Looking at Aero Clinchers

Mar 12, 15 14:48

Post #1 of 54 (9730 views)

So I know this has been posted a lot before but I have narrowed down what I want for wheels just looking to get input from anyone that has experience with any of these wheels.

About me, I am a 31 year old male, 5'10 200lbs (goal to get down to 170 my my Ironman in Chattanooga). I have completed 3 halves and a full in lake placid. My biking has gotten stronger (I average 20-21 MPH) just trying to help step it up another notch.

My ride is a 2011 Orbea Triton (its an aluminum frame, carbon fork and seat post) that has a matching geometry to a Ordu or Orca of the same yr. I run an Osymetric chain ring up front (42/54) and an 11-25 in the back. Im more of a grinder then a spinner, working on getting my spinning up though trying to keep my average cadence higher. The wheels I currently have are a set of cheap aluminum box style wheels now that I bought a few yrs ago to replace the stockers when one of them got a bad dent when I hit a pothole.

The wheels I am considering are at a difference in price of about $450 difference. Any comments, suggestions, or feedback will be extremely helpful.

First set is $1449 free shipping, new:
Campagnolo Bullett 80 mm Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 16F, 18R
Includes skewers, wrench, wheel mag, wheel bags

Second Set is $1499 free shipping, and were demo wheels:
Reynolds Eighty One Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 16F 20R

Third set is $1699 estimated $37 shipping, new:
Profile Design 78 Twenty Four Full Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 20F 24R

Fourth Set is $1800 free shipping, used:
2014 Zipp 808s
less then 600 miles on them
spokes 18F 24R (from the pics, hard to see clearly)
includes skewers and 10s spacer

Fifth Set is $1800 free shipping, used:
Rolf Prima Ares 6 Full Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 8F 16R
less then 300 miles on them

Again, any feedback or suggestions are greatly appreciated, my plans are to use my tax return on wheels this year and next year upgrade my bike.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 15:47

Post #2 of 54 (9685 views)

Consider a set of used Reynolds Aero, they tend to go for prices similar to what you've listed. I purchased mine in the ST classifieds and I've been pretty happy with them.

I'd only consider getting rid of them if i could afford the RZR line :) See Paul Lew's talk on youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceNJIHyErZc

I like promoting these wheels because I don't think they get enough representation compared to Zipp, HED, Flo. I'm also an aerodynamicist by trade and degree, and I happen to agree with the Reynolds Aero & RZR design more than the oval design Zipp and others have chosen.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 15:51

Post #3 of 54 (9672 views)

I had a set on Reynolds Carbon Clincher Aero wheelset, is that the same design your referring to?

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 15:58

Post #4 of 54 (9657 views)

As a former RZR 46 and current RZR 92 owner, I concur with Cody.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 16:02

Post #5 of 54 (9648 views)

Why not a pair of flos for 750 to 1k used or new. Then upgrade your frame.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 16:04

Post #6 of 54 (9642 views)

How about the 80mm Boyds listed in the classifieds right now for $800?

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 16:10

Post #7 of 54 (9637 views)

codygo wrote:

Consider a set of used Reynolds Aero, they tend to go for prices similar to what you've listed. I purchased mine in the ST classifieds and I've been pretty happy with them.

I'd only consider getting rid of them if i could afford the RZR line :) See Paul Lew's talk on youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceNJIHyErZc

omg...that's even more indecipherable/incorrect than his "white paper"...I didn't think that was possible.

codygo wrote:

I like promoting these wheels because I don't think they get enough representation compared to Zipp, HED, Flo. I'm also an aerodynamicist by trade and degree, and I happen to agree with the Reynolds Aero & RZR design more than the oval design Zipp and others have chosen.

Hmmm...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 16:16

Post #8 of 54 (9627 views)

''Fourth Set is $1800 free shipping, used:
2014 Zipp 808s
less then 600 miles on them
spokes 18F 24R (from the pics, hard to see clearly)
includes skewers and 10s spacer ''

Go for the Zipps, They are the best on your list and in the future, if you decide to sell them, they will sell easily and for more than any of the others,

---------------------------
''Sweeney - you can both crush your AG *and* cruise in dead last!! 😂 '' Murphy's Law

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 16:18

Post #9 of 54 (9623 views)

Quote:

Rolf Prima Ares 6 Full Carbon Clinchers

Is this the 2014 model that was updated to the wide rim, or a previous year that was still narrow?

I ride the TDF6SL (tubular) rims, and these things are bullet proof (Louisiana is full of pot holes). The 2014 Ares 6 is shown to be slightly faster than the TDF6 (their fastest wheel in 2013 when I purchased).

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [geauxtri] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 17:05

Post #10 of 54 (9569 views)

With the Flo, how much does the weight affect my ability to climb (already crappy)? Also not sure how the spoke wholes on the fairing affect the aerodynamics?

As for Boyds, how are their aerodynamics and Hubs compared to the ones in my list?

I was kinda leaning between the Reynolds 81s and the Zipps, tough decision.....

IDK about the year on the Rolf Ares 6, here is a link to the ebay listing:
http://www.ebay.com/...e=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 18:57

Post #11 of 54 (9473 views)

I'm also an aerodynamicist by trade and degree, and I happen to agree with the Reynolds Aero & RZR design more than the oval design Zipp and others have chosen.

Why is that?

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 19:17

Post #12 of 54 (9439 views)

rruff wrote:

I'm also an aerodynamicist by trade and degree, and I happen to agree with the Reynolds Aero & RZR design more than the oval design Zipp and others have chosen.

Why is that?

This is going to be good

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 19:44

Post #13 of 54 (9400 views)

With the Flo, how much does the weight affect my ability to climb (already crappy)? Also not sure how the spoke wholes on the fairing affect the aerodynamics?
As for Boyds, how are their aerodynamics and Hubs compared to the ones in my list?
I was kinda leaning between the Reynolds 81s and the Zipps, tough decision.....

The Flo wheels seem to have solid aero properties, and the aluminum brake track is very nice. Whatever the weight penalty is it will slow you down as much as weight anywhere else. It would take a very hilly course before this would be a significant issue.
Boyds are probably fine as well.
There is a graph floating around that shows the Profiles do very well in the tunnel.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [BryanD] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 19:55

Post #14 of 54 (9380 views)

BryanD wrote:

rruff wrote:

I'm also an aerodynamicist by trade and degree, and I happen to agree with the Reynolds Aero & RZR design more than the oval design Zipp and others have chosen.

Why is that?

This is going to be good

*gets bag of popcorn and a comfy chair*

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 20:15

Post #15 of 54 (9365 views)

First, some disclaimers :)

While I do have an aerospace engineering degree with a focus on aerodynamics, wind tunnel testing, and CFD, I have not tested wheels or bicycling related components. I have, however, done scholarly research on low-Reynolds (no relation to the manufacturer) number flows, separation on airfoils, and turbulence.

Since I don't have any raw data to process, I can only form an opinion based on my training and experience.

The leading edge that Reynolds uses is not a new concept, much as dimpled surfaces are not a new concept. However, for boundary layer trips to be effective, they should be large enough to extend beyond the laminar boundary layer, and for efficiency, they should only be placed just before you actually need to create the onset of turbulence - usually just before an adverse pressure gradient.

The most canonical experiment regarding boundary layer trips were likely performed by Prandtl, where he placed a wire on a sphere to help mix "freestream" flow with the lower energy flow of the boundary layer. He placed the wires approximately 60 degrees from the stagation point, on the leading side of the sphere.

That said, here's my conjecture:

A large portion of uniform distribution of dimples on wheels like Zipp will most likely never trip the flow in time to reattach along the rim surface. It's a smart choice for golf balls because they're not designed to have a specific orientation with respect to their velocity.
The ovalized cross-section relies on this boundary layer tripping to be effective on the leading edge of the wheel, which is likely where most of the efficiency is lost. My judgement is that for the leading side, this section is likely worse than an airfoil shape with a turbulent flow - in other words, i believe the wake will most likely be smaller than that which is made to fill the inefficient blunt-body of the oval section.
On the second "leading edge" of the wheel, the flow is already disturbed and noisy due to the wake of the first leading edge and the spokes, so a fear of "leading edge separation" from the sharp end of the "backwards" airfoil section is likely mitigated by this messier, lower energy flow which is already better aligned and conditioned. A spoke is traveling at twice the velocity of the bicycle on the high side, and essentially not moving at all on the ground side where the wind gusts would be weakest.
I find it hard to believe that a wheel is "optimized aerodynamically" when the hubs and spokes have little design focus on wheels like Firecrest. An aerodynamic system is a package, and wheels like the RZR and Aero series look the part.

That said, I don't think that ovalized cross-section wheels are not competitive; I simply don't believe they are superior to a well designed airfoil section wheel. For what it's worth, there's a German magazine that includes Aero 58/72 in 2014 wheel data showing it to be competitive with Zipp 808. I've not seen any independent data on other wheels in the RZR or Aero line.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 21:08

Post #16 of 54 (9325 views)

I only know of that one independent test you mentioned. They scored well at low yaw, but not at high yaw. I think that was using 23mm Conti 4000. Anybody got a link? I know the graph was posted on this forum awhile back.

I had a tough time believing that the currently vogue oval rim shape would be any good, but the data seems to show it is. I'm willing to believe that the Reynolds rims are good also, but I'd like to see more evidence. In particular I'd like to see what the steering torque looks like, since this is one of the benefits of the oval shape. Lew does not give me a warm feeling at all. Too much of what he says is nonsense.

Lew is using fairly traditional triangular shape with some new twists. The rim is very wide and the hooks extend way into the centerline to ensure that a 23mm tire ends up significantly narrower than the rim. This produces a sharp step that I guess is supposed to interrupt the boundary layer and induce the flow to stay attached to the side of the rim. The shape and location of this step is different on each rim depth. It might work. I know that some people have reported that the aerodynamic performance of the 20mm Supersonic on a 808 FC is very good (better than any wider tire), and it may be for a similar reason. Making the tire significantly narrower than the rim may be beneficial.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [codygo] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 21:30

Post #17 of 54 (9303 views)

codygo wrote:

First, some disclaimers :) [..]

My aerospace degree does not disagree with your points.

The one thing Zipp loves to claim is improved crosswind handling. I don't know if a sharp TE like the Reynolds or a blunt TE like the Firecrest (et al.) and the resulting separation from a cross wind will result in a downstream low pressure that will significantly affect apparent handling. That being said, it's hard to enforce the Kutta condition on a blunt TE.

[pink]Maybe we should ask ST for the right answer [/pink]

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Mar 12, 15 21:35

Post #18 of 54 (9300 views)

The good high-yaw behavior attributed to oval sections is most likely due to the width increase that seemed accompany the trend on modern wheels. This is analogous to large, round leading edges on airfoils being less prone to leading edge stall, just rotate everything 90 degrees.

I'd be interested in steering moment data as well. Although I'd say my Aero 72 wheels are no more sensitive to gusts than a non-aero race-x lite wheelset I have, I haven't ridden other deep section wheels to make a judgement on them.

I've formed my opinions independent of Paul Lew's paper and I've never seen that video I linked till today. I was a bit startled by the industry lingo of lift as some forward force, but the reality no matter the jargon is that there is a resultant aero force vector, which is the vector sum of all pressures on the surfaces in the direction of the local surface normals (this is my attempt to not use specific language). Talking about field-specific things to a general audience takes some practice, so I don't judge the guy harshly for his camera presence. I linked the video because i think his sailing description is appriopriate, relatable, and non-tecnical. Typed on my phone, forgive my typos :)

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 1:01

Post #19 of 54 (9221 views)

I recently got some Campy Bullet 50s for ~1000 from wiggle with ceramic hubs and have been delighted with them.
The build quality is excellent. They have aluminium brake tracks which I prefer yet weigh about the same as Zipp 404s.
I've bought them as all round wheels for road racing but will use them for tris sometimes. I think they are going to last.
They are stiff laterally. Friends with Zipp 303s and 404s have problems with them flexing when sprinting and climbing and rubbing on the brake blocks...perhaps not an issue for steady IM style riding. I'd be wary of secondhand Zipps...heard their are often hub problems.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [Shinny] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 4:06

Post #20 of 54 (9132 views)

Shinny wrote:

The one thing Zipp loves to claim is improved crosswind handling. I don't know if a sharp TE like the Reynolds or a blunt TE like the Firecrest (et al.) and the resulting separation from a cross wind will result in a downstream low pressure that will significantly affect apparent handling. That being said, it's hard to enforce the Kutta condition on a blunt TE.

Thing is that every review and personal account I've read on the Aero line and RZR 92 extol the crosswind stability of said wheels. This consistency is telling to me and isn't something I hear consistently about the 404 or 808. In fact many say the 808 is downright scary in the same situations.

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 4:51

Post #21 of 54 (9103 views)

No specific opinion on the wheelsets, but 2 things to look for. 1. I don't see if they are all 11 speed or not (I guess I could look them up). 2. Some wheels won't accept disc covers should you choose to go that route. Wheelbuilder generally lists which wheels can take covers. I know many Campy wheels can't.

Personally I like more spokes.

Ian

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [tkos] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 5:30

Post #22 of 54 (9035 views)

Any thoughts on bontrager aeolus 7.0 front and 9.0 rear for 1500?

I kinda like the Reynolds 81s, does anyone have experience with those

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 6:50

Post #23 of 54 (8977 views)

2011ironorbea wrote:

So I know this has been posted a lot before but I have narrowed down what I want for wheels just looking to get input from anyone that has experience with any of these wheels.

About me, I am a 31 year old male, 5'10 200lbs (goal to get down to 170 my my Ironman in Chattanooga). I have completed 3 halves and a full in lake placid. My biking has gotten stronger (I average 20-21 MPH) just trying to help step it up another notch.

My ride is a 2011 Orbea Triton (its an aluminum frame, carbon fork and seat post) that has a matching geometry to a Ordu or Orca of the same yr. I run an Osymetric chain ring up front (42/54) and an 11-25 in the back. Im more of a grinder then a spinner, working on getting my spinning up though trying to keep my average cadence higher. The wheels I currently have are a set of cheap aluminum box style wheels now that I bought a few yrs ago to replace the stockers when one of them got a bad dent when I hit a pothole.

The wheels I am considering are at a difference in price of about $450 difference. Any comments, suggestions, or feedback will be extremely helpful.

First set is $1449 free shipping, new:
Campagnolo Bullett 80 mm Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 16F, 18R
Includes skewers, wrench, wheel mag, wheel bags

Second Set is $1499 free shipping, and were demo wheels:
Reynolds Eighty One Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 16F 20R

Third set is $1699 estimated $37 shipping, new:
Profile Design 78 Twenty Four Full Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 20F 24R

Fourth Set is $1800 free shipping, used:
2014 Zipp 808s
less then 600 miles on them
spokes 18F 24R (from the pics, hard to see clearly)
includes skewers and 10s spacer

Fifth Set is $1800 free shipping, used:
Rolf Prima Ares 6 Full Carbon Clinchers
Spokes 8F 16R
less then 300 miles on them

Again, any feedback or suggestions are greatly appreciated, my plans are to use my tax return on wheels this year and next year upgrade my bike.

All the wheel sets in RED won't work for you as the spoke count is too low for your body weight. You will need a 24h rear if you're at or over 200lbs. If you plan on loosing the weight and keeping it off then you can add them back into the mix. However if you're normal "off season" weight hits this target you're better off being honest with yourself and grabbing the a wheel built for a "Clydesdale" cyclist. You're right on the cusp which makes things tougher to gauge but err on the side of caution.

------
"Train so you have no regrets @ the finish line"

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [cshowe80] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 7:00

Post #24 of 54 (8962 views)

My weight has gotten high due to working in fast food, and taking a yr off to get my stuff situated (new house, New car, etc) I have been 170 as few as 2 yrs ago and stayed between 170-180, I won't plan on riding the wheels for a little while after I get them (to ride the old wheels then feel the huge transition to make me feel better about the money spent)

Re: Looking at Aero Clinchers [2011ironorbea] [ In reply to ]

Mar 13, 15 7:11

Post #25 of 54 (8952 views)

In that case you'll be fine with 20H or less in the rear. And knowing that I'd echo what some others here have said. I've found the best price/performance of the retails brands is Reynolds. They have a comprehensive line of wheels, they have great brake pads (Cyro Power) for Carbon clinchers. If you're willing to wait the logical route is FLO Wheels as they offer the best price performance in the market place but you can't just order them or pick them up, you have to be willing to set aside time to get them for yourself.

FLO 60: Front $424
Weight: 875g
Rim: 700c Aluminum Clincher
Brake Track Width: 24.4mm
Fairing: Matte 3k Carbon Fiber
Depth: 60mm
Max Fairing Width: 27.2mm
Spokes: Sapim CX-Ray
Spoke Count: 20
Spoke Pattern: Radial
Hub: FLO VORTEX
Bearings: EZO Stainless

FLO 90: Rear $474
Weight: 1199g
Rim: 700c Aluminum Clincher
Brake Track Width: 24.4mm
Fairing: Matte 3k Carbon Fiber
Depth: 90mm
Max Fairing Width: 27.2mm
Spokes: Sapim CX-Ray
Spoke Count: 24
Spoke Pattern: 2 Cross Standard
Hub: FLO VORTEX
Bearings: EZO Stainless

------
"Train so you have no regrets @ the finish line"

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.