# Number crunching and performance data for top wheels



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

September 2005 Tour Magazin wheel test

Numbers in the following specific order: Brand, model name; Price in €; number of spokes front/rear; Watt at 30/40/50km/h; moment of inertia; stiffness front/rear in N/mm; rim (width x height); weight /weightlimit; braking (max. 5pts) 

Ambrosio X-Carbo 1399; 28/28; 6.8/16.1/31.5; 114Joule; 65.2/39.7; 20x46mm; 1655g/90kg; 1/5 
Bontrager Race X-Lite Aero Carbon 1400; 16/16; 5.1/12/23.4; 105Joule; 67.41/43.8; 20x43mm; 1420g/no limit; 1/5 
Campagnolo Bora G3 2300; 18/21; 5/11.8/23; 103Joule; 52.5/44.1; 20x50mm; 1400g/82kg; 3/5 
Citec 3000s aero 699; 12/16; 5.5/13.1/25.5; 129Joule; 55.3/55.9; 18x30mm; 1695g/89kg; 5/5 
CKT Splendor 1089; 16/24; 4.7/11.1/21.7; 115Joule; 64.0/54.0; 20x45mm; 1565g/110kg; 1/5 
Corima Aero 808; 18/24; 5.3/12.6/24.7; 106Joule; 65.2/37.7; 20x46mm; 1455g/no limit; 1/5 
Easton Tempest II Carbon 1700; 18/20; 4.7/11.1/21.6; 101Joule; 60.9/46.1; 20x58mm; 1380g/no limit; 2/5 
Gipiemme Carbon 5.5 1199; 20/20; 5.2/12.3/24.1; 148Joule; 68.3/40.2; 20x55mm; 2040g/120kg; 3/5 
Lightweight Obermayer 3690; 20/20; 5.4/12.7/24.8; 84Joule; 78.3/37.1; 20x53mm; 1065g/80kg; 3/5 
Mavic Cosmic Carbone SL 1250; 16/20; 4.7/11.2/21.9; 143Joule; 58.7/52.8; 19x52mm; 1985g/100kg; 5/5 
Ritchey WCS Carbon 1868; 16/24; 4.2/9.9/19.3; 97Joule; 37.4/31.9; 22x58mm; 1295g/no limit; 2/5 
Tune Olympic Gold 1583; 16/20; 5.2/12.3/24.1; 88Joule; 37.0/32.6; 20x46mm; 1075g/90kg; 1/5 
Xentis Mark 1 1718; 4/4; 5.4/12.8/25; 103Joule; 39.8/37; 20x42mm; 1455g/no limit; 3/5 
Zipp 808 1960; 18/24; 3.9/9.3/18.1; 107Joule; 52.9/40.7; 26x82mm; 1450g/no limit; 2/5


..track test of the current issue of a German triathlon mag. 
Featured wheels were (ordered by results): 
-Vuelta Carbon Pro 
-Xentis Mark 1 HM 
-Zipp 808 
-Bontrager Aeolus 
-Zipp 999 
-Ritchey Carbon 
-Easton Tempest II Carbon 
-Lightweight TT 
-Mavic Cosmic Carbon 
-Corima 3 Spoke & disc 
-Corima 3 Spoke 
-Lightweight 12/20 
-Corima Aero 
-Tune Olympic Gold 
-Nimble Crosswind


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

carbon: what are you trying to say?? zipp beats aeolus??


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

z ken said:


> carbon: what are you trying to say?? zipp beats aeolus??



???? It's a Zipp *808* for crying out loud vs a 65mm Aeolus. Of COURSE it has better aerodynamics :mad2:


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

uzziefly: my point zipp is faster than trek's aeolus. see my point?? anyway it doesn't matter it's not like you and i going to buy aeolus. i'll enjoy my 404 and see who's going to zipp pass me. wahahah


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

dude... you might as well say zipp's 999 wheelset is faster than the aeolus....  


Wheels do not maketh the rider. Legs maketh the good rider. and lungs. and lactate tolerance. 

I zipped pass a guy on a TT bike on no less then Zipp 606 wheels and he was already in his aero position while I was riding with my hands on the hoods at 25mph or so. 

FWIW, I might get the aeolus 6.5 in a few months time, depends on whether I decide to and such. 404s are just too common these days. Zed tech or Z4s, well, too expensive. Lightweights, well, I'd rather get those but they cost too much too.


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

uzziefly: 404 is a " common " wheels now?? how many of those you see comparing to say Mavic SL or ES?? yeah i do wish you would buy your dream wheels b/c mine just came true ( smile ) have you think about campy's Boras?? look=best, fast=world class, price=stiff but affordable ( almost the same price as Aeolus ) + Boras is a great climbing wheels too. fast on flat and also fast going up hills. 404 is abviously not my # 1 for the money, Boras is. if i would have 1 BILLION dollar, i would buy Boras over Lightweight. i be honest here i'll buy 404 over Aeolus b/c i don't ride flat all the time. i want my wheels to be fast up and down and everywhere in between. gl with your dream wheels.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

I'd either get the plain 404s or the Aeolus 6.5 but haven't decided on either yet. The prices are a little different so that might be a factor. But, I am leaning towards the Aeolus because I already ride a 32mm Carbon Aero (Race X Lite Carbon Aero) by Bontrager and would like to get something deeper say around 60mm or so. I was considering a 606 but that might be just a tad too deep, though it's just the rear that's at 80mm or so. And the wheels are a tad heavy for my liking. Though aero wins over weight in my choice and I could always use my current wheelset for hilly rides. (I'm 135lbs and would need to be around 150lbs for Track so weight is clearly not a problem here)

My dream wheelset would be the LW Standards or Obermayers but WHOA, unless someone drops by my front door with $4k or so, I wouldn't get em. NOOOO WAAYYYY.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

these are two seperate tests 


what surprised me was Nimble coming in last. Must be due tot he low rim depth on their 3 spoke

The Bontrager X Lite coming in so high and the Aeolus both share properties in design only with Mavics Carbone so I suppose that isn't a surprise

LW scored pretty low on the list for 4-5K$ wheelset

No surprise Zippscored high or Easton since they use Zipp rims

Corima did veyr well and sells carbon clinchers by the way


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

carbon: why worry since you already own zipp 303. i bet not many riders can drop you on a climb or atleast it's not the wheels that let you down. yeah i'm a little surprise Lightweight score very low. Jan Ullrich used them ( Lance didn't ) and he still lost to Lance's Bontrager and Baso's Zipp from 04 and 05. so Lightweight, well may be just lightweight and nothing much. for $ 4 k to $ 6k, i could get Boras, 404 and may be Aeolus, of course on E-bay.

enjoy and ride strong


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

hah z'ken how much you my friend have to learn! But the process will be highly enjoyable 

There is always someone faster and stronger my man ALWAYS. Lance did use LW by the way I think in 2004 when he won the TOur De Swiss

Wheels help but matter little compared to training. I see guys on beaters beat guys on 10k bikes. I've seen 200+ pound riders beat guys my size up hill - still haven't quite figured that out yet lol

I got beat once by a guy who must have weighed in at 230-240 in spandex. He barely fit in his shorts and was all over his bike like a cow hand on a bull.

It was an early season race but I had done my preperation but lacked some intensity training. Me and some other fellas had the hardest time dropping this guy and we were all looking at one another in sheer amazement about it because it was like a Honda pulling ahead of a Porsche on the track. 

The course was rolling but the hills were hard enough to lose plenty of the field and the intensity was high. At one point a group of 4 or 5 riders saw the big fella shoot out that back and someone said "thought we'd never lose drop that guy" and we snickered a little bit but we all were equally astonished. Then before we knew it the big guy blew past us all just pounding those pedals like rail spikes on a railroad

The roads were brutal, NH go figure, and we all were waiting for this one guy to get dropped and he never gave up. I was so impressed and we commended him after. I thought a few times he was going to pass out his face was so red but he was relentless and would make his way to the mid-front of the field then get blown out the back and come back again and again and again. He lasted the whole race. I was riding my zipp 303s with AC hubs and low spoke count that weighed 1020 grams. They sure felt fast, maybe if the big guy was using them he could have won - of course he exceeded the WL but he deserved them as much if not more than I


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

carbon: may be that " honda " was on EPO or some kind of " allegy " medication. hahah also have you check his rear wheel, may be a motor was attached to it?? anyway yeah having lighter bike/wheels doesn't mean you're going to win races but atleast getting to the top ( mountain ) will be much easier. i'm not pro/racer. i'm just a bike freak who want to ride " sexy " stuffs ". heheh of course i'm not a couch potato either. some said earlier today, just came back from the bike shop, that i'm the best rider they seen here in my " neighborhood-san jose, california ". i humblely said, " i'm an ok rider who just happened to have alot of money and ride expensive bike/parts " heheh


----------



## ridebikes (Jun 7, 2005)

Sort of curious how these numbers would compare to a "lowly" Ksyrium SL or Bontrager Race X Lite or any other non-aero wheels. I only say "lowly" as the rim height is not as great.


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

ridebikes: lowly?? those are good quality wheels that some of pros use so give them some props. sl/x-lite vs. 50/60 deep rim, for sure they'll loose some time in flat or rolling courses. 

enjoy and ride strong


----------



## steel515 (Sep 6, 2004)

do you know if braking performance was tested with carbon pads?


----------



## ridebikes (Jun 7, 2005)

z ken said:


> ridebikes: lowly?? those are good quality wheels that some of pros use so give them some props. sl/x-lite vs. 50/60 deep rim, for sure they'll loose some time in flat or rolling courses.
> 
> enjoy and ride strong


z Ken,

That was an attempt at a joke - yeah I know those are great wheels. I have a set of SL's and after an initial issue with one spoke they are great. I did specify why I called them lowly. 

I was just wondering if the same type of tests were done on the SL wheels what would the numbers look like.


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

i think they only do aero wheels only. i could be wrong.


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

It is a wheel. It will turn the same way when you pedal. Even if it is a $2000 wheel or a used $20 wheel. Unless you are looking to win the Ironman or the Prologue in the Tour, who really cares.


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

crossboy: nothing personal but with that kind of " mentality " for sure you're not going to win any races. of course i'm just average joe too but i do want to own a fancy bike/wheels and other cool stuffs that related to bike. i'm a bike freak who is making " ok " money. heheh yeah you're right about one part: you do have to pedal. just curious what kind of bike/wheels you ride right now. as i've mention before as you ride bike, you'll get my respect regarding it's $10k ( Scott Addicted ) or $ 60 ( pacific mountain bike at Target which i'm proudly own today. heheh of course i also own madone/404 )


----------



## tellico climber (Aug 14, 2006)

crossboy said:


> It is a wheel. It will turn the same way when you pedal. Even if it is a $2000 wheel or a used $20 wheel. Unless you are looking to win the Ironman or the Prologue in the Tour, who really cares.


Whenever there is a honest discussion of higher end bikes or components why must there always be someone like this in the crowd? If you dont like the discussion stay out of it. One could also say, its a car-push the gas pedal and it will go,its a house-lie down in the bed and you will sleep,its just food-eat and you will not be hungry,and on and on.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

crossboy said:


> It is a wheel. It will turn the same way when you pedal. Even if it is a $2000 wheel or a used $20 wheel. Unless you are looking to win the Ironman or the Prologue in the Tour, who really cares.



So get a $20 wheelset and use em then..


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

tellico climber said:


> Whenever there is a honest discussion of higher end bikes or components why must there always be someone like this in the crowd? If you dont like the discussion stay out of it. One could also say, its a car-push the gas pedal and it will go,its a house-lie down in the bed and you will sleep,its just food-eat and you will not be hungry,and on and on.


Yes, exactly. If I lie in a bed at night, I usually fall asleep. If I am hungry and there is food around, I eat in, thus I am not hungry anymore.

Dog is to puppy as cat is to?????

I am liking your way of thinking.


----------



## z ken (Dec 30, 2006)

hey c'mon now. stop acting like a sissy and let's go ride the bike and enjoy the sunny weather, well atleast here in California. sad to see east coast and New England area got hit hard by a blizzardy weather. hang in there.


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

I am going to go ride my 10k Scott with carbon zipps today through the snow.


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

crossboy said:


> Yes, exactly. If I lie in a bed at night, I usually fall asleep. If I am hungry and there is food around, I eat in, thus I am not hungry anymore.


I've got a question for you, crossboy. Do you ever....in *any* aspect of your life....see value in a product or service that is more expensive than the absolute *cheapest* option available?


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

WhiskeyNovember said:


> I've got a question for you, crossboy. Do you ever....in *any* aspect of your life....see value in a product or service that is more expensive than the absolute *cheapest* option available?



No. I can buy something that is made over seas by a 11 yr old for over half of what it costs to be made by a union worker here in the states. After seeing the market-up on some items, I do not see the value. A $1500 retail pair of wheels is sold for around $750 to a dealer. In that $750 is the cost of the labor and all the other bs stuff involved. So, essentially, you have about $200-$300 of actual materials. So, to answer your question, NO. I don't see value in the more expesive items, rather higher mark-up.


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

crossboy said:


> So, to answer your question, NO. I don't see value in the more expesive items, rather higher mark-up.


Fair enough. So is it accurate to say that each and every time you decide to make a purchase, you opt for the absolute cheapest option available, without exception?


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

WhiskeyNovember said:


> Fair enough. So is it accurate to say that each and every time you decide to make a purchase, you opt for the absolute cheapest option available, without exception?


For the most part. So if I buy a $40 bottle of Whiskey, will it get me 4 times drunker than a $10 bottle?

Have you ever opted for the cheapest? In college, we we had a clothing designer(men's pants) come into our class and talk about his product. One of the guys asked him why his pants sell for $80 and he can buy Dockers at a local dept. store for $25. What is the difference. The owner kind of danced around the question and then he said that the quality was slightly better, but mainly it was where they marketed their product. High end golf apparel, county clubs, etc. That is how they got the bigger bucks.

There is a difference from a very-low end road bike to a top of the line. But from a mid-level carb bike 3k vs a top of the line for 10k, is there that much of a difference? Not really.


----------



## WhiskeyNovember (May 31, 2003)

crossboy said:


> For the most part. So if I buy a $40 bottle of Whiskey, will it get me 4 times drunker than a $10 bottle?


No, but often, a better product (that happens to be more expensive) will provide a better *experience*. I could get by eating gruel or unflavored oatmeal for breakfast, lunch, and dinner every day. I'd save tons of money, and the oatmeal/gruel would occupy space in my stomach and fill me up. 

So why do I pay more for a good sandwich or some pasta? Because eating such foods is a more enjoyable *experience*.

This rule applies to just about everything, including bikes. Different products provide different experiences. Is it *always* the case that the more expensive product provides a more enjoyable experience? No, but more often than not, the absolute cheapest product will provide a *less enjoyable* experience.

Another example....I could drive a 1990 Geo Metro. It would transport me from point A to point B. Instead, I choose to drive a significantly more expensive car, because the design and technology it offers makes the drive more fun, more comfortable, and more enjoyable. Instead of putting me in a frustrated or sour mood every morning, my car puts a smile on my face and *improves* my mood. 

The manufacturer of my car paid lots of people lots of money to figure out what my customer segment loves in a car. Then, they paid lots of people lots of money to build the car well. These expenses were passed on to me, the buyer, in the form of a car that's far more expensive than a 1990 Geo Metro, and I feel that, for *me*, the benefits are well worth the added expense.

You see, there's more to a product than the sum if it's ingredients. 



crossboy said:


> Have you ever opted for the cheapest?


Absolutely. The cheapest is often the best option. I'm just saying that a *more expensive* option often can *also* be....and often *is*....the best option.



crossboy said:


> There is a difference from a very-low end road bike to a top of the line. But from a mid-level carb bike 3k vs a top of the line for 10k, is there that much of a difference? Not really.


Ahh, now we're getting somewhere....the law of diminishing return. I generally agree with what you're saying here, but I'll take it a step further. I maintain that, to be able to proclaim that there is or isn't "much of a difference", you first must qualify the statement by defining *who* will be using it. 

To the average Joe, I absolutely agree that there will be very little discernible difference between a 3k carbon bike and a 10k carbon bike.

To a seasoned rider who is receptive to the smaller nuances and subtle benefits that differentiate the two bikes, it's a different story altogether.

Not all companies are out to screw people, crossboy. Often, a company is run *by* fellow enthusiasts, *for* fellow enthusiasts. Don't fault that company for offering befits or experiences to which you're simply not receptive. : )


----------



## ridebikes (Jun 7, 2005)

This was a good thread til it got side tracked.


----------

