# "Aero" wheels' benefits.....?



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

I am currently looking into getting a wheelset that is a bit more "aero" than my current c24s. Not to replace my c24s, but a set to replace my roval fusee sl25s on my other bike. 

Today, I visited my LBS looking at some more "aero"-type wheels (clinchers not tubulars). I bumped into another cyclist and we started chatting. Long story short.....he told me that for me to benefit from aero-type wheels (ie, improving my time), I would have to average around 24 mph over say, 30+ mile ride. I definitely do not average that kind of speed over a 30+ mile ride. I usually average closer to 18.5 mph (mostly flats with some rollies) over this distance. 

If that is true, are most cyclist out there who don't average this kind of speed getting aero wheels just for the looks? Are they dropping that kind of money and only getting a "psychological" advantage? I have the funds to make this purchase, but don't want to get something solely for the looks. 

Please advise....as I may just stick with my Fusee SL25s.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

First off, I would advise to be a skeptic of what your friend has to say. Aerodynamic wheels will have some benefits, and some draw backs. The one thing that you will really notice (depending on what wheels you choose) will be the stability and consistency that you will feel when trying to maintain average speeds. Obviously the draw back that will be considerable is the fact that the wheels will not accelerate nearly as quick as other options. 
All in all, don't let one random rider at one LBS convince you what is right or wrong. See if you can find a demo program or something similar that may be rolling through town to help you make your own informed decision.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

Cni2i said:


> are most cyclist out there who don't average this kind of speed getting aero wheels just for the looks?


Pretty much.

The benefit from aero wheels is less than 1mph.. more like 0.5mph on a good set over a bad set. 

For a casual ride, 0.5mph is irrelevant. I change my average more than that depending on how well rested I am.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

Zen Cyclery said:


> First off, I would advise to be a skeptic of what your friend has to say. Aerodynamic wheels will have some benefits, and some draw backs. The one thing that you will really notice (depending on what wheels you choose) will be the stability and consistency that you will feel when trying to maintain average speeds. Obviously the draw back that will be considerable is the fact that the wheels will not accelerate nearly as quick as other options.
> All in all, don't let one random rider at one LBS convince you what is right or wrong. See if you can find a demo program or something similar that may be rolling through town to help you make your own informed decision.


Thanks for the feedback. Yeah, I have a 14lb bike that is very responsive and accelerate quickly (at least I think so). That bike has the dura ace c24s. So, with my second bike, I wanted to put more emphasis on the "aero" aspect rather than the fast acceleration and weight saving aspect. She'll probably end up weighing 16 lbs or so. I guess I was looking for a set that could help me hold my speeds for a longer period of time. 

I realize that it's primarily about the rider rather than the ride, BUT, if there are wheel designs out there that can truly improve my performance, I am game.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

TomH said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> The benefit from aero wheels is less than 1mph.. more like 0.5mph on a good set over a bad set.
> 
> For a casual ride, 0.5mph is irrelevant. *I change my average more than that depending on how well rested I am*.


I hear ya. Wow, didn't realize that they had such a minimal effect.  Now, I really have to do a little more research on this topic. Thanks for the reply.


----------



## Lectron (May 29, 2005)

There is an aero advantage on a good aero set, but.
It ain't really as much as PR sites try to tell you.

Comfort and 'suspension' should also be in the calculation
Fatigue makes you weaker than any aero benefit can override


----------



## 2Slo4U (Feb 12, 2005)

Didn't you just get the c24s?

I have a set of c24's and a set of Roval sl45's. I used the c24's for about 18 months then recently got the sl45s. I hardly use the c24's anymore as I have taken a stong liking to the sl45's. My riding is a mixed bag of flats, descents, and climbing . I feel that aero wheels really have a stong benefit on the flats and descents and not much of a penelty on climbs. The best benefits come in a group....those wheels will roll forever. While my speeds didn't jump significantly, I feel that it takes less effort maintaining speed. This can translate to alot of benefits....


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

the c24s score very well in aero tests (probably due to the low spoke count). The difference between them and a deep aero wheelset is likely no more than 3 watts at 50km/hr. Your gain will be minimal. 

As a rule, I would also not trust anyone who talks about gains in terms of average speed - it's pretty meaningless (and not a number someone who is training seriously thinks about).


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

Cni2i said:


> Long story short.....he told me that for me to benefit from aero-type wheels (ie, improving my time), I would have to average around 24 mph over say, 30+ mile ride. I definitely do not average that kind of speed over a 30+ mile ride. I usually average closer to 18.5 mph (mostly flats with some rollies) over this distance.


The cyclist who told you this does not understand aerodynamics. If you're moving, aerodynamics matters. Period. It's just a question of _how much_ gain you will see.

For a given distance, slower riders will actually save more _time_ with an aero wheelset than faster riders. Faster riders, however, will save more _power_. This is a consequence of the non-linear (power law) nature of aerodynamic drag, which scales as speed^3. 

But the other posters here are right -- remember that you, the rider, are 80+% of the total aerodynamic drag of the bike+rider system. Maybe a few percent of the total is due to the wheels. No matter how fast or slow you ride, you simply will not see a huge improvement in your speed with just more aerodynamic wheels.

Asad


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

I'm a 17 - 19.5mph average solo speed cyclist (depending whether I'm doing intervals or steady ride) and I swap back & forth between a set of 24mm deep rims (1410g wheel weigh) and a 50mm carbon set (Gigantex, 1579g) and sometimes an OpenPro/DA wheelset. My average speeds when using my 50mm set are within the variance of the average speeds of my other wheels. The 50mm rims don't jump out with some higher average speeds.

Those rims sell for about $250 each (I got that figure from BikeHubStore.com) But I've no idea if $800+ carbon rims are faster and I probably won't find out anytime soon.

There is a drawback to the 50mm front rim - today I was descending at 37mph with a strong crosswind. A pickup truck passed me and a gust caused a swerve that took up more than half my lane. That's happened 2x before on that downhill. It was a heart-stopper this morning. I wonder if the high-priced carbon rims perform better in speed and crosswinds.

Yeah, buy carbon wheels for the right reason (bling?) but don't expect them to change your world.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

asad137 said:


> For a given distance, slower riders will actually save more _time_ with an aero wheelset than faster riders. Faster riders, however, will save more _power_. This is a consequence of the non-linear (power law) nature of aerodynamic drag, which scales as speed^3.


So close.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

2Slo4U said:


> Didn't you just get the c24s?
> 
> I have a set of c24's and a set of Roval sl45's. I used the c24's for about 18 months then recently got the sl45s. I hardly use the c24's anymore as I have taken a stong liking to the sl45's. My riding is a mixed bag of flats, descents, and climbing . I feel that aero wheels really have a stong benefit on the flats and descents and not much of a penelty on climbs. The best benefits come in a group....those wheels will roll forever. While my speeds didn't jump significantly, I feel that it takes less effort maintaining speed. This can translate to alot of benefits....


Thanks for the feedback. And yes, I did pick up a set of c24s. Really like them thus far...no complaints. I was looking for a second set for my other bike, and wanted to go with a slightly deeper rim set. I am not a big fan of really deep rims (ie, greater than 45mm) for some reason, but wanted something maybe between 35-45mm depth.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

Thanks for ALL the great feedbacks everyone. Very helpful!!!

So if I do decide to get a slightly more "aero" wheelset than my c24s, at least I now know more realistically what their limits and benefits are :thumbsup:

BTW: Is $1300 for a almost brand new set of c35 clinchers a reasonable price ( OTD price)? Or do you guys know of better deals out there. Thanks again.


----------



## F45 (Nov 25, 2010)

Cni2i said:


> If that is true, are most cyclist out there who don't average this kind of speed getting aero wheels just for the looks? Are they dropping that kind of money and only getting a "psychological" advantage? I have the funds to make this purchase, but don't want to get something solely for the looks.


My opinion is that many buy aero looking wheels for the same reason you see so many (or at least I see so many) soccer moms putting around with their kids in Mercedes and Porsche SUVs and middle aged guys poking along in the right lane in new Corvettes. The allure of vanity and the pleasure of knowing you look richer and happier than those around you is hard to resist. 

I used to ride on Zipp 440 tubulars, but now I just use regular spoked wheels (also a C24 user).


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

F45 said:


> middle aged guys poking along in the right lane in new Corvettes. The allure of vanity and the pleasure of knowing you look richer and happier than those around you is hard to resist.


I'm middle aged (ok I'm older than that) and have a Corvette. Is *that* the reason I have it? How do you know?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

My cat 1/2 buddies have convinced me to hold off on aero wheels until I advance to cat 2. 

I'm also currently on DA wheels. There's no need for me to buy fractional benefits in performance when I can improve in countless other ways for free, like riding an extra hour every week or watching my diet a little better.

The velodrome is another story. The wheelset I use now is rubbish. When I upgrade there I'm going big.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

F45 said:


> My opinion is that many buy aero looking wheels for the same reason you see so many (or at least I see so many) soccer moms putting around with their kids in Mercedes and Porsche SUVs and middle aged guys poking along in the right lane in new Corvettes. The allure of vanity and the pleasure of knowing you look richer and happier than those around you is hard to resist.
> 
> I used to ride on Zipp 440 tubulars, but now I just use regular spoked wheels (also a C24 user).


Many of the racer types around here seem to have deep carbon hoops while the non racer types do not. So, while it may have something to do with vanity I think it has more to do with guys wanting to gain free speed because they feel if they don't and the rest of the guys are riding them they will be at a disadvantage. Aero is aero and I think what asad137 said should be re-read by many to understand how small of an affect one small piece of the aero puzzle (wheels) will have. Especially in the context of us week end warriors who could benefit more from diet, rest, understanding limiters in training and working to improve them and race strategy (for racers). 

Personally I happen to think a set of 50mm carbon wheels looks really nice. And to be honest, one of the larger reasons I purchased them was for the looks. There I said it!


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

So from what I've gathered here, the "aero effect" is pretty negligible in most circumstances. My average speed over a 50+ mile ride would not likely improve with more aero wheels (all else being the same). I can accept that. But, can aero wheels help a rider maintain his/her speeds better...for instance, when pulling up front? and better stability when descending down a hill? Or am I just missing the whole picture here?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Yes, aero wheels can help. The aerodynamic benefits increase with speed. People with higher average speeds will glean more benefit from improved aerodynamics. 

Will you feel it on the 50 mile ride? Maybe. 

That said, if you're averaging 18.5mph you have plenty of room to improve. I know that I could improve by getting better rest, riding an extra hour every week, or watching my diet a little better. I know that I can improve without spending any money. My DA wheels are pretty darn good -- I'm not going to go carbon until I get closer to my physical limit.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Cni2i said:


> So from what I've gathered here, the "aero effect" is pretty negligible in most circumstances. My average speed over a 50+ mile ride would not likely improve with more aero wheels (all else being the same).


But "all else being the same" is an elusive impossibility. Oh sure if all else was the same you should be a few seconds faster over a flat-out 50-miler. They can probably measure the drag difference in a wind tunnel between two sets of wheels. But real life riding isn't like that. I "test" my two sets of wheels and I go "WoooHooo I was 2 mins faster this ride (from last ride) on my flat-out 30-mile benchmark ride (and I do have one) with my 50mm c/f rims!" But then two weeks later I throw in my 24mm alum wheels and I'm a minute faster than with the 50mm carbons. Ouch. There are too many real-world variables to know what's what.

I just checked my copious average speed chartings. Today, with 50mm deep cf wheels I was 0.74mph slower than the same 53mile ride last year when using my 24mm rims. It doesn't take much of a genius to list the possible variables here.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Mike, if you're ever interested in "testing" the aero benefits, you can try Dr Ferrari's roll-down method. Here he is talking about bike position. But as he says towards the end, this method can be used for just about any aero testing. 

_Wind-gallery tests are very useful, but also very expensive and not so easily accessible. 

Personally I’ve always used an extremely simple test, absolutely costless, in order to check the aerodynamic advantage of different positions on the bike. 

All we need is a 200-300m long descent, steep enough to allow speeds of about 50 km/h without pushing on the pedals, immediately followed by an uphill distance so to slow down and stop the movement of the cyclist in a reasonably short time: the farther the cyclist stops, the more aerodynamically efficient is the position. 

Obviously it takes several measurements and try-outs in order to limit the influence of external factors, such as variations in wind speed or temperature, but in the end the results are reliable. 

To make it even more realistic, the cyclists should “empty-pedal” (i.e. with a 39x25) during the descent, so to reproduce the kind of turbulences of moving legs. 

It is also possible to test special materials, such a wheels, handlebars, tires, helmets etc…_


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Cni2i said:


> So from what I've gathered here, the "aero effect" is pretty negligible in most circumstances. My average speed over a 50+ mile ride would not likely improve with more aero wheels (all else being the same). I can accept that. But, can aero wheels help a rider maintain his/her speeds better...for instance, when pulling up front? and better stability when descending down a hill? Or am I just missing the whole picture here?


Aero is aero. So yes they will help but I think what these threads always try to point out is that you may not notice any difference. IIRC the speed advantage at say 20mph from a box rim depth to say 50mm is close to 0.1-0.3 mph. Don't quote me on that some others blessed with math skills can verify. From what I've seen and experienced, paying attention to your hubs, tire choice and inflation pressures are vastly more important and noticeable than the actual depth of the rim. Lastly, take these opinions and wheel reports/comparisons with a grain of salt. Most guys don't hold anything constant when they talk about two different sets of wheels. Hubs, tires, inflation, spokes, lacing pattern all have an affect on how a wheel feels and performs. So when someone says that this carbon wheel is stiffer or faster or what ever be skeptical. I'm pulling off of my local experience and not necessarily these forums.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Mike T. said:


> But "all else being the same" is an elusive impossibility. Oh sure if all else was the same you should be a few seconds faster over a flat-out 50-miler. They can probably measure the drag difference in a wind tunnel between two sets of wheels. But real life riding isn't like that. I "test" my two sets of wheels and I go "WoooHooo I was 2 mins faster this ride (from last ride) on my flat-out 30-mile benchmark ride (and I do have one) with my 50mm c/f rims!" But then two weeks later I throw in my 24mm alum wheels and I'm a minute faster than with the 50mm carbons. Ouch. There are too many real-world variables to know what's what.
> 
> I just checked my copious average speed chartings. Today, with 50mm deep cf wheels I was 0.74mph slower than the same 53mile ride last year when using my 24mm rims. It doesn't take much of a genius to list the possible variables here.


+1. I've experienced much the same with a set of Easton EA50 aluminum clincher POS training wheels and my EC90 tubulars. So many variables but the bottom line was no detectable difference in speed after many repeated "runs" on a flat course. The power of marketing, looks and what your peers are riding makes wheel purchases or any type of bike purchase less than objective every time. Oh well. I've had a lot of fun and have spent a lot of money figuring out it's all about training smart and resting smarter!


----------



## aaric (Mar 10, 2011)

Cni2i said:


> Thanks for ALL the great feedbacks everyone. Very helpful!!!
> 
> So if I do decide to get a slightly more "aero" wheelset than my c24s, at least I now know more realistically what their limits and benefits are :thumbsup:
> 
> BTW: Is $1300 for a almost brand new set of c35 clinchers a reasonable price ( OTD price)? Or do you guys know of better deals out there. Thanks again.


From what I recall, the C24's are actually pretty aero for a lower profile rim, even outperforming some deeper aero wheels..

older test data, but here you go:
Great wheel test 2008 – Part 1 – Aerodynamics | Roues Artisanales


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

woodys737 said:


> IIRC the speed advantage at say 20mph from a box rim depth to say 50mm is close to 0.1-0.3 mph.


And my charted average speeds fluctuate by 10x more than that so it's all a moot point isn't it?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Yes Hero you're right about the inexpensive rolldown tests and I'm aware of them. I'd do them at my normal speeds as I'm rarely doing 50kph in my location. So I know the benefits at 18-22mph (I see those speeds lots on my computer) would be much less. A 20mph downhill would be much easier to climb too.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

Is it too simplistic/generalized to say that the miniscule potential gain from aero wheels on a 50+ mile ride is negated by the increased weight of some aero wheels (when climbing)? 

Lets say you're doing a century ride with 6000' total feet of climbing....

Would you take your 16.5 lb bike with aero wheels (lets say 45mm deep or deeper) or your 14.0 lb bike with standard depth (lets say 25 mm)? Just curious to hear why you would choose one over the other. For simplicity, lets say the fit is the same, drivetrains are the same and you have identical saddles on both rides.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

why would you want 50mm clinchers ? the good thing is the carbon aero tubulars, light and fast. if you want good clinchers get a good set of OP/Your hub of preference/Revos

I have 50mm tubular, they are light, improve my speed, - but alas, not dramatically -, look cool and are less compliant.

The 50mm ones do fly, I like them, but I can tell you that I actually ride much more often the Record/OP/Revos 32x3 set I built that is quite compliant and not that heavy.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Mike T. said:


> And my charted average speeds fluctuate by 10x more than that so it's all a moot point isn't it?


Yes. I was trying to remind/illustrate bring to light that the aero advantage, to use terms loosely, isn't easy to find/feel/experience in a controlled environment much less the open road. However, on an absolute scale 0.1mph faster is in fact faster.

edit: maybe you missed my post responding to yours detailing the exact same thing?


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

Salsa_Lover said:


> why would you want 50mm clinchers ? the good thing is the carbon aero tubulars, light and fast. if you want good clinchers get a good set of OP/Your hub of preference/Revos
> 
> I have 50mm tubular, they are light, improve my speed, - but alas, not dramatically -, look cool and are less compliant.
> 
> The 50mm ones do fly, I like them, but I can tell you that I actually ride much more often the Record/OP/Revos 32x3 set I built that is quite compliant and not that heavy.


I hear ya. Makes sense to me.....aero and lightweight. But, I'm just not that mechanically inclined to properly deal with tubular flats. :mad2:


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

aaric said:


> From what I recall, the C24's are actually pretty aero for a lower profile rim, even outperforming some deeper aero wheels..
> 
> older test data, but here you go:
> Great wheel test 2008 – Part 1 – Aerodynamics | Roues Artisanales


Nice. Thanks for the link.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

woodys737 said:


> edit: maybe you missed my post responding to yours detailing the exact same thing?


Quite possibly! Or I just didn't remember it. I'm old and busy and that's a bad combo for storage memory.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

Local Hero said:


> Yes, aero wheels can help. The aerodynamic benefits increase with speed. People with higher average speeds will glean more benefit from improved aerodynamics.
> 
> Will you feel it on the 50 mile ride? Maybe.
> 
> That said, *if you're averaging 18.5mph you have plenty of room to improve.* I know that I could improve by getting better rest, riding an extra hour every week, or watching my diet a little better. I know that I can improve without spending any money. My DA wheels are pretty darn good -- I'm not going to go carbon until I get closer to my physical limit.


That's for sure. If nothing else .....maybe the new set of wheels will motivate me to ride/train even more and improve on that 18.5.


----------



## F45 (Nov 25, 2010)

Mike T. said:


> I'm middle aged (ok I'm older than that) and have a Corvette. Is *that* the reason I have it? How do you know?


Do you drive it fast?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Cni2i said:


> ....maybe the new set of wheels will motivate me to ride/train even more and improve on that 18.5.


It'd take way more than that to "motivate" me to get back to my 21.5 of 30 years ago. A new bike with new (50mm aero) wheels, this year, didn't make a dent


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

F45 said:


> Do you drive it fast?


And chance getting it impounded for a week plus thousands of dollars in fines (for 50kph over)? Not a chance. I cruise sedately and the Corollas go flying past.


----------



## F45 (Nov 25, 2010)

*Vanity, actually....*



woodys737 said:


> Personally I happen to think a set of 50mm carbon wheels looks really nice. And to be honest, one of the larger reasons I purchased them was for the looks. There I said it!


That's the best reason. There, I said it!


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Overestimation*



TomH said:


> The benefit from aero wheels is less than 1mph.. more like 0.5mph on a good set over a bad set.


Your estimates are too high. The fastest wheels available, when compared to a 32 spoke box section rim set, are worth 0.3 mph at 20 mph, or 0.4 mph at 25 mph (0.5 km/hr at 32 km/hr, or 0.6 km/hr at 40 km/hr).


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

aaric said:


> From what I recall, the C24's are actually pretty aero for a lower profile rim, even outperforming some deeper aero wheels..
> 
> older test data, but here you go:
> Great wheel test 2008 – Part 1 – Aerodynamics | Roues Artisanales


Those are tubular C-24's in that test. Totally different rim.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

asgelle said:


> So close.


I should have specified that I meant the power needed to overcome aero drag, which goes as speed^3, not drag force itself which goes as speed^2.

Asad


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

Cni2i said:


> Is it too simplistic/generalized to say that the miniscule potential gain from aero wheels on a 50+ mile ride is negated by the increased weight of some aero wheels (when climbing)?
> 
> Lets say you're doing a century ride with 6000' total feet of climbing....
> 
> Would you take your 16.5 lb bike with aero wheels (lets say 45mm deep or deeper) or your 14.0 lb bike with standard depth (lets say 25 mm)? Just curious to hear why you would choose one over the other.


In most cases, aero is better -- unless the rider is very lightweight and/or the grades are very steep. Depending on your power output, the crossover point varies, but I hear numbers of around 6% for recreational cyclists and closer to 10% for pros. You can go to analyticcycling.com and plug in numbers for various cases and see for yourself.

Asad


----------



## 2Slo4U (Feb 12, 2005)

I recently read a study in some magazine about what component saves the most seconds in a time trial. I can't remember where I saw it but the wheels came in almost if not dead last (based on cost/time saved.) Maybe someone else recalls the article...possibly in Bicycling Magazine. It was an interesting analysis


----------



## the_don (Mar 23, 2008)

Mike T. said:


> But "all else being the same" is an elusive impossibility. Oh sure if all else was the same you should be a few seconds faster over a flat-out 50-miler. They can probably measure the drag difference in a wind tunnel between two sets of wheels. But real life riding isn't like that. I "test" my two sets of wheels and I go "WoooHooo I was 2 mins faster this ride (from last ride) on my flat-out 30-mile benchmark ride (and I do have one) with my 50mm c/f rims!" But then two weeks later I throw in my 24mm alum wheels and I'm a minute faster than with the 50mm carbons. Ouch. There are too many real-world variables to know what's what.
> 
> I just checked my copious average speed chartings. Today, with 50mm deep cf wheels I was 0.74mph slower than the same 53mile ride last year when using my 24mm rims. It doesn't take much of a genius to list the possible variables here.


So why not sell them and go on vacation with the money?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

the_don said:


> So why not sell them and go on vacation with the money?


Cozz they look dead cool and I'm waiting for chicks to notice them.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

the_don said:


> So why not sell them and go on vacation with the money?


Hey Don. That's actually a really interesting question. I think it comes down to what goals the rider has in mind. If he or she is going to spend the time and energy to lose the last 5lbs off the body, watch religiously what they eat, train to extract every last watt then some of these components like "aero" wheels are just another piece of a much larger puzzle. I look at the rider, the bike (wheels, components, frame), helmets/shoes, clothes, training (nutrition, rest, adaptation) as that puzzle. Each individual piece, by itself, may or may not be a noticeable improvement but when you sum up the quantity across the entire spectrum of pieces you have a larger and more noticeable improvement.

That's the way I justify it at least!


----------



## aaric (Mar 10, 2011)

Jay Strongbow said:


> Those are tubular C-24's in that test. Totally different rim.


Oops, good point.


----------



## Cni2i (Jun 28, 2010)

woodys737 said:


> Hey Don. That's actually a really interesting question. I think it comes down to what goals the rider has in mind. If he or she is going to spend the time and energy to lose the last 5lbs off the body, watch religiously what they eat, train to extract every last watt then some of these components like "aero" wheels are just another piece of a much larger puzzle. I look at the rider, the bike (wheels, components, frame), helmets/shoes, clothes, training (nutrition, rest, adaptation) as that puzzle. Each individual piece, by itself, may or may not be a noticeable improvement but when you sum up the quantity across the entire spectrum of pieces you have a larger and more noticeable improvement.
> 
> That's the way I justify it at least!


Nice. Will try to memorize what you just said for the next time my wife asks me "Does that really make a difference?"


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

2Slo4U said:


> I recently read a study in some magazine about what component saves the most seconds in a time trial. I can't remember where I saw it but the wheels came in almost if not dead last (based on cost/time saved.) Maybe someone else recalls the article...possibly in Bicycling Magazine. It was an interesting analysis


Here's something similar from BikeRadar, also linked on Cyclingnews:

How Aero Is Aero? - BikeRadar

Asad


----------



## the_don (Mar 23, 2008)

woodys737 said:


> Hey Don. That's actually a really interesting question. I think it comes down to what goals the rider has in mind. If he or she is going to spend the time and energy to lose the last 5lbs off the body, watch religiously what they eat, train to extract every last watt then some of these components like "aero" wheels are just another piece of a much larger puzzle. I look at the rider, the bike (wheels, components, frame), helmets/shoes, clothes, training (nutrition, rest, adaptation) as that puzzle. Each individual piece, by itself, may or may not be a noticeable improvement but when you sum up the quantity across the entire spectrum of pieces you have a larger and more noticeable improvement.
> 
> That's the way I justify it at least!


This only makes sense if you are racing and using these wheels only on race day, using heavy non aero training wheels normally and swapping over for the race. 

For any other riding, it's for show. Ya gotta admit it to yourself, the same reason you bought those carbon bottle cages over the plastic ones that weigh 10g more. 

Nothing wrong with buying nice things for the sake of it, we just need to be more honest to ourselves about it. Humans have a great capacity for self delusion, just look at all the religions you don't belong to.


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

*Not about averages.*

Folks, anyone who wants to talk about aero in their "average" ride should probably not worry about aerodynamics.

Simple answer:

At competition speeds -- whether this is official racing, with numbers pinned on, or just looking to "win" the Tuesday Night Worlds, aero matters quite a bit.

At recreational / fitness speeds, it does not.



This is not about a ride's average speed.

This is about the part when you are going 32mph, absolutely on the limit, and you NEED to close the gap to the guy in front of you....


----------



## ohvrolla (Aug 2, 2009)

woodys737 said:


> +1. I've experienced much the same with a set of Easton EA50 aluminum clincher POS training wheels and my EC90 tubulars. So many variables but the bottom line was no detectable difference in speed after many repeated "runs" on a flat course. The power of marketing, looks and what your peers are riding makes wheel purchases or any type of bike purchase less than objective every time. Oh well. I've had a lot of fun and have spent a lot of money figuring out it's all about training smart and resting smarter!


No doubt. Average person probably buys 50mm deep rims for looks, and they definitely do look good. No different than buying rims for a car for the appearance. More aero? Of course. ZOMFG speed increase? Nah. Do you need them for racing? Time trialing would see a benefit, but otherwise I don't think anyone is going to decide to stay at the front of a peloton just because of the aero advantage. I'd take drafting any day.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

ohvrolla said:


> Time trialing would see a benefit, but otherwise I don't think anyone is going to decide to stay at the front of a peloton just because of the aero advantage. I'd take drafting any day.


Where do you think your power goes when you're sitting in? All sub threshold efforts are not equal.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

the_don said:


> *This only makes sense if you are racing and using these wheels only on race day, using heavy non aero training wheels normally and swapping over for the race. *
> 
> For any other riding, it's for show. Ya gotta admit it to yourself, the same reason you bought those carbon bottle cages over the plastic ones that weigh 10g more.
> 
> Nothing wrong with buying nice things for the sake of it, we just need to be more honest to ourselves about it. Humans have a great capacity for self delusion, just look at all the religions you don't belong to.


That's precisely what I do. 

+1 on the rest of your post. I'm probably in the minority but I did ditch the carbon cages for plastic! lol!


----------



## ohvrolla (Aug 2, 2009)

asgelle said:


> Where do you think your power goes when you're sitting in? All sub threshold efforts are not equal.


You're absolutely right, you'll get just as much aero benefits when drafting in the pack with others cutting the wind for you. What was I thinking.


----------



## the_don (Mar 23, 2008)

I have to admit I bought Minora alu cages as they were even cheaper! Light and hold the bottle. 

Don't look cool though as they are kinda old school.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

ohvrolla said:


> You're absolutely right, you'll get just as much aero benefits when drafting in the pack with others cutting the wind for you. What was I thinking.


To paraphrase Shawshank Redemption, are you being deliberately obtuse? It has been my experience that even sitting in a pack, I have to expend energy to keep up. It has been shown to my, and as far as I know, everyone educated in the field's satisfaction that the majority of power used even in a pack goes to overcoming aero drag. Needing less power is better than needing more.


----------



## the_don (Mar 23, 2008)

asgelle said:


> To paraphrase Shawshank Redemption, are you being deliberately obtuse? It has been my experience that even sitting in a pack, I have to expend energy to keep up. It has been shown to my, and as far as I know, everyone educated in the field's satisfaction that the majority of power used even in a pack goes to overcoming aero drag. Needing less power is better than needing more.


Unless you ride for exercise. 

For recreation, pretty much any bike that is comfortable and has 700c wheels will have the same result, I ride for 2 hours and get some good exercise. 

I might even go back to a steel FG with high spoke count as I enjoy getting a high cadence/workout!


----------



## ohvrolla (Aug 2, 2009)

asgelle said:


> To paraphrase Shawshank Redemption, are you being deliberately obtuse? It has been my experience that even sitting in a pack, I have to expend energy to keep up. It has been shown to my, and as far as I know, everyone educated in the field's satisfaction that the majority of power used even in a pack goes to overcoming aero drag. Needing less power is better than needing more.


I originally stated I don't think anyone is going to decide to stay at the front of a peloton just because of the aero advantage. I'd take drafting any day. Pretty simple idea to wrap your head around that between the two options I would rather draft than buy a 50mm wheelset believing it was enough advantage that I could lead the pack with me being the only one doing any pace making. Were you obtuse in not understanding that? If I said I'd rather sit in with 27mm rims versus 50mm rims then you'd have an argument, but how big I don't know. All the testing I've seen is for single rider, so what do those 5 to 10 watts saved trickle down to when drafting in a pack?


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

Peleton?

I'd rather have the more aero wheels when I stick my nose out there and cross the finish line first.

-Eric


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

the_don said:


> Unless you ride for exercise.
> 
> For recreation, pretty much any bike that is comfortable and has 700c wheels will have the same result, I ride for 2 hours and get some good exercise.
> 
> I might even go back to a steel FG with high spoke count as I enjoy getting a high cadence/workout!


That doesn't make any sense. You get a good exercise in if you put the effort in. The equipment doesn't dictate effort level.

-Eric


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

ohvrolla said:


> I originally stated I don't think anyone is going to decide to stay at the front of a peloton just because of the aero advantage. I'd take drafting any day. Pretty simple idea to wrap your head around that between the two options I would rather draft than buy a 50mm wheelset believing it was enough advantage that I could lead the pack with me being the only one doing any pace making. Were you obtuse in not understanding that? If I said I'd rather sit in with 27mm rims versus 50mm rims then you'd have an argument, but how big I don't know. All the testing I've seen is for single rider, so what do those 5 to 10 watts saved trickle down to when drafting in a pack?


this drafting vs. solo argument is getting tiresome - the difference between solo and drafting in terms of power requirements is about a 25-30% savings. Aerodynamic drag is still the dominant source of resistance, so while drafting the power savings is 70-75% of the benefit in solo conditions. So, aero wheels provide a 3.5-7.5 watts savings in a pack. Put them on an aero frame and you get up to a total savings of 30 watts over a standard frame and wheelset. That's not insignificant (see Cervelo's white papers on estimates).


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I wonder what non-aero bike cervelo is using for comparison.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Local Hero said:


> I wonder what non-aero bike cervelo is using for comparison.


My friend ownsFaster a new boutique fitting/coaching/retail one stop shop kind of place here in Scottsdale. I just spoke with him about this and he confirmed the comparison was made to other "race" bikes you'd see in the pro ranks. Anyway, he's slowly building his S5 into a bike that is fitted with everything aero in mind from the new Edge tubulars to bladed or flat top bars. He said he'd do an in house experiment with their low velocity wind tunnel but has no intentions of publishing the data. Said something about the consistency of data between tunnels and more importantly he doesn't want to get into any legal trouble or a pissing contest at the very least if the data comes back looking bad for Cervelo. Don't quote me on this as I was looking around at all the gear more than anything! Ha!

If you are ever in the area look them up. The staff is super helpful, friendly and the operation is something to see imho. I do not work for them in any way shape or form. In addition, I don't use their services as I can not afford them.


----------



## GWH74 (Mar 3, 2011)

I have a question in regards to aero spokes.
How much of a difference does a small bladed spoke like CX-ray / DT aerolite compared to a normal 2.0-1.5-2.0 DB spoke?
Are they worth 3x the price?
I am think about a 20 spoke front wheel. Rear wheel would not be as big of an effect due to the more turbulent airflow.


----------



## jsedlak (Jun 17, 2008)

The benefits of my Zipp 404s are abundantly clear anywhere north of 23mph.

Does it make me faster over the same routes? Hard to tell. Probably not much, if at all.
Are they fun, and do they make going fast easier? Absolutely.
Do they work for TTs? Yes. Absolutely!


----------



## brmike22 (Sep 12, 2011)

lots of great back and forth debate here, but you have to buy what will make you happy. i can't prove that my 50mm aeolus wheels are faster than my bontrager rxl's, but they sure make me feel faster. unless it's a super windy day, i ride the 50mm dish wheels are my "go-to" wheels for every ride.


----------



## Wines of WA (Jan 10, 2005)

Argentius said:


> This is not about a ride's average speed.
> 
> This is about the part when you are going 32mph, absolutely on the limit, and you NEED to close the gap to the guy in front of you....


This! I once won a race in a sprint by half a wheel length versus two guys on either side of me. This was nine years ago and I was using an early set of Zipp 404s. The 2nd and 3rd place finishers were using shallow rimmed wheels with lots of spokes. We finished at around 35mph, and I'm pretty sure I won due to the wheels. That's just one of several times while racing that I thanked those wheels for a little extra power savings during particularly fast moments. These moments were all about me getting a little extra speed out of my equipment when I'm already at peak power. Other things like bike position and pinning your number on so it doesn't flap (plus dozens of other little details) were also important -- after you do everything you can to train right. The wheels were just part of it. 

Now that I'm a retired racer at age 43 who just rides fast-ish a few times per week, I've noticed that not only do the wheels I use not make any difference on the same routes I ride dozens of times per year at the same level of output, but on one particular dead-flat route, I can use either my "race" bike (with 20-24 Kinlin XR300 CXray-spoked wheels) or my "rain" bike (32-32 box rim wheels...with full FENDERS & FLAPS), and my times are statistically the same across many rides with the same effort.

So now I choose wheels based on stiffness and durability above all else, including picking a great wheel builder. I'm willing to spec a few nice details like CXray spokes and Kinlin rims, but there is no reason except vanity for a non-racer like me to choose deep carbon-rimmed wheels.


----------



## Yukikaze (Oct 24, 2012)

I have a few questions regarding aero wheels after reading this article on red kite prayer.
link: The Numbers Game : Red Kite Prayer

Are aero wheels that much more efficient aerodynamically compared to a box rim, as shown in those pictures?

What is the difference in getting a deep aero rim vs a shallow aero rim? I see a small difference in drag, but not drastic. Does a deeper rim handle better in headwind situations due to the heavier weight?

Thanks


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

Yukikaze said:


> Are aero wheels that much more efficient aerodynamically compared to a box rim, as shown in those pictures?
> 
> What is the difference in getting a deep aero rim vs a shallow aero rim? I see a small difference in drag, but not drastic. Does a deeper rim handle better in headwind situations due to the heavier weight?
> 
> Thanks


No, not really. When you consider your body accounts for 80% of the drag, the wheels will have less impact. However, the faster you go the more benefit you will get from the aero wheels assuming the wind is not directly "on the nose", so to speak. You must have an angle to the wind for aero wheels to be of any benefit (often referred to as the "yaw" angle"). Generally, if you're not routinely riding over 20 mph then don't bother. Get a quality lightweight wheel like the Shimano Dura Ace C24. Its aero enough, lightweight, lively and extremely durable with no weight limit. Aero wheels are often heavier, many have carbon brake tracks which don't work as well as aluminum tracts, can be a handful in gusty conditions, and have rider weight limits....not to mention they can be expensive. 

But if you ride primarily flat terrain, at greater than 20mph then the aero wheel should be considered.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Yukikaze said:


> Are aero wheels that much more efficient aerodynamically compared to a box rim, as shown in those pictures?


There is wealth of info in this magazine: TOUR QTR 4-2011

Shallow rims and round spokes definitely have high drag, but you can do quite well with a nicely shaped rim that is <30mm deep and minimal aero spokes. Many of the "normal" wheels performed better than the aero ones at low yaw.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

If you ride in a hilly area, deep aero wheels will only harm you. If that is your environment, try to keep the aero profile to 30mm so the wheelset weight isn't too high. By increasing the profile you're not only increasing weight, but you're also increasing rotational inertia, which will make it more difficult to accelerate.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

SauronHimself said:


> If you ride in a hilly area, deep aero wheels will only harm you. If that is your environment, try to keep the aero profile to 30mm so the wheelset weight isn't too high. By increasing the profile you're not only increasing weight, but you're also increasing rotational inertia, which will make it more difficult to accelerate.


I suggest you do some research here and check back.

Analytic Cycling, Interactive Methods for Estimating Cycling Performance Parameters. Tom Compton


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

SauronHimself said:


> you're also increasing rotational inertia, which will make it more difficult to accelerate.


And will make the wheels coast better (you get the kinetic energy back). Unless you're braking on every corner of a criterium race (turning the kinetic energy into heat) then rotational energy makes no difference. The only time wheel weight is any different than any other weight on the bike is during acceleration, and the only time that is meaningful is in a sprint, and at sprint speeds you are even more interested in aerodynamics. The only time lower weight makes you faster is when you're climbing and again it makes no difference whether it is rotating or not.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

Kerry Irons said:


> And will make the wheels coast better (you get the kinetic energy back). Unless you're braking on every corner of a criterium race (turning the kinetic energy into heat) then rotational energy makes no difference. The only time wheel weight is any different than any other weight on the bike is during acceleration, and the only time that is meaningful is in a sprint, and at sprint speeds you are even more interested in aerodynamics. The only time lower weight makes you faster is when you're climbing and again it makes no difference whether it is rotating or not.


You only repeated what I said. Never did I say that you wouldn't coast better. I was referring specifically to hills and accelerating (in this case increasing speed; acceleration is defined as change in velocity).


----------



## Yukikaze (Oct 24, 2012)

rruff said:


> There is wealth of info in this magazine: TOUR QTR 4-2011
> 
> Shallow rims and round spokes definitely have high drag, but you can do quite well with a nicely shaped rim that is <30mm deep and minimal aero spokes. Many of the "normal" wheels performed better than the aero ones at low yaw.


Thanks! The magazine's review of aero wheels really helped.


----------



## disaster999 (Jan 28, 2013)

First off I just want to say that im not a racer, Im just a weekend warrior that enjoy biking. I average around 30-35kph on flats. I wanted carbon aero wheels at first because of how cool it would make my bike look and the possible increase speed with aero wheels.

Well this discussion gave me something to think about and pretty much helped me decide on my next wheel. I was planning going with Zipp’s Firecrest wheelset, either the 303s or 404s since Zipp is the only manufacture, that Ive seen in my research, that shows they have done R&D on their wheel profile and have the best cross wind performance. All the rest of the aero wheels seem to have the same triangular design.

Currently, Im running on 2010 Mavics Krysium Elite wheelset which is 1550g for the pair. The Zipp 303 is a good 300g lighter than my current wheels and the 404 weighs the same as the Mavics. Acceleration wise, the 303 will probably be better and the pedal wheel would probably feel lighter do to less rotational mass. The 404 would give me better aero, which from this discussion Ive concluded that it doesn’t really help much, without adding extra weight to my current setup and probably would be easier for me to maintain a constant speed improving my endurance.

Im leaning towards the 303 more since it’s a lighter wheel and will have some aero effect, a good all rounder for me. Do you think this is a good choice or should I disregard the aero profile and look for an even lighter wheelset.


----------



## Rickard Laufer (Jan 1, 2013)

Anyone ever looking at the benefit of better hubs and not just weight? I think a wheelset with superb hubs will affect as much as weight (if talking +/- 100-200g).


----------

