Reynolds wheels (2)

Triathlon Forum
1

I’ve noticed reynolds wheels don’t get a lot of press on this board…They seem pretty sweet to me, stiff light, aero etc. does anyone ride em? I’m especially interested in the new DV66 rear and DV46 front…has anyone tested or used the 66?

thanks

also if you are a zipp/hed junkie, what do you think reynolds is not as good?

2

also the come from the factory with dtswiss 240 hubs…seems to me like that is a pretty sweet stock hub…just my 2 cents
.

3

also if you are a zipp/hed junkie, what do you think reynolds is not as good?
Not what I think…what the wind tunnel thinks…plus Zipp is made in USA (please note: these days Zipp puts other peoples names on quite a few wheels - Elite for one).

4

What does the wind tunnel think of the DV66’s?

5

Have a question about reynolds. What do you think about the solitude wheelset for a good set of training wheels?

6

I use the Reynolds DV46UL and love them. Have them on my Cervelo P2C

7

Reynolds uses NACA airfoil shapes for their rims, which is all well and good…if you’re seeing a 0 yaw wind. As the yaw gets higher, airflow separation begins to become quite a problem for spinning surfaces, especially when they have a tire as a leading/trailing edge.

That’s the reason for Zipp’s ‘‘hybrid toroidal cross section’’: it prevents separation until much higher angles.

That being said, Reynolds has a wicked sweet EP program (wholesale minus 20%) if you work at a shop and the SDV66 is still more aero than most of its deep section compatriots.

8

Reynolds uses NACA airfoil shapes for their rims, which is all well and good…if you’re seeing a 0 yaw wind. As the yaw gets higher, airflow separation begins to become quite a problem for spinning surfaces, especially when they have a tire as a leading/trailing edge.

That’s the reason for Zipp’s ‘‘hybrid toroidal cross section’’: it prevents separation until much higher angles.

While I understand the theory behind that, I’ve yet to see any independent evidence to suggest that really makes a difference. All of the independent wheel tests out there seem to point to a wheel’s aerodynamic properties being almost directly related to depth, unless there’s something else funky going on (i.e. fat spokes), at least between 30 and 80 mm rims. I’d expect those Reynolds would probably fall right between the 404’s and the 808’s in terms of aerodynamics.

I’m not saying rim shape makes no difference, just that I think that difference gets overstated in the marketing world a little. I also think that width at the rim is probably more important, since a wider rim allows for a better continuity between a wider (faster rolling) tire and the rim.

The Reynolds wheels certainly have a reputation for being bomb proof, so I wouldn’t hesitate to go with those given the quality of the other parts (spokes/hubs).

9

Personally, I wasn’t impressed by their stiffness. Lots of lateral play, could have been a bad build though.

10

it is funny, you almost never see them in the classified section and you don’t see a lot on ebay either. I should go back to the kona wheel count thread and see how many wheelsets they had a kona.

11

ok, so no one likes em because of what the wind tunnel says, but yet no one has provided any data to back it up…are there any additional opinions out there on the DV wheels, specifically dv66…thanks!

12

I rode a DV60 on a couple of races and was very impressed by them. Light, aero and they seemed to spin forever. If I was to choose a wheelset I would go with Reynolds. But I’m against all those brands that make us pay for their name so…

13

also if you are a zipp/hed junkie, what do you think reynolds is not as good?
Not what I think…what the wind tunnel thinks…plus Zipp is made in USA (please note: these days Zipp puts other peoples names on quite a few wheels - Elite for one).

“Made in the USA” in and of itself is a good thing because…?? GM and Ford are American made, would you drive a Taurus? That’s a whole other can of worms though.

Here are some of my previous posts on the matter:
I have a pair of Reynolds DV all carbon clinchers, they’re my training AND race wheels for 2 reasons:

  1. They’re ‘bomb proof’. I’ve have SEVERAL flats on these and haven’t had any issues with the carbon bead. I’ve hit holes at high speed and they’re as true as the day I bought them.
  2. The rear is laced to a PowerTap Pro.

I’ve ridden Zipps, both 303 and 404 in both clincher and tubular, and consider them ‘fragile’. I’d say they’re ESPECIALLY fragile when compared to the Reynolds. Constant truing, shattered carbon bead when holes are encountered (small or large), and let’s not forget the bulging where the spoke meets the carbon. Granted, these were a couple of years ago so I’m sure someone (who probably works at Zipp) will pipe up and say they’ve improved their manufacturing.

It's simple. Don't get Zipps, get **Reynolds** Carbon Clinchers. THOSE are bombproof based on my experience. Not only that, they have an 'insurance' program that costs 1/2 of what a single replacement will cost from **Zipp**. And that's assuming you only have to have a single replacement.

Let me make sure I understand what you’re saying, these wheels cost $2000 and I should only use them 3 times a year?

Unsafe? Let’s not bring up the 202 thread again…or my personal experience with 404 and 303 tubulars. The only reason they say (all carbon clinchers) are ‘unsafe’ is because they don’t have any in their line-up. I’d put money on my Reynolds DV Clinchers against any set of Zipps, any day. Maybe even twice on Sunday.

14

Yes, I have the tubular DV66 w/Wireless PT. They are super fast and much better than Zipps that I have ridden in past. Unfortunately, I haven’t raced much so they sit in there box most of the time.

15

Reynold’s has the RAP program for $200 where the manufacturer will replace wheels damaged while in normal use;

https://www.reynoldscycling.com/index.php?p_resource=support_assurance

I was under the impression Reynold’s was an American company? Are they English?

16

Reynold’s has the RAP program for $200 where the manufacturer will replace wheels damaged while in normal use;

https://www.reynoldscycling.com/index.php?p_resource=support_assurance

I was under the impression Reynold’s was an American company? Are they English?

Not sure where the rims are actually made, but Reynolds is based out of Salt Lake City.

17

Zipp’s are great if money is no object and you don’t mind cracking rims every other year. 3 cracked 440’s and I was done. Crazy light and fast, but I’m not made of 100’s.

18

I run the assault full carbon clincher on my Cervelo S2 for road racing. I love them! Stiff, resonalby light and plenty aero for road racing. I know they don’t get much love here, but I know a lot of roadies that ride them and love them. I have a set of 404’s on my TT bike and I’ve raced them a few times on my road bike. Performance wise, I’m more pleased with the Reynolds.

Cheers.

19

I don’t believe you. I know you have seen wind tunnel plots with the big drop in yaw at 10-15 degrees (depending on the wheel)

I know you have seen that big german test where the 404 and 808 did better than non torodial rims of similar depth

While I understand the theory behind that, I’ve yet to see any independent evidence to suggest that really makes a difference.

20

there is tons of data
but keeping trying to talk yourself into it if you want

in the meantime HED Jet’s are cheaper and have the toroidal shape, and mate better with tires and so on and so on. so I’ll just be using that.

http://idata.over-blog.com/0/02/72/10/Tests-Acheteur/base-de-donnees/TEST-aero-wheels.jpg

ok, so no one likes em because of what the wind tunnel says, but yet no one has provided any data to back it up…are there any additional opinions out there on the DV wheels, specifically dv66…thanks!