Carbon vs aluminum
12-31-20, 04:55 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Nor-Cal
Posts: 3,767
Bikes: lots
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 2,932 Times
in
1,489 Posts
The pros are
- basically no pinch flats
- no fragile bead hook profile
- pretty much eliminates heat dissipation/ delamination issues for rim brakes
- lighter
- better safety margin for high speed punctures
- can run lower pressure
- arguably fewer flats
- bargain priced used available.
- basically no pinch flats
- no fragile bead hook profile
- pretty much eliminates heat dissipation/ delamination issues for rim brakes
- lighter
- better safety margin for high speed punctures
- can run lower pressure
- arguably fewer flats
- bargain priced used available.
12-31-20, 05:23 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
Don't buy tubulars this day in age.
12-31-20, 06:00 PM
#28
Zoom zoom zoom zoom bonk
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,624
Bikes: Giant Defy, Trek 1.7c, BMC GF02, Fuji Tahoe, Scott Sub 35, Kona Rove, Trek Verve+2
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 551 Post(s)
Liked 722 Times
in
366 Posts
For a wheelset, low rotational inertia is the #1 performance requirement, which helps you to reconnect with the wheel in front of you coming out of corners. If you are behind a group of say 10 riders, at 40kph, you are basically coasting. But if you drop 10 feet back, exposed to the wind, you have to amp up the watts to close to that of the pacemaker. As in 100 to 400 watts ASAP. If you cannot, and drop back, then you are finished: solo for the rest of the ride.
01-01-21, 03:45 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,547
Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1528 Post(s)
Liked 718 Times
in
510 Posts
Logic says any gain in acceleration you get from lighter weight is offset by a loss of inertia; you have to work harder to maintain speed. You get a slight benefit for climbing, and maybe improved braking.
Another benefit of a lighter bike that occurs to me is less unsprung weight; every time the bike has to move over a bump, that's proportionately less energy lost from whatever fraction of the force that doesn't end up moving the rider too (rider could be unweighting, seatpost could flex). That might be approaching significance, but I haven't seen anybody talking about that, let alone trying to quantify it. The unsprung weight factor might also be relevant for grip.
But it's all pretty marginal stuff.
What isn't marginal is what a frikken beast your whip feels like when it's rocking a deep 1kg wheelset.
Another benefit of a lighter bike that occurs to me is less unsprung weight; every time the bike has to move over a bump, that's proportionately less energy lost from whatever fraction of the force that doesn't end up moving the rider too (rider could be unweighting, seatpost could flex). That might be approaching significance, but I haven't seen anybody talking about that, let alone trying to quantify it. The unsprung weight factor might also be relevant for grip.
But it's all pretty marginal stuff.
What isn't marginal is what a frikken beast your whip feels like when it's rocking a deep 1kg wheelset.
01-01-21, 03:51 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 755
Bikes: 2019 CAAD12, 2015 Specialized Sirrus Comp
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 562 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 64 Times
in
46 Posts
I love my tubeless setup, but no way do they have the same feel as sew-ups, especially silk sew-ups. And with tubeless, I am slightly less confident that I can get up and rolling again if there's a flat.
Last edited by Robert A; 01-01-21 at 04:02 PM.
01-01-21, 03:55 PM
#32
Senior Member
...every time the bike has to move over a bump, that's proportionately less energy lost from whatever fraction of the force that doesn't end up moving the rider too (rider could be unweighting, seatpost could flex). That [i]might be approaching significance, but I haven't seen anybody talking about that, let alone trying to quantify it.
https://blog.silca.cc/part-4b-rollin...-and-impedance
01-01-21, 03:59 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,547
Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1528 Post(s)
Liked 718 Times
in
510 Posts
Read up on impedance and rolling resistance. This has been covered.
https://blog.silca.cc/part-4b-rollin...-and-impedance
https://blog.silca.cc/part-4b-rollin...-and-impedance
01-01-21, 04:02 PM
#34
Senior Member
That the break point is a function of system weight has absolutely been discussed, perhaps not in the one article I cited, but in the context of understanding the factors that determine when the breakpoint occurs. There's little point in understanding the slope of the Crr curve beyond that point as it doesn't make sense to ride there at all.
