Advice needed (Eurus 2006 / Fulcrum Racing 1 / Mavic Ksyrium SL)

Hi guys,

After several years of interruption - and some extra pounds... - I have resumed road biking in 2005. I only rode approximately 5000 km + last year. I bought a Time VXS / Campy Record in November. I find it awesome: comfortable, smooth and stiff (I am really happy with this bike after some time with a Specialized Allez / Shimano Ultegra).

I am considering buying a new set of wheels soon. I currently use Campy Neutron I really like. I use them for flat, climbing, tough ground. They are really great.

I am looking for higher profile rims for long distance rides. I am hesitating between the 3 types above. People seem to really enjoy Eurus or Mavic SL (more fit for climbing). I find the Fulcrum really look great. However I have not come across any thread from Fulcrum owners yet as these wheels are new on the market.

So before I make up my mind, I would welcome your feedback if you have had a chance to use them.

Thanks very much in advance!

Thomas

Thomas, good that you've rediscovered cycling. I'm not really familar with the wheels you list, so can't offer any specific endorsements. But I do question your notion that high profile rims would be better for long distance rides.

Campagnolo website describes that their low profile rims are "....the answer to long-distance rides and steep mountain climbs. These wheels are laterally and torsionally stiff for better power transmission and greater steering precision, while being vertically elastic to absorb the jolts and bumps of badly surfaced roads."

The medium and high-profile wheels may be better for racing, since under perfect conditions they will have slightly lower drag. But doubt if this is any advantage you could measure on the road, unless of course your interest is shaving a few seconds off in fast, flat TTs.

You really do have to be hauling to get any aerodynamic advantage out of a deep profile. As for Fulcrum, the name may be new but they're built by Campagnolo. The Fulcrum 1 is literally the Eurus with different stickers on it.

Thanks so much for your input, dhk.
I understand you point. My perception is that the types of wheels I am looking at are rather "medium" rims (24 front & 28 rear with Eurus & 26 for both with the Fulcrum). I have thought about those as I had in mind they may be laterally stiffer. With the Neutron low rims I have, I sense some kind of limitations to my speed. I don't know what causes that though.

I used to ride with Shimano medium rims before. It seems harder to accelerate with them as they are less "nervous". However, they are more fluid at higher speed, which does not happen with low rims. I don't know if this is just about me or if this is due to the difference between the frames I ride (carbon / alloy vs. full carbon). I just feel it takes more effort to reach the same speed with the Neutrons.

I have reviewed what you pointed out on Campy's website and your comments are right.
I hope that those who just bought Fulcrum will soon stop riding and take some time to post their comments about these wheels....

Talk to you soon!
Thomas

Thanks, artmichalek. I am aware that Fulcrum is manufactured by Campy. However, they do not come with G3 pattern, they are both rear and front 26 mmm deep (I mean the Racing 1). The Eurus are 24 front and 28 rear and come with different spokes and sections. I sense that Fulcrum are less classical than Campy. I am afraid it might not only be a matter of stickers!

Thomas

Try looking into Ritchey Protocol wheels, They're lighter and more aero than my Ksyrium Sl's and Eurus. They have bladed spokes and the hub friction is ok - more than Ksyriums but less than Eurus. I don't know why they're not popular.

The differential profile on the Eurus is new for '06. Last year they were 26 front and rear. As for the rear lacing, they're not really different. Both use a 2:1 spoke count in a radial-left 2x-right pattern. The only difference is that the drive side spokes are evenly spaced on the Fulcrum rather than being paired up.

Keep in mind that aero studies (see the Zipp site for one example) indicate that rims must be a minimum of 38mm deep before you get any aero effect. In your "medium profile" wheels, the only aero factor would be spoke count and spoke shape. And here you get two factors which have opposite effects: as you reduce spoke count you must strengthen the rims to make up for the longer unsupported spans (i.e. distance between spokes) but as you strengthen the rim, you decrease the vertical compliance (so the ride becomes harsher). As they say, "there is no free lunch."

I would stick with the neutrons. I can't see any of the others being substantively better than what you have. To get a significant aero advantage you would have to go with a true deep rim, such as the Zipp 404s, Hed Alps, or similar.