a front wheel's flange shearing away in the same spot, which could cause the spokes to be exposed.


Rear hubs have to deal with torque from the rider pedaling -- front hubs don't.

Asad


----------



## onrhodes (Feb 19, 2004)

Sebastionmerckx said:


> Do you feel they're good for heavier riders?


Please define "heavy". That is such a subjective term

I'm not saying this to be rude or anything, but "heavy" riders......200+ people from my experience SHOULD NOT ride lighweight equipment. 
We're all involved in a sport where we can go out and buy what the pros ride. What do you think a "heavy" pro rider weighs? Even Thor and Magnus are sub 200lbs guys. I remember reading a while ago that Magnus couldn't ride some of the sponsored wheels on his earlier team because he would destroy them in about 2 weeks.
Most of your petite little climbers and such are going to be sub 140lb guys. I'm only 130lbs and I have learned from experience that I can ride just about anything out there. My buddy who is 210 on a light day cannot and totally agrees he should not.

I apologize if I am offending anyone here, but come on, use some common sense. It's in the same vein as all mountain riders who complained about folding a Stans Olympic Rim after hucking it off a 6 foot drop.

To get back on topic. There is a guy around here who has raced RAAM and was putting 200-300 mile training rides on Neuvation wheels and he never had a problem with them. He was no light guy either, being in the 170-180 range.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

Sebastionmerckx said:


> Do you feel they're good for heavier riders?


Again, define heavy.
A good friend of mine has been beating the hell out of a pair of R-Sys for two years. He's cat1 and uses them for training and racing. He's at least 175lbs. Is that heavy? For these wheels, yes. That's pushing it. My guess is those wheels have a 180lb weight limit. If you're over that, get some Ksyriums.


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> Again, define heavy.
> A good friend of mine has been beating the hell out of a pair of R-Sys for two years. He's cat1 and uses them for training and racing. He's at least 175lbs. Is that heavy? For these wheels, yes. That's pushing it. My guess is those wheels have a 180lb weight limit. If you're over that, get some Ksyriums.


Apparently I wasn't clear enough but I assumed you would know I was referring to 200 + riders when I asked that based off the tenor of the thread. I know I could have been more clear and that was the point I was trying to make with your post. You stated that they were durable or more durable than 99% of wheels in the market. In my experience, a statement like that is going to be taken way out of context by a lot of riders that are 200+, especially in a thread where more than one person has mentioned they are larger riders. Nothing against you, I just wanted it clarified for those people.


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

onrhodes said:


> Please define "heavy". That is such a subjective term
> 
> I'm not saying this to be rude or anything, but "heavy" riders......200+ people from my experience SHOULD NOT ride lighweight equipment.
> We're all involved in a sport where we can go out and buy what the pros ride. What do you think a "heavy" pro rider weighs? Even Thor and Magnus are sub 200lbs guys. I remember reading a while ago that Magnus couldn't ride some of the sponsored wheels on his earlier team because he would destroy them in about 2 weeks.
> ...


You're not offending anyone so no worries. As far as heavy, I assumed it would be pretty obvious based off the tenor of the thread that I was talking 200+. The poster who mentioned the R-SYS, never listed a weight they were safe at, he simply said that in his experience, they were as durable or more so than 99% of the market.That statement, in a thread like this, is going to be taken as saying they are safe for 200+ pound riders by a lot of people. I felt that needed clarified that's why I simply asked the way I did. As far as common sense goes, I use the pair of Neuvations I have(24/20) as a back up set..Most other wheels I have are custom and are higher spoke count. Basically, I found it a bit interesting that you went off on a bit of a tangent on me when I asked a vague questioned totally based off another person offering a vague statement...I asked it to make a point and I thought it was obvious. Also, don't you think it's a bit much to say use some common sense on wheels like this when companies list them as safe for the very riders you state they are not safe for(and I agree totally with you by the way)? Yes, I feel they're not safe for big guys but that's because I've seen it first hand. When you're talking about a lot of cyclists who only know what they've been told by companies or an LBS, why do you expect them to have common sense on the issue,especially if they don't get online a lot and read forums?
FYI- Like I said before, I weigh 190


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

Sebastionmerckx said:


> Apparently I wasn't clear enough but I assumed you would know I was referring to 200 + riders when I asked that based off the tenor of the thread. I know I could have been more clear and that was the point I was trying to make with your post. You stated that they were durable or more durable than 99% of wheels in the market. In my experience, a statement like that is going to be taken way out of context by a lot of riders that are 200+, especially in a thread where more than one person has mentioned they are larger riders. Nothing against you, I just wanted it clarified for those people.


Well I stand behind that. Rider weight aside, they are as durable as 99% of stuff out there. Should a guy whose 200# ride them? No, but that guy shouldn't ride Zipps, Eastons, Heds, or ANY light weight wheels either. But the R-Sys will out last any wheel from Zipp or Easton.
That said, if you want a good strong and reasonable light wheel, there are options for bigger guys, but you have to pay through the nose. Racing Zero/Shamal Ultra are about as bomb proof as you can get, and are not tanks. But they are bucky.
A 200Lb guy should not be worrying about an extra 200g on a wheelset, and should instead focus on getting something strong. 32X3 on Open Pro's. Cheap and strong. I have nothing against Neuvation and their product, but they are hardly bomb proof wheels. They get away with the shoddy quality by offering outstanding customer service. Tons of guys on here defend them to the death with sayings like "I broke a flange and they took care of me right away." And "3 spokes rip out of my rim and they sent me a new wheel right away." Those guys are happy because they were taken care of. But imagine what they would say if Neuvation had the same level of service that the rest of the industry had. They would have been out of business a long time ago. Personally, I would rather spend the money on a good wheel and not have any issues with it. Too often people define a company as being good by their level of customer service and ease of warranty. A good company should be one that you never have to call in the first place.


----------



## natedg200202 (Sep 2, 2008)

Joemero said:


> . . my LBS said the rear one had a weird creaking noise and that I shouldn't trust this brand. They claimed that their quality has diminished lately and that even one of their own employees had a serious accident when his front Neuvation wheel spokes came loose and almost stabbed him when he fell.


Another great example of why I spend as little time as possible in LBS's as possible. Complete BS!!


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> Well I stand behind that. Rider weight aside, they are as durable as 99% of stuff out there. Should a guy whose 200# ride them? No, but that guy shouldn't ride Zipps, Eastons, Heds, or ANY light weight wheels either. But the R-Sys will out last any wheel from Zipp or Easton.
> That said, if you want a good strong and reasonable light wheel, there are options for bigger guys, but you have to pay through the nose. Racing Zero/Shamal Ultra are about as bomb proof as you can get, and are not tanks. But they are bucky.
> A 200Lb guy should not be worrying about an extra 200g on a wheelset, and should instead focus on getting something strong. 32X3 on Open Pro's. Cheap and strong. I have nothing against Neuvation and their product, but they are hardly bomb proof wheels. They get away with the shoddy quality by offering outstanding customer service. Tons of guys on here defend them to the death with sayings like "I broke a flange and they took care of me right away." And "3 spokes rip out of my rim and they sent me a new wheel right away." Those guys are happy because they were taken care of. But imagine what they would say if Neuvation had the same level of service that the rest of the industry had. They would have been out of business a long time ago. Personally, I would rather spend the money on a good wheel and not have any issues with it. Too often people define a company as being good by their level of customer service and ease of warranty. A good company should be one that you never have to call in the first place.


I agree with a 100 percent of this and I also agree with you about the R-Sys as well, I just wanted it to be clarified so some 200 pound guy didn't think they were a good idea. Also, I find myself explaining the idea of paying out the nose on wheels for lightweight if you're over 200+ all the time. Being 190, I'm in the ballpark and some of the people I ride with balk at me having pairs of wheels between 900-2,000 dollars. They really can't wrap their heads around the idea that you really need to pay a lot more to achieve comparable weights and still be safe if you're a larger rider. I couldn't agree more with your thoughts on Neuvation. Like I said above, I look at them as disposable wheels. The pair I have,which I feel are their safest for big guys(24/20), are nothing but a wheel to ride in bad weather where I'd prefer not screwing up pricey wheels. I wouldn't say they're junk, but I think Aksiums are better than Neuvations Aero base wheel and can be had for cheaper in most cases.In fact, I've heard more than once that Neuvation can send you out replacements literally three times before they break even on their wheels. Also, you're spot on about your thoughts on customer service. Whenever I hear that a company has good customer service constantly, I wonder how good their product really is. Thanks for the back and forth.


----------



## dcl10 (Jul 2, 2010)

I cant believe anyone would even try to tell you that load of BS. Firstly as penya already pointed out they only sell direct to consumer, so for him to give you the old "well we used to sell them, but their quality was so bad we dropped them, how 'bout some mavics?" routine is ridiculous. Also, if I took some light weight spokes like the ones used on that front wheel, and intentionally tried to stab you with it I could not, they would simply bend long before even breaking the skin, and I'm sure anyone who works at a LBS knows this.


----------



## Hula Hoop (Feb 4, 2009)

I have no doubt the newer R-sys are fine wheels, and at 162lbs I would not
hesitate to use them. A lot of wheelmakers have also introduced wheelsets
with defects and corrected them later. However, reputations suffer and are
not easily restored. Just ask GM. Still, the R-sys uses proprietary spokes,
is not easily field servicable, and costs a lot more than the BWW blackset
race I use with a 28/24 that cost $350. I just see no reason whatsoever to
spend more. BWW even has an Ultegra hubbed 32 spoke Mavic open pro
for heavier riders for $270. I am not a shill, just saying it's an option.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

I've been using Neuvations for a couple of years and have never had a problem. I get into the high 40's going downhill sometimes and have always felt confident in the integrity of my wheels. I got a set of the newest ones this year after my last pair got trashed in a bad accident, and I haven't noticed that the quality has diminished at all.

I recommend these wheels to everyone all of the time.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

I am a Clydesdale and have ridden Neuvation for years. The M28 Aeros are my wheels of choice. I've owned the Aero and Aero 2s and I was lucky to get a year out of them before either a spoke or a hub would break. Both the Aero and Aero2 were failing on climbs but it was the rear wheel- not the front. I've never heard of a front wheel ever failing until now. Keep in mind, I'm 215 lbs and I ride in the big chainring even when I'm climbing. Just when I was about to replace them, Neuvation changes the hub design with the Aero3s. They looked beefier and since my Aero 2 rear was being replaced, I gave it a try. February will be three years and I haven't had any issues with the Aero 3s. If they would fail now, I won't care. They have close to 20,000 miles on them. However, they don't seem to show any signs of failing soon. Great wheels if you were to ask me. My other bike has Ksyrium SLs and I'm still having problems with those (not to mention the SLs were $500 more).


----------



## nayr497 (Nov 8, 2008)

I have been riding the R28s since last July. I bought them because I was trying to stay under a certain limit with the build-up project and they were/are inexpensive wheels with a pretty good reputation.

I have put around 5500 miles on them in those 15 months. Broke one rear spoke going across some train tracks, but had a spare spoke at home that they had sent with the original order so put that in, trued it up, and kept riding.

I did develop a creaking noise in my rear cassette body a few weeks back. Sent them back, they warrantied them, though I was over the 12 month limit. Wheel is back and I'm riding it again. Can't beat them honoring an expired warranty, plus covering the return shipping, all on a $100 wheel.

For $200 for the two wheels I'm pretty happy with them. Light and solid and for the price, you can't beat them. I'm 145 pounds, ride them on group training rides and solo rides. Good product for the price.

As for low spoke count, Mavic issues, etc. a little story. A raccoon decided to bomb into me last Friday night when I was out riding (on a different bike, not Neu. wheels). Barreled into my front wheel, right into the spokes. He bounced off for a second, I slowed, then he ran under my ST and into the woods. Don't quite know how he slipped through there.

Wheel is perfectly true. Record hubs, Open Pro rim, DT spokes, 3x32.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

^^^^^^^^^^^this post perfectly illustrates what I was talking about earlier.^^^^^^^^^^
In 2004 I bought a set of Campy Protons. A good mid priced wheelset. I used them for racing and training in Cat3 for a year, as a training wheel and a race wheel when the roads were bad in cat2 for 2 years, then they got relegated to the cross/rain bike. I just sold them this summer on a cross bike. Those wheels easily have 25000km on them, that's conservative I think. Never had I broken a spoke, never had to re-pack the hubs, and only trued them once in all that time. FTR I'm 170Lbs and I ride on roads that Belgians call crappy. (Seriously, I know dozens of guys who have/do race in Belgium and France and everyone comes home saying our roads are worse).
So here you are 30 lbs lighter and after 15 months you have one broken spoke, and a full wheel replacement. I spent twice as much and had zero issues.


----------



## nayr497 (Nov 8, 2008)

Just to clarify, they replaced my bearings and seals, but sent me the original rear wheel back. I kind of was hoping for a new one but I also figure it is one less wheel in the garbage somewhere.

I'm going to ride mine until they are having issues, then upgrade. This wheelset is on my "light" bike and I'm not sure if I want to go with light wheels again or just get good wheels that will last forever. I don't race, but I do ride in group rides that become races. Pros and cons both ways.

That is a good point made on pg. 1 that a good company is one that doesn't have issues, while a company just replacing broken wheels is a different story.

I can't complain because my Neuvation wheels have held up pretty well and cost very little. But, I'm also someone who will typically pay a bit more for better quality. In this situation, I was trying to keep my whole project under a certain limit.

And I think my Record/OP wheels will last a long, long time.


----------



## frdfandc (Nov 27, 2007)

nayr497 said:


> That is a good point made on pg. 1 that a good company is one that doesn't have issues, while a company just replacing broken wheels is a different story.





A good company is one that makes quality products, BUT takes care of their customers when/if issues arise.

No company makes a perfect product. Working in a LBS, I see this everyday. But the customer service is what makes a company stand heads above the rest.


----------



## carveitup (Oct 25, 2008)

I have a pair of R28 Aero 2s. They creaked quite a bit but I could usually resolve it by re-greasing the cassette mechanism. The first time I did this, it was creaking loudly on every pedal stroke. I found that I had to re-grease it about every 1000km or so. Maybe a different lube would last longer.

Anyway, the wheels are now hanging on a hook in my workshop. There are multiple cracks around the spoke holes in both the front and rear rims. I noticed it before the rims failed completely but I have no confidence in these wheels anymore. I would guess I have about 7000km on the wheels (I typically only ride on dry roads). I weigh about 145lbs, I'm not a particularly strong rider and I don't race. I've never crashed on these wheels and they have never gone more than a mm or so out of true. I'm sure Neuvation would replace the rims for a reasonable fee (as described in the FAQ on their web site), but I simply don't feel comfortable riding a wheel that cracks like this under a rider like me. I haven't brought this to their attention as I am not interested in repaired or replaced wheels and the wheels are well past their warranty. It is clear on their web site that cracked rims are not uncommon. New wheels are on the way from a custom builder.

There are a lot of happy Neuvation customers out there and I have found their customer service to be good, but I thought it was important to share my experience.

Photo below is my rear wheel:
View attachment 216764


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

neuvations are generic rims with decent build quality at best. but IMO, they are ugly as hell. Dangerous? I guess, if built poorly. Any wheel can be built poorly. But the name brands may have more quality control to cover their asses and protect their brand reputation.

likelihood situation here is the typical LBS: bashing any and all purchases made online. There is an idiot salesman at my lbs that bashes me for buying my sram groupset online at $700 under what they'd sell it for. i hate when salesmen know less than the customer, also. They try way too hard to be a salesman, when they should be trying harder to know the products they sell. i'll support my lbs when it suits ME. When the final net price is lower for me to buy it from them than to buy online (yes, with all the service and warranty and troubleshooting crap taken into consideration)

back to neuvation wheels. i wouldn't buy them. i dont hear many good things about them, and theres so many other wheel options out there that are better and look better.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

A little off topic, but I just have to ask. Why in the world would anyone buy R-SYS? As said on a slowtwitch thread, they are an "aerodynamic abortion". 

Consider this data: 
https://www.rouesartisanales.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/aero_english.jpg

The R-SYS have roughly 10 watts more drag compared to even moderately aero wheels. They require 16 more watts to push at 50kph compared to a Zipp 808. 

I see no reason for them to still be marketed, other than maybe cyclocross. There are wheels that are lighter, more aero, and cheaper. Why would you choose the Mavics?


----------



## beeristasty (Jan 1, 1970)

asad137 said:


> Rear hubs have to deal with torque from the rider pedaling -- front hubs don't.
> 
> Asad


Ah, very good point.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

asad137 said:


> Rear hubs have to deal with torque from the rider pedaling -- front hubs don't.
> 
> Asad


+1...


----------



## bahueh (May 11, 2004)

*you don't hear..*



LOUISSSSS said:


> neuvations are generic rims with decent build quality at best. but IMO, they are ugly as hell. Dangerous? I guess, if built poorly. Any wheel can be built poorly. But the name brands may have more quality control to cover their asses and protect their brand reputation.
> 
> likelihood situation here is the typical LBS: bashing any and all purchases made online. There is an idiot salesman at my lbs that bashes me for buying my sram groupset online at $700 under what they'd sell it for. i hate when salesmen know less than the customer, also. They try way too hard to be a salesman, when they should be trying harder to know the products they sell. i'll support my lbs when it suits ME. When the final net price is lower for me to buy it from them than to buy online (yes, with all the service and warranty and troubleshooting crap taken into consideration)
> 
> back to neuvation wheels. i wouldn't buy them. i dont hear many good things about them, and theres so many other wheel options out there that are better and look better.


good things about them? and you're listening to whom exactly? they have the best customer service in the business in my experience. are they "bling" wheels? no, they're not designed to be. but then again they aren't going on pro bikes or under pro riders either.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

chase196126 said:


> A little off topic, but I just have to ask. Why in the world would anyone buy R-SYS? As said on a slowtwitch thread, they are an "aerodynamic abortion".
> 
> Consider this data:
> https://www.rouesartisanales.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/aero_english.jpg
> ...


Sure they may have more drag than an 808, but which would you rather have in a 50km/hr cross wind? Pretty sure those 18W are not going to mean much then. Also, the Mavics come equiped with a very nice hub. Zipps don't, never have, and likely never will. I would also bet a solid $5 that the Mavic would be a stiffer wheel in a sprint. Carbon wheels are notoriously flexy to sprint outputs due to them generally having a lower spoke tension due to the limitations of the rim. Zipps are very prone to this, and the issue get even worse as the rim gets deeper in profile causing a greater angle as the spoke enters the rim. The new profile they put out, Firecrest or something like that, should help with that problem. And one last thing, you will never pull a spoke nipple out of an R-sys rim. We see tons of pulled nipples on rims made by Zipp.
So, that's why someone would buy Mavic.
Let it be said that I actually hate Mavic and really don't like their products much. I think that their are better options out there. Not sure why I'm defending them so much. I guess I like them more than other companies products.
Edited to add, 808's are twice the price of R-sys and all you save is 16W's? I would expect more.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> Sure they may have more drag than an 808, but which would you rather have in a 50km/hr cross wind? Pretty sure those 18W are not going to mean much then. Also, the Mavics come equiped with a very nice hub. Zipps don't, never have, and likely never will. I would also bet a solid $5 that the Mavic would be a stiffer wheel in a sprint. Carbon wheels are notoriously flexy to sprint outputs due to them generally having a lower spoke tension due to the limitations of the rim. Zipps are very prone to this, and the issue get even worse as the rim gets deeper in profile causing a greater angle as the spoke enters the rim. The new profile they put out, Firecrest or something like that, should help with that problem. And one last thing, you will never pull a spoke nipple out of an R-sys rim. We see tons of pulled nipples on rims made by Zipp.
> So, that's why someone would buy Mavic.
> Let it be said that I actually hate Mavic and really don't like their products much. I think that their are better options out there. Not sure why I'm defending them so much. I guess I like them more than other companies products.
> Edited to add, 808's are twice the price of R-sys and all you save is 16W's? I would expect more.



You are really overestimating the difficulty of riding an 808, or other deep rim, in a cross wind. The R-SYS will not handle any better because of the huge cross section of their carbon spokes, in fact many people report them handling worse in crosswinds than a Zipp. There is the same problem with the Ksyriums with their large flat spoke design.

As for wheels stiffness you are only partially right. 
http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-23159755.html
That test shows that the Zipp was 8 nm stiffer in the front wheel but 20 nm less stiff in the rear. I would much prefer the "free" 16 watt difference of the 808 over the Mavic wheel. Also, as long as the wheels are not touching the brake pads the stiffness will not make up nearly that 16 watt difference, if any difference at all. I also believe that it has been proven several times that spoke tension (apart from extreme differences) has no real effect of the stiffness of a bicycle wheel. 

A 16 watt difference in wheels is considerable, and it is probably more with the new 808 clincher design. The hubs of the Zipp wheels have also been considerably updated in the past few years and are quite nice at the moment. 

I just don’t see why anyone would buy the R-SYS over something like a basic Easton, or even a carbon Reynolds (The Assaults are about $300 cheaper than the R-SYS). They are wheels that can fail horribly and are basically the slowest design you could create for a bicycle wheel aerodynamically. Why does it still exist?


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

As a owner of a pair of R-sys and 50mm carbon wheels...I'll tell you right now that the 50mm wheels pushed alot more then the Mavics. The was evident the first day I ran the 50mm's up my local mountain pass.

That article on wheel aerodynamics is fine if you plan to roll the wheels down the road by themselves. Its very misleading. The biggest piece of aerodynamic drag on the bike is you...the rider...something the article does not take into consideration.

The "energy savings" on the 808 vs the R-sys will probably only make a difference to the elite level racer where every watt of energy saved will make a difference.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

chase196126 said:


> You are really overestimating the difficulty of riding an 808, or other deep rim, in a cross wind. The R-SYS will not handle any better because of the huge cross section of their carbon spokes, in fact many people report them handling worse in crosswinds than a Zipp. There is the same problem with the Ksyriums with their large flat spoke design.


This is the most ill-informed, uneducated, and biased untruth I have ever read on this forum.

Ever.


Have you ridden 808's? Have you ridden R-sys or Ksyriums?
They do not even remotely handle the same in a cross wind. Hell, you can't even compare a 303 to a Ksyrium in a cross wind. That is just dumb.
And EVERY carbon wheel I have ever ridden has rubbed on the pads in a sprint. Nature of the beast. I could fix it, but I don't like my brake levers touching the bars when I lightly brake.
And sure, 16W is considerable. In an ITT. For pack riding it is negligible. And if you race around here with 808 people will yell at you. Not kidding. 808's have caused so many Cat1/2 pile ups that organizers are talking about banning them.
As for the hubs on Zipps. Sure they have improved, but they are still junk. 
I'll give you that Easton's are better than Mavics. Sure they are great. But Reynolds are junk too. Ride a set of Assualts. Not good compared to others on the market


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> This is the most ill-informed, uneducated, and biased untruth I have ever read on this forum.
> 
> Ever.
> 
> ...



Yes, I have ridden 808s, and Ksyriums, and R-SYS, and Reynolds (extensively). From my experience the 808s handle no worse in a crosswind than the Mavics. The same goes for the 90mm and 55mm rims I rode on Trek this year. The Reynolds standard V shaped rims do not handle very well in cross winds, except for the RZRs I am currently testing for the company. They have the best crosswind handling characteristics of any deep dish wheel I have ridden. 

Yelling at a rider because they show up to a race on 808s is ill informed at the very least. Not all riders suck at handling their bikes. If a rider shows up to a ride or race without knowing how to handle their equipment in common situations that makes them an idiot. 
If a rider cant handle deep rims they should not own them. 

If there is a contest for the most blatant falsehood on this thread it has to be that a 16 watt advantage makes no difference in pack riding. Or that an advantage due to equipment is worth overlooking because the rider makes up a larger portion of the bikes drag. If you ever plan on being in contention for a win you will have to stop wheel sucking at some point. At that point an aero advantage (especially one as large as 16 watts) could certainly be the difference between winning and losing. 

Avantdale: Yes, a rider makes up the largest part of the systems aerodynamic drag, but that does not mean that because wheels are a smaller part of that equation that they cease to matter. 16 watts is a VERY significant difference in drag. At 400 watts (roughly 49 kph for my analytic cycling model), a 16 watt difference in drag is going be worth 1 minute.


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

Not everyone that is buying these wheels use them to race. Seems like your looking at if only from your view. I do not race...so that minute I can potentially save means nothing to me.

You have got to be cruising at pretty high speeds to save those watts.

Your comparing apples to oranges. The 808 is a time trial type wheel and the R-Sys is a climbing wheel. Will the 808 save you 16 watts on a long climb going 8mph?

There are way too many variables. Differences in rider size, shape, type of bike...it can go on and on.

Those "tests" just crunch data. They don't really mean to much in a real situation...unless you plan on putting a pair of R-Sys on your TT bike...but that would just be silly.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

I understand that not all riders are looking to race. Personally if I were going for a purely recreational set of wheels I would opt for some nice 28 or 32 spoke handbuilts. Cheaper and much nicer than the R-SYS

You would be surprised how much of a difference aerodynamics can make on a climb, even a steep one. Cervelo did an interesting article on this issue here: http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/engineering/tech-presentations/#project-california (click on aero vs weight)

To quickly sum up that presentation the tipping point for light weight to trump aerodynamics on a bicycle (assuming the R-SYS is roughly 200 grams lighter than the 808s in this situation) would be about 5% grade for the average 250 watt rec. cyclist, and 8% for a pro. Even then the advantage the slightly lighter wheel has over the deep dish rim is very slight. The advantage given by the deep rim on the way to the climb would far outweigh the 200g difference. 

I dont know the exact amount of drag the 808 would save at lower speeds, but I can tell you that it would be more than the RSYS would save by being 200g lighter. 

The differences in pieces of equipment are easily measureable in the real world. Crunching these numbers can make you noticeably faster (if that is your goal) by paying attention to the details. 

I had a cool experience last year going from an older TT bike design with not great aero bars (Felt B2 AL with profile designs) to a new design with very aero parts (P4 with Ventus bar). Positions on the bikes were identical, wheels and tires identical, yet I went 30 seconds faster over 12km on the P4 for the same wattage. I rode that TT course several more times that year and the difference in time compared to wattage stayed the same.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

I like Neuvation wheels.

I make lots of money replacing the spokes that seem to break frequently on the V-rimmed, low spoke count wheels.


----------



## heathb (Nov 1, 2008)

Hey guys save yourself some headaches and get a pair of 32h 3x with a DT Swiss RR585 rim. True them once a year and ride with confidence.


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

chase196126 said:


> I understand that not all riders are looking to race. Personally if I were going for a purely recreational set of wheels I would opt for some nice 28 or 32 spoke handbuilts. Cheaper and much nicer than the R-SYS
> 
> You would be surprised how much of a difference aerodynamics can make on a climb, even a steep one. Cervelo did an interesting article on this issue here: http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/engineering/tech-presentations/#project-california (click on aero vs weight)
> 
> ...



Lol...you are comparing the 808 Tubular to the clincher R-sys.

Try 2000gr for the 808 clincher...a 500gr difference...


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

I understand I am comparing the clincher R-SYS to the tubular 808. The top production Version of the R-SYS is a clincher, not a tubular. I am trying to compare apples to apples as far as the wheels location in their lineup. If the pro only R-SYS premium was available to buy I would have used that for comparison. 

The only reason the 808 was brought up was to show the largest gap on the aerodynamics chart... I still think the R-SYS is a terrible design and a wheel that has no place in the world. You have not said anything to persuade me otherwise. 

Sorry to the OP for the thread hijack.


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

Lol...I'm not trying to persuade anyone of anything.  

I'm just saying that article is very misleading.

Something else I read...on the interwebz.

"While the math and logic is certainly sound enough in the graph posted by ephedyn (which is based on this test: http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-15505311.html), what we need is a little bit of perspective on the watt differences between wheel and rim height, so allow me this illustration on a ceteris paribus basis (all other factors being equal):

Based on the calculator at http://bikecalculator.com/wattsMetric.html, it typically takes 551 watts (!) of power to maintain 50 km/h on a level road.

Now the difference in absorbed power between a standard wheel and a good aero wheel is only around 10 watts at 50 km/h, which gives: 10/551 = 1.8% difference.

This translates to an increase in actual speed by just 0.35 km/h ! (again using the bikecalculator)

*While this may be a lot for a pro rider doing TT, it really doesn't mean much for most riders. And this it at 50 km/h, which is a speed most of us only ride for a few minutes at a time, on a level road and with no wind to help. At 40 km/h the difference would be less than 1% and the actual speed diff probably close to zero..*.

So it seems to be, that the aerodynamic properties of wheels, are basically irrelevant for the vast majority of riders. Having said that, I am still planning on building a set of 38 or 50mm carbon tubs, just for the fun of it - and because they look cool"

Sorry OP...my last post.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> I dont know the exact amount of drag the 808 would save at lower speeds, but I can tell you that it would be more than the RSYS would save by being 200g lighter.


The weight advantage of the RSYS gives you zero watts power saving on level ground at a constant speed. Weight is irrelevant unless you're accelerating or climbing.

Asad


----------



## Hooben (Aug 22, 2004)

Yes, I concur...my experience with Neuvation M28's...
Bought a new pair from a little LBS.
Rode them for about three months, then on a slow ride the rear wheel failed.
Spoke broke out of the hub through a crack that allowed the spoke to fall out.
wheel tacoed out and stopped bike with a skid. A second spoke broke.
Luckily i clipped out in time and wasn't on a descent going 60mph.
LBS contacted Neuvation and sent a new wheel.
LBS stopped carrying Neuvation all together soon after.

Sure they're backed and replaced, but how much do you want to trust these things?
I sold the pair on ebay. I weigh 184lbs and was told they should have been okay for me.


----------



## AJL (Jul 9, 2009)

I have a pair of M28 Aero 3s. I've been as heavy as 260 lbs riding on these wheels (they feel much stiffer at 240 lbs). With the introduction of the Aero 3s, Neuvation started to to use a better quality aluminum for the rims. I hit a protruding drainage gate on a ride this summer (having just sprinted through a 4 way intersection) - I got a pinch flat, but only needed to true the rear wheel. Even though I wish Neuvation had a 20/24 spoke count for clydes, they seem to be holding up just fine.


----------



## Appendage (Dec 28, 2006)

*Neuvation says straight up they'll crack*

What you get from Neuvation:

1. The owner, John Neugent, says that low-spoke-count rims will crack eventually and that his are no different. It's right there on their website.
2. He will sell you a "wheel protection plan" for pretty cheap- $50 I think- that will cover cracked rims.
3. Customer service is prompt and efficient.

Other notes:

1. Seems to me that the real question is are Neuvation wheels more prone to sudden, catastrophic failure than Brand X. I have no idea.
1.5 If you don't look after your equipment then I would suggest you buy only stout gear and stay away from the lightweight stuff. All aluminum and carbon fiber stuff will break eventually from cumulative stress.
2. I did ride with small cracks around the eyelets in the rear rim for months. I kept an eye on the situation, and the cracks did not get bigger, but more appeared.
3. I've got the silver rims. It would've been very hard to see the cracks on a black rim.
4. There's nothing wrong with Neuvation wheels- they are what they are. Just know what you're getting and act accordingly. Think of the rims as disposable. They're gonna crack eventually. Mine did after about 1000 miles. I weight 170 lb and the roads around here are a little rough.


----------



## LOUISSSSS (Dec 14, 2009)

Appendage said:


> What you get from Neuvation:
> 
> 1. The owner, John Neugent, says that low-spoke-count rims will crack eventually and that his are no different. It's right there on their website.
> 2. He will sell you a "wheel protection plan" for pretty cheap- $50 I think- that will cover cracked rims.
> ...


cracking at 1000 miles is unacceptable. i'd get a refund or a replacement for free. i dont ride much and i can do 1000 miles in a summer.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

chase196126 said:


> Yes, I have ridden 808s, and Ksyriums, and R-SYS, and Reynolds (extensively). From my experience the 808s handle no worse in a crosswind than the Mavics. The same goes for the 90mm and 55mm rims I rode on Trek this year. The Reynolds standard V shaped rims do not handle very well in cross winds, except for the RZRs I am currently testing for the company. They have the best crosswind handling characteristics of any deep dish wheel I have ridden.


I call BS on your "experience". 303's are worse in a cross wind than a Ksyrium. And 404's are much worse than 303's. 808's are damn near dangerous. To say they handle the same is an outright lie, or you have no idea what a real crosswind is. Tell me this, If 808's are so fast, and so easy to handle, why doesn't every rider who is sponsored by Zipp choose them on race day? Cause they handle like crap, that's why.


chase196126 said:


> Yelling at a rider because they show up to a race on 808s is ill informed at the very least. Not all riders suck at handling their bikes. If a rider shows up to a ride or race without knowing how to handle their equipment in common situations that makes them an idiot.
> If a rider cant handle deep rims they should not own them.


Well, some people think they are more pro than they are. 808's are dangerous in crosswinds when pack racing. A 1/2 field is twitchy enough towards the end of a race, people get tired, and people make mistakes when on the rivet. Riding 808's accentuates those mistakes. Last year a guy on 808's took out half the field at a race because he got blown to the left by a crosswind. In short, there was about $40,000 of broken parts in the ditch, one broken jaw, one broken back, 3 broken collar bones and two serious concussions. These are all guys who have to go to work the next day. Thus none of them want to see anyone on 808's outside of an ITT.


chase196126 said:


> If there is a contest for the most blatant falsehood on this thread it has to be that a 16 watt advantage makes no difference in pack riding. Or that an advantage due to equipment is worth overlooking because the rider makes up a larger portion of the bikes drag. If you ever plan on being in contention for a win you will have to stop wheel sucking at some point. At that point an aero advantage (especially one as large as 16 watts) could certainly be the difference between winning and losing.


This is true, if you ever want to win you need to hit the front. In the last 100m. At 150m you want to start accelerating. So what saves more power, accelerating a wheel that is 500g lighter, or those 16W savings for 100m in the wind?
You have clearly bought into Zipp's marketing and analytical models that factor in half the equation. Good for you.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

mtbbmet said:


> I call BS on your "experience". 303's are worse in a cross wind than a Ksyrium. And 404's are much worse than 303's. 808's are damn near dangerous. To say they handle the same is an outright lie, or you have no idea what a real crosswind is.


I have to agree with this cross wind comment. I've ridden Ksyruims for years and they have little or no cross wind chatter. Years ago I had a set of Spinergy Rev-X wheels that have deep rims like the Zipps (not nearly as deep as the 808 though). A cross wind would definitely get your attention riding those wheels. Big difference between the two. I can't imagine pack racing with Zipp 808's. Makes as much sense as a front disk wheel. Then again, I've never and probably will never own a set of Zipp wheels. They're way over priced for what they are.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

mtbbmet said:


> I call BS on your "experience". 303's are worse in a cross wind than a Ksyrium. And 404's are much worse than 303's. 808's are damn near dangerous. To say they handle the same is an outright lie, or you have no idea what a real crosswind is. Tell me this, If 808's are so fast, and so easy to handle, why doesn't every rider who is sponsored by Zipp choose them on race day? Cause they handle like crap, that's why.
> 
> Well, some people think they are more pro than they are. 808's are dangerous in crosswinds when pack racing. A 1/2 field is twitchy enough towards the end of a race, people get tired, and people make mistakes when on the rivet. Riding 808's accentuates those mistakes. Last year a guy on 808's took out half the field at a race because he got blown to the left by a crosswind. In short, there was about $40,000 of broken parts in the ditch, one broken jaw, one broken back, 3 broken collar bones and two serious concussions. These are all guys who have to go to work the next day. Thus none of them want to see anyone on 808's outside of an ITT.
> 
> ...


I still stand by my experiences with those different wheels. I have raced in some extreme cross wind situations, both here in the states and over in Europe. I have experience with a lot of wheels at a lot of depths from a lot of different makers. What experiences do you have? I am just curious, since my "experience" does seem to amount to much compared to yours. 

I have no issues handling deep wheels in a reasonable cross wind, neither do most other pros. Cancellara and Voigt commonly ride 808s on flat stages. Zabriskie rode the even deeper 1080s on that his long break away in Paris Tours a year or two ago. Many of the top Zipp sponsored riders run the 808s in mass start races. Cavendish routinely runs a 55mm deep rim in front and a 80mm in the rear. As long as you know how your bike handles with the wheels, and practice with them, you should have no issues at all. 

Deep dish wheels are not appropriate for all situations. If you can’t handle them on a windy day, dont ride them! Conversely, don’t outlaw a wheel because one rider caused a crash while riding those wheels. 

A big pile up with a few broken bones and a hospital stay was caused by someone having a tubeless tire come off in a corner here in town. Should my local organization ban tubeless tires now? Should all the other races glare and assume riders on tubeless wheels are an accident waiting to happen? Hell, should they ban Look style pedals because guys clip them in corners and crash? Just because some guy caused a crash and blamed it on his wheels does not mean the wheels are at fault. 

As an aside; no matter where you race there will always be some guy who comes out on equipment that he cant handle safely, whether that be a wheel set or an entire bike. It’s a risk every racer takes, so identify the sketchy people and stay away from them. Better yet, have a word with them and let them know. 99% of the time they will listen if you go about it diplomatically.

As for the last 100 meters of a sprint: 
http://www.analyticcycling.com/WheelsCritCorner_Page.html

I ran the simulation with the following assumptions
Drag coefficient of .0491 for the standard wheels and .0377 for the “aero wheels” (I used the campy shamal and standard 32 spoke wheel data, that is all analytic had)

Weight of 1.2kg total for standard (600 front, 800 rear) and 2kg total for the aero (900 front, 1100 rear) giving the standard wheels an 800g "advantage"

Starting speed of 60kph (16.7 meters/second when rounded)
100 meter finishing stretch
Peak power of 1200 watts for both (peak reached at 3.7 seconds), with an average of 900 watts over the entire sprint.

The result is that the rider with the aero wheels will be ahead by .01 seconds and .2 meters. 

I would rather have aero wheels. :thumbsup:


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> *Deep dish wheels* are not appropriate for all situations. If you can’t handle them on a windy day, dont ride them! Conversely, don’t outlaw a wheel because one rider caused a crash while riding those wheels.


I would say that using pizzas for wheels is never appropriate.

Deep Dish = Pizza
Deep V = Rims

Deep Dish related to wheels would mean that you had a wheel where the rim was all the way off to one side; say centered over the 11 tooth cog.

Of course, I've ridden deep v rims in the wind. It's a little like riding pizzas.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

chase196126 said:


> I still stand by my experiences with those different wheels. I have raced in some extreme cross wind situations, both here in the states and over in Europe. I have experience with a lot of wheels at a lot of depths from a lot of different makers. What experiences do you have? I am just curious, since my "experience" does seem to amount to much compared to yours.


10 years racing. In those 10 years I have ridden 303's, 404's and other 58m wheels, 808's Carbone's, Hed3, Hed Ardennes, Protons, new and old Shamals, Comos', some 28mm Alex wheel that is very similar to a Neuvation, Bora's, Ksyrium's, EA70's, Racing 1,3 and 5's, and probably a couple others that I'm forgeting about. If you can't tell the difference between an 808 and a Ksyrium, you have serious sensory problems that you should get looked at. I can tell the difference in the way a bike handles between a proton and a new Shamal.


chase196126 said:


> I have no issues handling deep wheels in a reasonable cross wind, neither do most other pros. Cancellara and Voigt commonly ride 808s on flat stages. Zabriskie rode the even deeper 1080s on that his long break away in Paris Tours a year or two ago. Many of the top Zipp sponsored riders run the 808s in mass start races. Cavendish routinely runs a 55mm deep rim in front and a 80mm in the rear. As long as you know how your bike handles with the wheels, and practice with them, you should have no issues at all.


What's a reasonable crosswind? What do you consider wind? Where I live and race, there is always wind and it's usually 15-20km/hr constant with gusts. Is that reasonable? And riding an 808 in rear with a 404 in front is different than riding an 808 in front. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THEY DO THAT?!? BECAUSE 808's UP FRONT IS HARD TO HANDLE!! I understand that SOME pro's ride 808's in mass start events. But one thing separates pro's from the rest of us. The fact that they are Pro's. 



chase196126 said:


> Deep dish wheels are not appropriate for all situations.


Deep section.


chase196126 said:


> As for the last 100 meters of a sprint:
> http://www.analyticcycling.com/WheelsCritCorner_Page.html
> 
> I ran the simulation with the following assumptions
> ...


Well, I guess science has spoken. Why don't you run that same data on a road that has a 0.1% grade. Or would that mess up your outcome? Cause we all know that every road is perfectly flat and organizers never make the finish slightly uphill.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

My bad on the "deep dish" wheels thing. Slip of the tongue (fingers?) 

I still stand by what I have experienced. I never said the wheels handle exactly the same or that you can tell a difference. I said that the 808s handle no worse in a cross wind than the R-SYS or Ksyrium. 

Ill clarify my intended statement:
Compared to a standard spoke, box section rim all of those wheels are sensitive to crosswind. From my experience the Mavic wheels are just as sensitive to cross winds as the 808s. Once you get used to them in the wind they are no issue to handle, save extremely gusty days. In comparison to a rim like Reynolds SDV66 (or even the 46), the 808s and Mavics handle better in cross winds. 

That’s my experience. 




> What's a reasonable crosswind? What do you consider wind? Where I live and race, there is always wind and it's usually 15-20km/hr constant with gusts. Is that reasonable? And riding an 808 in rear with a 404 in front is different than riding an 808 in front. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THEY DO THAT?!? BECAUSE 808's UP FRONT IS HARD TO HANDLE!! I understand that SOME pro's ride 808's in mass start events. But one thing separates pro's from the rest of us. The fact that they are Pro's.


A reasonable crosswind is subjective! I know guys who wont touch a deep wheel if there is a hint of wind, and others that ride 80mm wheels no matter what the wind is like. I cant tell you the optimum range of wind speed for me to ride deep wheels, only that I can tell the day of the race whether I will be safe or not. If a rider cant tell the difference between conditions where they will/wont be safe on deep rims they are not experienced enough on those wheels to ride them in a pack. 

Pros are not so different than many experienced riders, other than the number of watts we can push. Just because someone carries a pro license does not make them fantastic at handling their bike. Some guys are comfortable and safe handling deep wheels in the wind, others are not. Just like in amateur fields. 

As for a race with a 1% finishing grade: 
Assuming the same constants as I previously presented, the rider with deep wheels will win by .02 meters. 
For 2% the aero rider will win by .01 meters
For 3% they are equal
For 4% the standard rider will win by .01 meters


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

There's really nothing wrong with Neuvations. They suffer what most low spoke count wheels suffer- the lack of strength for many Clydesdales. I have to agree that the weight limits are around 225-250 on their wheels. Not sure if Neuvation actually says that but I remember years ago that a bike shop told me that. BTW, bike shops DID in fact sell Neuvation wheels at one time. Neuvation decided that they can offer a better price by not selling through a brick and mortar shop. Ever notice that their wheels are always less than the MSRP? The MSRP was what I paid for my first set at a bike shop. I also remember higher end KHS road bikes running Neuvations as OEM wheels back then as well.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

onrhodes said:


> Please define "heavy". That is such a subjective term
> 
> I'm not saying this to be rude or anything, but "heavy" riders......200+ people from my experience SHOULD NOT ride lighweight equipment.
> We're all involved in a sport where we can go out and buy what the pros ride. What do you think a "heavy" pro rider weighs? Even Thor and Magnus are sub 200lbs guys. I remember reading a while ago that Magnus couldn't ride some of the sponsored wheels on his earlier team because he would destroy them in about 2 weeks.
> ...


Not sure about Thor but Magnus was a little over 200 lbs. when he raced for Slipstream- Chipotle. The guy was a powerhouse to put it lightly. BTW, riders over 200 lbs are called "Clysdesdales." At 215lb. I've destroyed many wheels due to the torque I dish out.


----------



## mdutcher (May 1, 2005)

*Here is my take...*

Neuvation's pricepoint is very appealing to a lot of cyclists out there. I must say that I have been smitten by that pricepoint as well. With that said, I currently own 2 sets of Neuvations. One set is on my wife's bike (clincher), the other set is for a CX set-up (tubular). Both sets were bought for about $225. My thought was that you get what you pay for and I was cool with that. 

Out of the box, both wheels met my expectations. The clinchers weighed in at about 1600 grams. The tubulars were under 1400 grams, which I was totally impressed by.

Both set of wheels have performed and are currently still performing to spec with no issues at all.

However, I also did purchase a set of the C50 carbon tubulars. Those wheels truly have an appealing pricepoint factor for an inexpensive set of carbon tubulars. The wheels though are junk, in my opinion. The spoke tension was so out of whack that it required some major work by my LBS to get them "true." They were true out of the box, but the spoke tension was inconsistent all around. Some spokes had some major flex to them while the others were tight. It was scary and I could only imagine what they might have been like on the road had my LBS not stepped in to give it a once over. My buddy at my shop told me to get rid of them as they were not good quality. So, I did sell them on eBay.

My buddy has told me that Neuvation hubs are hit or miss. So far on my other wheels things have been a hit. For the money, I could not be happier with them. So far so good.

I have seen a few locals racing and riding on the C50s and I am not quite sure of their individual success, but I see them in races and such.

In the end, the pricepoint is the appealing factor to these wheel offerings. The quality is hit or miss and I have been told that Neuvation stands by their product and has good customer service as well. Hope that this helps.


----------



## Zipp0 (Aug 19, 2008)

I have a set of Neuvation M28 Aero 3, Mavic CXP33 with Dura Ace hubs, and Cosmic Carbones. All have been great wheels. I now use the CXP33/DA wheels as my primary training wheel, as they are nice, bombproof, but sort of heavy.

The Neuvations took some good hits and trued up just fine when needed, and no borken spokes yet. But I WILL be checking for cracks before riding them again.

Are they dangerous? I don't think so - at least from Aero 3 models onward.


----------



## tbrown524 (Dec 9, 2006)

Sebastionmerckx said:


> Do you feel they're good for heavier riders?


No, I'm on my third Neuvation rear wheel.. Good thing their Customer Service is great and didn't give me any hassle replacing the wheels.. The spoke pulled right out of the rim on both sets.


----------



## AFenvy (Nov 19, 2010)

Wow, I have never heard this side of Neuvation reviews. All I ever hear is praise. My bike has an old set of Neuvation R28X wheels, they have been ridden on 5000+ miles of CX racing, road riding, potholes, curbs, etc. etc. Neither I or the previous rider of my bike were nice to them, and they still are perfectly true. No issues whatsoever, and VERY light. They look great on my bike. I would buy many more sets, and customer service is second to none.


----------



## Sebastionmerckx (Mar 6, 2008)

tbrown524 said:


> No, I'm on my third Neuvation rear wheel.. Good thing their Customer Service is great and didn't give me any hassle replacing the wheels.. The spoke pulled right out of the rim on both sets.


 I was actually asking that question in regard to another set of wheels but yes, Neuvations are in some cases questionable for larger riders over 220 imo.


----------

