I don’t have access to the Tour. Did anyone read the new Wheel test in the June issue?
Thanks
Yes, I’ve read it. But I’m way too afraid of posting it here. Even in the (not so aero weenie) Tour forum they’ve started a huge thread about the shocking results. Let me say that there were some 30mm rims (Campa Eurus) that outperformed many super-wheels (Zipp FC 303).
Yes, I’ve read it. But I’m way too afraid of posting it here. Even in the (not so aero weenie) Tour forum they’ve started a huge thread about the shocking results. Let me say that there were some 30mm rims (Campa Eurus) that outperformed many super-wheels (Zipp FC 303).
what tire and size did they use?
4000S 23mm for almost all clinchers.
Conti Competiton 22mm for allmost all tubulars.
303 FC: Challenge 27mm (since they argued these are to be used with wider tires).
Cosmic Carbone SLE: Mavic Yksion
They tested them on a speed concept as well as a traditional bike (Canyon F8)
All was at 45km/h.
Going from 23mm to 25mm on the Eurus was +12W.
Going from 23mm to 27mm on the 303 was +2W.
I already regret posting this. I know I’m gonna end up having to translate the whole thing. Let’s just wait until it’s available on Tour QTR? 
oh they tested them ON a bike.
that is tricky.
I canceled my subscription because of Tour QTR but just found out they are not doing the App any longer.
I am in the market for HEDs, Zipp 404s or 808s. Were they mentioned?
You can PM me. I can also read the test in German.
Thanks
303 FC: Challenge 27mm (since they argued these are to be used with wider tires).
I know you’re just the messenger here…but …
oh they tested them ON a bike.
that is tricky.
For the Speed Concept they only changed the front wheel and had a HED disc on the rear.
I already regret posting this. I know I’m gonna end up having to translate the whole thing. Let’s just wait until it’s available on Tour QTR?
That got canned. Not enough sales or something.
It’s up to you now to provide us with some details
4000S 23mm for almost all clinchers.
Conti Competiton 22mm for allmost all tubulars.
303 FC: Challenge 27mm (since they argued these are to be used with wider tires).
Cosmic Carbone SLE: Mavic Yksion
They tested them on a speed concept as well as a traditional bike (Canyon F8)
All was at 45km/h.
Going from 23mm to 25mm on the Eurus was +12W.
Going from 23mm to 27mm on the 303 was +2W.
I already regret posting this. I know I’m gonna end up having to translate the whole thing. Let’s just wait until it’s available on Tour QTR? :)27mm Challenges? Aren’t those the biggest aero dogs out there? Who rides on 27s?
edit: Wonder if they had a subjective “feels lighter” component to their scoring metric.
Yes, I’ve read it. But I’m way too afraid of posting it here. Even in the (not so aero weenie) Tour forum they’ve started a huge thread about the shocking results. Let me say that there were some 30mm rims (Campa Eurus) that outperformed many super-wheels (Zipp FC 303).
That explains why the Eurus has not been updated since its inception. Perfect out of the box aerodynamics are hard to improve upon.
4000S 23mm for almost all clinchers.
Conti Competiton 22mm for allmost all tubulars.
303 FC: Challenge 27mm (since they argued these are to be used with wider tires).
Cosmic Carbone SLE: Mavic Yksion
They tested them on a speed concept as well as a traditional bike (Canyon F8)
All was at 45km/h.
Going from 23mm to 25mm on the Eurus was +12W.
Going from 23mm to 27mm on the 303 was +2W.
I already regret posting this. I know I’m gonna end up having to translate the whole thing. Let’s just wait until it’s available on Tour QTR? :)27mm Challenges? Aren’t those the biggest aero dogs out there? Who rides on 27s?
edit: Wonder if they had a subjective “feels lighter” component to their scoring metric.
I believe they didn’t wanna just make the 303 intentionally look bad and put a wider tire on them but instead wanted to make the 303 look good and say “Hey look, you can put some wide freaking tires on the 303 for comfort and have only very little aero penalty”. And then they stated that you only give up 2W when going from 23mm to 27mm whereas other rims have a LOT higher penalty.
Btw, 25-27mm tires have been run a lot on Robaix style races this year.
I think it was a good decision of the Tour test to point that out and test the 303 with a wider tire because that’s the whole point of the 303 and justifies it’s price tag.
It would actully be pretty helpful if road bike wheels were tested with a range of tires, say 20 23 27. Generally speaking for a TT I’m only interested in whats fastest with a particular wheel, but for general riding the whole range is useful.
When the road looks like this:
it makes sense.
Yeah, but you don’t ride the other wheels on the tires they had on there on cobbles either. You have to test all of them on the same tire to make a direct comparison. And yes, I read on the other weenies forum about the test and all I can say is, I have lost all faith in Tour. Their results and methodology just plain sucks.
Let me put it this way, does everything seem fine and dandy when the Campagnolo Eurus with round spokes outperforms the Campagnolo Bullet 50 in terms of aero? Oh, and the Enve’s were also almost last in terms of aero, over 6 watts worse than the Eurus…
Using the entire bike in the test is just extremely problematic unless they have some really nitpicky aero engineers running the test.
I keep referring back to this article, which is a partial list of the pains Cervelo goes through to do accurate full-bike comparisons:
http://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/A_Day_in_the_Life_of_a_Wind_Tunnel_2198.html
Even if Tour meant well, it is unlikely they had the money to go through that much trouble with each wheel/tire combo.
Wish I knew German, did they did wheel-only tests to? Or only wheels on bikes?
The test is either problematic or we can save a bunch of money on aero wheels =)
Let me put it this way, does everything seem fine and dandy when the Campagnolo Eurus with round spokes outperforms the Campagnolo Bullet 50 in terms of aero? Oh, and the Enve’s were also almost last in terms of aero, over 6 watts worse than the Eurus…
You can nitpick the numbers will not be totally accurate and measurable error, but overall relative values are probably accurate. This test seems to be Tour magazine’s new thing. They recently had an article with a rider in a wind tunnel. Again 45 kmh. I’d have to pull out the article again, but road bike on the tops, 460 w, on hoods maybe 450, on drops , on roadbike with aero bar extentions, skin suit, aero helmet, tt bike with curved aero bars, straight aero bars, lower position,. etc etc.
There lowest combination went to around 318 w.
Ultimately the hard part is finding your optimal position for power vs aero savings.
Using the entire bike in the test is just extremely problematic unless they have some really nitpicky aero engineers running the test.
I keep referring back to this article, which is a partial list of the pains Cervelo goes through to do accurate full-bike comparisons:
http://www.slowtwitch.com/...ind_Tunnel_2198.html
Even if Tour meant well, it is unlikely they had the money to go through that much trouble with each wheel/tire combo.
Wish I knew German, did they did wheel-only tests to? Or only wheels on bikes?
The test is either problematic or we can save a bunch of money on aero wheels =)
Let me put it this way, does everything seem fine and dandy when the Campagnolo Eurus with round spokes outperforms the Campagnolo Bullet 50 in terms of aero? Oh, and the Enve’s were also almost last in terms of aero, over 6 watts worse than the Eurus…
Yeah, but you don’t ride the other wheels on the tires they had on there on cobbles either. You have to test all of them on the same tire to make a direct comparison. And yes, I read on the other weenies forum about the test and all I can say is, I have lost all faith in Tour. Their results and methodology just plain sucks.
Let me put it this way, does everything seem fine and dandy when the Campagnolo Eurus with round spokes outperforms the Campagnolo Bullet 50 in terms of aero? Oh, and the Enve’s were also almost last in terms of aero, over 6 watts worse than the Eurus…
I have a set of Eurus wheels. Nice strong wheel, but definitely not an aero contender. It does not have round spokes.
And to King-Tony, it’s been updated twice that I’m aware of. Once for weight reduction and once to add two-way fit rims.
You can nitpick the numbers will not be totally accurate and measurable error, but overall relative values are probably accurate.
The accuracy of the numbers is what it is, whether or not I nitpick them, yes. Are overall relative values probably accurate? Why do you think they are? I have good reason to believe they are not. Three main reasons:
- The non aero campy wheel is a bizarre result (only on the road bike)
- The mannequin has clothes on it, no way to control that
- The ranking of the wheels changes dramatically between the road bike and tri bike tests. this is very suspicious.
There is every indication that in this particular test, the noise from their protocol is bigger than the differences between wheels. If Tour is lurking on slowtwitch, I would echo the recommendations of others that they remove the clothing from the dummy as a start.
Regarding your comments about position - yes it is paramount. But one must also have wheels on the bike.
Do we know that they didn’t test everything all during one session? Wouldn’t that alleviate the need for the reference bike Cervelo uses? And I see the point in having the perfectly symmetrical bike to test the symmetry of the tunnel but assuming any asymmetry is stable relative to individual runs it shouldn’t be a serious issue in a product comparison like this where relative performance is of more interest that absolute. And if someone is fortunate enough to ride a speed concept with a Hed disc - would that make this test less problematic because the complete system tested is more similar to what they actually ride as opposed to someone with a different frame and rear wheel that would have unknown interactions with the various front wheels?
Using the entire bike in the test is just extremely problematic unless they have some really nitpicky aero engineers running the test.
I keep referring back to this article, which is a partial list of the pains Cervelo goes through to do accurate full-bike comparisons: