I am looking to upgrade my stock wheelset I would expect to get better RR, nicer bearings, and carbon etc. looking for a good value (used). I found these choices locally:
Roval Carbon (with the funky red center star) and Hitchinson Fusion - like new asking $800
Reynolds Attack carbon as new - asking $900
Shimano Dura Ace 7800 C24 Tubular Rims '08’s with tires 2500 km ask $750
Brand new 2011 Dura Ace WH7900-C50 Tubular wheels, never ridden, tires never mounted. $1300 obo
I would have to buy then get them shipped in. I sifted through the classifieds and didn’t see anything there (hard to search)
PS: I have the XERO XR-1 now, which are the OEM low-end stock. I want to scorch a 20Km race a mix of climb then falling back straight, with a few challenging corners - also just want to experience how these better carbons wheels ride.
For TTs you are going to want that 50mm Dura Ace wheelset. I have the 7850s and they are fantastic wheels, I know they might not be quite as aero as the top wheels but they work really well for racing. It’s all subjective feel, mind you. Those 24s would be fantastic if you are climbing monstrous mountains.
I get it the 24, 35, and 50 is the rim height. I guess the higher rim is more aero?? perhaps stiffer… & heavier. Also found a set of
C35 carbon TUBULAR wheels. These wheels are in mint condition. 6 rides 400k total. Fantastic wheels for an amazing price! $1100 obo
the numbers denote rim depth. Deeper is more aero (generally). Heavier, yes. I’m not sure about stiffer though. That does look like a good price on the C35s.
Deeper does NOT mean more aero…and, more aero than what?
So, the OP posts
I would expect to get better RR, nicer bearings, and carbon etc.
RR? Rolling Resistance? Um, not so sure that the rim / wheel has much of a bearing in that matter…and we are talking budget rims so you wide rim Firecrest go back to your Pontiacs and polish the paint okay.
“Nicer bearings” - again…nicer than what? ABEC blah blah blah blah…when the fact is that most cone/ball bearing setups in the modern world when properly adjusted have a lower drag and longer life than most cartridge ceramic bearing sets.
“Carbon”…well, I will be dipped in holy water and called Achillies…if it is Carbon, it done must be fast…
Okay, being as deeper does more often than not mean stiffer - this, not due to the rim being deeper but rather the spokes being shorter percentage of the radius. That has bearing more than that the additional mass of the rim itself. Deep does not mean aero, in the years that has been proven over and over again by everything from CarbonBike and Spinnergy to Velocity…sure, it “looks” aero, but the pesky wind tunnel again and again proves that idea fallacious. But, being as we do not know what wheel the OP currently rides, nor the hub he is currently on…we have no idea what is “better”
For all we know he is on an Open Pro 32 Spoke 3x on a Super Record hub…and thinks the look of less spokes is “better”…but why would we want the facts to get in the way. Order up some Carbon Mr. OP, with a side of ceramic (but certainly not ceramic or M2c brake tracks
Not sure what to make of the replies but I called support at Shimano and confirmed that the:
50 is designed for aerodynamics (ie TT) , but with more rotational inertia (if I can call it that)
35 is in-between, compromise
24 is less aerodynamic but more responsive for speed changes due to less rotational inertia. He called it a more everyday wheel
Tubular well that is another decision - I’m thinking why not.
I thought there would be more love for the Rovals
Budget = I am buying used.
Carbon is an amazing material of course. It’s got a fantastic feel to it, a real snap. As an engineer I work with carbon for hockey and waterskiing (http://www.jagersport.com). In general I know what carbon can and can’t do. Aluminum is pretty good too!..I’ve biked all my life just never had the opportunity to get into racing or even get some decent equipment. Thanks for the help - much appreciated.
50 is designed for aerodynamics (ie TT) , but with more rotational inertia (if I can call it that)…**Sure sure, but this is ST. We need to bring in yaw angle and moment of inertia and on and on. While it may be more aero with a 20mph head wind, any other criteria may make it a sail. We just dont know. **
35 is in-between, compromise -** I hate he word “compromise”…not sure what we are compromising.**
24 is less aerodynamic but more responsive for speed changes due to less rotational inertia. He called it a more everyd**ay wheel - Here we can go off on a Newtons law rant. But, I wont. The 24 would presumably be more comfortable as in a ride all day aspect. Plus, we are on Tri bikes not Road/Crit bikes. They are just not the same worlds. **
Tubular well that is another decision - I’m thinking why not. - **I agree. Why not? I sure would. **
I thought there would be more love for the Rovals
Budget = I am buying used.
