To all contemplating deep dish bling wheels

[grahamspringett]

I did a 10km time trial yesterday, using clip-on bars on a road frame but with the stem whacked right down, a skinsuit and with Mavic Ksyrium wheels.

A teammate who is a grade higher than me and much stronger was riding his standard road bike with a pair of Zipp 606 wheels (which I understand are a 404 front and 808 rear, so plenty of deep-dish aero goodness).

I beat him by 45 seconds, which ain't bad over such a short distance.

This surely demonstrates that aero bars make all the difference and that Zipp wheels aren't worth the thousands of bucks asking price?

I'm sure there'll be some die-hard Zipp or aero wheel fan who'll try to argue with me, but as far as I can tell we were both motivated and the conditions were the same (we were on the road at the same time, separated by only a handful of minutes).

For you number crunchers, I (C grade) managed 16min 14.12, my B grade mate did 16min 59.5 and the A grade winner (who has a contract with Drapac Porsche for next year) did 14min 30.4. My grade winner did 15min 42.45.

 

[Phill P]

The human body contributes WAY more drag than the wheels. If you reduce your frontal area using aero bars that will reduce aero drag far more than deep section wheels.

 

[artemidorus]

Aero bars/TT position make a lot more difference than wheels, that has never been disputed. Why on earth was your friend, who cares enough to ride with deep Zipp wheels, not riding a TT bike or at least using clip-ons? For that matter, why were you, who cares enough to ride in a skinsuit, using Ksyrium wheels?

 

[mikesbytes]

Even more important is torso position, as the torso provides more wind drag than any other body or bike part.

 

[531Aussie]

yeah, what those guys said ^, plus....

There's no doubt the benefits of bling wheels are way overstated by those who wanna sell them, and also by those who wanna justify their big purchase. I have 2 pairs of aero wheels (Flash-Points and Token C50As), and I can't tell any speed difference at all. Overall, I'm a little disappointed them and I reckon I might've wasted my dough.


In this test, the drag was reduced by only 15w when the rider changed from 32-spoked wheels to two tri-spoke wheels, but he cut 105w of drag just by going from riding on the hoods to riding in an aero position with tri bars!

http://www.dk-content.de/tour/pdf-archiv/tests/zeitfahren_material_0107.pdf

This aero wheel test shows similar small differences, and it tests front wheels, so the benefits are about half on top of each figure for the rear. For eg, it says that the cheap Shimano R550 front wheel generates only about 6 watts more drag than a Zipp 404!
http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-15505311.html

On the other end of the scale, this test suggests that wheels such as the Zipp 808, Vuelta Carbon Pro and the Xentis Mk II make 40w difference (that must be for the pair), translating to a speed benefit of 1.56kph at 40kph!! Wow. It seems a bit high to me.

http://www.vueltausa.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/media/German Wheel Test.pdf

 

[grahamspringett]

For that matter, why were you, who cares enough to ride in a skinsuit, using Ksyrium wheels?

Money, mate!

That's the point I was making. You don't need to spend thousands to go fast. And you don't need to feel disadvantaged if you can't afford Zipps et al.

 

[Peter@vecchios]

I did a 10km time trial yesterday, using clip-on bars on a road frame but with the stem whacked right down, a skinsuit and with Mavic Ksyrium wheels.

A teammate who is a grade higher than me and much stronger was riding his standard road bike with a pair of Zipp 606 wheels (which I understand are a 404 front and 808 rear, so plenty of deep-dish aero goodness).

I beat him by 45 seconds, which ain't bad over such a short distance.

This surely demonstrates that aero bars make all the difference and that Zipp wheels aren't worth the thousands of bucks asking price?

I'm sure there'll be some die-hard Zipp or aero wheel fan who'll try to argue with me, but as far as I can tell we were both motivated and the conditions were the same (we were on the road at the same time, separated by only a handful of minutes).

For you number crunchers, I (C grade) managed 16min 14.12, my B grade mate did 16min 59.5 and the A grade winner (who has a contract with Drapac Porsche for next year) did 14min 30.4. My grade winner did 15min 42.45.

Only way to know and it still is up in the air is to swap bikes, have all other conditions the same and do it again...BUT the BIG differences reside in the rider, not the bike. Position, fit, fitness, finesse, etc. BUT all the bike marketeers can accurately measure is the bike.Wind tunnel(maybe) numbers, weight and price.

 

[Peter@vecchios]

Money, mate!

That's the point I was making. You don't need to spend thousands to go fast. And you don't need to feel disadvantaged if you can't afford Zipps et al.

" more races have been lost solely due to equipment than won"

" to finish first you must first finish"

"it isn't about the bike"

plus lots of others.....

 

[Bro Deal]

I think I read somewhere that wheels account for roughly 10% of total drag and the difference between box rims and the best discs is about 25%, which makes your maximum reduction 2.5%. That works out to maybe one kph at speeds most of us cruise around at.

 

[alienator]

Only way to know and it still is up in the air is to swap bikes, have all other conditions the same and do it again...BUT the BIG differences reside in the rider, not the bike. Position, fit, fitness, finesse, etc. BUT all the bike marketeers can accurately measure is the bike.Wind tunnel(maybe) numbers, weight and price.

Mostly what he said.

Your "test" really doesn't prove anything for or against any particular aero solution, nor has it provided any new information. If you've been around any internet bike forum the last 2,3,4 or so years, you've read over and over again that even the best wheels provide only ~0.4 mph benefit at 25 mph. So much for your epiphany.

As stated earlier, it ain't a valid test if you don't compare like with like, holding the same variables constant, in the same conditions, on the same surface, with the same tires, the same inflation pressure, the same inner tubes.......blah blah blah. The odds that you and your friend have the same body dimensions, the same weight, and so on are about nil.

As an equally stupid counterpoint, in the last week, Dave Zabriskie competed in Paris-Tours. He was using Zipp 1080 wheels, was wearing a skinsuit, and was as aero as he could get without having aero bars and an aero frame. He didn't win. Maybe he should have used your exact setup.

FWIW, bike marketeers don't measure anything. They never have and never will. Thinking they do displays an immense amount of ignorance. Marketeers do take data that engineers, scientists, and technicians collect and mistate it, incorrectly report it, and/or report it out of context to sell a product. Of course, this only works because buyers believe what the marketeers say. If there weren't gullible buyers, there wouldn't be marketeers. Conflating marketing with experimental tests and results is, at best, another demonstration of how American schools have failed society, and at worst, criminally stupid.

 

[dhk2]

Agree the anecdote proves nothing. But 0.4 mph would be a huge advantage to a TT racer doing a 40K @ 25 mph, over 30 seconds saved. To someone racing at the elite level, where only seconds often seperate the top few places, and they've already fine-tuned the aero position, helmet, skinsuit, spending big money on aero wheels might make sense....after all, why have a silver or bronze medal if you could get a gold (plastic) one by just spending another grand or two?

Of course, no company can make money selling wheels to just elite TT riders, hence the marketing push to all the rest of us. I don't see this as a bad thing really, since all the rich old club-level guys buying these fancy wheels means a better selection and price for the racers who are so often strapped for cash.

 

[alienator]

dhk2: this is NOT directed at you but rather at this corrosive idea re: who buys what, who rides what, and who does what with their cycling dolllars.

I don't buy the rich old club level guys thing. I mean, it is a great way to appear superior to other cyclists, and all, but it's just another load of BS from a different dump truck.

Quaint old LBS owners and workers will have you think that you should really only have DT rims laced 32 3x to Campy or Shimano hubs, but they can never really offer up any reason why that should be. The simple fact is that with the rapid maturation of CF technology as applied to things like wheels, some of the ol nuggets that people repeated like Hail Marys, really aren't so true or so applicable any more. There are CF wheels/rims, now, that are perfectly durable for every day use. The price on said wheels is coming down, so it's getting to the point where people can have their wheel cake and eat it, too.

I'm not really sure where this categorization of cyclists based on their station in life, their racing history, their purchase history, and what they do or don't deserve came from. Does anyone out there ever try to ride without worrying about or formulating comment re: what someone else is riding, what they're wearing, and/or what they do for a living? Really, this continuing saga of what rich lawyers ride or don't ride really makes cyclists look ****ing stupid.

I mean, if we're going to be that petty, then we should insist that everyone, except Pro Tour riders and a few pro continental teams, should only be allowed to buy $500 bikes. Really, unless you're being paid to win, you don't need anything else, right?

Who is cycling really about, anyway? Is it all about those poor little cash strapped racers? Is it all about what happens in Le Tour? Or could it also be about those lowly folks that just like to ride and who might actually have reasons to buy what they buy? Nah, couldn't be that....at least not without the approval of the governing board of cycling snobbery.

Or maybe we should all just grow up and realize that it is "cyclists" that are buying bike stuff and that it doesn't ****ing matter what job you have, what house you live in, whether or not you're floating under a golden parachute......ride what turns you on.

Of course, if you need facts, go to the marketeers AND the LBS workers/owners: they are equally well versed in the facts......as they see them, and all they're both interested in is sellin' you something.

 

[sideshow_bob]

As others have pointed out the number of variables makes any comparison meaningless. Who knows if you'd ridden a set of 1080's maybe your time would have been faster. Maybe not.

There's also the fact that some people simply don't TT well and some do. Especially at club level the variance is large because of the very low number of these you are ever likely to do. Maybe you are great, and your mate is a **** TT'er.

What I find a bit odd is that your time as a C grader equates to 39.1km/h over 10km, and someone who's going to a Pro Continental team is doing a time that is 41.3km/h.

Was this a flat course? Cause most club A grade TT's I see on flat courses over less than 30km, usually run a whole lot faster than 41km/h, even on dead roads.

 

[dgregory57]

If equipment were the only differentiation for a time trial, then they would not be raced.

Even at the pro level, two equally matched racers on equivalent bikes will not always do the same times on a time trial. There are variables in the racer that can not be accomodated in a comparison like the OP pointed out.

I am not a racer, nor will I likely ever be, but, the aero wheels are a small piece of the overall machine that a serious time trialist puts together to win an event when seconds matter. Will deep section rims save minutes on a time trial? Not likely. Can they trim a few seconds? Possibly. If those seconds are worth $2,000 to the rider, then it is... It is no sillier than paying $50 for a stem that saves 15 grams...that probably saves even less time on a time trial... but may help a little bit on hills.

 

[dhk2]

If equipment were the only differentiation for a time trial, then they would not be raced.

Even at the pro level, two equally matched racers on equivalent bikes will not always do the same times on a time trial. There are variables in the racer that can not be accomodated in a comparison like the OP pointed out.

I am not a racer, nor will I likely ever be, but, the aero wheels are a small piece of the overall machine that a serious time trialist puts together to win an event when seconds matter. Will deep section rims save minutes on a time trial? Not likely. Can they trim a few seconds? Possibly. If those seconds are worth $2,000 to the rider, then it is... It is no sillier than paying $50 for a stem that saves 15 grams...that probably saves even less time on a time trial... but may help a little bit on hills.

Aero wheels can definately trim seconds in a TT, and at some level seconds count. Our local hero won the World's Masters TT championship in Salzburg last year by < 6 seconds.....certainly within the margin where wheels (and lots of other little things) do matter. IIRC, he was on Rennspeed wheels, which aren't all that expensive.

OTOH, there are guys who are just club riders or local racers who have this stuff because they like bling equipment and enjoy spending money on cycling. One of our club riders seems to build up a new high-end frame every season....believe he's got at least five very nice road bikes in the garage now. After a scary health issue, his philosophy is "you can't take it with you". When he comes out on a new bike, we all tell him he's got more money than sense, and he freely agrees

 

[artemidorus]

What I find a bit odd is that your time as a C grader equates to 39.1km/h over 10km, and someone who's going to a Pro Continental team is doing a time that is 41.3km/h.

Was this a flat course? Cause most club A grade TT's I see on flat courses over less than 30km, usually run a whole lot faster than 41km/h, even on dead roads.

The OP's time gives 37.0 km/h, not 39.1 km/h. Probably a hilly course.

 

[sideshow_bob]

The OP's time gives 37.0 km/h, not 39.1 km/h. Probably a hilly course.

Correct, good math I did there.

 

[grahamspringett]

It was flat but the road surface was rough as guts and there was a fairly stiff breeze on the L-shaped course, so you caught it whichever way you went.

I knew this post would open a can of worms, and there has been a lot of interesting comments. Of course I realise there are huge variations at the club level. All I wanted to do was reassure anybody who feels they are at a disadvantage by not having expensive wheels when they do a time trial.

Were I Fabian and my mate Carlos then yes, I'd be after some nice Zipps. If I could afford it, then yes, I'd like to shave off a couple of seconds with Reynolds et al. But in my recent research over what wheels to splash out on I have come across some wild claims of the benefits of 50mm deep rims.

Train hard, use clip-ons and enjoy yourself. You never know who you're going to beat.

 

[Felt_Rider]

Train hard, use clip-ons and enjoy yourself. You never know who you're going to beat.

I suppose many avid cyclists has someone that they know competing with lower end bikes and gear.

I have several that I know, but one that stands out the most to me is a guy that competed last year in the World Ironman with a sub $1000 Scattante bike, obviously low end components, low end wheels and clip-ons and did quite well in his age group. He did well enough with that bike to get qualified to go.

I've tried to ride to ride with him, but his engine was just too much.

This year he and his wife are going to the Arizona Ironman on a new Felt TT bikes, which he says they like much better. Still he has one heck of an engine to push what ever bike he is on. At least compared to most that I ride with.

 

[slowfoot]

can you guys speak about tubulars vs clinchers?

despite the problems with flatting, how much of a benefit are they?

(relative to the other quick fixes such as deep rimmed wheels, TT bars, posiitoning, etc.)

thanks

dave