# any Disadvantages to 2-way Eurus or Shamal wheels?



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

For the reasonable extra cost, I am tempted to buy 2-way (clincher + tubeless) versions of Eurus or Shamal Ultra wheels, when I get around to it.

I expect to mostly be riding clinchers, at least at the beginning, and probably the same tire model I've been using (Michelin Pro3 Race). 

Are there any _Disadvantages_ to the 2-way wheel design ?
Eg, harder to get clinchers on/off, harder to seat the tire bead, or anything like that??

From Campy's pics, it seems the 2-way have a more pronounced groove or channel in the center of the rim, maybe a slightly different edge profile to hook the tire bead, and that's about it.


----------



## Americano (Dec 20, 2001)

*I think that they're pretty great*

I'm actually on my second set of Eurus 2-way fit wheels (first set was damaged when hit by a car). I have not tried regular clinchers on them yet so I can't comment on that aspect. But I've been running Hutchinson Fusion tubeless for a few weeks now and really love the performance of this wheel/tire combo. The feel of the tubeless tire is just so much better than a clincher tire, even when running at a comparable pressure. But the really cool thing is that you can easily run tubeless at well under 100 psi. I'm pretty new to this setup so I can't say how long the tires will last or if they'll offer the better flat protection that I'm also hoping for.

If you go for a tubeless wheelset, you'll be wasting time by not trying out a tubeless tire.


----------



## Chris Keller (May 19, 2008)

*I'm interested too...*

I'm about to spring for some Shamal Ultra 2 way fit wheels. I am seriously thinking about running tubeless too. any issues for big riders (210lbs)??


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

> Are there any Disadvantages to the 2-way wheel design ?


20 grams. My guess is that's the only disadvantage.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

Getting tires on them is a PITA. Not much fun at all.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

FYI (I'm the OP),
Back in March 2009 I chose the clincher-only Shamal Ultra wheels ... no regrets.

I've used the wheels with both Michelin Pro3Race and Vittoria Open Corsa CX tires. 

The tires install without too much difficulty, but I do need 2 plastic tools to remove the tires.


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

I've been using the 2007 Eurus (clincher only) for 2 years now and they have been amazing. The stiffness and strength for such a light weight is great. They have basically required zero maintenance, not even spoke tension adjustment, and are still completely true. I looked inside the hubs about a year ago thinking I might need to strip and regrease them, but they were still in perfect order so I just put them back together and haven't touched them since. No play in them at all.


----------



## temoore (Mar 9, 2004)

Although the OP has already bought some wheels, I will chime in. I bought Eurus 2 ways at the end of July and have been running Hutchinson Atom's (ordered Fusion 2, but they sent me Atoms). I did a 6 day 400 mile trip early August and had a flat. Put a tube in for the remainder of the trip (the tires are harder to put on with tubes). When I returned from the trip, I put a tubeless patch on it and have been running tubeless since then. I had originally used the Hutchinson aerosol sealer, but was not that happy with it. Since then, have switched to Stan's sealant (2 oz per tire) and no problems so far.
As the to tubeless, I am a convert. Better ride, better traction, low rolling resistance, all and all a winner for me. Hard to find parts / tires locally if you need them. The Eurus are great wheels. I had Kryserium Elites on the bike before I had a rim failure. The handling and stability of the Eurus are noticeably better. I love these wheels!


----------



## Chris Keller (May 19, 2008)

i bought the Shamal Ultra 2-way Fit wheels and I absolutely love them! I have over 2,500 miles on them and the ride great. I'm a 210lb rider on a Look 595 Ultra and these wheels with the Hutchinson Fusion 2 tubeless run fantastic. I usually have them at 105-110psi and the ride is supple yet fast with little rolling resistance. 

I've had to replace the rear tire due to a flat after 1,500 miles which was easy...I just used a little soapy water on the beads to seat the tire. I can easily inflate it with a floor pump. 

Very sweet wheels...you won't go wrong.


----------



## Eyorerox (Feb 19, 2008)

Any one know the difference between the shamal 2 way fit 2009 and 2010 ?
Thanks


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

Just resurrecting this thread because I am currently torn between shamal ultra 2-way fit or standard clinchers...

I know it seems like a no-brainer - the 2-way are only slightly more expensive and only about 20-30g (?) heavier and you have the option of using tubeless if you ever want to.

However, at the moment with only one manufacturer making tubeless and the potential hassles of the system (having to use sealant etc), I'm just not convinced I'd ever want to go tubeless. Is the rolling resistance / feel of tubeless really THAT much better than, say, a set of Veloflex Corsa with latex tubes? Also it strikes me that when you actually do the maths, the tubeless setup is really quite a bit heavier even with the lightest tyres, e.g. - 

Shamal Ultra clinchers (1450g) + 2x light inner tubes (2x 50g) + 2x light tyres, e.g. Veloflex (2x 200g) = *1950g*

Shamal Ultra 2-way (1480g) + 2x Hutchinson atom (2x 295g?) = *2070g* not including sealant... How much extra does that add?

I don't particularly want to run tyres at lower pressures - for whatever reason (perhaps because I'm light, or my frame is comfortable) I'm not a big fan of the cushioned feel you get at lower pressures. If the tubeless are really faster and offer a much better ride in other ways however, that might convince me...


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

smoo said:


> ... I'm just not convinced I'd ever want to go tubeless. ...


Me, neither! 
Still happily rolling along on Shamal Ultra paired with Conti GP4000S or Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX and latex tubes. The Vitts are a bit fragile, now using the Conti as every day tire and it doesn't give up much to the Vitts.

I recently splurged on Zipp404 tubulars w/ Vittoria Corsa as a race wheelset, but no way are they as all-around versatile as Shamal/Eurus clinchers.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

I have eurus in both 2 way and clincher version. really no difference between the 2. tried tubeless, felt as good as a good clincher, but the experiment ended when I flatted and broke 3 plastic levers trying to get the tubeless tire off to insert a tube on the side of the road. I was forced to phone for help for the first time in 23 years of riding. no thanks.


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

Glad I'm not alone.

Another thing - if there are no disadvantages to the 2-way fit wheels, why are Campagnolo still making and selling the clincher-only version? If it had just been for one year I could believe it was because they had a bunch rims they needed to get rid of, but they've been selling both versions side by side now for about 3 years.

One thing I noticed that's buried away in the specs for these wheels is that the clinchers supposedly have a 24mm profile at the front and 30mm at the rear, while the 2-way are 24mm and 28mm.


----------



## Eyorerox (Feb 19, 2008)

I bought a pair of shamal 2 way fit wheels, unable to mount vittoria corso evo cx tyres on them
so sold them bought Fulcrum Racing Zeros, no problem
Hutchinson I think are the only tyre company making tubeless tyres?


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

Eyorerox said:


> I bought a pair of shamal 2 way fit wheels, unable to mount vittoria corso evo cx tyres on them
> so sold them bought Fulcrum Racing Zeros, no problem
> Hutchinson I think are the only tyre company making tubeless tyres?


Must be a slightly larger diameter on the 2-way Shamals.

The Vittoria Open Corsa clinchers are very snug on my 'regular' Shamal (2009), but I'm always able to mount the Vitts by hand -- and I don't have a particularly strong hand. 

A very snug tire fit is always preferable, for safety.


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

Eyorerox said:


> I bought a pair of shamal 2 way fit wheels, unable to mount vittoria corso evo cx tyres on them
> so sold them bought Fulcrum Racing Zeros, no problem
> Hutchinson I think are the only tyre company making tubeless tyres?


That's really interesting - are the zeros the standard clinchers or are they 2 way as well?

Because far as I can tell from studying all of the specs, the current (2010 & 2011) zeros and shamals are *identical * apart from the graphics and the slightly wider spaced spoke pattern on the rear of the zeros (although it is functionally the same pattern). The spokes even look like they are the same (unlike in older models where the zeros had wider spokes). In both the shamals and the zeros however, the clincher has a 30mm rear profile and the 2-way has a 28mm profile, and there will be other differences in the rim to allow the fitting of tubeless. 

So assuming your zeros are standard clinchers, that definitely suggests that clincher tyres should be easier to mount on the standard clincher wheels than on the 2-way, for both the shamals and the zeros.


----------



## mattsupersix (May 12, 2011)

*hey all*

i see that you have been discussing shamal's. i have a quick question and hopefully you can give me an opinion... i have the opportunity to buy some gold shamals cheap urgently right now and am curious to know whether i would even notice the difference compared to my RS80 wheels that have done about 3000km?? i am 100kg and ride a mix of short (50km) to long (150-200) rides a few times per week. would really like so nice ceramic bearing wheels but not sure if the cost is justified??

thanks


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

The Shamals will be a significant upgrade. 
Use the RS80s for training/crap weather and the Shamals for that little bit of advantage. The Shamal is one of the sturdiest light all-round alu-rimmed wheelsets you can buy. Those ceramic bearings are nice, but not really necessary. Make sure that there is nothing phoney about that cheap urgent deal.


----------



## smoo (Sep 20, 2007)

As far as I know the gold shamals are a few years old and don't have ceramic bearings, but don't let that put you off - in other respects they are almost identical to the current model and if you can get them at a good price you should definitely go for it! The steel bearings in the older shamals and eurus are very high quality and the ceramic thing is a bit of a gimmick to be honest.


----------



## varian72 (Jul 18, 2006)

Specialized is making tubeless now.


----------



## mattsupersix (May 12, 2011)

i really dont understand the theory - use your old "cheaper" wheels for bad weather and good wheels for dry training/racing. whats the difference? the rain and water aren't going to hurt a good set of wheels like shamal's is it??


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

If the weather is scheisse there's no reason to bring out the nicest equipment IMHO. Unless there's a race on, of course.

Rain and water doesn't hurt, but at least in my parts of the world the brake tracks get more wear in the wet due to dirt.


----------

