I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they using,
and how do they manage to keep up with riders with aero wheels?

Thanks

"Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in news:b77e8i$sq9@dispatch.concentric.net:
> I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they
> using, and how do they manage to keep up with riders with aero wheels?

Aero wheels really only matter in time trials and you'll undoubtedly see the fanciest wheels then.
On the mountain stages, weight is more important. On the flat stages, the peloton sticks close
together so aerodynamics aren't very important.

I've read something about the 32 spoke wheels having a lot of rotational weight. Wouldn't they save
more energy by using the lighter wheels with less spokes?

"Ken" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message news:Xns935AA28BB2FC2fubar123@66.134.198.18...
> "Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in news:b77e8i$sq9@dispatch.concentric.net:
> > I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they
> > using, and how do they manage to keep up with riders with aero wheels?
>
> Aero wheels really only matter in time trials and you'll undoubtedly see
the
> fanciest wheels then. On the mountain stages, weight is more important.
On
> the flat stages, the peloton sticks close together so aerodynamics aren't very important.

"Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in news:b77rvu$sq1 @dispatch.concentric.net:

> I've read something about the 32 spoke wheels having a lot of rotational weight. Wouldn't they
> save more energy by using the lighter wheels with less spokes?

Is this a troll or something? Where did you read that? Try asking the author your question.

"Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:b77e8i$sq9@dispatch.concentric.net...
> I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they
> using, and how do they manage to keep up with riders
with
> aero wheels?
>
> Thanks

*yawn*

.01

On Sat, 12 Apr 2003 02:00:30 +0000, Jiyang Chen wrote:

> I've read something about the 32 spoke wheels having a lot of rotational weight. Wouldn't they
> save more energy by using the lighter wheels with less spokes?

1) Fewer spokes, not less.

2) What makes you think a 9-spoke wheel is lighter than a 32-spoke wheel? It's not. In order to get
by with fewer spokes, the rim has to be stronger. Stronger means heavier.

3) Rotational weight is weight, pure and simple.

The reason more pros don't ride handbuilt 32-spoke wheels, and instead ride boutique 11-spoke
wonder-wheels is very simple. The people who market boutique wheels pay them to ride them, and they
aren't _that_ much worse, so why not? Some are more aero, which helps in a time trial.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored _`\(,_ | by little
statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo (_)/ (_) | Emerson

Jiyang Chen <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they
> using, and how do they manage to keep up with riders with aero wheels?

It's all irrelevant, since everyone knows LANCE and pals would be dropped like a hot rock by anyone
blessed enough to ride a lowracer recumbent, I read it here on rbmisc.

The guys with 32 spoke wheels keep up because the other racers feel sorry for them for having such
lame equipment sponsors.

"David L. Johnson" <david.johnson@lehigh.edu> wrote in news:b77v7n$6bq@fidoii.CC.Lehigh.EDU:

> On Sat, 12 Apr 2003 02:00:30 +0000, Jiyang Chen wrote:
>
> 3) Rotational weight is weight, pure and simple.

Not quite. Heavier wheels have more angular momentum, which is proportional to rotational inertia,
which, in essence, means a spinning wheel wants to keep on spinning. This is an advantage on long
flats, but a disadvantage in sprints and climbs.

A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a pound of
rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."

"Ken" <nospam@no.spam> wrote in message news:Xns935AC24B767D7fubar123@66.134.198.18...
> "Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in news:b77rvu$sq1 @dispatch.concentric.net:
>
> > I've read something about the 32 spoke wheels having a lot of rotational weight. Wouldn't they
> > save more energy by using the lighter wheels with less spokes?
>
> Is this a troll or something? Where did you read that? Try asking the author your question.

Jiyang Chen writes:

> A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a pound
> of rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."

Oh cut it out! Repeating this BS only embeds it deeper in bicycling myth and lore. Bicycles do not
accelerate fast enough for these weights to have any effect, so the computation is invalid. Neither
rotating or static weight on a bicycle has a significant effect on bicycle propulsion, the bicycle
accelerating with such a low rate that it is imperceptibly affected by weight in the range of
interest. Weight is important in climbing but then those who argue about its importance are
generally those who never look into a mirror critically with respect to weight.

Aluminum spoke nipples are a classic example of misplaced concern for weight.

Jobst Brandt jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org Palo Alto CA

Jiyang Chen <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a pound
> of rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."

This is almost definitely marketing BS. Ksyrium Elites are HEAVIER, not lighter than a pair of
hand-built 32-spoke wheels of the same price. Given that the Ksyriums have fewer spokes it's very
likely that the rim is much heavier than the typical rim in a 32-spoke wheel.

-as

"Jiyang Chen" <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:b77e8i$sq9@dispatch.concentric.net...
> I've noticed the riders using the 32 spoke wheels in previous Tours. What wheelsets are they
> using, and how do they manage to keep up with riders with aero wheels?

Those guys aren't using old stuff like Jobst would put together, take team Telekom, they used
Campagnolo Neutrons at the Tour on many stages, as did Igor Gonzalez De Galdeano on his
ONCE-Eroski's Giant TCR Composite and Alexander Shefer riding for team Alessio. Laurent Dufaux was
using Campy Eurus which only have 14 spokes.

Alexandre Botcharov riding for AG2R-Prévoyance used 20 spoked Penta wheels.

There are tons of teams using either Shimano Dura Ace with 16 J-bend spokes or the 18 and 20 Zicral
bladed straight pull spoke Mavic Ksyrium SSC SLs.

A guy like me should really be rolling on something like Campy's nice Hyperons.

Anyway, the days of riding on 32 spoked wheelsets built by some old guy at the bike shop are forever
long gone. Old silly stuff like Mavic's CXP-33, Open Pros, and MA3 aren't going to get you anywhere
and look really cluncky.

Jiyang Chen <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote:
: A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a pound
: of rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."

lol. that's from the may 2003 issue of bicycling magazine page 120 and the exact quote is:

"Switching from a traditional 32-spoke wheel to a low-spoke-count model such as Mavic's Ksyrium
Elite ($500, www.mavic.com) shaves about a half pound of rotating weight, equal to dropping 3-5
pounds elsewhere."

catalog, indeed!
--
david reuteler reuteler@visi.com

Yep, that's it...

"David Reuteler" <reuteler@visi.com> wrote in message
news:3e98bf3f$0$169$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com...
> Jiyang Chen <Jiyangc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> : A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a
pound
> : of rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."
>
> lol. that's from the may 2003 issue of bicycling magazine page 120 and
the
> exact quote is:
>
> "Switching from a traditional 32-spoke wheel to a low-spoke-count model
such
> as Mavic's Ksyrium Elite ($500, www.mavic.com) shaves about a half pound
of
> rotating weight, equal to dropping 3-5 pounds elsewhere."
>
> catalog, indeed!
> --
> david reuteler reuteler@visi.com

On Sat, 12 Apr 2003 19:57:59 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:

>Jiyang Chen writes:
>
>> A cycling catalog... "Upgrading from a 32 spoke wheels to Mavic Ksyrium Elites save half a pound
>> of rotational weight, or 2-3 pounds elsewhere."
>
>Oh cut it out! Repeating this BS only embeds it deeper in bicycling myth and lore. Bicycles do not
>accelerate fast enough for these weights to have any effect, so the computation is invalid. Neither
>rotating or static weight on a bicycle has a significant effect on bicycle propulsion, the bicycle
>accelerating with such a low rate that it is imperceptibly affected by weight in the range of
>interest. Weight is important in climbing but then those who argue about its importance are
>generally those who never look into a mirror critically with respect to weight.
>
>Aluminum spoke nipples are a classic example of misplaced concern for weight.

Sometimes I wonder when the marketing departments are going to swing the other way. For the past few
years we've been hearing about the benefits of low spoke count wheels with their attendant heavier
"aero" rims. Now we see "low rotational weight" being touted. Every time I look at my 36 spoke Mavic
Montlhéry rimmed wheels I'm reminded that there was a day when sub-400 gram rims were common. Could
we someday see the return of high spoke count, light rimmed wheels marketed with claims of low
rotational weight? After all, if we can reduce rotational weight by a half pound it's like losing
two to three pounds elsewhere. ;-)

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3