Dreww10

To make a long story not-so short, I grew tired of constantly cleaning off brake residue and picking metal shavings from my brake pads with my alu/carbon Dura Ace clinchers and decided to pony up for carbon. This was my primary motivation, but I wanted to retain a similar degree of quality and performance. After researching and considering different options, I was offered a pretty attractive deal on a new set of Vision Metron 40 or 55 clinchers. With the price difference only $100, I debated back and forth, but had to make a quick decision while the deal lasted. In the end, I went with the 40's, partly to save $100, but also to go with a more understated look. I can hold my own, but I'm not the fastest guy around, and personally, I think there's a degree of "Fred-ness" to riding a blinged-out deep section aero wheel if you're not a racer nor the guy ripping the legs off the A group on the club ride. To that end, I've done enough forum reading with comments that aero wheels don't matter that I didn't feel like I HAD to have them. But as I wait for these to arrive, I continue to contemplate if I should've gone with the aero wheel while I had the chance (again, only another $100), or like so many others, I'm merely fooling myself back in to thinking a deeper wheel is going to benefit me in any situation short of trying to solo breakaway in a Cat 1/2/3 race. To answer the inevitable question: I don't presently race, but never rule it, do a local 19K TT for fun, and just generally enjoy pushing to go faster, solo or group.

Good choice? Bad choice? Or just ride what I bought, be content, and HTFU?

Jeremy_S

Just ride what you bought? I'm 37, have no carteledge in my right knee, barely any in my left, my l5 is broken, the disc above and below are collapsed, and I can pull off an 18mph average solo if I push it on a 30 mile ride. I don't race, I may start doing some crits just because I've competed in every sport I've ever been involved in, but I have no illusions I'll ever be one of the "fast guys". I'm too old, I've beaten my body to death, but I enjoy it. To that end, both of my bikes have aero carbon clinchers, they have slammed stems because it's comfortable to me, they're light and look like they belong under a faster set of legs than mine.

But I paid for them, I ride them two hundred miles a week when I'm home, and I don't care if people think it's "Fred" lol. I enjoy them both and thy look the way I want which makes me go out and ride them even more.

That said, my 38mm tokyowheel epics are on my podium, same gearing as my Altamira with 46mm Reynolds. The podium is 12oz heavier than the Altamira, on paper should be less aero, but on a 9ish mile stretch near my house that's one of the few flat to slightly downhill areas around Fort Worth that isn't just covered in rolling hills, the heavier bike with less aero wheels (same tires and tubes in each) consistently covers that stretch faster. Now when the rolling hills come into play in always faster on my Altamira but that one spot where it's really just you pedaling and not fighting short hill after short hill, the podium with 38mm wheels is close to 40 seconds faster on average.

Enjoy your wheels.

Silvercivic27

I personally think that carbon clinchers are a mistake mainly because of braking issues and the rim bead, but here's one blog article addressing whether you should have gotten more aero wheels or not. Your post is kind of confusing and it comes across like you don't know what you want. You want the look, but you don't want the look. You want the performance, but you don't really care about the performance. In my opinion, if the only race or timed event you do is TT, you should have gotten the aero wheel because aero is everything in TT. Aero is the only reason to get a carbon clincher because it sucks in every other way. You should have gone tubular plus sealant or stuck with the Shimanos, IMO.

Flo Cycling Blog: FLO Cycling - The Great Debate - Aero vs. Weight

Jeremy_S

I've read more complaints about carbon and braking than I can count and I just don't see it. I've had all kinds of aluminum wheels from mavic krysium sls to shimano and my Reynolds wheels with proper pads and ultegra calipers will put you over the front just as easily as the aluminum would. Maybe if you've got huge mountains you're shooting down yes but rolling hills in most places carbon is just fine for braking.

Silvercivic27

You have to change the way you apply the brakes, pressing and letting go periodically so the rim doesn't overheat and the pads don't overheat, which changes the way you descend. That changes the way you ride in a group. When the brake tracks screach like a banshee, which is unavoidable if you really need to grab the brakes hard, you look and feel like an idiot. I don't EVER ride mountains with carbon clinchers, and I have had a front brake track on an Enve 6.7 SES rim fail. Really steep short descents can be just as bad as more gradual mountain descents if not worse depending on the grade too. So in my experience, they are not fine. It took about 2-3 years for some of these issues to be realized.

bostongarden

I have 2011 Zipp Firecrest 404 clinchers that I use mainly for racing -- crits and rr -- and I've ridden them regularly for stretches when I was doing some maintenance work on my training wheels. I have found them to be great for training rides and races. I haven't had any issues with braking. They feel great and would have no hesitation in considering them for everyday riding.

I'm not familiar with the wheels you mention. Their deeper dish may not deliver the same experience as the Zipps. However, general concerns about braking, clinchers, appropriateness for everyday riding are unfounded; it will vary by brand and reputation.

dvdslw

I don't have a lot of saddle time on carbon clinchers so take this response for what its worth, about three months ago I had an itch to buy some new wheels and decided on a set of carbon clinchers. I was considering two set's, one 40mm deep and another 60mm deep from the same manufacturer. I struggled with the decision for weeks leading up to the purchase because I really liked the look of the deeper 60mm wheels and convinced myself that I would benefit more with a deeper wheel because I was looking to pick up speed around and above 20mph which is where a wheel like this starts to come alive. I then test rode a set and while the looked killer on the bike, I felt like I was really having to mash the pedals to accelerate and they just made my bike feel sluggish compared to the Ultegra wheels I'd been riding so I test rode a set of the shallower 40mm wheels which instantly felt good across the board compared to the deeper wheels, still had the look I was after, and just seemed to motivate me somehow so I bought a set. I ended up having a quality control issue with my wheels so I'm not able to enjoy them as of now but the performance difference between the two sets was obvious. I think you'll be happy with your purchase especially after you get them mounted up and go for a ride. As far as I can tell Vision makes a top notch product and if you've ever watched Marty Ashton's road bike party 2 video you've seen how well the hold up to abuse. Here's a link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhabgvIIXik

fasdriah

AGREE!

StanSeven

40s are a good depth for all around riding. You should be happy with your choice.

I never had a problem braking or squelling in thousands of miles riding with carbon rims. I've got two sets of Zipps and they have been perfect. The only negative is they stop just a little slower when wet. That doesn't bother me because I don't go out intentionally in the rain.

therhodeo

You got rid of Dura Ace wheels because you were tired of cleaning them?

topflightpro

You should be happy with 40s. That is a good all-around wheel size.

With regards to aero benefit, you will see a greater benefit going from 20mm to 30mm than from 30 to 40 or 40 to 50. That's because the benefit curve levels out as the rim gets deeper. And really, until you are at about 6 percent or greater incline, aero trumps weight.


I also own 25mm, 27mm, 46mm and 58mm wheelsets. I also had a 52mm set, but sold it recently.

topflightpro

Double post.

Alias530

Very typical of this forum... the cheap option always wins unless it's a MASSIVE difference. Obviously aero wheels help, but not MASSIVELY, so people say they're a waste.

Bluecoupe

I have 40mm carbon clinchers and I enjoy them... cross winds make the ride a bit entertaining at times though.

rpenmanparker 

I agreed with you regarding cross winds enough to dump my 50 mm carbon clinchers after only a few rides. Most others here say it is no big deal. At my cruising speeds of 14-23 mph, medium deep carbon wheels provided me only negative effects: braking, amplification of hub and road noise, instability in crosswinds, some weight penalty, etc. I quickly decided they were not for me.

Stucky

You answered your own question: "aero doesn't matter"- so if you like the wheels and are happy with them, and are not being blown all over the road in a cross wind...then they are good.

Me? I would've kept the DA wheels, and just changed brake pads. Decent rubber pads- like Kool Stop salmons would not make metal residue; metalic pads will. (When it comes to braking issues...it's usually about the brake pads. Most problems- from poor stopping, to rim wear/meatl shavings, can be resolved merely by switching to a better pad)

Dreww10

I run Kool Stop Salmons. Even with those, the braking sounds like a pair of knife blades being scraped together, and the pads are always filled with metal chunks. They're unridable in the wet, because every application of the brakes peels metal out of the wheel. I figure if I'm going to have a wheelset that's unridable in the wet, I might as well have carbon, and then not have to Scotchbrite the brake track and remove metal bits from the pads and sand them down smooth 2-3 times a week. My second set of DA 9000 clinchers, BTW...same story with both.

rpenmanparker 

That whole thing is a new one to me. I have never heard of aluminum rims shredding like that.

Homebrew01

I don't think I have ever felt the need to clean my brake pads.
When they wear out after 10,000 miles or whatever, I get new ones.

therhodeo

Same.

topflightpro

I've only ever done it when I flatted a carbon tubular in a race and had to throw on my aluminum rims to finish. It was more of a preventative effort - I never saw any aluminum pieces in the brake pads, and the cleaning was a 10-second process of rubbing the pad down with a sandpaper sponge.

StanSeven

Something is wrong. You might be picking up strange grit and debris from road surfaces that destroy the braking surface. I've put more than 30,000 miles on aluminum rims and replaced them because the spokes holes cracked. The brake surface still had room to go.

Stucky

Something is DEFINITELY wrong there! Rubber is softer than aluminum. I've heard of Kool Stops making their own dust (same color as the pads)....but never ever doing that to rims.... It's unfathomable how that could even be.

BoSoxYacht

I see it almost every time I ride in the rain. A little bit of grit gets on my brake pads, and when the brakes are applied I can hear the difference and see some metal flakes on the brakes after a ride. Sometimes the grit is so large that I can see the scratch it makes on the braking surface.

I live in AZ, so rain isn't a huge problem, but when we do get rain it usually causes minor flooding, and puddles are often filled with very sandy water.

rpenmanparker 

I hear ya. I try VERY hard to not ride in the rain.