I'm in the market for race wheels. I've raced on everything form Specialized trispokes (stiffest) to
Shimano 7701s (softest). I prefer stiff as possbile.

I'm looking at Reynolds carbon wheels... but does anyone know if these wheels are stiff? How would
they compare to Ksyriums, for example?

Thanks in advance, Scott

All wheels are equally stiff. There is no give at all in any of them. It's in your head.

scott wrote:
> I'm in the market for race wheels. I've raced on everything form Specialized trispokes (stiffest)
> to Shimano 7701s (softest). I prefer stiff as possbile.

Hmmm. In the test data that I have seen, the Specialized tri-spokes are quite flexible both
vertically and laterally. This was confirmed by Jim Merz at Specialized when I spoke to him about it
In September. He was on the team that designed those wheels, and he indicated that it was quite
difficult to get adequate stiffness because the wheel lacked the triangulation found in most wheels.

Furthermore, the stiffness of the wheel is not something normally detectable by the rider as even
the most flexible wheel will deflect only a small amount compared to tires, fork, saddle, seatpost,
bars, and stem.

Todd Kuzma Heron Bicycles Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com http://www.tullios.com

"scott" <scottsmack@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e048ac47.0312011615.7dc8a3d5@posting.google.com...
> I'm in the market for race wheels. I've raced on everything form Specialized trispokes (stiffest)
> to Shimano 7701s (softest). I prefer stiff as possbile.
>
> I'm looking at Reynolds carbon wheels... but does anyone know if these wheels are stiff? How would
> they compare to Ksyriums, for example?
>
> Thanks in advance, Scott

You have any way to get a test ride? Try talking to your LBS: they may be able to wrangle you
up a set...

I know my 404s with 24/24 lacing are plenty stiff for me at 180#. If you're over 160# I wouldn't go
with any fewer than 18/24 lacing for crits.

If you're looking for all out stiffness, try some first gen Cosmics. Even though they're 16/16 they
ride way stiff. At one point, they were the most aero spoked wheel out there. Probably still pretty
far up there as far as aero goes.

Mike

Todd Kuzma <tullio@theramp.net> wrote:
: Hmmm. In the test data that I have seen, the Specialized tri-spokes are quite flexible both
: vertically and laterally. This was confirmed by Jim Merz at Specialized when I spoke to him about
: it In September. He was on the team that designed those wheels, and he indicated that it was
: quite difficult to get adequate stiffness because the wheel lacked the triangulation found in
: most wheels.
:
: Furthermore, the stiffness of the wheel is not something normally detectable by the rider as even
: the most flexible wheel will deflect only a small amount compared to tires, fork, saddle,
: seatpost, bars, and stem.

quiet you.
--
david reuteler reuteler@visi.com

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 11:49:39 -0600, Todd Kuzma <tullio@TheRamp.net> wrote:

>scott wrote:
>> I'm in the market for race wheels. I've raced on everything form Specialized trispokes (stiffest)
>> to Shimano 7701s (softest). I prefer stiff as possbile.
>
>Hmmm. In the test data that I have seen, the Specialized tri-spokes are quite flexible both
>vertically and laterally. This was confirmed by Jim Merz at Specialized when I spoke to him about
>it In September. He was on the team that designed those wheels, and he indicated that it was
>quite difficult to get adequate stiffness because the wheel lacked the triangulation found in
>most wheels.
>
>Furthermore, the stiffness of the wheel is not something normally detectable by the rider as even
>the most flexible wheel will deflect only a small amount compared to tires, fork, saddle, seatpost,
>bars, and stem.
>
>Todd Kuzma Heron Bicycles Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
>http://www.heronbicycles.com http://www.tullios.com
>

My experience of Aerospokes is that the lateral flex was not enough to cause brake rub but plenty to
move a previously stable bike into a shimmy demonstration device as quite low speeds, <20mph. Of
course, a 12cm stem and cowhorns and long tribars all hanging out front miles from the steering axis
helped to lower the shimmy resonance frequency too. I'd expect all 3,4, and 5-spoke designs with
narrow connections to the hub to exhibit similar tendencies to varying degrees. I wonder what the
original poster meant when he said the Specialized wheels were the stiffest he'd used.

If you want stiff, get some 36 spoke track wheels with deep rims!

Kinky Cowboy

*Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.

Mmmmm..... Old school.

KinkyCowboy wrote:
>
> If you want stiff, get some 36 spoke track wheels with deep rims!
>
>
> Kinky Cowboy
>
> *Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.

"Gearóid Ó Laoi/Garry Lee" <nospam_glee@iol.ie> wrote:

> All wheels are equally stiff. There is no give at all in any of them. It's in your head.

That's functionally true in the vertical plane, which may be what the OP meant.

But wheels vary wildly in the amount of flex they display under a given side load. The resistance to
side flex in a wheel is dependent upon the center-to-flange spacing of the hub (wider is better) and
the number and thickness of spokes.

A wheel built with 32 14/17ga. spokes will deflect about the same amount as one built with 16
14ga. spokes, and about twice as much as a wheel built with 32 14ga. spokes, assuming the same hub
flange spacing.

I would imagine that most all aero wheels besides lenticular disks would flex a lot under side
loads. Most are deficient in hub flange width or its structural equivalent.

Chalo Colina

__________________
Just a signature for identifying purposes

Mea Culpa for the blank reply

Really? I would think that their high Rim compensates quite a bit. I was under the impression when I used them that Cosmics and Shamals didn't flex at all. Then again, I am 60 kg's, so I am not a good guinea-pig on flex.

Anyways, I know three guys weighing 75 kgs who race (and they are really really good) with Ksyriums on cobblestone courses. So far they have no breakage over a year, yet these guys are rather rough with them.

__________________
Just a signature for identifying purposes

My experience and measurements agree.
For some more data on the subject check what Damon Rinard's tests say at URL:
http://sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel/index.htm

__________________
David Ornee, Western Springs, IL USA

Tuschinski <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:

> Chalo wrote:
> > I would imagine that most all aero wheels besides lenticular disks would flex a lot under side
> > loads. Most are deficient in hub flange width or its structural equivalent. Chalo Colina
>
> Really? I would think that their high Rim compensates quite a bit.

No road rim is wide or heavy enough to contribute very much to a wheel's out-of-plane stiffness.
Consider that even if the rim were perfectly stiff, it would still be able to deflect visibly due to
elasticity in the spokes. But the rim is not at all stiff by itself, either.

> I was under the impression when I used them that Cosmics and Shamals didn't flex at all. Then
> again, I am 60 kg's, so I am not a good guinea-pig on flex.

One easy measure of the lateral stiffness of a wheel is how much force it takes to deflect the rim
until it contacts a brake pad. It's not much.

> Anyways, I know three guys weighing 75 kgs who race (and they are really really good) with
> Ksyriums on cobblestone courses. So far they have no breakage over a year, yet these guys are
> rather rough with them.

I have no experience with low-spoke-count wheels, but whether such wheels are durable or not is a
separate issue from whether or not they are stiff.

Chalo Colina

> > Chalo wrote:
> > > I would imagine that most all aero wheels besides lenticular disks
would
> > > flex a lot under side loads. Most are deficient in hub flange width
or
> > > its structural equivalent. Chalo Colina
> >
> > Really? I would think that their high Rim compensates quite a bit.
>
> No road rim is wide or heavy enough to contribute very much to a wheel's out-of-plane stiffness.
> Consider that even if the rim were perfectly stiff, it would still be able to deflect visibly due
> to elasticity in the spokes. But the rim is not at all stiff by itself, either.
>
> > I was under the impression when I used them that Cosmics and Shamals didn't flex at all. Then
> > again, I am 60 kg's, so I am not a good guinea-pig on flex.
>
Mine don't flex under me that I can determine and I'm 82kg. Siffest damn wheels I've ever ridden, my
404s included!

> One easy measure of the lateral stiffness of a wheel is how much force it takes to deflect the rim
> until it contacts a brake pad. It's not much.
>
> > Anyways, I know three guys weighing 75 kgs who race (and they are really really good) with
> > Ksyriums on cobblestone courses. So far they have no breakage over a year, yet these guys are
> > rather rough with them.
>
> I have no experience with low-spoke-count wheels, but whether such wheels are durable or not is a
> separate issue from whether or not they are stiff.
>
> Chalo Colina

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:

> > > Chalo wrote:
> > > > I would imagine that most all aero wheels besides lenticular disks would flex a lot under
> > > > side loads.
> >
> > Tuschinski wrote:
> >
> > > I was under the impression when I used them that Cosmics and Shamals didn't flex at all. Then
> > > again, I am 60 kg's, so I am not a good guinea-pig on flex.
> >
> Mine don't flex under me that I can determine and I'm 82kg. Siffest damn wheels I've ever ridden,
> my 404s included!

You must not have ridden normal wheels, then. According to measurements posted at

http://sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel/data.htm

here are measured side deflections for rear wheels of similar weights, two 32 spoke conventional
wheels, one Mavic Cosmic, and one Campy Shamal:

Mavic MA40/Shimano Ultegra 9sp, 32 14/15ga. spokes: 1.98mm Velocity Deep-V/Shimano Ultegra, 32
bladed spokes: 1.83mm Mavic Cosmic tubular 16 spoke rear: 2.46/2.36mm
L/R Campagnolo 1999 Shamal 16 spoke tubular rear: 1.91mm

So you can see that Shamals are no stiffer laterally than normal wheels, and Cosmics are quite a
bit less so.

Chalo Colina

On 5 Dec 2003 16:26:10 -0800, chumpychump@hotmail.com (Chalo) wrote:

>"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:
>
>> > > Chalo wrote:
>> > > > I would imagine that most all aero wheels besides lenticular disks would flex a lot under
>> > > > side loads.
>> >
>> > Tuschinski wrote:
>> >
>> > > I was under the impression when I used them that Cosmics and Shamals didn't flex at all. Then
>> > > again, I am 60 kg's, so I am not a good guinea-pig on flex.
>> >
>> Mine don't flex under me that I can determine and I'm 82kg. Siffest damn wheels I've ever ridden,
>> my 404s included!
>
>You must not have ridden normal wheels, then. According to measurements posted at
>
>http://sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel/data.htm
>
>here are measured side deflections for rear wheels of similar weights, two 32 spoke conventional
>wheels, one Mavic Cosmic, and one Campy Shamal:
>
>Mavic MA40/Shimano Ultegra 9sp, 32 14/15ga. spokes: 1.98mm Velocity Deep-V/Shimano Ultegra, 32
>bladed spokes: 1.83mm Mavic Cosmic tubular 16 spoke rear: 2.46/2.36mm
>L/R Campagnolo 1999 Shamal 16 spoke tubular rear: 1.91mm
>
>So you can see that Shamals are no stiffer laterally than normal wheels, and Cosmics are quite a
>bit less so.
>
>Chalo Colina

The wheel data comfirms my experience with Aerospokes, they're heavy and downright floppy! But
they're also faster in flat course time trials than a 28 spoke Mavic Mach2, proving that if you
improve the aerodynamics enough it makes up for a lot of other faults.

Kinky Cowboy

*Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.