Deep section rims for gravel?
01-20-20, 02:09 PM
#26
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
Thanks for the links, based in Europe I was not familiar with any of those brands. I would wonder whether 22C rim with 35-42mm wide tires is any much difference to 19C (which seemed to be kind of standard CX for a while). That's because 22C rim for road 25mm wide tire with its outside witdh "hugs" the tire in a smooth transition, but that will never happen with 35+ ones. I believe by ETRTO 19C or 21C are also both just fine for way above 42mm tires.
On this basis - that aerodynamics does not seem to matter at CX tire widths and road rims - looking at the weight the 380g is nice, but I wonder - why don't the manufacturers make even wider / shallower / otherwise lighter cabon ones for CX? Even if I did not have any budget contraints it does not seem that there is anything lighter in the market than using wide road carbon wheel for gravel, but one cannot go as wide as would be necessary and may as well stay 19C (to save weight).
On the alloy ones, I would wonder what's wrong (in comparison with your quoted ones) with e.g. Open Pro UST that apparently represents 19C alloy rim that does not bother with deep profile (at 22mm) and goes for well under $100 listed as 430g? If I were to match the width then the 465g would be represented by HED Belgium Plus, but I do not want to go that route because it's clearly going to get heavier with wider ones for not much additional aero gain.
Noted, I was getting at the fact I am building myself, so having less or more work with truing is not an issue. Unless the carbon rim would provide significant benefit (for the CX use in terms of weight), I would rather avoid the material for structural reasons. If I receive badly egg-shaped alloy rim I would be just returning it, not sure I can spot quality issues with carbon ones with naked eye before on the road...
On this basis - that aerodynamics does not seem to matter at CX tire widths and road rims - looking at the weight the 380g is nice, but I wonder - why don't the manufacturers make even wider / shallower / otherwise lighter cabon ones for CX? Even if I did not have any budget contraints it does not seem that there is anything lighter in the market than using wide road carbon wheel for gravel, but one cannot go as wide as would be necessary and may as well stay 19C (to save weight).
On the alloy ones, I would wonder what's wrong (in comparison with your quoted ones) with e.g. Open Pro UST that apparently represents 19C alloy rim that does not bother with deep profile (at 22mm) and goes for well under $100 listed as 430g? If I were to match the width then the 465g would be represented by HED Belgium Plus, but I do not want to go that route because it's clearly going to get heavier with wider ones for not much additional aero gain.
Noted, I was getting at the fact I am building myself, so having less or more work with truing is not an issue. Unless the carbon rim would provide significant benefit (for the CX use in terms of weight), I would rather avoid the material for structural reasons. If I receive badly egg-shaped alloy rim I would be just returning it, not sure I can spot quality issues with carbon ones with naked eye before on the road...
B) Mavic. Oy. I personally wouldn't use that rim. Or, I'll be honest, any Mavic rim/wheel. And I quote:
Respect the appropriate spoke tensions; Mavic recommends spoke tensions between 70 and 90 kg (for a front or rear wheel on the free wheel side with a crossed 3 pattern). Inappropriate spoke tension can generate too much stress and damage the rim
That is right....Mavic sells rims that cannot even take 91KGF maximum tension. Which simply sets you up for a weaker wheel build to start before talking about hubs and bracing angles. For reference the above LB rims are not only lighter--LB recommends 125KGF tension. The Mavic maximum DS tension range is so low it is almost my LB wheel NDS tension. To be fair, LB's tensions are higher-end compared to some other big-name wheel/rim brands in carbon...but even normal plain-jane alloy rims in the same price bracket take 110-120KGF.
I'm not trying to be a shill for LB here...I have used them as I have ordered from and am more familiar with their product/CS than Far Sports or Yoeleo etc.
Bad product happens in all materials. All that you can do is RMA, and hope the company gives you the time of day.
-Pacenti, as mentioned above, had their internet-infamous failed alloy rim "SL23" which after 3 revisions they couldn't get to not fail on people. Revision after revision--they promised they had a "EUREKA" moment and it was resolved. Nope. Thousands of pissed SL23v1 and v2 and v3 customers and builders. They retired the SL23 extrusion and branding and replaced it with "Forza"--same thing has happened, and Pacenti has the nerve to blame spoke-choice by builders--instead of their crappy OEM doing the extrusions. Their SL25 (I bought a set), wasn't effected.
-WTB has also had problems with their rims failing lately, I believe that effected their i23 rims.
-Stan's has a CX rim, a few folks on our sub-board discovered after building them that the 45PSI "MAX INFLATION PRESSURE" is unbelievably actually accurate--the tire blows off the clincher beads at that redline.
01-21-20, 03:47 PM
#27
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 265
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked 29 Times
in
24 Posts
https://tech.mavic.com/tech-mavic/te...ucts/2_119.pdf
That is right....Mavic sells rims that cannot even take 91KGF maximum tension. Which simply sets you up for a weaker wheel build to start before talking about hubs and bracing angles. For reference the above LB rims are not only lighter--LB recommends 125KGF tension. The Mavic maximum DS tension range is so low it is almost my LB wheel NDS tension. To be fair, LB's tensions are higher-end compared to some other big-name wheel/rim brands in carbon...but even normal plain-jane alloy rims in the same price bracket take 110-120KGF.
That is right....Mavic sells rims that cannot even take 91KGF maximum tension. Which simply sets you up for a weaker wheel build to start before talking about hubs and bracing angles. For reference the above LB rims are not only lighter--LB recommends 125KGF tension. The Mavic maximum DS tension range is so low it is almost my LB wheel NDS tension. To be fair, LB's tensions are higher-end compared to some other big-name wheel/rim brands in carbon...but even normal plain-jane alloy rims in the same price bracket take 110-120KGF.
Not looking for racing, but also not rock bottom, any opinion on the DT R460? I know it's 18C, but then at 460g it has 120kgf printed right on the decal i believe.
(I guess I am biased towards alloy by now and also kind of decided for hubs with 32 spoke holes.)
01-21-20, 04:54 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
Why not go with like the XC lineup that is wider: Budget https://www.dtswiss.com/en/products/...country/x-412/ or https://www.dtswiss.com/en/products/...ountry/xr-361/
01-21-20, 06:40 PM
#29
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 265
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked 29 Times
in
24 Posts
Why not go with like the XC lineup that is wider: Budget https://www.dtswiss.com/en/products/...country/x-412/ or https://www.dtswiss.com/en/products/...ountry/xr-361/
The 410g (at 700C) one also needs PHR washers, which will add to weight and arguably not to rigidity. Ironically all of them are rated for system weight max 110kg, but the gut feeling tells me - may be wrong - that if road 18C is 460g (disc one 10g less I guess) and 23C is 465g (700C), although low profile (that's where the weight is shaved from and added to the width) the cross section appears less rigid than the "road" one. Out of the three the road one comes out as cheapest and from the discussion above it appear whatever width beyond perhaps 17C is added does not bring aero gains anyhow for CX tires.
Last edited by am8117; 01-21-20 at 06:43 PM.
01-21-20, 10:49 PM
#30
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,586
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1086 Post(s)
Liked 859 Times
in
488 Posts
Now this was actually entertaining and new to me, particularly because I am sure their in-house built wheels come with 120kgf tensioned DS spokes. I can't find it anymore but they used to have these values in specs on a per rim basis. I guess the generic manual is one of their ways to shed off liability as is their original (non) ERD measuring.
Not looking for racing, but also not rock bottom, any opinion on the DT R460? I know it's 18C, but then at 460g it has 120kgf printed right on the decal i believe.
(I guess I am biased towards alloy by now and also kind of decided for hubs with 32 spoke holes.)
Not looking for racing, but also not rock bottom, any opinion on the DT R460? I know it's 18C, but then at 460g it has 120kgf printed right on the decal i believe.
(I guess I am biased towards alloy by now and also kind of decided for hubs with 32 spoke holes.)
I think it's like 1550 or 1600 g for the wheelset. Considering how inexpensive a setup this is, it's hard to beat.
I run tubeless with skinny strippers. In their time have had Maxxis Ramblers and Gravelkings. No issues mounting or bead sealing. I've absolutely hammered these wheels in the two years I have had them. I haven't had to true the front yet and the rear developed one loose spoke, that didn't even come close to causing brake rub.
One quirk, maybe it's common knowledge but it blew my mind. I went on a super short ride the day I built these wheels. ALL of the spokes on the rear came loose and most of the ones up front did too. I'm surprised the whole thing didn't collapse. Apparently this is from the tubeless pressure. I tensioned everything back up and gave it all a little extra (no tensiometer). Like I said, they've been great.
01-22-20, 09:55 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 2,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1456 Post(s)
Liked 1,477 Times
in
867 Posts
That said, Zipp 303's have been the gold standard for CX race wheels for decades, and I don't think that's all about aero advantages (perceived or real). They're strong, they shed mud, they're super light and they mate up well with a variety of wider tires. I can't think of another wheelset that I see pros riding in so many different conditions. CX, gravel, all-around road, spring classics, etc. This would likely be one of my top choices for a gravel race wheelset.
