# Mad Fiber clinchers out!



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Mad Fiber finally released their clinchers. Holy smokes. 1200g carbon clincher wheelset. Very unique process of bonding carbon to the aluminum rim extrusion, so it has a carbon brake surface with aluminum underneath to include an aluminum clincher bead and tubless ready. Seems like it will hellp with the overheating issue. I will be very interested to see how the longevity is on these.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Only $2599.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

I'm impressed.


----------



## DonDenver (May 30, 2007)

Ya gotta love a MF spokesperson discussing the technology as though he is the very part:

From Zinn...
_Mad Fiber’s spoking system also minimizes bulges and distortion in the rim due to tension at spoke attachment points. “What makes rims happy, if I can speak for a rim,” says Hjertberg, “is lots of spokes to spread the load out. Rims don’t like unsupported spans, and our rim thinks it’s got about a hundred spokes, due to the way our fibers in the rim act like spokes.”_

Sounds like the clincher version with ceramic bearings is the same as the tubular at $3k with the steel bearing clincher at $2800.00.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

There's a set for sale at a local wheelbuilder's shop.


The biggest surprise to me was that the wheelset has no weight limit.

So Clydesdale's like me can ride a set  !


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

I can't say I would drop $2600 on a road wheel set anytime soon, but I sure like these puppies!!!


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

I would love to see a cross section of the rim.


----------



## Mtl_Rookie (Jul 24, 2011)

I'd love to take those for a spin


----------



## Dray3573 (Jun 22, 2010)

Dang those are nice. Not knowing a bunch about MF, I wonder what the lateral stiffness on those wheels are like. How nice would they look on a Moots or Alchemy Ti bike. Sure would be nice to build a "spare no expense" bike someday.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Dray3573 said:


> Dang those are nice. Not knowing a bunch about MF, I wonder what the lateral stiffness on those wheels are like. How nice would they look on a Moots or Alchemy Ti bike. Sure would be nice to build a "spare no expense" bike someday.


Lateral stiffness is pretty solid. At least it felt so on the tubular versions...


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

spookyload said:


> I would love to see a cross section of the rim.


Here you go...Basically take the carbon tubular section out of the top (if you look it's bonded in place) and replace it with the aluminum clincher section.


----------



## dharrison (Oct 27, 2009)

I haven't had a chance to ride them, but my LBS has a few sets of the tubulars. Crazy light and they look sick on a bike. Also, the new decals look much better. Maybe someday...


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

spookyload said:


> I would love to see a cross section of the rim.


Did you go to their website?

Their aerospace engineer has an impressive resume' and the founder/owner has spent a lifetime in the cycle industry as well as being influential.


Here's what I wish: A wider tubular wheelset (27mm) with ISO disc hubs. Basically a 'cross set up that I would use for the road. 

They already fulfilled one requirement: No weight limit.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

cda 455 said:


> Did you go to their website?


I did check. They only have a cross section picture of the tubular.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

How do they handle in crosswinds? Flat spokes don't give me confidence.

Apart from that the wheels seem like an innovative piece of engineering.


----------



## Yangpei (Sep 21, 2004)

Looks promising. Too bad they aren't available yet.


----------



## samh (May 5, 2004)

*madfiber*



kbwh said:


> How do they handle in crosswinds? Flat spokes don't give me confidence.
> 
> Apart from that the wheels seem like an innovative piece of engineering.


yes. looks like trispoke. also if they break from accident not easily repairable.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Yangpei said:


> Looks promising. Too bad they aren't available yet.


They are available now.

There's a wheel-builder in town that has a set for sale.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

I'm skeptical that I would sweat on the aluminum bead, which would corrode the aluminum enough to bubble and flake off the carbon over it. Happened to me on all my Al/CF stems. Maybe if the rim was anodized...


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

kbwh said:


> How do they handle in crosswinds? Flat spokes don't give me confidence...


Also, that flat seam projecting inward from the rim is contrary to current good aero design. Note Zipp and others using wider rounded trailing edges.


----------



## Zipp0 (Aug 19, 2008)

Try explaining $3000 bicycle wheels to the wife. I mean..... I had to pick up my Cosmic Carbones used and STILL downplay the cost a bit.


----------



## Yangpei (Sep 21, 2004)

Zipp0 said:


> Try explaining $3000 bicycle wheels to the wife. I mean..... I had to pick up my Cosmic Carbones used and STILL downplay the cost a bit.


Try explaining that it is equivalent to a nice handbag (or 3 pairs of shoes), and that you will likely get more use from the wheels


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

Yangpei said:


> Try explaining that it is equivalent to a nice handbag (or 3 pairs of shoes), and that you will likely get more use from the wheels


That won't work here. When my wife got a gift cert to Coach, she went to the outlet and bought 2 because she didn't think they were worth what they normally charge. Although, we did drop 40k on a Lexus recently............Hummmm, maybe I'll compare her car to a wheels and point out the differences. Hummmmmm, hummmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

I would assume they are fairly awful in cross winds. But, if I had the money, I'd probably buy a pair as they are like a modern equivalent of the old Spinergy wheels.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

My teams sponsor just became the Australian Importer for these.
Looking to get a set but am completely torn as to whether I should get the clincher or tubular model.
Never had tubs before.
Mainly doing Crits but also some road races on what can be reasonably ordinary road surfaces.
Anyone want to give me some input as to which way to go and if tubs, what is a good tyre that would meet both these uses?


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

FTR said:


> My teams sponsor just became the Australian Importer for these.
> Looking to get a set but am completely torn as to whether I should get the clincher or tubular model.
> Never had tubs before.
> Mainly doing Crits but also some road races on what can be reasonably ordinary road surfaces.
> Anyone want to give me some input as to which way to go and if tubs, what is a good tyre that would meet both these uses?


Must be nice to have your dilemna. I guess it depends on the discount you get really on these. But if you buy tubulars, they really will be one-trick pony wheels, and suitable only for racing. Clinchers afford you the option to use them periodically for group rides, etc.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

nightfend said:


> Must be nice to have your dilemna. I guess it depends on the discount you get really on these. But if you buy tubulars, they really will be one-trick pony wheels, and suitable only for racing. Clinchers afford you the option to use them periodically for group rides, etc.


Why would tubulars only be "one-trick pony wheels?"

In most cases the tire casings are just as solid as clincher counterparts. The chance of flatting is the same (or lower by eliminating pinch flats) and you can still carry a spare tubular and a can of sealant.

Not really much more annoying than riding a clincher setup.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

To each their own. I would never ride tubulars without wheel vehicle support. Too many hassles.


----------



## pcs2 (Sep 4, 2006)

FTR said:


> My teams sponsor just became the Australian Importer for these.
> Looking to get a set but am completely torn as to whether I should get the clincher or tubular model.
> Never had tubs before.
> Mainly doing Crits but also some road races on what can be reasonably ordinary road surfaces.
> Anyone want to give me some input as to which way to go and if tubs, what is a good tyre that would meet both these uses?



As a race only wheelset I would be on tubs for sure. For training I would use either. I don't find it more or less difficult to replace a tub than a clincher out on the road. My note to this is that I only carry 1 spare when riding with tubs, with clinchers I usually carry 2 tubes + patch kit, and I ride/corner slower on a replaced tub than a clincher.

IMO if I had to choose just one, it would be the tubs. For tires I like Vittorias, corsas for tubular, and open corsa with latex tubes for clinchers.


----------



## veloci1 (Nov 29, 2005)

i wonder how careful you have to be when changing tires. what is you use a tire leveler and chip the coating on the braking surface? will that be covered under warranty? i would love to get a pair, but, i would be afraid of screwing up the braking surface.that is why i sold my Lightweight wheels. i was so stressed when riding becasue i did not want to damage the wheels. i just sold them. i could not afford to replace them if i damage them. like they say, if you cannot afford to replace something, do not buy it. at least that is true for bike parts.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

veloci1 said:


> i wonder how careful you have to be when changing tires. what is you use a tire leveler and chip the coating on the braking surface? will that be covered under warranty?


How are you changing tires that you would damage a brake surface with a tire lever? If you use plastic levers, it would never be an issue, but I still cant see how you would nick a brake surface. It has an aluminum rim inside the carbon which is all you should be contacting with a tire lever. I hardly use a lever for the tires I install anyways.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

nightfend said:


> To each their own. I would never ride tubulars without wheel vehicle support. Too many hassles.


Like what?


----------



## stoked (Aug 6, 2004)

I would like to see some reviews when they come out. RB Action tested the tubular version and found them to be a bit flexy. I don't think I could swing these till next year anyway(my LW III clinchers are only 4 months old)


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

stoked said:


> I would like to see some reviews when they come out. RB Action tested the tubular version and found them to be a bit flexy. I don't think I could swing these till next year anyway(my LW III clinchers are only 4 months old)


Interesting review and somewhat at odds to all of the others I found at an initial search:



velonews said:


> Before I go into the details of why the $2,600 Mad Fiber wheelset is so different from others, you should know that the pair weighs 1,080 grams (!) and is _*very stiff.*_





Lava magazine said:


> Our test of Mad Fiber wheels reinforced what Hjertberg said: it was a great do-it-all wheelset. It was an overly windy day (with 50mph gusts) but it handled well for the light weight. As advertised, it was _*extremely stiff*_ out of saddle, but even on rough roads, it was quite compliant in the vertical plane.





Cyclocross magazine said:


> OK, so what about the ride? During my demo a few weeks back, I only spent about 20 minutes flying around industrial Northeast Portland, so it’s tough to give a full-fledged report. But, on first blush, I can say they accelerated like crazy, which you’d expect at that weight, and they were *stiff *and super-responsive. And, yes, here it comes, perhaps the most overused phrase in bikes – they’re “vertically compliant.” I intentionally drilled it every time I passed over a particularly bumpy railroad track section, and while I certainly felt the terrain beneath me, there was some nice vibration absorption.


Also no comment about flex in the RBR Featured Review.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Oh also this:



Thomas Dekker prior to signing with Chipotle said:


> These wheels are very _*stiff*_.


----------



## stoked (Aug 6, 2004)

I was referring to road bike action 4/11 review of MF tubulars, under sprinting and verdict. I am not saying this is the only valid review but alternative opinion. 



Road Bike Action - April 2011 - (73)

(click preview)

The new rear wheel design is more clean looking. Much better than last year's where carbon spokes were on top of each other by the hub. Now it looks like a finished product than a proto-type.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Yep that is the one I read.
All I am saying is that it seems at odds to every other review I have seen for Mad Fiber wheels.


----------



## stoked (Aug 6, 2004)

FTR, Only one way to find out. Let us know when you buy your set


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

stoked said:


> FTR, Only one way to find out. Let us know when you buy your set


They are ordered.
Apparently they will be here in 60 days or so.

:thumbsup:

Now to order some tubulars.


----------



## veloci1 (Nov 29, 2005)

all i am saying regarding the tire change is that the braking surface is a laminate. so, even using plastic levelers, you might miss the edge of the rim and take a chunk of the laminate. this might a non-issue, but, i was thinking of the possibilities.

the wheels look great, i saw them at Interbike.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

robdamanii said:


> Like what?


Seriously? So pulling a well glued tubular that you've flatted off a rim while in the middle of a training ride is not a pain? I hate doing this at home on a work stand, let alone on the road.

Then, you put an old tubular on and hope the glue residue on the old tubular is enough to bond to the rim and get you home? What if you are in the middle of a training ride and still have fast descents and mountains to ride over? Am I now forced to ride "easy" the rest of the way? Not worth it.

With a clincher, I can fix the flat and rejoin my team on an aggressive training ride like nothing happened.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

nightfend said:


> Seriously? So pulling a well glued tubular that you've flatted off a rim while in the middle of a training ride is not a pain? I hate doing this at home on a work stand, let alone on the road.
> 
> Then, you put an old tubular on and hope the glue residue on the old tubular is enough to bond to the rim and get you home? What if you are in the middle of a training ride and still have fast descents and mountains to ride over? Am I now forced to ride "easy" the rest of the way? Not worth it.
> 
> With a clincher, I can fix the flat and rejoin my team on an aggressive training ride like nothing happened.


So the fact that you _might_ get a flat and _might_ have to take it easy on tricky cornering or handling drills on one ride a year means that tubulars are a write off? How many flats do you get, anyway?

Whatever, to each their own. There's nothing wrong with tubulars; they were the standard for years and years, so they couldn't have been that bad.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

robdamanii said:


> Whatever, to each their own. There's nothing wrong with tubulars; they were the standard for years and years, so they couldn't have been that bad.


Tubulars were the "Standard" for years because there wasn't a good, viable alternative. This is no longer the case, and for training tubulars have been surpassed for convenience, durability and longevity. 

For racing a tubular tire/wheel still makes a lot of sense...for training, not so much.


----------



## stoked (Aug 6, 2004)

There is no need to go on a tangent here about tubs vs. clinchers. MF makes both now. Buy the one that suits your riding style and all the pros and cons that come with either setup is your decision.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> Tubulars were the "Standard" for years because there wasn't a good, viable alternative. This is no longer the case, and for training tubulars have been surpassed for convenience, durability and longevity.
> 
> For racing a tubular tire/wheel still makes a lot of sense...for training, not so much.


And I still disagree that tubulars are a "one trick pony," left to sit in the garage until race day. There's no earthly reason you _can't_ use them as everyday wheels, aside from being mildly inconvenienced once a year when/if you get a flat. 

The bottom line remains, as with everything else in cycling, to each their own.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

robdamanii said:


> aside from being mildly inconvenienced once a year when/if you get a flat.


LOL..Are you sure you ride much? I've had 3 flats in a single ride and on average probably have 8-10 a year at a minimum (but then, I put 9,000-11,000 miles a year on the bike with a lot of that in the wet winter where flats are more common). That would be a whole lot of "Inconvenience" if I were on tubular tires. 



> The bottom line remains, as with everything else in cycling, to each their own.


I pretty much agree with this ... However, If you ride in areas with little glass gravel or other debris then sure, tubulars would be a great choice. However, if you live in the rest of the world...clinchers are where it's at. This is why there is such a big push for carbon clinchers...so people no longer have to switch out brake pads when going from training to race wheels.

I think in just about any thread where tubulars are mentioned there should be a caption for newbies letting them know the drawbacks of tubular tires.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> LOL..Are you sure you ride much? I've had 3 flats in a single ride and on average probably have 8-10 a year at a minimum (but then, I put 9,000-11,000 miles a year on the bike with a lot of that in the wet winter where flats are more common). That would be a whole lot of "Inconvenience" if I were on tubular tires.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again, the drawbacks you mention are the same as not having your patch kit, or (as you put it) flatting 3 times on a ride while carrying one tube.

Carbon clinchers are a solution to a problem that didn't exist (or just so people can be lazy and not have to switch brake pads, as you said.) You can build a perfectly well performing aluminum clincher wheelset at or below the price point of a carbon clincher set, and it will likely weigh less as well. Sounds like a lot of money to spend so you don't have to spend 5 minutes swapping brake pads.

FYI, I've NEVER flatted 3x on a ride. Then again, we don't have horrible glass and cinders up here, and I ride my cross bike during the winter. I've not had a flat in 2 seasons (even with riding on dirt and unpaved roads 25% of the ride) but I'm not using ultra light racing tires either. 

If the area you live in precludes you from using tubulars, then so be it. But that's still no reason to claim they are "one trick pony" wheels that sit in the garage but for 30 days a year (or however many race days one has.)


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

robdamanii said:


> Again, the drawbacks you mention are the same as not having your patch kit, or (as you put it) flatting 3 times on a ride while carrying one tube.


Actually it wasn't a problem with 1 tube...A patch kit, several CO2 cartridges and I was just fine. With a tubular...I would have been screwed being 20 miles from home and no phone.

In my case...I'd be going through nearly $1K a year in tubular tires just from flats alone. Include actual wear on the tire and that number goes up.



> Carbon clinchers are a solution to a problem that didn't exist (or just so people can be lazy and not have to switch brake pads, as you said.) You can build a perfectly well performing aluminum clincher wheelset at or below the price point of a carbon clincher set, and it will likely weigh less as well. Sounds like a lot of money to spend so you don't have to spend 5 minutes swapping brake pads.


Funny...Carbon Clinchers are a solution to a problem that didn't exist but Tubulars are "Great"??? So being able to switch between wheels without changing brake pads (which takes 5 minutes or so...but is a pain in the butt if you do it regularly) is worse than trying to glue/change a tubular tire...especially when compared to a clincher?

At this time...To me, tubulars are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist any longer.



> If the area you live in precludes you from using tubulars, then so be it. But that's still no reason to claim they are "one trick pony" wheels that sit in the garage but for 30 days a year (or however many race days one has.)


However in this day and age when a tubular tire gives you maybe a 100-150 gram advantage on a 14 pound bike, where clinchers are much easier to change and avoid on the road issues that many have suffered (more than one flat on a ride), where for the most part people only use them on race wheels and the track...*Tubulars have now been relegated to a "One Trick Pony"*.

And YES, I do own a pair for racing (Vittoria Evo CX) so I know all about the hassles of tubulars. Honestly, to me...they don't ride any better than a good clincher, don't corner any better and all of the praises people sing of them to me are a load of bunk! The only reason I use them on my race wheels is because they are lighter...Period!

The only people that really use tubulars on a training bike/ride are retro-grouches who are unable or unwilling to move toward new technology...I guess the nostalgia of the past, regardless of how much of a pain it may be, is just too much for people to give up. Just out of curiosity...How many pro's do you think use Tubulars as training tires? I'd guess not many if any at this time.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> Actually it wasn't a problem with 1 tube...A patch kit, several CO2 cartridges and I was just fine. With a tubular...I would have been screwed being 20 miles from home and no phone.
> 
> In my case...I'd be going through nearly $1K a year in tubular tires just from flats alone. Include actual wear on the tire and that number goes up.
> 
> ...


Carry a phone and sealant can. End of problem.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I guess I'm retro grouch territory for using tubulars as every day wheels. I just don't have the problems with them that you claim to have, so I'm perfectly happy singing their praises to whomever wants to hear it.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

robdamanii said:


> Carry a phone and sealant can. End of problem.
> 
> We'll have to agree to disagree. I guess I'm retro grouch territory for using tubulars as every day wheels. I just don't have the problems with them that you claim to have, so I'm perfectly happy singing their praises to whomever wants to hear it.


If someone made tubular rims wide enough (28mm+) in aluminum I would consider using them as everyday wheels as well. 

For daily commutes 32mm would be my minimum size. My 69'er commuter has a 38mm tire on a 26mm wide clincher rim up front. I'm a Clydesdale, BTW.


----------



## Doug B (Sep 11, 2009)

DrSmile said:


> I'm skeptical that I would sweat on the aluminum bead, which would corrode the aluminum enough to bubble and flake off the carbon over it. Happened to me on all my Al/CF stems. Maybe if the rim was anodized...


Anodized with a chromate conversion coating over top. The chromate will promote better adhesion than just pure anodize.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

cda 455 said:


> If someone made tubular rims wide enough (28mm+) in aluminum I would consider using them as everyday wheels as well.
> 
> For daily commutes 32mm would be my minimum size. My 69'er commuter has a 38mm tire on a 26mm wide clincher rim up front. I'm a Clydesdale, BTW.


You can run larger tires on a tubular wheel like Mad fiber's just fine. You don't need a wide rim to run wide tires. Racers run the larger Dugast and FMB tires (28mm) on the smaller 21 and 22mm wide tubular rims all the time. Not to mention cross racers mount knobby 32mm tires to those same type of rims.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Well my MF's are somewhere in the air between the US and Australia.
Hopefully I will have them in my hands with a week or so.
Went with the tubs for racing only.
I have seen a set up close and personal now and they are gorgeous.
And stupid light.

Pic's as soon as I get them on my bike.


----------



## Diopena1 (Jul 21, 2011)

I thought the clincher version was able to allow for tubeless tires?...

And about the clincher vs. tubular discussions/comments... ride what you feel is best for you, and your wallet. I ride clinchers, and will say that technology has made it possible to get a "tubular feel" out of a decent clincher tire.

Then again, I'm running Conti Force/Attack setup, and love it. 

These wheels caught my attention, and I'm waiting for the clincher version to come out. Might even get the ceramic bearing upgrade....


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Diopena1 said:


> I thought the clincher version was able to allow for tubeless tires?...


They are.
What about it?


----------



## QQUIKM3 (Apr 20, 2008)

*I totally agree. .*



nightfend;3580049What if you are in the middle of a training ride and still have fast descents and mountains to ride over? Am I now forced to ride "easy" the rest of the way? Not worth it.[/QUOTE said:


> Tubulars are for pros who are VERY conservative, and amateurs who are nostalgic. Other than some perceived better cornering on a tubbie, there are only the disadvantages you mention.
> I would ask anyone to ride a clincher wheelset shod with a superior open tubular like a Torelli Gavia with latex tubes and say it's not as good as a tubluar wheel. It's hard to believe it's the 21st century and people are still ga-ga over an antiquated wheel system.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

So if you tweak a rim, or break a spoke, you just trashed 2600 bucks worth of wheels?


----------



## BunnV (Sep 7, 2005)

TomH said:


> So if you tweak a rim, or break a spoke, you just trashed 2600 bucks worth of wheels?


No


----------



## Diopena1 (Jul 21, 2011)

Road tubeless: suppleness and weight of a tubular, with clincher ease of maintenance


----------



## BunnV (Sep 7, 2005)

Diopena1 said:


> Road tubeless: suppleness and weight of a tubular, with clincher ease of maintenance


Road tubeless requires the use of sealant. That is not as easy as just using a tube.


----------



## Diopena1 (Jul 21, 2011)

What i mean by that is that the tire itself does not require to have glue for it to stick to the rim. Worse case, pop in a tube, and get rolling.
I agree with most, Tubs for racing, Clinchers all around use, unless you have the $$$ for tubs, then the point is moot.


----------



## J24 (Oct 8, 2003)

QQUIKM3 said:


> Tubulars are for pros who are VERY conservative, and amateurs who are nostalgic. Other than some perceived better cornering on a tubbie, there are only the disadvantages you mention.
> I would ask anyone to ride a clincher wheelset shod with a superior open tubular like a Torelli Gavia with latex tubes and say it's not as good as a tubluar wheel. It's hard to believe it's the 21st century and people are still ga-ga over an antiquated wheel system.


Where did you get the Gavias, its getting hard to find Torelli tires


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

BunnV said:


> Road tubeless requires the use of sealant. That is not as easy as just using a tube.


Does NOT require sealant, period! Same with MTB tubeless. Sealant helps prevent flats, not sealing the tires on road tubeless. So no sealant, a tube can be used easily.

No sealant also helps sealing the system if you use tape like the no tubes system and you have leaks. Only tubeless ready wheels, this is usually, usually not necessary, unless you have a bad set of wheels.


----------



## onthebottom (May 4, 2011)

FTR said:


> Well my MF's are somewhere in the air between the US and Australia.
> Hopefully I will have them in my hands with a week or so.
> Went with the tubs for racing only.
> I have seen a set up close and personal now and they are gorgeous.
> ...


What do you think of these, did you post a pic?


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

I have posted pics but not in this thread.
I finally got the wheels about 7 weeks ago.
Unfortunately 6 weeks ago I got hit by a car while out training and broke my scaphoid.
My arm has been in plaster since then until yesterday when I was finally released from the fibreglass prison.
I glued the wheels up and they are sitting in my bikeroom.
Hopefully I will get to ride them within the next week or so if my arm holds up to some training rides.


----------



## onthebottom (May 4, 2011)

FTR said:


> I have posted pics but not in this thread.
> I finally got the wheels about 7 weeks ago.
> Unfortunately 6 weeks ago I got hit by a car while out training and broke my scaphoid.
> My arm has been in plaster since then until yesterday when I was finally released from the fibreglass prison.
> ...


They look fantastic, looking forward to a first person account of the ride...

OTB


----------



## Diopena1 (Jul 21, 2011)

FTR said:


> I have posted pics but not in this thread.
> I finally got the wheels about 7 weeks ago.
> Unfortunately 6 weeks ago I got hit by a car while out training and broke my scaphoid.
> My arm has been in plaster since then until yesterday when I was finally released from the fibreglass prison.
> ...


DAMN!!!!!! that looks sexy!

What is the rim width?... Im curious, because I might be getting a set


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

I want those! I will just have to settle for some cheap china carbons for now. Need to stop buying stuff for my other hobbies.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Not sure on the rim width, but it should be listed on their website.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

FTR,

Have you had the opportunity to ride your Madfibers yet? Curious what you think.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

redondoaveb said:


> FTR,
> 
> Have you had the opportunity to ride your Madfibers yet? Curious what you think.


Yep.
Did some standing sprints on them a couple of weeks ago and then raced them that weekend.
Felt super fast and I did not detect any flex in them.
Spin up really quickly and as a result you can stomp on them if need be for chasing ay surges from the pack. Some slight impact from side winds but nothing too bad.

Running Vittoria Corsa Evo CX tubulars on them.
Cannot wait for the next chance to ride them.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

FTR said:


> Yep.
> Did some standing sprints on them a couple of weeks ago and then raced them that weekend.
> Felt super fast and I did not detect any flex in them.
> Spin up really quickly and as a result you can stomp on them if need be for chasing ay surges from the pack. Some slight impact from side winds but nothing too bad.
> ...


Nice. Glad to hear the positive review. Are you just using them for racing or are you training on them also? Have you done any ascending and descending on them? They should be good climbers, wondering how they handle descents.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

No plan to ascend or descend on them.
I see them as purely race wheels.
I have a set of Fulcrum 1's and a set of DA hubs laced to Stans Alpha's if I want wheels for the hills.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

FTR said:


> No plan to ascend or descend on them.
> I see them as purely race wheels.
> I have a set of Fulcrum 1's and a set of DA hubs laced to Stans Alpha's if I want wheels for the hills.


Yeah, it sounded like it from your previous post. Glad you like them. I've been looking at their clinchers. That was the reason for all the questions. :thumbsup:


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

redondoaveb said:


> Yeah, it sounded like it from your previous post. Glad you like them. I've been looking at their clinchers. That was the reason for all the questions. :thumbsup:


No problem.
I personally dont see these as being the wheels I would ever use for the hills (same goes for any deep dish carbon wheel) but that is probably just me.
I always scratch my head when I see people saying about how they melted their deep dish carbon rim coming down off some mountain and wonder to myself WTF they were riding those wheels up there in the first place.


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

FTR said:


> No problem.
> I personally dont see these as being the wheels I would ever use for the hills (same goes for any deep dish carbon wheel) but that is probably just me.
> I always scratch my head when I see people saying about how they melted their deep dish carbon rim coming down off some mountain and wonder to myself WTF they were riding those wheels up there in the first place.


I know what you're saying. It's nice to have a spare set of climbing wheels.


----------



## stoked (Aug 6, 2004)

Anyone riding the clinchers yet? I see them available at some web retailers.


----------



## supraholic (Oct 10, 2010)

spookyload said:


> Mad Fiber finally released their clinchers. Holy smokes. 1200g carbon clincher wheelset. Very unique process of bonding carbon to the aluminum rim extrusion, so it has a carbon brake surface with aluminum underneath to include an aluminum clincher bead and tubless ready. Seems like it will hellp with the overheating issue. I will be very interested to see how the longevity is on these.


It is also a two way fit! Clincher and tubeless compatibility.

I've read the LEGAL part on their website at one point and I'm not sure if this is something I would invest in. Most specially the no weight limit claims.

"MadFiber, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the proper use of the merchandise purchased and makes no warranty either expressed or implied as to the fitness of the merchandise for any particular use. The customer is urged to exercise caution in using the merchandise including wearing a helmet, reflectors and lights."

I get the helmet, reflector and lights part but what about "accepts no responsibility for PROPER use."


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

supraholic said:


> It is also a two way fit! Clincher and tubeless compatibility.
> 
> I've read the LEGAL part on their website at one point and I'm not sure if this is something I would invest in. Most specially the no weight limit claims.
> 
> ...



I guess if it's used properly and anything goes wrong, they're not liable? 

I guess a CWA disclaimer.


----------



## supraholic (Oct 10, 2010)

cda 455 said:


> I guess if it's used properly and anything goes wrong, they're not liable?
> 
> I guess a CWA disclaimer.


I'll keep my $2500 for a wheelset that has a good track record.


----------

