Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72?
Quote | Reply
I have an opportunity to get a new Reynolds 72 Aero front at a great price. I would pair it with a Zipp Super 9 on a NP3.

I don’t currently have an aero front wheel of any kind.

I would appreciate any input the forum may have on this. I’m just wondering if the bar has been lifted so much that this wheel isn’t really worth considering anymore. Internal rim depth is 15.5mm for example, and in 2018 that’s basically unheard of.

Thanks for all and any input!
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Don't hesitate if you can do a bargain. It is a great wheel!
Sam
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well you face the typical "bottom feeders dilemma" of what features you have to give up in order to save some money (story of my life). That is a nice wheel but 15.5 mm is really narrow. I haven't seen anyone test this wheel with multiple tires, but it is a safe bet that it is going to only work well with a really narrow tire. Make sure you stock up on some Conti SS 20s because there is no guarantee these will be available for too much longer (I have 3 in the basement) That is about the only low Crr narrow tire left on the market.

Now given that you can score a set of HED Jet 6+ for 800$, you have to ask yourself if the savings are worth it. That wheel would have to be really cheap (150-200$ and basically new) before I would bite.
Last edited by: grumpier.mike: Dec 8, 18 8:30
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [grumpier.mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
huh??? I think you are thinking of the wrong wheel. I have an aero 72 and use a 25mm tire on it and the aero 90. From slowtwitch, they tested it with a 25mm tire, https://www.slowtwitch.com/..._58_and_72_3957.html
The 700x25mm tires measured right at 26.0mm (at 100 psi) – just slightly narrower than the 26.3mm rim:

To the OP this is a great , fast rim, I bought the 2016 model, it states 16mm width internal, 26.2 external, which easily fits 25mm tires. This one:
https://support.reynoldscycling.com/wheels/72-Aero
Much better wheel than a HED Jet 6, not sure why a wheel just 2 years old would be as cheap as this other guy thinks.


grumpier.mike wrote:
Well you face the typical "bottom feeders dilemma" of what features you have to give up in order to save some money (story of my life). That is a nice wheel but 15.5 mm is really narrow. I haven't seen anyone test this wheel with multiple tires, but it is a safe bet that it is going to only work well with a really narrow tire. Make sure you stock up on some Conti SS 20s because there is no guarantee these will be available for too much longer (I have 3 in the basement) That is about the only low Crr narrow tire left on the market.


Now given that you can score a set of HED Jet 6+ for 800$, you have to ask yourself if the savings are worth it. That wheel would have to be really cheap (150-200$ and basically new) before I would bite.

Last edited by: CP78: Dec 8, 18 8:56
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
scjohnston wrote:
Internal rim depth is 15.5mm for example, and in 2018 that’s basically unheard of.

If you think the internal width is out of fashion, what about the shape... !?

Anecdotal reports I've seen are nearly 100% positive for handling in gusty winds. And I do recall a WT test where it was good with a narrow tire. I'd run a 23, probably a new Attack.


Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's a 16mm internal width. Does that matter for the tire? I regularly use 25mm tires on these, it seems like a wide rim to me, since its 26mm external. Most of the reviews and tests also 25mm. I think it's funny how a 2015,2016 wheel can already be considered out of fashion.
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The 58 looks good.



The Syntace wheel below uses the Reynolds 72/90 combo. At low yaw it beats everything.


Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for all the input.

I'm most likely going to go with a HED Jet 6 Black. Although mixing wheel brands just feels wrong.
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [CP78] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CP78 wrote:
huh??? I think you are thinking of the wrong wheel. I have an aero 72 and use a 25mm tire on it and the aero 90. From slowtwitch, they tested it with a 25mm tire, https://www.slowtwitch.com/..._58_and_72_3957.html
The 700x25mm tires measured right at 26.0mm (at 100 psi) – just slightly narrower than the 26.3mm rim:

To the OP this is a great , fast rim, I bought the 2016 model, it states 16mm width internal, 26.2 external, which easily fits 25mm tires. This one:
https://support.reynoldscycling.com/wheels/72-Aero
Much better wheel than a HED Jet 6, not sure why a wheel just 2 years old would be as cheap as this other guy thinks.


grumpier.mike wrote:
Well you face the typical "bottom feeders dilemma" of what features you have to give up in order to save some money (story of my life). That is a nice wheel but 15.5 mm is really narrow. I haven't seen anyone test this wheel with multiple tires, but it is a safe bet that it is going to only work well with a really narrow tire. Make sure you stock up on some Conti SS 20s because there is no guarantee these will be available for too much longer (I have 3 in the basement) That is about the only low Crr narrow tire left on the market.


Now given that you can score a set of HED Jet 6+ for 800$, you have to ask yourself if the savings are worth it. That wheel would have to be really cheap (150-200$ and basically new) before I would bite.

OH my did I screwup. Sorry I saw the internal width and mistook theses for earlier Reynolds wheels. My bad.
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [CP78] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CP78 wrote:
....Much better wheel than a HED Jet 6...
What makes it much better than the HED Jet 6?
Given the choice, I'd probably go for the HED. Why would you consider the Reynolds wheel "much better", or even just better?
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Really? Well ones a full carbon wheel, one isn't. The spokes, theyre not integrated, you'll get water in them and then it swishes around till the drain hole works.
Really you get what you pay for. HED6s go for under 1k new and Reynolds 72s around 2k new. Also the obvious ,ones more aero than the other. I went from Hed6s to 72/90 Reynolds and bike split went from 5:45 to 5:13 on the same Ironman. Hed 6s are a great value but not as good as a full carbon wheel with integrated spokes. I think they're very similar to the Bontrager Aura 5s, another value wheel, same drain hole and aluminum brake surface. Bontrager has the Aeolus though so you can see the difference in upgrading to full carbon, not sure if HED has an equivalent yet.

Edit: did a quick search and HED Vanquish 6 is now they're full carbon wheel. They promote it that way too. The Vanquish 6 sounds more equivalent to a Reynolds aero 72
Last edited by: CP78: Dec 10, 18 10:47
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [CP78] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CP78 wrote:
Really? Well ones a full carbon wheel, one isn't. The spokes, theyre not integrated, you'll get water in them and then it swishes around till the drain hole works.
Really you get what you pay for. HED6s go for under 1k new and Reynolds 72s around 2k new. Also the obvious ,ones more aero than the other. I went from Hed6s to 72/90 Reynolds and bike split went from 5:45 to 5:13 on the same Ironman. Hed 6s are a great value but not as good as a full carbon wheel with integrated spokes. I think they're very similar to the Bontrager Aura 5s, another value wheel, same drain hole and aluminum brake surface. Bontrager has the Aeolus though so you can see the difference in upgrading to full carbon, not sure if HED has an equivalent yet.

Edit: did a quick search and HED Vanquish 6 is now they're full carbon wheel. They promote it that way too. The Vanquish 6 sounds more equivalent to a Reynolds aero 72

Yes, really.
One's full carbon, the other isn't, so what? Are you under the impression that full carbon construction provides a meaningful performance benefit? Typically carbon wheels are a little lighter, but the material itself doesn't bestow an aerodynamic advantage and for rim brakes it generally incurs a braking disadvantage. It's highly debatable IMO whether full carbon rim brake wheels exist for any reason other than the willingness of cyclists to believe marketing nonsense, engage in group-think and worry about aesthetics. So, in summary, full carbon does not mean better.

Integrated spokes, by which I presume we're referring to nipples fastened to the carbon at inner radius of the rim rather than passing through a fairing to the alloy rim, mean relatively little as far as I'm concerned. I've got Swiss Side Hadrons which similarly are not sealed at the nipple and have a small drain hole in case of water ingress. It's never been a problem, and I've never heard anyone say they had a problem with it, and I've raced in torrential rain on roads with significant surface water. That simple drain hole is used rather than trying to seal the rim because it's simpler, lighter and it works.

Now, I concede, some people will argue the above points and any may insist braking is adequate with carbon or whatever. I disagree, but I've said what I think so lets move on to the big one.....

Apparently you think it's obvious that "ones more aero than the other" and you're crediting the Reynolds with bestowing upon you a 32 minute improvement in an IM.
I'm afraid there can be only one description of this claim. And with all due respect, it's an entirely accurate appraisal. This is utter garbage!
Find ANYONE with a shred of credibility on ST to endorse that claim as being even vaguely possible. I challenge you. There are no two ways about it; it's just total nonsense. Claiming any data for individual changes by comparing events with a multitude of variables is silly, but I don't even need to make that argument since the scale of the benefit you're claiming is so ludicrous. Those times may be accurate but if you think wheel aerodynamics are responsible, you're wrong.

Some test data was provided above by others and there is plenty more elsewhere. From what I've seen, and to the best of my recollection, in the wind tunnel, the HED Jet 6s have repeatedly performed among the very best and often equal or outperform many far more expensive wheels. So I believe you are inaccurate to suggest cost is a reliable indicator of performance. Given the choice of top of HED Jets, or top of the range ENVE, Lightweight, Zipp, Reynolds, etc.... with money being no object, I'd happily use the Jets and not feel I'd made any significant sacrifice. Of course, if I was allowed resell them I'd take the Lightweights, sell them at once and buy HED Jets. ;)
I recommend both yourself and the OP have a look at the available test data on the HED Jet wheels to verify the above. I do have some issues with how wind tunnel and other aerodynamic testing and analysis is done in the cycling realm but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing, which is in turn better than misleading race time comparisons.
Last edited by: Ai_1: Dec 10, 18 16:49
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow, seemed to get under your skin. My time was anectodal, I know it's not evidence. I said ones obviously more aero than the other because one is 72mm deep and one is 60mm deep, deeper wheels are generally more aero. Not always but in this case it is. Anyways I own both sets of wheels , and I think ones obviously faster than the other but concede that's my opinion. I dont see much testing done on Reynolds 72 90 combo but I know from countless rides its faster. By the way if having a full carbon wheel didnt matter why is HED now marketing their new Vanquish as full carbon. Anyways if you want to compare the Vanquish to a Reynolds 72 fine but all your writing will never convince me the HED jet 6 is faster under any conditions.
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [CP78] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CP78 wrote:
.....By the way if having a full carbon wheel didnt matter why is HED now marketing their new Vanquish as full carbon....
Because a huge proportion, probably a vast majority, of cyclists THINK they're inherently better. That means they are in demand, and profitable. It doesn't make it the best choice. I'll never be convinced that something is better simply because a company is marketing it as such or it is the popular view. I like actual reasons when possible. An opinion is worth nothing without a rationale. Plenty people don't have one. Thus fashion!
I like some logic when possible.
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ai_1 wrote:
I recommend both yourself and the OP have a look at the available test data on the HED Jet wheels to verify the above.

I posted a couple graphs above that have both Hed+ and Reynolds Aero wheels. What do you see?
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [scjohnston] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for posting, I found where this chart was explained on the forum here
https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/New_Wheel_Windtunnel_Results_P5211291/


Apparently the Synatace W23 RS on this chart are using synatace hubs and Reynolds 72/90 wheelset, as you said at low yaw, beats everything. Cant find any other data out there on the 72/90 combo so this is nice. The HEDs on this chart didnt perform as well when on a bike with both wheels tested.





Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [CP78] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Reynolds wheels have done well at low yaw in every test I've seen. And more surprisingly they get high marks for stability, anecdotally. The profile looks downright goofy, and Paul Lew seems pretty goofy too when he talks or writes, but maybe he knows what he's doing... ;)
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [rruff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I’m using Reynolds 58/90 on my P4. Basically to build the ultimate low yaw bike.

The narrow inner rim diameter keeps the tire from buldging out super wide and keeps it narrower than the outer diameter. 23mm tire on that rim creates a REALLY good looking airfoil from rubber to rim.

Alex Arman

Strava
Quote Reply
Re: How good is a good deal on Reynolds 72? [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ai_1 wrote:
Some test data was provided above by others and there is plenty more elsewhere. From what I've seen, and to the best of my recollection, in the wind tunnel, the HED Jet 6s have repeatedly performed among the very best and often equal or outperform many far more expensive wheels. So I believe you are inaccurate to suggest cost is a reliable indicator of performance.
I recommend both yourself and the OP have a look at the available test data on the HED Jet wheels to verify the above.

The test data you reference above shows the Reynolds performing better at low yaw, what data are you referring too?
Quote Reply