Ill be the PM

---

http://RoadID.com/...te/4HC4V-TAFQ9XPJDTX

I think it's a great idea and have had similar thoughts. I have questions about how certain tests would be conducted (in particular a braking test). It'd be interesting if one could do a side wind force test. Would also like to see a "watts to spin" test with different bearing loads to tease out how much effect there is from different hubs. Would also love to see plots with error bars, in order to help determine if a given difference between wheels is statistically significant or just measurement noise. One simple way to do this would be to take a single wheel and run it multiple times (5 or 10); then set the error bars for all wheels at each yaw point to be equal to the standard deviation of the repeated measurements.

I would also not have some random forum member as a PM -- there's no accountability. And I don't think forum members should be able to nominate themselves as PM. I nominate Greg Kopecky (gregk) from Slowtwitch if he can make it work logistically. If not Greg, maybe Robert (?) Chung.

Part of the issue is going to be limiting what wheels to actually test. I'd suggest testing clinchers only, for two reasons: Far more people use clinchers, and it's easier to switch a single clincher tire to the different rims for consistency (though maybe if a tubular isn't glued on its not hard...). Also, front wheels only (front wheel matters more in both aero and braking, avoids having to do left/right sweeps in the tunnel), and with that implication no discs (most people will just get a disc that matches their front, or use a cover, and is more impacted by which frame is used than the front wheel). Only wheels in the ~50-60 and ~80-90 mm class as those are the wheels that are most popular.

Here's a preliminary list of wheels that would on my list of wheels to test. I've probably missed some:

Zipp Firecrest or Firestrike 404 and 808 (obviously)
Zipp non-Firecrest 404 and 808
Hed Jet 6 and 9
Bontrager Aeolus 5 and 9, Aura 5
Enve 6.7 and 8.9
Reynolds 58 Aero and 90 Aero;
Easton EC90 Aero55 Clincher
Mavic CXR60C and Cosmic Carbone SLS
Flo 60 and 90
Boyd 60mm and 90mm
Williams Cycling new 58 and 85
Swiss Side Hadron
Tokyowheel Epic 60 and 88 (obviously you want your wheels in the test!)
Generic open-mold narrow V-shaped aero wheels in the 60-90mm range
Generic open-mold wide 'toroidal' wheels in the 60-90mm range

Don't forget rolling resistance and power to spin

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

I would be extremely interested in seeing these results.

With so much marketing BS on these wheels and other components, I wish Dan and ST would be the website that would start doing these unbiased tests and put it out there for us. Honestly maybe Dan could find a cycling website that they could split the costs of doing such testing.

This is what I would love ST to evolve into.

That being said, I could see this affecting Dan's marketing income as I am sure some of the suppliers might not be so happy after the information was published.

I would really love to see how all aero wheels stack up against each other. Zipp, Hed, Flo, Mavic, Chinese and all others.

Huge pipedream as it will never happen but we can all dream like we do about winning the lottery one day.

Mavic! I knew I forgot someone!

I'm pretty sure Tour Magazine has done this already. Maybe not the very newest wheels though. Of course by the time this would get done and the money would be spent some of the products would be outdated.

I also think you'd be pushing it to get that many wheels tested in a reasonable time frame. Let's say you could do it in one day (unlikely) you are looking at close to 4k in tunnel time alone at A@ and almost double that at LSWT. Not to mention purchasing the wheels. Some manufacturers might send some to test, but others I'm sure would not be too keen on something they can not control.

---

---

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

How about Dura Ace wheels?? They are great wheels btw.
I have 2 sets 7850TU dreamy smooth.

Just get a group to ride them & review because what are lab #'s going to do for you in the real world?
Each wheel has its own personality maybe that can be put into words.

Ratings 1-10
Aero
Handling
Braking
Ride
Rolling / Feel
Weight
Rider Comments

e.g Having ridden them, I would score a standard generic carbon wheel lower across the board in most categories.

---

Training Tweets: https://twitter.com/Jagersport_com
FM Sports: http://fluidmotionsports.com

Please include November Rail52.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

Shimano is a good addition (as is November). But I completely disagree about your proposal of just having riders ride them and rate them. Subjective evaluations are basically worthless. Too easily influenced by preconceived notions, and too variable from person to person.

Lab tests may not tell you everything, but they can tell you a lot, and what they do tell you is at least quantifiable, repeatable, and more free from tester bias.

Exactly, or you'll get plenty of people that say that the 1300g, 50 mm wheels "spin up" incredibly fast versus the 2000g, 90 mm wheels, when, in fact, the overall amount of energy expended getting the bike "spun up" is the same or less for the 90mm. Or xyz felt this wheel or that blows them around to bits, whereas another rider couldn't be less bothered by it.

There's a lot of issues with doing "unbiased" wheel testing, as there are plenty of objective things that can be measured, but some that are nigh impossible (transients vs steady-state). E.g. how vortices shed off the wheel in a gust might freak me out to no end, but don't bother you in the least. It'd be very hard to design an experiment that tests that transient condition, and different folks might be differently affected by those side forces.

So, while it'd be difficult (albeit desired) to have a synthetic metric that enumerates the wheels from best-to-worst, that would cause infinitely more problems than it helps solve. A panel of unbiased tests requires that the person reading the result be able to understand their significance.

---

The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important.

-Albert J. Nock

I have some experience with this type of testing.

I won't be able to take payment from people in the industry, but if the community can come up with samples, $, and a protocol, I'd be happy to execute things transparently.

Let me know your thoughts and/or feedback. I'm confident we can figure something out that works.

---

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================

If there is interest by the community, then I'll take care of the costs.

What is your budget? It isn't going to be cheap to do this right... even if you get manufacturers to donate wheels.

Aero drag and lateral force. A range of tires and sizes would be really nice since their effect on wheel aero isn't small.
Lateral wheel stiffness.
Weight and moment of inertia.
Hub losses. Hubs need to be run for several hours then measured under load. Friction Facts was working on a fixture and protocol for doing this. It isn't easy.
Braking. I think that would require a custom fixture and equipment, and would ideally be destructive... determine the point where braking overheats the rim and causes it to fail.
Durability. That's a tough one.

Exactly right on budget, particularly if you throw in a variety of tires and tire sizes for tunnel testing.

Some of the lab stuff is easy; other bits are not so much.

I don't want to step on Kraig's toes at all but could certainly be available to assist if it doesn't work out with him for any reason.

Former Zipp test engineer with plenty of time in the tunnel and developing and building test machines. Not sure if the Zipp connection is good, bad, or indifferent at this point.

---

------------------------------------------------------
Former Zipp test engineer | Current ENVE contract engineer

Thanks everyone for your posts. It's good to see interest in this project on this forum. I agree with a lot of what asad137 has said. And the individuals interested in managing/ helping are all greatly appreciated.

From a project execution point of view I think the project needs to move forward in the following steps.

1. A consensus on the minimum effective testing processes. This is a mandatory first step, which can be done at essentially no cost, through communication on this forum.
2. A decision as to how the final information will be presented. This, along with the amount of engagement on this thread, determines the value to the consumer, and to the financial sponsor(s) of the project.
3. The project cost can be controlled by the number of wheels included in the test. A prioritized list of candidates should be decided.
4. At this point we can confirm the project budget with the funding party(s). (In the interest of keeping things unbiased I will try to separate my suggestions with the fact that my company will be funding the tests)
5. With a plan and a budget in hand we can move forward with determining project roles, and our steps to execution.
6. Completion of testing and publication of results.


Let me know what you think of this action plan. If this is generally acceptable then we can focus on step 1. A consensus on the minimum effective testing processes.

Thanks everyone, for your input and support. I think is is a valuable project for the community. Let me know your feedback, positive or negative. Thanks.

---

James Ferrer

Full Disclosure - I work for Tokyowheel

http://www.tokyowheel.com Carbon Wheels For Road, Triathlon & Cyclocross Bikes | FREE Shipping Worldwide | Guaranteed No Customs Fees | 110% Money Back Test Ride

Not sure why we'd test a variety of tires, given the results have pushed just about everyone to the GP4KS-23 or the Attack. Pick one and run it on every wheel.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

Note the "if" in my post, which was a reply to ruff's suggestion to test multiple tire models and sizes.

Selecting a single tire model obviously greatly simplifies the test matrix, but it's not without consequence:

• The assumption that a particular tire is universally the best (drag-wise) across all wheels is incorrect; is the test intended to compare all wheels in identical configurations or determine the best tire (from limited options) for each wheel and then compare performance?


• This decision prevents evaluation of some interesting changes in handling characteristics that can arise with different tires on the same wheel.
• Certain tires are frequently incorrectly cited as good aerodynamic performers on this forum; the Attack is actually a good example of this with several wheels.
• Lastly, depending on how much variability you accept in a particular tire model, if you use only a single sample of a particular tire model you increase downtime between tests as you swap tire from wheel to wheel. Testing multiple tire models or sizes will allow you to more efficiently use tunnel time.

---

------------------------------------------------------
Former Zipp test engineer | Current ENVE contract engineer

I wish Dan and ST would be the website that would start doing these unbiased tests and put it out there for us. Honestly maybe Dan could find a cycling website that they could split the costs of doing such testing. //

It happens here all the time. Check out some of Tom A's reports and a few others. Honestly, be pretty hard to get more unbiased tests that are accurate than this. And there is no unbiased test, you can skew protocols to suit any number of flaws or highlights of any wheel. The best you can do is simulate some real world conditions and compare those to each other. After that you have to decide what is really going to happen out there on race day, and make the best choice you can. Maybe right, maybe wrong, but at least an informed decision.


But another test is always good. But the OP should just know that this is not a bunch of yahoos that just fell off the turnip truck here. Do it wrong, skew one tiny thing, you will get called out. Want to kill your brand in a hurry, just try and slip one past our jury.. (-;