# What light (but not crazy light) wheels are good these days?



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

Haven't followed much the evolution of wheels in recent years - what are good, reliable, light wheels these days?

- don't tell me Ksyriums. I have a set and like them, but Ksyriums have never been light.
- I already have various handbuilt sets with Dura-Ace/King/DT240/Record and Open Pro/DTrim/whatever. My lightest set is probably the Topolinos that are rated I believe at 1380g.
- not interested in Carbon. Too expensive, too fragile. Although I'm sure people have debated 'fragile' to death.
- A few years ago, the Am Classic 350 had a shady reputation with their hubs being not so great. The Rolf Prima Elan were supposed to have fragile rims.

What use? Everyday riding. Lots of climbing, long-distance but no race.

I'm not completely new to biking (joined this forum more than 11 years ago) so I don't need a lesson on lightness vs durability of rim walls, but I could use some enlightenment on recent models since I've not followed anything. Thanks!


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

FWIW, I have had two sets of American Classic 350s and one set of AC 58 carbon tubulars (which use the same hubset). In the last two years I've logged about 16,000 miles and have yet to have my first problem with an AC hub, and a single broken spoke among them. Cartridge bearings need replacing from time to time, but if you follow their printed or online instructions this is routine. I also had friendly and competent technical advice from them over the phone. I sold one set of 350s about 9 months ago to offset the cost of a used set of Zipp 303 tubular wheels. AC wheels are increasingly popular on the roads in my area and I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to buy from them again. 

I also don't agree that good carbon wheels are delicate. I was in a bad crash a 6 weeks ago while running the Zipp 303s--bad enough to crumple the top tube of my Felt F1. There was a broken spoke on the rear wheel, and at first glance it looked like the nipple had pulled out of the rim. In fact, the head of the nipple sheared off and was rattling around inside the rim, which was completely undamaged. The mech at the LBS put in a new nipple and spent 10 minutes truing it and I was good to go again. That's a tough rim. The front wheel needed nothing.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

Here are my impressions. American Classic has never made and as far as I can tell will never make a set of wheels that anyone weighing more than 120 lbs can ride. With that said its not like they have come out with anything groundbreaking in the last few years anyway.

I would have to say that the most impressive new product out there in terms of non-carbon parts is the Stans Alpha 340 rim. These come in at about 355-360 grams/hoop and at that weight they build surprisingly strong wheels. I have been very impressed with their stiffness and durability.

You can do any number of things with a set of hoops like this but here are two examples on either end of the continuum.

Alpa 340s 20/28 built with White Industries hubs 1286 grams
This is with a relatively inexpensive but extremely durable set of hubs that I'm sure you've considered using on previous sets of wheels. They're a got-to for just about any application when durability and/or price are factors. This would be a great every day trainer/race wheel for someone of average weight.

If you wanted to go with the featherweight option here is the the other side of the spectrum. 
Stans Alpha 340 20/28 and Extralite's Ultrahubs SX 1110 grams

This build would not be as durable as the previously mentioned one due to the very light weight hubs. The bearings are smaller and the flanges are narrower but this would be on the light weight end without being crazy light. You could train on this set of wheels however the small bearings would have to be replaced every 18-24 months assuming that you ride them consistently.

There are plenty of options in between what I have mentioned for hubs. The 340s have simply made the potential for alloy builds that much higher.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Here are my impressions. American Classic has never made and as far as I can tell will never make a set of wheels that anyone weighing more than 120 lbs can ride. With that said its not like they have come out with anything groundbreaking in the last few years anyway.


You're entitled to your opinions of course, but I'm entitled to call BS, too. I weigh 190 and was 230-240 when I started riding those "delicate" AC wheels. I put another 65 miles on the 350s this morning.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

Fireform said:


> You're entitled to your opinions of course, but I'm entitled to call BS, too. I weigh 190 and was 230-240 when I started riding those "delicate" AC wheels. I put another 65 miles on the 350s this morning.


Well hang onto that pair for dear life! Seems like they're one in a million. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## cfoster (Dec 20, 2007)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Here are my impressions. American Classic has never made and as far as I can tell will never make a set of wheels that anyone weighing more than 120 lbs can ride. *With that said its not like they have come out with anything groundbreaking in the last few years anyway*.


Depends on what you consider impressive, but I think the AC Mag clinchers are pretty ground breaking. Way lighter than the Stan's rims, if their published stats are semi-accurate. Cheap? No...but then again new rim tech stuff is never cheap. If you start talking value, well then there's tons of options out there.

As far as reliability goes, I think that consideration should be discussed in context of wheel type/utilization. I'd consider the lower weight 700c wheel sets to be more race oriented than everyday reliability oriented. To offer both, you sort of dive into the exact rim/spoke count custom builder scenario.

I'd say that the Stan's rim with a higher spoke count is a great recommendation, in theory. I haven't built with that rim yet, so I can't say from practice. There was a thread a few months back about wheels built with the Stan's rim dropping considerable spoke tension after a tire was mounted up. I read through that but wasn't really sure where that left off. Doh, don't mean to derail the thread. Light weight rim + lots of light weight spokes + a great wheel builder is a tough formula to deny. From my experience, the lighter rims (sub 400g/rim) typically rum into max recommended rider weights anywhere between 170 - 200 lbs.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Pierre, you didn't mention your body weight and type if riding/roads and those who made suggestions didn't ask you. But reading between the lines I'll take a guess at sub-200lbs. If so, then let me point you at BWW's Blackset Race Eleven which goes for $330 - $500 depending on your spoking choice. In that "type" of wheelset it's priced very competitively. Mine are superb - in rim quality and weight, sensible spoke numbers, build quality and hub durability. They're very tough to beat and you can spend lots more and just get flashier stickers.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Well hang onto that pair for dear life! Seems like they're one in a million.
> 
> :thumbsup:


Gosh, a commercial wheelbuilder running down the competition. What are the odds?


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

Fireform,
In my group of riders AC's have not held up well. First off they are squishy and those that tend to to ride hard on their equipment pretty much trashed the hubs within 1 year. There are also those that have AC tubulars and don't ride them a whole lot. These have held up fine so far. At 16k with relatively no issues I will say that's great and wish you many more problem free miles....but it is simply well known that AC hubs suck in general. You may just not ride hard on your equipment...another good thing.

OP pretty much already has what are still considered good wheelsets today. The Stans sounds great and probably would be my choice but there s no longer reliability on these to report yet either.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Fireform said:


> Gosh, a commercial wheelbuilder running down the competition. What are the odds?


Pullin' up a chair here. (in my best Costanza voice)


----------



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

thanks for the various answer - I'm not asking for a debate about Am Classic wheels or testimony about how great your own set is. I've used the AC350 for a while myself, did a few centuries on them, I didn't have any problem. I'm rather asking to show me wheels that I've probably not heard of and that are great. In that regard, the Alpha 340 recommendation sounds interesting. I'm ~170lbs and don't race, btw.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

Pierre said:


> 170lbs and don't race


The Alpha 340 is the lightest alloy rim that is currently available. Although they are pretty new I have built quite a few of them and durability is looking really good so far. I cannot think of any off the shelf alloy wheelsets that can compete with the weight of a 340 build. If there are any I would sure like to know about them so I can see what type of rims/hubs they're using...


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

mimason said:


> Fireform,
> In my group of riders AC's have not held up well. First off they are squishy and those that tend to to ride hard on their equipment pretty much trashed the hubs within 1 year. There are also those that have AC tubulars and don't ride them a whole lot. These have held up fine so far. At 16k with relatively no issues I will say that's great and wish you many more problem free miles....but it is simply well known that AC hubs suck in general. You may just not ride hard on your equipment...another good thing.
> 
> OP pretty much already has what are still considered good wheelsets today. The Stans sounds great and probably would be my choice but there s no longer reliability on these to report yet either.


Well, your experience is hard to argue with. My riding partner has put about 6,000 miles on a set of AC420s without a bearing change or problem of any kind. The owner of my LBS (a four-time olympian in speed skating who rides all the time and is pretty swift at it) uses the same wheelset on his own bike. My AC 58 carbon tubulars, on which I've ridden the lion's share of my own miles, employ the pre-dimple Zipp 404 rim which I think has a pretty good track record. So it may be generally known in your circle that they suck, but not mine.


----------



## Eyorerox (Feb 19, 2008)

weight limit for AC wheel is 91Kg I asked them, How do HED C2 and Velocity A23 rims compare with the 340s?


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Interesting that Zen would run down the AC hubs when they offer them in their own wheels. What's up with that?

Sorry to the OP for the hijack, but I smell a rat here.


----------



## mopartodd (Dec 1, 2010)

Fireform said:


> Interesting that Zen would run down the *AC hubs *when they offer them in their own wheels. What's up with that?
> 
> Sorry to the OP for the hijack, but I smell a rat here.


I thought he was referring to the wheels overall, not specifically the hubs.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Fireform said:


> Well, your experience is hard to argue with. My riding partner has put about 6,000 miles on a set of AC420s without a bearing change or problem of any kind. The owner of my LBS (a four-time olympian in speed skating who rides all the time and is pretty swift at it) uses the same wheelset on his own bike. My AC 58 carbon tubulars, on which I've ridden the lion's share of my own miles, employ the pre-dimple Zipp 404 rim which I think has a pretty good track record. So it may be generally known in your circle that they suck, but not mine.


Well I can say with experience form friends and my self using AC wheels and hubs. Maybe Zen's post was a slight exaggeration, but people over 180lbs should RUN from their stuff. Hubs, rims, etc.

I can't tell you how many people I road with or raced against that had C issues, including myself. Especially on the MTB side. How many times did they redesign tier hubs?

I found their the 350 rims to be ok. The 420 rims are excellent at anyone weight.

I personally trashed 2 MTB years around 7 yrs ago.Never again. Their old MTB rims sucked as well.

The road 420 is a decent wheelset. Hubs are ok.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

That's true. Another poster was running down the hubs and the wheels. If Zen was referring to the whole wheels, AC uses Sapim spokes and the AC hubs he sells, so that would seem to leave the rims. No one I know has had undue problems with them, so I'm surprised to learn I'm on such inferior wheels. Maybe if they crap out on me in another 30k miles or so I can get something good.

Back in the days when you had to touch up the truing of your wheels every week if you rode them hard, I build dozens of wheelsets both in the shop where I worked and for myself and friends. It's not rocket science. The rims available now are far better than what we had back then, that's the main difference.


----------



## ajxd (Oct 10, 2011)

Granted a lot of people know this, I think wheel building is going to be the best bet for light, affordable wheels.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

Fireform said:


> What's up with that?


Please reference my site. I specifically recommend only light weight riders use their hubs. I do not build wheels with AC hubs for anyone over about 150 lbs. A few months ago I turned away a potential customer because he insisted upon doing a build with AC hubs, because of the weight and price. I was concerned that the gentleman in question would have a bearing blow out... which I have seen before on wheels that I have built with AC hubs. In light of my experience with them the only people who I will recommend them for are very light weight women. I do not carry any of their rims so my opinion on them is outdated by at least a few years.

Fireform,
I respect your opinion and I applaud your willingness to ask critical questions to someone in the industry. I wish more people analyzed what we as manufacturers are saying because then companies would be unable to make untrue claims. The perfect example being a few years ago Zipp claiming their Sub-9 had negative drag...
If you would like to continue this discussion please start a new thread and title it something like "Your experiences with American Classic Wheels. opinions wanted"
Im glad you have a set of wheels you really like thats hard to find for some people. Continue to ride them! Hopefully youll get another 30k! Good luck and have fun!


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

Zen Cyclery said:


> The Alpha 340 is the lightest alloy rim that is currently available. Although they are pretty new I have built quite a few of them and durability is looking really good so far. I cannot think of any off the shelf alloy wheelsets that can compete with the weight of a 340 build. If there are any I would sure like to know about them so I can see what type of rims/hubs they're using...


Can you comment on how the Alpha 340 can be a durable rim compared to rims that weigh 385 to 425g ? Especially at 20 spokes. It would seem that the material has to be thinner and therefore weaker and prone to earlier failure. Is there something I am missing here?
Do these rims exhibit brake pulsing problems?


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

jnbrown said:


> Can you comment on how the Alpha 340 can be a durable rim compared to rims that weigh 385 to 425g ? Especially at 20 spokes. It would seem that the material has to be thinner and therefore weaker and prone to earlier failure. Is there something I am missing here?
> Do these rims exhibit brake pulsing problems?


Great questions! Ill do my best to answer them. 

The 340 is a light weight rim. There is no question about that. 
It is however stiffer than the Kinlin XR200. When I build with the 340 it comes into round, dish, and true much more quickly than the heavier Kinlin XR200. I am not sure why this is but I suspect that the 340 has just as much or more structurally important alloy in it and they are using more advanced machining techniques to trim the unimportant material. This would be accomplished through thick nipple beds and thinner tire beds, ex...

My thoughts on where it compares to Kinlins line of hoops? In terms of stiffness and durability its somewhere between the 200 and 270. Building them in 20 hole fronts is just fine especially when a hub with a wide flange is employed (Alchemy ELF). They can take the same tensions as any other high end alloy rim and they are remarkably solid. I have even been riding a pair recently and Im almost 200lbs.

With regards to the OP I would be suggest running a 20/28 if a wide flanged hub is used for the front wheel.

I have had 0 reports of any pulsing problems with the 340.


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

Zen - Thanks for the great feedback.
Maybe I will try a 340 sometime in the future.


----------



## fast ferd (Jan 30, 2009)

Get you back on topic here. Seems it turned into an AC thread. 
To me, anything under 1,400 grams is getting in crazy light territory. Shimano's 7850-SL wheelset weighs just under 1,500. In my opinion, pretty close to a perfect clincher wheelset. Nice ride and no lateral flex. Over the last couple years, I've hit assorted potholes and took them over some very rough roads. Straight and true as day one. Haven't the foggiest what I did with the spoke wrench that came with the pair!

The hubs accept 8 and 9 speed cassettes, as well, although I've not gone that route with them yet.


----------



## motobecane69 (Apr 8, 2011)

op needs to define what he considers light He dismissed Ksyriums but lets be real here, what ksyriums are you talking about? For one, they have changed over the years. I just got a new bike that came stock with Ksyrium elites and they weighed in at 1580 grams, thats not crazy light but thats pretty good, especially for their reputation of being durable. 

I sold those for $450 the day after I got the bike because I had already ordered some carbon tubulars from China from Yishun bike after reading good reviews from people here and at bikeforums. My 44mm tubulars weighed in at 1338grams and they cost me $450 shipped to my door. Awfully hard to beat that 20/24 aerospoked


----------



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

thx motobecane69, I should have mentioned - light as in less than 1400g. I have various wheels that are around 1400-1500. I know and have used all the versions of Ksyriums out there (not light or aero, but very well made). Just started this thread to learn something new - and possibly spend some $ on a new set of wheels. Thanks to all for the various feedback.


----------



## motobecane69 (Apr 8, 2011)

well depending on your budget you definately have some options. I don't know about those stans rims but I hear a lot about kinlin xr200's for front wheels matched with xr270 in the rear for some added strength 

BikeHubStore.com also has some lightweight hubs I've used "circus monkey" hubs with good results which is essentially what bikehubstore has. kinlin rims from there $40 each, hubs for $100 and go with sapim lasers for .90 a spoke and your looking at $45 for spokes. Your looking at $185 in parts for a wheelset that should come out around 1350grams and be reasonably tough provided your not too heavy.


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

Pierre said:


> Haven't followed much the evolution of wheels in recent years - what are good, reliable, light wheels these days?
> 
> - don't tell me Ksyriums. I have a set and like them, but Ksyriums have never been light.
> - I already have various handbuilt sets with Dura-Ace/King/DT240/Record and Open Pro/DTrim/whatever. My lightest set is probably the Topolinos that are rated I believe at 1380g.
> ...



I too had bad experience with AC Classic Wheelsets when I weighed 170.
For the record, I'm not a wheelbuilder or an employee of a company that sells bike product.
You can take everyone's opinion with a grain of salt, but generally AC wheels are not very durable from what I've seen from my ex-teammates unless you are a real light rider.
My recommendation is a set of Kinlin XR-270 rims on WI or Alchemy hubs with CX-Rays spokes.

I have a set of wheels with Kinlin rims and it has held up very well under my 185lb weight.


Good luck and have fun shopping!


----------



## tiflow_21 (Nov 21, 2005)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Great questions! Ill do my best to answer them.
> 
> The 340 is a light weight rim. There is no question about that.
> It is however stiffer than the Kinlin XR200. When I build with the 340 it comes into round, dish, and true much more quickly than the heavier Kinlin XR200. I am not sure why this is but I suspect that the 340 has just as much or more structurally important alloy in it and they are using more advanced machining techniques to trim the unimportant material. This would be accomplished through thick nipple beds and thinner tire beds, ex...
> ...


I appreciate the experience you have in building with the alpha 340s, so was curious what you'd recommend for someone ~180lbs in terms of hubs/spoke/spoke count for a road bike? How about for a cross bike? I've had great luck with a number of the stans rims on mountain bikes which makes me more inclined to go with their road rims.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

tiflow_21 said:


> I appreciate the experience you have in building with the alpha 340s, so was curious what you'd recommend for someone ~180lbs in terms of hubs/spoke/spoke count for a road bike? How about for a cross bike? I've had great luck with a number of the stans rims on mountain bikes which makes me more inclined to go with their road rims.


For someone who is 180 lbs a 20/28 or 24/32 would be spoke counts worth considering for a road build. I do not think that using that hoop for a XC build at your weight would be wise. After all it is the lightest alloy rim available and although its proving to be remarkably durable I have a hard time convincing myself that it would be able to handle more than a couple of imperfect remounts in a cyclocross race. 

With that said I would suggest a rim that I am sure you have already considered the XR 270. There are lots of guys your weight out there on them for XC and they have proven their capable of handling a beating.

If you dont want to go with a Kinlin or a traditional road rim you could build a set of XC wheel with the Stans 355 29er mnt rim. At 405ish grams they weigh less than the Kinlins and you can get them in white... I have done a handful of XC builds with the 355 and they look pretty cool especially when laced to polished aluminum White Industries hubs. This rim would be the lightest option that would provide the necessary durability, multiple seasons worth, for a 180lb guy racing cross.


----------



## tiflow_21 (Nov 21, 2005)

Zen Cyclery said:


> For someone who is 180 lbs a 20/28 or 24/32 would be spoke counts worth considering for a road build. I do not think that using that hoop for a XC build at your weight would be wise. After all it is the lightest alloy rim available and although its proving to be remarkably durable I have a hard time convincing myself that it would be able to handle more than a couple of imperfect remounts in a cyclocross race.
> 
> With that said I would suggest a rim that I am sure you have already considered the XR 270. There are lots of guys your weight out there on them for XC and they have proven their capable of handling a beating.
> 
> If you dont want to go with a Kinlin or a traditional road rim you could build a set of XC wheel with the Stans 355 29er mnt rim. At 405ish grams they weigh less than the Kinlins and you can get them in white... I have done a handful of XC builds with the 355 and they look pretty cool especially when laced to polished aluminum White Industries hubs. This rim would be the lightest option that would provide the necessary durability, multiple seasons worth, for a 180lb guy racing cross.


Thanks for the info! I'm very familiar with the stans 355 rims as I've used them the past two seasons on my XC race bike. They made it through the dakota 5-0 without any troubles, in addition to ~12 XC races this year, along with a number of training miles. I'm partial to disc brakes on cross bikes, so if I decide to build up a light wheelset I'll likely go with the 355s or crests.

I'm curious how much of a difference the 340s would make over my current road wheelset (dt 240s/open pro/32 spoke f/r). If I remember correctly they're in the 1500 gram range, so not sure how much of a benefit I'd get with the 340s.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

tiflow_21 said:


> I'm curious how much of a difference the 340s would make over my current road wheelset (dt 240s/open pro/32 spoke f/r). If I remember correctly they're in the 1500 gram range, so not sure how much of a benefit I'd get with the 340s.


Well the question of how much benefit you'll see is one of the great debates that happens on this forum. Before I answer that question let my put out a disclaimer first. Lighter wheels will accelerate faster and will be faster up hill. What does this mean in terms of real world time differences? Its hard to say but I would suspect that the advantages are somewhere between minimal and nominal. With that said a 340 build will be anywhere between about 1100 grams to 1300 grams. 

An important point to note is that about 160 grams of that weight savings will be in the hoops. This is weight that is noticeable when accelerating because its out on the end of the wheel. I suspect that if you were to get on a pair of 340s you would find that they feel snappier and more lively than your Open Pro build.


----------



## fortisi876 (Oct 8, 2011)

Mike T. said:


> If so, then let me point you at BWW's ..........which goes for $330 - $500 depending on your spoking choice. In that "type" of wheelset it's priced very competitively. Mine are superb - in rim quality and weight, sensible spoke numbers, build quality and hub durability. They're very tough to beat and you can spend lots more and just get flashier stickers.


 How risky would it be for someone who weighs 205 to use this wheel set?


----------



## motobecane69 (Apr 8, 2011)

fortisi876 said:


> How risky would it be for someone who weighs 205 to use this wheel set?


They are listed on BWW's website as for riders 198 or under so your pretty close to that cut off. they are 24/28 spoke count so would expect that you would be fine.


----------



## BWWpat (Dec 17, 2009)

fortisi876 said:


> How risky would it be for someone who weighs 205 to use this wheel set?


You shouldn't have an issue. But one of my biggest concerns when riding is piece of mind. I find that if I am 100% confident in the wheels that are under me, I can put out/ am willing to put out more power then if I was even just a tiny bit unsure. The benefit of lower weight never trumps piece of mind in my experiences.

Our Pure Race SL is very close in weight but is a bit stronger and more aerodynamic.


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

While we all would like the lightest possible wheels I think that effect of lighter is greatly exaggerated.
I often hear as in this thread "wheels spin up faster". If you turn your bike upside down you can easily spin the wheels up to speed using just the strength in one finger. Now imagine your wheelset is 500g lighter or heavier, you can still spin it up to speed with one finger. The amount of power it takes to accelerate wheels is a tiny percentage of the total power you apply to the pedals. At best, removing weight at the rim of the wheel is like removing twice the weight elsewhere. Weight is weight whether it is on your wheels, frame, water bottle or body. A better argument can be made for wheels that are aerodynamic.


----------



## cmg (Oct 27, 2004)

jnbrown said:


> While we all would like the lightest possible wheels I think that effect of lighter is greatly exaggerated.
> I often hear as in this thread "wheels spin up faster". If you turn your bike upside down you can easily spin the wheels up to speed using just the strength in one finger. Now imagine your wheelset is 500g lighter or heavier, you can still spin it up to speed with one finger. The amount of power it takes to accelerate wheels is a tiny percentage of the total power you apply to the pedals. At best, removing weight at the rim of the wheel is like removing twice the weight elsewhere. Weight is weight whether it is on your wheels, frame, water bottle or body. A better argument can be made for wheels that are aerodynamic.


Simple experiment to feel the effect of increasing/decreasing rotating weight. Buy a set of performance lunar light tubes +/-52 grams and replace your inner tubes. go ride for a week or do 2-3 weekday 20milers. then replace performance lunarlight tubes with thorn resistant tubes +/-90 grams. do the same rides you did the week before. see if you can tell the difference. If you can the chase for the lightest tire/rim/tube combo begins if not then you'll be decrying the chase as fools folley. a buddy of mine would laugh everytime i would go on about rotating weight telling me to dump some water to save weight until he went from conti 400 tires to conti gatorskins and noticed he wasn't dropping me as easily as before. complained that the tires didn't have any snap. i pointed to the weight difference and the light bulb went on. 

As far as AC wheels go. have several sets of sprint 350s, replaced several sets of bearings. a low cost easy to do yourself repair. are they junk? no more than anything else. all bearings will need to be replaced sometime. always be aware of the limits of your wheelset. if your pedalling at 25mph in to a turn and leaning into it there might be a problem or if you throw the bike around everytime you sprint. but if your doing a spin up and just increasing pedal speed there great.


----------



## dougifresh1 (Aug 6, 2005)

Also building up the Alpha 340 on White Ind. 24/28 hubs. Front 2x, rear 3x. Thinking of Sapim laser with brass nipples. Weigh 170lb. Should I use a nipple washer to help with keeping cracks from happening? Is the cross number and lasers a good choice? Thanks


----------



## cmg (Oct 27, 2004)

question for Zen Cyclery;
What would the front hub spacing have to be to create a stiff wheel using a 20poke hole stans 340 rim? what should the dimension between the flanges be? Just bought a 20 and 32 hole set of rims. trying to figure out what hub to buy. it's going to be a low cost build.


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2011)

cmg said:


> Simple experiment to feel the effect of increasing/decreasing rotating weight. Buy a set of performance lunar light tubes +/-52 grams and replace your inner tubes. go ride for a week or do 2-3 weekday 20milers. then replace performance lunarlight tubes with thorn resistant tubes +/-90 grams. do the same rides you did the week before. see if you can tell the difference. If you can the chase for the lightest tire/rim/tube combo begins if not then you'll be decrying the chase as fools folley. a buddy of mine would laugh everytime i would go on about rotating weight telling me to dump some water to save weight until he went from conti 400 tires to conti gatorskins and noticed he wasn't dropping me as easily as before. complained that the tires didn't have any snap. i pointed to the weight difference and the light bulb went on.
> 
> As far as AC wheels go. have several sets of sprint 350s, replaced several sets of bearings. a low cost easy to do yourself repair. are they junk? no more than anything else. all bearings will need to be replaced sometime. always be aware of the limits of your wheelset. if your pedalling at 25mph in to a turn and leaning into it there might be a problem or if you throw the bike around everytime you sprint. but if your doing a spin up and just increasing pedal speed there great.


My guess is your buddy changing the tires the difference has more to do with rolling resistance than rotational weight. Rolling resistance requires energy to overcome at all times not just when accelerating. Tires with thicker and denser rubber (meant to be more puncture resistance) will have significantly more rolling resistance than a tire optimized to be as thin and elastic as possible. 

While I believe significant drops in wheel weight are definitely noticeable, all else equal, my guess is your buddy probably felt his old setup was "snappier" _mostly_ because he was likely not quite as fresh as usual when he was accelerating with the gatorskin tires not because of rotional inertia, but from having to do slightly more work over the duration of the entire ride to maintain the same speeds as before.

I definitely notice this effect _big time_ on my commuter when there's on occasional hot day following a long period of cooler weather. It feels like i've dropped a bunch of weight. At higher temperature, rolling resistance of rubber tires goes WAY down as the rubber itself is much more flexible/elastic when warm. This is particularly noticeable on my 32c commuter tires-- when weather warms dramatically I'm usually cruising about a gear higher at similar cadence and perceived exertion.


----------



## cmg (Oct 27, 2004)

an even simpler experiment. take a set of discarded inner tubes, cut out the valve stem and slice them open down the middle. Then place them inside your current tires encapsulating the current inflatable inner tube. This should increase the weight by about 70 grams per wheel. go ride and see if you feel the difference. whether this effects rolling restance or rotational weight is debatable but you will feel a difference. why carry more weight than you have to? anyway, just purchased a set of Stans 340 rims and looking into having a budget wheelset made. my experimenting continues.


----------



## Akez (Aug 13, 2011)

Pierre said:


> Haven't followed much the evolution of wheels in recent years - what are good, reliable, light wheels these days?
> 
> - don't tell me Ksyriums. I have a set and like them, but Ksyriums have never been light.
> - I already have various handbuilt sets with Dura-Ace/King/DT240/Record and Open Pro/DTrim/whatever. My lightest set is probably the Topolinos that are rated I believe at 1380g.
> ...


This forum existed 11 years ago!?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Akez said:


> This forum existed 11 years ago!?


Since '97 that I've been around and I wasn't the first.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

jnbrown said:


> Can you comment on how the Alpha 340 can be a durable rim compared to rims that weigh 385 to 425g ?


One place where weight is saved is the bead socket. The distance from the internal web to the bead hook is shorter than on a conventional rim, reducing the amount of material needed to support the bead and the brake track. 

On the other hand, a thin brake track would be expected to wear out more quickly. Something to think about if you do a lot of heavy braking in the wet. 

The stiffness isn't too bad because of a fairly round profile, but it is a very light rim (thin material), and no one should expect it to last as long as say a Kinlin XR270 which weighs ~90g more.


----------



## gofast2wheeler (Oct 13, 2011)

just make sure there round, then roll.


----------



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

There was some redesign or something in 2004, so the registration date under our names show 2004 - But actually I registered in 2000.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Pierre said:


> There was some redesign or something in 2004, so the registration date under our names show 2004 - But actually I registered in 2000.


They changed to V Bulletin site format in 2004 and everyone had to re-register.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

I'd contact a decent wheel builder and use Hugi Hubs 240s, DT RR1 rims and Sapim of DT spokes. 28 hole if I was light, 32 if I was not. Not too pricey, light, easy to fix, repair, replace. Oh and IMHO better road feel


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Well hang onto that pair for dear life! Seems like they're one in a million.
> 
> :thumbsup:


+1.... Would it be safe to say borrowed time? Last I checked, the AC 350s have a max rider weight of around 175-180. I should know because I remember when I had my Fuji Team SL and that's what they came with. In fact, the 420s were introduced to cater to heavier riders and the rider weight limit was around 225 lbs. on those.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Fireform said:


> You're entitled to your opinions of course, but I'm entitled to call BS, too. I weigh 190 and was 230-240 when I started riding those "delicate" AC wheels. I put another 65 miles on the 350s this morning.


I doubt calling the manufacturer's rider weight limit of 175 lbs. just an opinion. I don't know about the new AC wheels but I know that the old AC 350 weren't designed with big riders in mind. Zen is right but labelling them as delicate. Read any reviews on the 2003-2005 Fuji Team SL. Those are flexy wheels. Many complained about them on their Team SLs- including me. That's why AC came out with the 420s. Stiffer and a higher weight limit. Still 230 lbs. was beyond the max rider limit eevn on those.


----------



## LONDON-GUY (Oct 3, 2011)

I tip the scales at 224 lbs and have been on capag zonda 1 for the last 2 years and have not had any problems these are about 1550 grms I believe which is not a heavy wheel nor supper light but there are lighter wheels but these will be over twice the price. As you state you have been around cycling for a few years so why don't you get a set of old school shallow section mavic rims made up fitted with lightweight tubs as these will be lighter than most new style deep section rims


----------



## nsk1 (Feb 22, 2012)

Zen Cyclery said:


> Great questions! Ill do my best to answer them.
> 
> The 340 is a light weight rim. There is no question about that.
> It is however stiffer than the Kinlin XR200. When I build with the 340 it comes into round, dish, and true much more quickly than the heavier Kinlin XR200. I am not sure why this is but I suspect that the 340 has just as much or more structurally important alloy in it and they are using more advanced machining techniques to trim the unimportant material. This would be accomplished through thick nipple beds and thinner tire beds, ex...
> ...


thank you. this is what i was looking for.


----------



## Zen Cyclery (Mar 10, 2009)

cmg said:


> question for Zen Cyclery;
> What would the front hub spacing have to be to create a stiff wheel using a 20poke hole stans 340 rim? what should the dimension between the flanges be? Just bought a 20 and 32 hole set of rims. trying to figure out what hub to buy. it's going to be a low cost build.


Well I don't think there is any definitive answer for this one. The front wheel won't be too much of an issue with rigidity, due to the fact that the tension is even on both sides. The rear wheel however can still tend to be a bit soft (even with wider flange spacing) due to the softer nature of that hoop. You made a good call going with a 32 hole for the rear though. Overbuilding is a must on the 340.


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

I used to weigh in at 180 and now am running around 165 and have been using AC Sprint 350's for years. I maybe am not as hard on them as someone who would race, but for me, I have had no issues at all. One of the lightest on the market. I have 2 pairs of 350's and recently sold a bike with the 420's on it. I thought their customer service was pretty good also. for a recretional rider (which I am) I would have no problem recommending them, though those Stan's 340 rims do look awfully good.
I'm a little skeptical regarding the statement about them only being good for someone weighing in at 120 but again, I don't race on them. 


Zen Cyclery said:


> Well hang onto that pair for dear life! Seems like they're one in a million.
> 
> :thumbsup:


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

cmg said:


> What would the front hub spacing have to be to create a stiff wheel.........it's going to be a low cost build.


This question is months old but the answer is to use this extra wide and inexpensive hub from BikeHubStore.com


----------

