wheel specs for all around bike

Greetings,
I am looking for suggestions for wheels for my new bike. I am building up a Salsa Casseroll as my general purpose bike. I'll use it for occasional commues to work (12 hilly miles each way), errand runs into town, grocery or beer runs, long rides in the country on roads ranging from smoothly paved to shake 'n' bake (chip seal) to dirt and some light touring.I weigh about 175 lbs. I don't want the wheels to be unnecessarily heavy, but I don't want to sacrifice strength or durability. I want strong wheels, but not at the expense of a harsh ride. I plan to run 28mm to 32mm tires.
What I'm thinking of at this point is Shimano Ultegra hubs with 32 DT 14/15/14 spokes. Rims I'm considering are DT Swiss R1.1 or 1.2 or Mavic CXP33. I would appreciate any thoughts about these choices or alternate suggestions.
thanks

I faced a similar decision for a cross bike fitted with front/rear pannier+racks and a child seat. I went with Mavic A319, which is said to be a sturdy asphalt rim, and Shimano 105 hubs. I don't recall the spoke count off hand (36 probably) and only know the spokes themselves were straight, beefy ones from DT.

I'm not familiar with DT rims, but the Mavic CXP33 description mentions aerodynamics. It looks like a lighter rim intended for high performance road riding. I would not be inclined to choose it if my intent was to use wide tires and if my riding included loaded touring/commuting/errand runs over rough terrain. If you are going with Mavic, I would look at one of the A-series rims. Also, for the hub, I chose 105 because the main difference with Ultegra seemed to be weight, which seemed like an unnecessary cost in a wheel like this.

Anyway, I've been very satisfied with the choice and fitted my wife's bike with the same setup. We had an incident where the original wheel (wide, single-wall rims) collapsed under load during a light bump. No worries with these new ones after over 4 yrs.

Thanks, but I think the A319 may be a bit of overkill for what I plan to do with this bike. I'm not extremely concerned with weight on this bike, but 597g is pretty heavy. With a 19mm inner bead width I would be limited to tires 28mm or wider. That would probably be OK for the most part, but I'd like to have the option of going smaller at some point. I would like to find a good rim with 17mm width, but I'm not having any luck.

I have heard that the Mavic CXP33 is a pretty sturdy rim, stronger than the Open Pro (another option I am considering) which is very similar to the DT R1.1. I have had very good results with Open Pro rims on my road bike.

Don't worry about wheel weight. It's effect on bike/rider performance is exceedingly small, small enough to not be real concerned with it.

With a 19mm rim, you can run 23's, 25's....pretty much whatever floats your boat.

__________________
Sex is horrid
Pain is Fun
I cut my fingers off
One by one

Wouldn't a narrow tire on a wide rim increase the chances of rim damage?

What would I be curing by going with the wider and heavier rims?

Not with proper inflation. There was a time when 19 or 20mm tires were found on clincher rims.

Actually, some wheel manufacturers have moved to wider than normal rim widths (Zipp, Hed....). Aerodynamic benefits aside, the wider rim in combination with a normal sized tire--say a 23mm--lowers rolling resistance by making the contact patch shorter from front to back and wider. It also gives a contact patch whose shape is better suited to cornering.

Heavier rims don't mean a thing. The idea that a wheel's rotating mass--or more specifically, its moment of inertia (MOI)--has a significant impact on performance is a myth. It's the result of people taking a little bit of science and losing perspective on the application. In a theoretical model, the numbers show that decreased wheel MOI makes a minimal impact, and those models are best case scenarios for the wheels. In reality, the impact is even less.

I used to have an 880 g set of CF wheels. At the same time I had (and have) a 1380 g set of alloy clincher wheels. There's a lot of climbing 'round where I live, and those 880 g wheels made no noticeable impact on climbing. Climb times essentially remained the same (I say essentially because there is some variance in the times resulting from weather conditions, how I felt at a given time, and how much porn I'd surfed that day.).

Here's a good analysis that Mark McM did for a Weight Weenies post. The numbers from his second order differential model of a bicycle in motion agree well with first order calculations that I, science guy John (on this site), and others have done.

Now I'm not anti-weight weenie at all. I built up a Moots Compact as a weight weenie project. It's important, however, to do the weight weenie thing for the right reasons. The best reason would be for the technical challenge of building the lightest possible everyday ridable bike you could or even just the lightest bike you could, without Katy barring the door. That's fun. It's a tech head/gear head/geek sort of thing to do. I am geek, so I'm hip to that.

Do the weight weenie thing, 'cuz seein' the bike like that really turns you on.

Don't do the weight weenie thing because you're looking for performance benefits. All you'll end up with is a lighter wallet and no performance gains to show for it.

__________________
Sex is horrid
Pain is Fun
I cut my fingers off
One by one

loading the rear rack or front basket with occaisional grocery runs makes me want a sturdier wheel, because if the inevitable pothole or curb smack happens on a lighter narrower rim while carrying a load then its often time to rebuild the wheel with a new hoop, but with a wider rim & tire the better chance of just bouncing off of that nasty stuff.

i also like to see eyelets on my 'long term' work horse wheels, commuting/touring applications. I dont want to be truing these wheels often but if i need to, the nipples always seem to turn smoother after years of service if they have eyelets...

i love to ride a set of touring wheels in the country on a long ride with 32mm tires, as long as my riding partners arent on ultralights! hehe they ride so smooth and soak up the bumps... ahhh

A319 or A719 maybe?


all's'miles


curby

I wasn't necessarily suggesting the A319, but thought that one of the A-series rims sounded better matched to what you were looking for. I mean this based on the points in your OP: 12 mile commutes; grocery/beer/errand runs; long rides on rough or dirt roads; light touring; 28 or 32 mm tire widths. This makes it sound like you want a relatively sturdy, stable touring rim. However, CXP33 appears to be Mavic's top-of-the-line Al clincher - aero, very narrow width, light weight, high tech alloy ... it might come across to some as overkill for different reasons.

Since tire widths were mentioned, another point would be that the spec for the CXP33 lists the recommended tire widths as 19-28 mm. So, the 32 mm tire that you are considering falls outside the recommended range, another reason the rim choice seems odd. Of course, the wider size may still work, as Alienator explains. However, you might want to do some experimenting, as I have had poorly matched tires slip off of rims before (several times before I figured out what the problem was). The tube suddenly bulged out the side and promptly exploded, which is something best to avoid.

I saw the Salsa Casseroll online, and it reminds me of a classic touring bike i.e. long wheel base, clearance for fenders, CroMoly frame, etc. On a similar bike many years ago, I chose 27"x1-1/4" rims (Super Champion Model 58, which were great rims in those the days). Not that there are any rules, but a narrow, speedy racing rim wouldn't be my first pick on this kind of machine. I fully agree that weight is a secondary concern. However, if the 597g are a major problem for you, there are other A-series rims that are lighter and still made for a similar type of riding.

But I know bikes are very personal things. So, as others often say, whatever excites you and still works is usually the best choice.

All are good choices. I have built many DT 1.1(get the double eyelet model) and CXP-33(far superior to the OpenPro) and have 1.2 on my 'wet weather' Moots. All can use 32mm tires as well. If you are going to do some loaded touring, I'd say the CXP-33 or the heavier 1.2.

Thanks Peter. I am leaning toward the CXP-33 as a good middle ground choice. I know several people who use them for cyclocross racing with great results. I won't be giving my wheels anywhere near that kind of abuse.

BTW, you built me a set of wheels with Torelli Master rims and 36 DT db spokes on my Phil Wood freewheel hubs a few years back. Those wheels have remained true through tens of thousands of miles, mostly while I weighed between 200 and 230 lbs. I took them down some pretty rough roads with 28mm tires mounted. They are currently on my 1980 Fuji S-12S wearing 35mm Pasela TGs. That bike is the one the new Casseroll will replace in my stable. Your wheels will be passed along with the bike to my son to use at college.

New cyclists should be required to read that statement, or one similar, when looking for a bike.

__________________
Sex is horrid
Pain is Fun
I cut my fingers off
One by one

Thanks for the note. Always glad to hear wheels we made are doing the good service they are designed to do.

And sign it, and hold their right hand up and promise to believe and follow and......

I'm intrigued by your recommendation of the CXP33 for loaded touring. I was wondering if you'd suggest it for a bike with a full set of bags (front/rear panniers and handle bars), occupied child seat .... total weight on bike of maybe 100-120 kg? Also, in what kinds of cases (loads, riding style, etc) do you recommend rims more like the A319? Not that I plan any changes soon (I'm excited by my choice ), but it's good reference for the future.

No. With rider and 120kg of stuff, A719, Dyad..lots of spokes(like 40h rear).