# Bontrager Aeolus 3 or 5? Tubular or clincher?



## racingmurph (Jan 28, 2014)

I need some advice on buying a new wheelset. I think I have decided on the new Bontrager Aeolus D3.. Either the 3 (35mm) or the 5 (50mm). I want these as race wheels that can both climb and sprint well. On paper the Aeolus 5 is supposedly more aero than Zipp 404 (60mm) in most wind angles. 
My major question is tubular or clincher? I know tubular are lighter(better acceleration for sprint/climb) but harder to change tires, etc. I cant remember my last pinch flat but often get punctures. If You puncture a tubular tire is it done? I like the ease of changing a clincher and I have found both types of tires for about the same cost. Is the hassle of gluing worth it? I know they make glue tape which is supposed to replace messy glue??? 
I would also use these wheels for cyclocross which makes me lean toward tubular. 

I can putt some power down and need something stiff and responsive. 
Im 6'2" and around 190lbs. 
Give me some feedback. Thoughts. Advice.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

If you're debating tubulars or clinchers, then go clinchers. Especially if you're in a place where you get punctures often. 
I think the best option would be for you to go with clinchers setup tubeless. It will be far less prone to flats than a tubed setup, and it should be slightly more supple.


----------



## racingmurph (Jan 28, 2014)

I've never owned tubular before. But in this wheel it's less $$ and much lighter wheel set. Would you still recommend clincher ?


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

racingmurph said:


> I've never owned tubular before. But in this wheel it's less $$ and much lighter wheel set. Would you still recommend clincher ?


Given the questions you're asking and how you're asking them, you should stay away from tubulars. Get regular clinchers or tubeless.

And if you ever do end up w/ tubulars, don't tape them.


----------



## FSonicSmith (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't necessarily disagree with the previous comments but then again, tubulars are nothing be afraid of. There is an easy learning curve. We also need to know-do you have access to a good mechanic (to glue on tires if you don't care to do it yourself) and do you have a wife to pick you up if you get stranded here and there (seems silly, but don't ride tubulars without a support system). I will maintain til the cows come home that carbon wheels are a natural for tubulars and not for clinchers. Read any decent website on why clinchers will blow on a carbon wheelset if prolonged hard braking is required-there are dozens out there. With clinchers, the braking surface sidewall is also an unsupported cantilever under tremendous load. It just does not make good engineering sense that the same braking sidewall be subject to melting under high friction and heat! Don't buy the tubular wheels because they cost less though. Good tubular tires are more expensive than good clinchers (say about $45 for clinchers vs. $80 for tubulars if you use the average retail price of Michelin Pro Race and the Conti Sprinter Chili as good baselines). A carbon tubular wheelset with a low profile can be incredibly light and a carbon clincher wheelset can be fairly light, but not incredibly light. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if weight is important and you want clinchers, you are better off and wiser to select light aluminum alloy rims unless you are simply stuck on the prestige and look of all the fashionable brands-namely Lightweight, MadFiber, and Zipp. 
All that said, at 6'2" and 190, I gather than in all likelihood you won't benefit from a superlight pair of climbing wheels like the Aeolus 30 tubulars. So, all in all, I tend to agree that for what little I know of you, you are likely best off with carbon clinchers going tubeless (or like I said, alloy clinchers).


----------



## Justin222729 (Feb 27, 2013)

My LBS is a sole Trek dealer and brilliant. I have a Madone 5.2 so am drooling over the Aeolus often. Our bike group all have either the Aura 5's or majority have Aeolus 3, 5 or 7. They all love them and have never had an issue with braking failure. Majority are pro level so use them often and hard. 

The 3 is an amazing wheel but I would go for the 5's just for slight aero extra and only a few extra gms. Although if the climb mostly then the 3's would be great. 

Because of my experience in seeing them in action I would go for the clincher. The shop owner also only uses clincher and wouldn't go tubular purely because of the hassle if they fail.


----------



## cannonf600 (Nov 9, 2008)

I got the 3 clincher and they claim 1440 grams and mine are 1520 with rim tape.The 5 clincher is 1620 without tape not sure what they claim for the 5.I got the 3 because I like the way they look and the lower weight because I ride a lot of hilly and rolling terrain.


----------



## racingmurph (Jan 28, 2014)

cannonf600 said:


> I got the 3 clincher and they claim 1440 grams and mine are 1520 with rim tape.The 5 clincher is 1620 without tape not sure what they claim for the 5.I got the 3 because I like the way they look and the lower weight because I ride a lot of hilly and rolling terrain.



The claimed wheelset weights are as follows
3 clincher 1440
3 tubular. 1150

5 clincher. 1550
5 tubular. 1295

I have decided on the Aeolus 5 over the 3
im still undecided on tubular or clincher. 
My current race wheels are zipp flashpoint 60cm with alum rim and carbon fairing. They are heavy at 1850+ but fast at speed. I took a test ride on LBS demo zipp 404 fire crest clincher and was amazed at the ride quality. The full carbon wheel was really smooth and took a lot of the road chatter away. I did a 45 ride and they felt very stiff and responsive when out of the saddle climbing. I did a mock sprint taking them up to 35+mph for a few hundred meters and they felt like they wanted to go faster. On paper the Aeolus 5 looks better at most wind angles over the 404 so now my only decision is clincher vs tubular. Should I stick with what I know or go tubular? Is tubular ride far superior to even carbon clincher? Those 404 clinchers were the first all carbon wheel I've ever ridden and they were so smooth? Would the carbon tubular be even smoother than the carbon clincher?


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

All carbon wheels over about 20mm in depth will have pretty much the same ride quality. Carbon rims are stiff. Ride quality is about tires and inflation pressure, nothing more. The wheel has virtually nothing to do w/ it. Here's the math:
Tire deflection at proper pressure: around 14-16%
Rim deflection: about 1%
You tell me which you'll notice more. 
A carbon tubular wheel will not ride any better than a carbon clincher just because it's a tubular wheel. The tire and pressure play a much larger role in ride quality. You can run a tubular at somewhat lower pressure than a clincher because they are much harder to pinch flat, but you should run any tire you use at the pressure that gives you the ride you want, not the pressure that guarantees not pinch flatting. 

As for whether to go clincher or tubular, you already stated that you flat a lot. Unless you want to replace tires that cost roughly $100ea every time you flat, buy clinchers. This is coming from a die hard tubular user, and pro team mechanic. I LOVE tubulars. But...I've glued over 1000 of them in the last 20 years and I'm good at it...it doesn't mean I like doing it, but I have no problems getting the job done. I ride tubeless on a daily basis and haven't had a single flat in the last 4 years. I love the fact that I can ride my bike wherever I want and pretty much not even think about getting a flat.

(obviously those numbers are percentages, not mm...ooops)


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Get the clinchers and set it up for tubeless tires (preferably 25c if it fits your frame, should with most frames).

You'll never wish for tubular whatever ever again.


----------



## Bob Walters (Aug 26, 2013)

*I'd suggest tubular*

In carbon, I would go tubular for most use cases -- certainly any case where the word "race" is involved. Here's why:



The fabrication of carbon is ideal for the tubular wheel shape, yielding -- among other things -- less weight, more strength, and precise tailoring of compliance. At least in wheels with sufficient R&D behind them (e.g., HED, Zipp).
Tubs are not nearly as difficult to install and maintain as some folks would have you believe. You really don't need to embrace week-long ordeals of glue/drying and the like. And yes, tape is quite effective (and ridiculously easy) for many circumstances.
If you can, ride an "open tubular" and a tubular back-to-back. I have, and I was surprised at how much better the tubs rode. (Yes, at the same inflation on the same bike).
If you can, ride a set of Zipp 303 FC (or the like) with a top tub tire. Amazing.
I think that I can fix (change) a flat on tubs much faster and easier than clinchers. It's also nice to be able to (carefully) ride home on a flat tub.

I don't sell anything. I don't race and don't ride in pelotons. I ride for fitness and the shear joy of it. I love tubs.

Bob


----------



## FSonicSmith (Jan 2, 2003)

The fabrication of carbon is ideal for the tubular wheel shape, yielding -- among other things -- less weight, more strength, and precise tailoring of compliance. At least in wheels with sufficient R&D behind them (e.g., HED, Zipp).

I said the exact same thing above. Carbon clinchers are a bad kludge. The fact that they exist does not mean that they are a good product-they are instead a huge compromise to facilitate market demand. Looking at it a different way, carbon wheels are singlehandedly responsible for a minor resurgence of tubulars. Michelin and Maxxis have come to market with new tubulars. 
I will stick again with what I said above-for many riders who want the prestige/look of carbon but don't want to deal with the unknown, clinchers are the best choice. Compromises are relative.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Bob Walters said:


> In carbon, I would go tubular for most use cases -- certainly any case where the word "race" is involved. Here's why:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you can do this your tubulars aren't mounted correctly. Period. And tape is NOT an effective way to mount tubulars if you plan on riding anything other than straight roads. You have your own very limited experience w/ tubulars. I have 'somewhat' more experience than you...I've probably mounted more tires in the last year than you'll ever see in your life. Add to that the fact that in the OP's first post he stated:

"I cant remember my last pinch flat but often get punctures."

What makes tubulars a good choice for the OP?


----------



## racingmurph (Jan 28, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> If you can do this your tubulars aren't mounted correctly. Period. And tape is NOT an effective way to mount tubulars if you plan on riding anything other than straight roads. You have your own very limited experience w/ tubulars. I have 'somewhat' more experience than you...I've probably mounted more tires in the last year than you'll ever see in your life. Add to that the fact that in the OP's first post he stated:
> 
> "I cant remember my last pinch flat but often get punctures."
> 
> What makes tubulars a good choice for the OP?




I should clarify. I only get 2-3 flats a year. So that's not very OFTEN. I should have said I only get puncture flats not pinch flats.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

racingmurph said:


> I should clarify. I only get 2-3 flats a year. So that's not very OFTEN. I should have said I only get puncture flats not pinch flats.


Since you have no experience w/ tubulars, I'd venture to guess you'd find 2-3 flats a year 'too many'. Obviously you can pay someone to glue your tires. If you do, make damn sure they know what they're doing. Did I mention NO TAPE? 
Or you can learn how to do it yourself. It's not hard, but it's one thing I see get screwed up more than just about anything else. I'm very picky about how well tires are mounted, and for good reason. The consequences of a poor mounting job are huge. It is definitely something worth learning how to do correctly if you're going to buy tubulars. 
You mentioned racing CX...tubulars are the ONLY way to do for cross. You can run much lower pressure and (hopefully) not have to worry about the tire coming off the rim. I've raced on the road, cross, and track...exclusively on tubulars for close to 20 years. I have no plans to go back to clinchers for racing, ever.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

I have both tubulars and clinchers. Yes, the carbon tubular has a slightly better ride quality than my clinchers however, I only really notice it when swapping wheels. Then I don't think of it much. When I'm riding with the group or racing, the last thing that comes to my mind is ride quality. If I rode alone all the time, it might be different as there is more time to focus on the ride. But that's not what floats my boat. I like group riding and/or, riding or training with others. I don't over inflate my tires and frankly, my clinchers feel very good. And they are easier (and cheaper) to repair a flat.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

NealH said:


> I have both tubulars and clinchers. Yes, the carbon tubular has a slightly better ride quality than my clinchers however, I only really notice it when swapping wheels. Then I don't think of it much. When I'm riding with the group or racing, the last thing that comes to my mind is ride quality. If I rode alone all the time, it might be different as there is more time to focus on the ride. But that's not what floats my boat. I like group riding and/or, riding or training with others. I don't over inflate my tires and frankly, my clinchers feel very good. And they are easier (and cheaper) to repair a flat.


The difference has nothing to do w/ the wheels. Not possible. Any measurable difference in rim stiffness would be completely and totally masked by the flex of the tire casing.


----------



## frogdrvr (Jun 5, 2012)

I am a Masters racer have the 5s tubulars and have several thousand miles and about 25 races (combination of crits, road races and TTs) on the wheels. As far as ride quality, feel, grip and the ability to break hard on downhills without melting your tubes, the tubulars are the way to go. The weight difference between the tubs and clinchers is also going to be noticeable. Not only are the tub wheels lighter but good tubular tires typically weight less then clincher tire/tube combinations. I have run the bontrager tubulars and the Schwalbe One tubulars and much prefer the 24mm Ones. 

I like the 5s over the 3s because they are much more versatile. You can climb them 1250g, use them in crits and in a pinch throw them for an aero option ie time trial etc. (According the the Trek white paper the 5s out aero deeper wheels from their competitors). 

Just my two cents. See you on the road....


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

personally I'd go clincher ... as for 5 vs 3.. the 3's are pretty nice, I put them on my wife's bike and she also has a 7 rear only for those non climbing days. If you climb a lot and your area is windy, I'd get 3's. If you ride fast a lot and kinda do TT's or something then 5's would be better. 

My wife's D3 3 front weighed 700g with tape and the rear weighed 835g with tape. I never weighed the d3 7


----------



## Justin222729 (Feb 27, 2013)

I've just got a set of the Aeolus 3's clincher for my new 5.2. They are amazing and have transformed the bike. They maintain speed brilliantly, especially on corners in climbs. On my regular climbs when I would be hitting the pedals hard to keep the same speed, these just motor through. My riding group all have 3's or 5's and all love them. I don't think there is major difference with the 3's and 5's. Braking is good and no crosswind issue with the 3's at all.


----------



## thegreatdelcamo (Aug 20, 2008)

cxwrench said:


> All carbon wheels over about 20mm in depth will have pretty much the same ride quality. Carbon rims are stiff. Ride quality is about tires and inflation pressure, nothing more. The wheel has virtually nothing to do w/ it. Here's the math:
> Tire deflection at proper pressure: around 14-16mm
> Rim deflection: about 1mm
> You tell me which you'll notice more.
> ...


Well, I read an article just the other day by Zipp wherein their engineers were discussing how and why their carbon tubulars withstand Pave in Europe. This is also something I have noticed on my Zip 303 tubulars (mine are 2008 or 9 versions with the toroidal shape). If I press on the side (the bulge) of the rim with my finger, I can SEE and feel rim deflection. It takes very little pressure with my finger. Zipp, with the use of high-speed cameras, came to the conclusion that that compliance was what gave the wheel's sidewall milliseconds to deform thus save or reduce stress to the spokes, making the wheel capable of surviving pave.

So, I suspect that it is not correct to discount rim deformation to the extent that you have. It seems that there may be more at work here than simply comparing 14 to one. While I don't presume to understand the finer points and I have not seen the high-speed video, my personal experience confirms that the wheels are VERY comfortable even with tire pressures that make clincher wheels relatively uncomfortable. That confirms to me that rim-influenced factors are playing a significant role in this whole comfort equation.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

thegreatdelcamo said:


> Well, I read an article just the other day by Zipp wherein their engineers were discussing how and why their carbon tubulars withstand Pave in Europe. This is also something I have noticed on my Zip 303 tubulars (mine are 2008 or 9 versions with the toroidal shape). If I press on the side (the bulge) of the rim with my finger, I can SEE and feel rim deflection. It takes very little pressure with my finger. Zipp, with the use of high-speed cameras, came to the conclusion that that compliance was what gave the wheel's sidewall milliseconds to deform thus save or reduce stress to the spokes, making the wheel capable of surviving pave.
> 
> So, I suspect that it is not correct to discount rim deformation to the extent that you have. It seems that there may be more at work here than simply comparing 14 to one. While I don't presume to understand the finer points and I have not seen the high-speed video, my personal experience confirms that the wheels are VERY comfortable even with tire pressures that make clincher wheels relatively uncomfortable. That confirms to me that rim-influenced factors are playing a significant role in this whole comfort equation.


You're pinching sideways on the 'fairing' part of the rim, not radially. Trust me, you couldn't make that rim budge at all radially. 

They (Zipp) have video of the rim deforming when hitting the sharp edge of a paving stone. Unless you're riding pavé your post is pretty much useless. You should watch the video, too. 

My argument is that riding on normal roads you won't feel any difference between different carbon rims. Tires and tire pressure differences, yes. If a rim were that flexible it would be nearly unrideable.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

cxwrench said:


> The difference has nothing to do w/ the wheels. Not possible. Any measurable difference in rim stiffness would be completely and totally masked by the flex of the tire casing.


Ever ridden a disc rear wheel? 

I can feel a difference in ride smoothness between wheels though I can't feel much difference between the different Aeolus rim depths I've ridden. A Zipp 404 I got from SRAM neutral support had a noticeably harsher ride than the D3 35mm I swapped from.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

davidka said:


> Ever ridden a disc rear wheel?
> 
> I can feel a difference in ride smoothness between wheels though I can't feel much difference between the different Aeolus rim depths I've ridden. A Zipp 404 I got from SRAM neutral support had a noticeably harsher ride than the D3 35mm I swapped from.


It 
wasn't
the
wheel...


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

cxwrench said:


> It
> wasn't
> the
> wheel...


Yes, it was.

Areo wheels are made of different carbon lay-ups, in different shapes/sizes, just like frames are. You do agree that different frames have different ride qualities, don't you?


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

davidka said:


> Yes, it was.
> 
> Areo wheels are made of different carbon lay-ups, in different shapes/sizes, just like frames are. You do agree that different frames have different ride qualities, don't you?


No. It wasn't. There is no way that either of those rims would ever flex enough to be noticed by you. The rims are way to stiff to flex anywhere near the amount that the tire does. What you felt was the difference in tires/pressure. If the rims flexed that much there would be zero spoke tension and they'd be unrideable. You'll have to trust me on this.

Also the 404's the SRAM neutral uses are the alloy rim 404, not the carbon clinchers. The rims aren't even made of carbon.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

cxwrench said:


> If the rims flexed that much there would be zero spoke tension and they'd be unrideable. You'll have to trust me on this.
> 
> Also the 404's the SRAM neutral uses are the alloy rim 404, not the carbon clinchers. The rims aren't even made of carbon.


 There is more flex than you realize in the sides of the aero section, between the spoke bed (where spoke tension is maintained), to the sidewall. There is also significant differences in spoke length between wheels with different depth rims. 

This amount of flex doesn't trump the tire's, but it is not insignificant, just like the seat post and cluster, chain and seat stays and all the other elements that result in a bike's ride characteristics.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

davidka said:


> There is more flex than you realize in the *sides of the aero section, between the spoke bed (where spoke tension is maintained), to the sidewall*. There is also significant differences in spoke length between wheels with different depth rims.
> 
> This amount of flex doesn't trump the tire's, but it is not insignificant, just like the seat post and cluster, chain and seat stays and all the other elements that result in a bike's ride characteristics.


Explain how this would make a difference. You're unclear on how spoke tension works. Spokes are ALWAYS under tension. Sometimes more, sometimes less...but there is ALWAYS tension on a spoke. If the inner part of the rim where the nipples seat was to flex relative to the rest of the rim you'd not only have to have moments when there was zero spoke tension, you'd have to have rigid spokes that could push back at the rim. We know emphatically that this is never the case, so what you're talking about doesn't happen.
The only way you can 'compress' a rim is to smack the tire against the rim, with clinchers this obviously can result in a pinch flat. On a normal road, under normal conditions, you will never feel radial rim flex. 
Never. 

You rode 2 completely different wheels (which doesn't really matter) with undoubtedly 2 different tires at different pressures. That's what you felt.


----------



## runabike (Jun 18, 2013)

I assume you already bought the wheels, but I'd go tubular. 

You can get tubular tires with latex tubes and I'm not sure about running latex tubes on carbon clinchers. From what I've read it sounds like it's a no. 

With removable valve stems, fixing a flat on the tubular is as simple as taking off the valve stem and putting some Stan's in it. I've gotten home from a race twice this year with a flat tubular and fixed it up both times in less than a minute with some Stans on the inside. Had a little nick in the rubber on the outside so dabbed a little super glue on it to fix that. Tires still rolling very nicely. And fast (did I mention latex tubes?).


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

cxwrench said:


> Explain how this would make a difference. You're unclear on how spoke tension works. Spokes are ALWAYS under tension. Sometimes more, sometimes less...but there is ALWAYS tension on a spoke.
> 
> You rode 2 completely different wheels (which doesn't really matter) with undoubtedly 2 different tires at different pressures. That's what you felt.


Again, no. I have many sets of wheels and decades of experience, I only offered that anecdote because the two wheels are similar and I had the opportunity to try them immediately after each other.

You are incorrectly hypothesizing that no component in the wheel until flexes the one "before" it in the tolerance stack has exhausted it's range, in this case the tire. Every part of the system has flex and deflection and contributes to the overall compliance of the wheel and even the stiffest wheels are the most flexible part of a loaded bike. 

You have a lot of experience in the industry and almost always offer useful advice, but you haven't quite thought this one through. I've discussed this at length with design engineers who create these wheels. They agree that the rim plays a significant role in the ride/compliance of the wheel though it is difficult to demonstrate with numbers.

Like I said before, try a disk wheel. It is at the extreme end of the spectrum and you will feel a large difference in ride quality that you will not attribute to tire pressure.

We're way off of the OP's question so I won't post any more about this.

OP, buy clinchers. Tubulars are great until you need to change a tire on the road or you damage a tire that isn't worn out yet. Clinchers are a little heavier, much more convenient, and just as fast.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

davidka said:


> You have a lot of experience in the industry and almost always offer useful advice, but you haven't quite thought this one through. I've discussed this at length with design engineers who create these wheels. They agree that the rim plays a significant role in the ride/compliance of the wheel though it is difficult to demonstrate with numbers.


Interesting thought. Although I'd think that engineers being engineers would be able to put a number on pretty much anything they do, or they wouldn't bother doing it. I've never heard an engineer say "I'm pretty sure this is going to work better...I can't prove it, or put a number on it, but I'm pretty sure..."
If Josh tells me that it does make a difference I'll believe him...unti then I have my doubts.


----------

