A suggestion from an user who can't be yet convinced to ditch low profile 17C or 19C aluminium rims: please find such a wheelset with a rim profile of ~25 mm (Mavic Aksium, Campagnolo Zonda, DT Swiss whatever they have) and do some testing on it with some 25C or 28C tyre so you can give us a true baseline for the drag at given speeds or for the expected speeds at given powers.
Would be very interesting to have such a baseline! I would also be curious to see the sensitivity of such traditional low-width and flat rims to tyre section. One could expect them to favour the most narrow tyres (23, even 21?) that most of us have long ditched!
@@robinnez9150 honestly I'd much rather he tested them using more or less the same tyres as in his other tests (or at least a 25C for some common ground and technical compatibility with most wheelsets). I have never chosen a road tyre or its width for aero reasons, as I usually go for the widest tyre that can fit my frame, fork and brakes in order to maximize the comfort on ultra-long rides (12+ hours).
@@11robotics I get your point and agree. My idea of investigating other tyre widths is purely driven by my curiosity for aerodynamics, I have no intention to ever go back to anything smaller than 25, I will probably rather switch from 25 to 28 or 32 soon.
@@robinnez9150 yes, fair enough. I guess such a study would confirm the general principle that the flatter the transition from the tyre to the rim, the more aero the system is.
@11robotics I'm building a rim brake climbing bike. I've got some old lightish wheels with an internal width of 17mm. I'd like to run these with 30mm tires for comfort/contact patch reasons. I appreciate that I can do this and aero isn't a real consideration. Beyond aero, have you heard of any other hypothesised benefits of wider rims?
If bicycle reviews were like this one, or at least with the same level of honesty, we would have well built/better/worth their money bikes. Criticism is not putting pressure on the industry, it makes it better (but tell that to the golden boys).
It certainly helps when reviewers like Peak are professional, and share both their test protocols and findings in a way that allows customers to learn and brands to improve.
@@ascentbikes I've seen your interview on Oompa and you seem you care about the quality of your products; or at least I'd like to believe that you do. Keep true to your holistic view of the wheel. I wish you the best. But, like most Asian companies at some point you have to sort out the distribution in Europe.
@@ascentbikes Echo that , a great thing for brands with genuine and transparent intent to produce good products and place customer service as the heart of their offering. Good companies and products sell themselves (substance over hot air every time ). Reliability in business is all I wish you every success 👏
28C front and on Contis32C rear for a while now. Bicyclerollingresistance tests and consistence experience its been an eye opener as, aside the speed advantage, I hardly skid during sprints on pavee or usual dirty side roads. I´m amazed to see that theres no AERO disadvantage from wide tires on the front though... very very interesting...
Consequence of the rim design - we have catered for wider rims. Choose the tire width that best matches your riding needs. If the roads aren't that bad, a 28mm will be sufficient and have less rotating mass than a 32mm.
@@PeakTorque I missed the context of the testing. It´s always depending on the rim outer width and results are specifically bounded to the rims tested. Ok thank you!
I'd really like to see you test the Nextie AGX45 (41mm OD) rims with a 40 or 42mm gravel tire (Thunderos or GK SS) vs the same tires on a pretty standard 29-32mm OD 45mm deep rim. Although I guess that would pose a logistical challenge as you don't have a gravel bike. The rim is so wide that sense dictates that it would do horribly in steady state, but in blustery conditions outdoors, the stability is so much better.
I also really want to see how these would perform against other narrower top and medium performers in real world conditions. The Nextie AGX wheels looks quite interesting! With 30 mm inner width and 40 mm outer width in hookless version. Also hooked version and 36 mm and 45 mm depth. Fit a tire that's slightly narrower than 40 mm to gain the possible margin aero gain. Might be a 35 mm tire that streches to 38 mm, or a 38 mm that goes 39 mm wide. Will there be a real world penalty in speed and how much, or still a benefit up to this width for normal to slightly rough pavements (and still with option to go on light speed gravel parts of tracks)?
you should get a set of Parcours Ronde wheels to analyze. you mention a 'holistic' approach to efficiency, those wheels seem to embody just that. I'm trying 30mm Pirelli clinchers with latex tubes with those wheels (30.5mm R, 32.0mm F external widths, 1400gr. w/tape).
Thanks for showing the roads that you're testing on. Having never been to the UK I wasn't aware that your roads are so poor, but now it makes more sense that you'll be recommending wider tires that don't make sense outside the UK
We have plenty of rough chip roads here in NZ. Being a lightweight rider, I have found 28mm tires the best for years. I can certainly see a heavier rider benefiting from 30/32 on our roads.
Nice comprehensive review! I would be curious how the Light Bicycle WR series rims stack up against the Ascents. They have a 25mm internal and 32mm external rim width (WR38 and WR50). I think they mate up to 32c tires well, but they might be too wide for 28’s
According to bicyclerollingresistance, there is no difference. The differences between those two setups are found in other areas: weight (marginal), ability to ride at lower pressures (if desired), speed at which air is lost, etc. etc.
Thanks a bunch for this. With you being geeky as you are...is there a way to do an overall weighted quality function for rims + tires? What I've really learned from you lately (and a bit from habini) is that matching tire width and rim width is so worth the effort in terms of "free speed".
With roads like that I'd be on a gravelbike with slicks... or just ride MTBs. All joking aside, thanks for the great review. I might try out 28 mm tires instead of 25, my wheels are wide enough that there shouldn't be much, if any, aero penalty. I'm not necessarily looking for more comfort, I'm blessed to live in a country with great roads, but what is appealing to me is better traction, especially under heavy braking.
Matt, why do you think higher spoke tensions are better? As long as the spoke tension is well within the linear elongation range the stiffness is a function of bracing angle, material stiffness and sectional area - super high tensions do not make a stroner/stiffer wheel.
Higher tensions do reduce the likelihood that the bottom spokes will completely de-tension and buckle on hitting a bump, especially if the rider is heavy.
@@ascentbikes True, i should've added 'while in use'. Whilst tensions at the higher end make it more likely to be a PITA to retrue in several years time.
Totally agree with your thoughts on the wider rims & tyres being faster on real world shit British country roads. I'm running Zipp 303 Firecrest hookless with 28mm Michelin Power Road Tubeless and at approx 52 PSI they feel fast over chip dressed and winter degraded roads. The other comforting factor is that they also feel bombproof yet forgiving but help the bike (TCR Advanced '21) drop like a stone on the descents - just perfect for the roads I ride, the Ascent Polaris appear to share a similar philosophy.
Superb channel and attention to most important details. Thank you. It would be very interesting to see your opinion on new Vision Metron 60 SL. Comparing quality, reliability and manufacturer's experience- to me they are a perfect choice vs Hyper 67, Elite or Ascent.
PT officially pro wide tyre wide rim- how will this affect the bromance with the narrow loving hambini? Incredibly in deoth review and a lot of food for thought. I ride a lot of street and recently swapped out my very bricky front 23mm wide xc rim with 28 tubeless pro one for a deep, bladed spoked carbon for a 21 tubular. Big gains in sprints and climbing but any aero benefit feels totally stomped by the slower tyre and rattle over rough bits of road plus being forced off line and out of tuck
Don't worry, still a 25 or 28mm on the front for the smooth paved road bike TTs. Horses for courses. The roads are smooth round Hambos neck of the woods, just like the hairdresser
Looking to upgrade. Very nice video! Lots to think on. Quick question, I'm looking at a nice aluminum rim (dt swiss) for durability. Am I being stupid?
@@PeakTorque yeah, it's disk. So high end aluminum rims are almost as pricey as carbon. Your say just get carbon? I think your right. I mean it's the same amount of money. Thanks for your input. And keep up the good work!
@@PeakTorque Damn right. I rode the rift in iceland last summer and the alu rims on my gravel bike started coming apart at the spoke holes right after.
Wider tires allow you to reduce pressures for more comfort without the risk of bottoming out. The Polaris is wider internally too, so the same tire actually has more air volume than narrower rim.
Actually, the fastest solution is the old Specialized venge riser aero bars and flat stem, failing that, a flat stem with (properly) aero spacers is the next best thing.
I can say both almost the same. Angle stem (-7°) not aero but less spacer. Flat stem (-17°) is aero but add more spacer that contribute more surface area, not aero. Both ara almost the same. I choose flat stem & spacer, cause I like the way its look. Just forget about aero, in aussie local race, rider put a block of gopro under stem and win the race. In other national race, a rider use 400usd non uci china made t800 frameset without proper rnd and still win the national race. GCN already test cheap rims + entry level hubs, 7s slower than Duraace 12s wheelset. Winspace hyperwheels / Superteam is more than enough or comparaple to expensive wheels.
@@apair4002 yeah, imagine the difference is probably negligible but, since PT is testing these kind of things lately, I thought this would be a good test. I see so many people using a lot of spacers on racing frames and have heard that is not ideal for safety reasons. But I agree that aero is mostly BS. Go get yourself flexible and you are fine.
Welcome to the fat tire revolution! Had a a hard time stomaching earlier videos where you say that wider tires are slower. Yes at outright speed it may be the case but the holistic approach you take here is what matters. Now extrapolate this thinking over 5-10 hours of riding and on even rougher roads. The longer the ride and the worse the conditions get the need for comfort increase. Then add less than ideal physical ability (core strength) resulting in the equation changing again. Sometimes it's hard to tell who you target your findings on. Is it folks at your capacity, average Joe or the pros? Physical performance and skill combined with the right equipment choice is what matters. What the fastest equipment is may differ for those categories. Would be interesting to hear more from you in this regard in future videos. Thanks again for killer content.
fantastic, i bought a pair of mavic slr 40 way over priced and my shimano 105 11 speed cassette has dug these like teeth marks into their drive 360 freehub body ive had them only about a year and not done that many miles i cannot for the life of me find abyone who has reviewed them online, probably because money is better spent elsewhere but i'd love to seea review on these or the mavic hubs at least
Very much depends on what inner tube you are using. TL tyres are heavier and slower than clinchers if used with a tube. What makes them better is if you use glue as intended. However most people are using heavier inner tubes, switch to Latex or TPU and the clincher will be faster.
yeah my Hunt aero 50 rim brake wheels loose tension on the non drive side. Could this be mitigated with a better spoke/nipple adhesive? I am pushing 200lbs, but only air up to 90psi. Seems like the tension on the non drive side was always low and I wonder if this because of the rim profile? Though 1 or 2 spokes have had basically no tension and when i put weight on the wheel, it seems to ride fine and is pretty true.
Raise the overall spoke tension is what I'd suggest. The higher the spoke tension, the less reliant you'll be on loctite type compounds. I've heard mixed reviews on hunt wheels layup, so be sure to not exceed the manufacturer max tension. But, get as close to that max while staying true as you possibly can.
@@dvoob agree. It largely comes down to hub/spoke angle geo and what tension you're willing to push the drive side too. A cx-ray will take way over 300kg before it breaks, but if you achieve say 140kg over 110kg you'd definitely be able to much the non drive side up a bit.
On top of Pete’s comments about CX-Rays, I’d add that rims like these being able to take quite high tension enables/requires a bit of a different wheel-building technique than I learned 25 years ago with alloy rims. I bring the drive-side tension up pretty close to the threshold Sapim alloy nipples can take before starting to deform, then pull the rim across to the non-drive side. This reduces time spent turning the drive-side nipples under high tension. I’m pretty sure this method isn’t used broadly, nor is spoke-prep applied broadly, and where both are absent wheels seem to fall apart. My wheels take an absolute ass-kicking and some of them have gone so long without needing to be tuned that I wind up finding sealant has infiltrated and corroded my nipples, necessitating a rebuild!
Peak Torque: do you find that rims with larger internal width make the tires not as tall? I'm trying to fit 28mm's on the rear of my Trek 5200 but they rub at the top(on frame, not brakes). Current rim internal width is 17mm, however. I am hoping I can fit 28's if I use modern wider rim. Just curious on your input
I think if anything it may make it taller. And if your clearances are that tight...think what damage a stone could so in there. Or worse, if a spoke brakes and the wheel goes out of radial true...
It would be interesting if you could add some of the western brands to the tests in the future - just to compare them to products that are sold directly from Asia and often praised online at the moment. For example, for aero testing it would be interesting too see if something like the Zipp NSW profile actually has it´s claimed benefits. In general, quality of western products would be interesting to see - DT Swiss, Zipp, Enve, Duke, Roval and the like. I´m not saying that I wouldn´t buy something just because it´s made / sold directly in/from China, but the western brands are simply much more common here. Support & service are just way more accessible and can easily be reached by either visiting a shop or with short shipping times in Europe.
Worth noting that the wider tyres are heavier and acceleration will be slower. Your testing is just about holding speed. Would love to see you test the schwalbe pro one TLE Vs the gp5000s. They are lighter and cheaper, but how much slower?
Yes, mathematically speaking. Practically speaking: no. With approx. 100 kg system weight of PT, you will NOT going to feel a difference of 30g per tire, EVER (that's the difference of a conti GP 5000 @ 28 mm vs 25 mm). That's about one part in 2000! And don't get me started on the absolute bollocks of "it's rotational mass". That doesn't make a jot of difference at the RPMs of bicycle wheels. Even a svelte 55 kg cyclist is unlikely to be able to feel the difference in acceleration, even from a standing start, between a 25 mm tire and a 32 mm tire (80 g difference per tire). Because it's still a mere 2.5% difference in total weight. What will possibly change in a noticeable way is the gearing, as the diameter of the wheel will be larger. Can you feel the difference in your bike between your water bottle having 700 mls in it or 500 mls? Don't think so. This is an engineering channel so I'm going to call out this kind of nonsense point blank.
With that tension numbers and no effect on trueness, I'd say they could have gotten away with lesser spoke count (but kept tension higher). Or there is something fishy about spokeholes, not allowing this
We have asked our wheelbuilders to up the tensions to about 130-140 on the inner side. No issues there, the rims can take it. Haven't reduced spoke count because failure of a single spoke would have a greater effect when the spoke count is low.
@@ascentbikes good to hear you take measures on the go! Regarding failure chance, this is basic redundancy. You could have gone 32 or 36 with traditional flange hubs to further improve this property, but we know this is beyond necessary 😁 However, more important is the failure mode... And here lower tension, straightpull design and hub specification for XC use imply the weakest (or less secured otherwise) spot to be the rim. I'd be very happy to know you put sufficient margin into the rim strength to match the redundancy, but that would also mean the structure is overbuild and you have plenty room for optimization.
@@feedbackzaloop Yep, but bear in mind, am optimized structure is less resilient to unplanned loads. That's why we overbuild it a little, while being one of the lightest rims in the depth class still.
@@ascentbikes true, that is why big brands invest so much in R&D to have everything planned and predicted. And yet failing it sometimes... Still, I see it as you overbuild the rim not as much as the wheel in general and loosing some - say - economical potential by having margins in elements procured, not produced. Yes, use of DT and CX-ray is a good advertising in its own, but "sub 1250 sub 2k" would sounds even tastier. This is however more to marketing research, not exactly my profile🤷♂️
Good review, I'm a huge fan of hookless/tubeless/low pressure setup but unfortunately there will always be people who refuse to accept proven data and progress with technology.
That’s a great review, there’s simply nobody else out there paying this much attention to detail. Very much appreciated.
A suggestion from an user who can't be yet convinced to ditch low profile 17C or 19C aluminium rims: please find such a wheelset with a rim profile of ~25 mm (Mavic Aksium, Campagnolo Zonda, DT Swiss whatever they have) and do some testing on it with some 25C or 28C tyre so you can give us a true baseline for the drag at given speeds or for the expected speeds at given powers.
Would be very interesting to have such a baseline! I would also be curious to see the sensitivity of such traditional low-width and flat rims to tyre section. One could expect them to favour the most narrow tyres (23, even 21?) that most of us have long ditched!
@@robinnez9150 honestly I'd much rather he tested them using more or less the same tyres as in his other tests (or at least a 25C for some common ground and technical compatibility with most wheelsets). I have never chosen a road tyre or its width for aero reasons, as I usually go for the widest tyre that can fit my frame, fork and brakes in order to maximize the comfort on ultra-long rides (12+ hours).
@@11robotics I get your point and agree. My idea of investigating other tyre widths is purely driven by my curiosity for aerodynamics, I have no intention to ever go back to anything smaller than 25, I will probably rather switch from 25 to 28 or 32 soon.
@@robinnez9150 yes, fair enough. I guess such a study would confirm the general principle that the flatter the transition from the tyre to the rim, the more aero the system is.
@11robotics I'm building a rim brake climbing bike. I've got some old lightish wheels with an internal width of 17mm. I'd like to run these with 30mm tires for comfort/contact patch reasons. I appreciate that I can do this and aero isn't a real consideration. Beyond aero, have you heard of any other hypothesised benefits of wider rims?
If bicycle reviews were like this one, or at least with the same level of honesty, we would have well built/better/worth their money bikes. Criticism is not putting pressure on the industry, it makes it better (but tell that to the golden boys).
It certainly helps when reviewers like Peak are professional, and share both their test protocols and findings in a way that allows customers to learn and brands to improve.
@@ascentbikes I've seen your interview on Oompa and you seem you care about the quality of your products; or at least I'd like to believe that you do. Keep true to your holistic view of the wheel. I wish you the best.
But, like most Asian companies at some point you have to sort out the distribution in Europe.
@@DnDMF Thank you for your well wishes. It's something we will work on.
@@ascentbikes Echo that , a great thing for brands with genuine and transparent intent to produce good products and place customer service as the heart of their offering. Good companies and products sell themselves (substance over hot air every time ). Reliability in business is all I wish you every success 👏
Love the intro!! A faded and echoed Hambini "hello!".. so cool!
I agree about Continental tires in general.. even their bicycle touring tires are great imo. Motorbike and car tires too!
They are great when they are new. GP5K clincher 25mm will become square quit quickly and that makes cornering scary.
Provided you change them at 4000Km intervals maximum, even as a very light cyclist. I doubt you weigh 48Kg as I do.
28C front and on Contis32C rear for a while now.
Bicyclerollingresistance tests and consistence experience its been an eye opener as, aside the speed advantage, I hardly skid during sprints on pavee or usual dirty side roads. I´m amazed to see that theres no AERO disadvantage from wide tires on the front though... very very interesting...
Consequence of the rim design - we have catered for wider rims. Choose the tire width that best matches your riding needs.
If the roads aren't that bad, a 28mm will be sufficient and have less rotating mass than a 32mm.
No aero penalty *on these rims. On narrower rims, there is significant penalty, as the data shows.
@@PeakTorque I missed the context of the testing. It´s always depending on the rim outer width and results are specifically bounded to the rims tested. Ok thank you!
@PeakTorque 32c has no penalty over 28c because of 23mm ID or rimshape? Thank you again for great content!
Sounds pretty dam good. These are going on my list for consideration.
How can you not love this channel.. real use before review. 👍
I'd really like to see you test the Nextie AGX45 (41mm OD) rims with a 40 or 42mm gravel tire (Thunderos or GK SS) vs the same tires on a pretty standard 29-32mm OD 45mm deep rim. Although I guess that would pose a logistical challenge as you don't have a gravel bike. The rim is so wide that sense dictates that it would do horribly in steady state, but in blustery conditions outdoors, the stability is so much better.
I also really want to see how these would perform against other narrower top and medium performers in real world conditions.
The Nextie AGX wheels looks quite interesting! With 30 mm inner width and 40 mm outer width in hookless version. Also hooked version and 36 mm and 45 mm depth.
Fit a tire that's slightly narrower than 40 mm to gain the possible margin aero gain. Might be a 35 mm tire that streches to 38 mm, or a 38 mm that goes 39 mm wide.
Will there be a real world penalty in speed and how much, or still a benefit up to this width for normal to slightly rough pavements (and still with option to go on light speed gravel parts of tracks)?
No shill review.. no Google warrior bs. Objective and real knowledge. Refreshing!
where did you get the carbon mudguards from? @2:48
good to see you coming around on wider tires :)
*for rough roads. On a fast tt course 25mm on the front!
Yea for time trials of course but that’s like 1% of conditions for most people
Good work doing the study 👍
The HELLO is back!! Cheers mate!
you should get a set of Parcours Ronde wheels to analyze. you mention a 'holistic' approach to efficiency, those wheels seem to embody just that.
I'm trying 30mm Pirelli clinchers with latex tubes with those wheels (30.5mm R, 32.0mm F external widths, 1400gr. w/tape).
Love that rear fender. What is it please??
Would like to know aswell it’s super slick.
His own protype th-cam.com/video/Cu6dCq_1o6Q/w-d-xo.html
@@brankosabol Thank you! Now if he'll only draw one for my bike 🤣👍
DT Swiss 240 EXP hubs use 1526 bearings (smaller + proprietary sizing?) vs 6902 in 350 hubs. Thoughts?
Thanks for showing the roads that you're testing on. Having never been to the UK I wasn't aware that your roads are so poor, but now it makes more sense that you'll be recommending wider tires that don't make sense outside the UK
We have plenty of rough chip roads here in NZ. Being a lightweight rider, I have found 28mm tires the best for years. I can certainly see a heavier rider benefiting from 30/32 on our roads.
Amazing review thanks for your work
Are you still running them a year later?
Did you ever change the default spoke tension on new wheels with your caad10 since it has the asymmetric integration?
thanks for the in depth review!
Great review, as always. That is a tasty looking custom mudguard you've knocked up - any plans to sell these in your shop soon?
Unfortunately not yet because it would be so damn expensive! And it only fits the TCR. Maybe in future i would make a more modular version!
Nice comprehensive review! I would be curious how the Light Bicycle WR series rims stack up against the Ascents. They have a 25mm internal and 32mm external rim width (WR38 and WR50). I think they mate up to 32c tires well, but they might be too wide for 28’s
I have them (WR45) on my training\winter bike in theory the shape is ideal but my setups are always 28/32C front/rear and roughly measure 31/34.8.
Great video with regards to the TR version of the GP5000 is it much faster than a non tubless clincher version with a latex tube?
According to bicyclerollingresistance, there is no difference. The differences between those two setups are found in other areas: weight (marginal), ability to ride at lower pressures (if desired), speed at which air is lost, etc. etc.
Thanks a bunch for this. With you being geeky as you are...is there a way to do an overall weighted quality function for rims + tires? What I've really learned from you lately (and a bit from habini) is that matching tire width and rim width is so worth the effort in terms of "free speed".
Thank you for the detailed review!
Do you know if they changed the spoke tension after this video?
With roads like that I'd be on a gravelbike with slicks... or just ride MTBs. All joking aside, thanks for the great review. I might try out 28 mm tires instead of 25, my wheels are wide enough that there shouldn't be much, if any, aero penalty. I'm not necessarily looking for more comfort, I'm blessed to live in a country with great roads, but what is appealing to me is better traction, especially under heavy braking.
Great Review!! Where did you get that Carbon Rear Fender?? Make it??
I made it! Video coming soon. But its 86g... 😝
@@PeakTorque wanna buy ✌️
what's that rear mud guard you've got on?
@@wespress i made it.
Matt, why do you think higher spoke tensions are better?
As long as the spoke tension is well within the linear elongation range the stiffness is a function of bracing angle, material stiffness and sectional area - super high tensions do not make a stroner/stiffer wheel.
Higher tensions do reduce the likelihood that the bottom spokes will completely de-tension and buckle on hitting a bump, especially if the rider is heavy.
@@ascentbikes True, i should've added 'while in use'.
Whilst tensions at the higher end make it more likely to be a PITA to retrue in several years time.
Totally agree with your thoughts on the wider rims & tyres being faster on real world shit British country roads. I'm running Zipp 303 Firecrest hookless with 28mm Michelin Power Road Tubeless and at approx 52 PSI they feel fast over chip dressed and winter degraded roads. The other comforting factor is that they also feel bombproof yet forgiving but help the bike (TCR Advanced '21) drop like a stone on the descents - just perfect for the roads I ride, the Ascent Polaris appear to share a similar philosophy.
Wouldn't ride the Michelins on a reasonably wide rim ... their tread width is tiny. Michelin forbid greater than 19mm ID on the 28s.
@@pmcmpc good point and worth checking - didn’t realise they had a minimum rim width. They are hookless rims & tyres but need to check
Hi Great video as always! How do you think a AX Lightness Ultra 38T would compare to wheels like this. Would love to see you test and review these.
Superb channel and attention to most important details. Thank you. It would be very interesting to see your opinion on new Vision Metron 60 SL. Comparing quality, reliability and manufacturer's experience- to me they are a perfect choice vs Hyper 67, Elite or Ascent.
PT officially pro wide tyre wide rim- how will this affect the bromance with the narrow loving hambini?
Incredibly in deoth review and a lot of food for thought. I ride a lot of street and recently swapped out my very bricky front 23mm wide xc rim with 28 tubeless pro one for a deep, bladed spoked carbon for a 21 tubular. Big gains in sprints and climbing but any aero benefit feels totally stomped by the slower tyre and rattle over rough bits of road plus being forced off line and out of tuck
Don't worry, still a 25 or 28mm on the front for the smooth paved road bike TTs. Horses for courses. The roads are smooth round Hambos neck of the woods, just like the hairdresser
Very interesting Pete 👌 have you come across the Parcours Strade wheels, just wondering what you thought/think 👍
What are the best 55mm and 60mm wheels for around 1k to 1500
Would love to see Venn's VAR 507 and 77 rims tested.....
On a side issue. What make and model is your mudguard? Thanks.
Looking to upgrade. Very nice video! Lots to think on. Quick question, I'm looking at a nice aluminum rim (dt swiss) for durability. Am I being stupid?
Disc brake? There is very little reason to to Alu for a disc brake rim. 'Fatigue' is more or a problem on alu rims at the spoke holes.
@@PeakTorque yeah, it's disk. So high end aluminum rims are almost as pricey as carbon. Your say just get carbon? I think your right. I mean it's the same amount of money. Thanks for your input. And keep up the good work!
@@PeakTorque Damn right. I rode the rift in iceland last summer and the alu rims on my gravel bike started coming apart at the spoke holes right after.
Are you running the tires tubeless? How have you been for punctures while out on real roads? You got me researching the wheels, I was curious!
No I'm testing the TR with just lightweight tubes. Not tried tubeless yet on them. I don't like the mess when a hole doesn't seal.
Ascent sell a rear 69 and front 42 combination. You have both wheels sets, what are your thoughts on this combination, tested it yet?
I think - the front wheel dictates the aero. So pick based on that and match the rear for a clean look
Is a video coming on the new Conti tires?
Sorry, 50 Psi? 3.4 bar? I'm at 7.5/8.0 bar at 25mm at 197 and 93ish kg. Please inform me
bigger tire volumes, einstein; that means far softer tire pressures.
Wider tires allow you to reduce pressures for more comfort without the risk of bottoming out. The Polaris is wider internally too, so the same tire actually has more air volume than narrower rim.
@@ascentbikes didn't know your could go this low. On my off road 45mm tires of often put 4 bars if I'm only riding road. But thanks
Gotta try me some GP5000s!
Very cool review
What is more aero, an angled stem or a flat stem with spacers?
are the spacers 'aero'?
Actually, the fastest solution is the old Specialized venge riser aero bars and flat stem, failing that, a flat stem with (properly) aero spacers is the next best thing.
I can say both almost the same.
Angle stem (-7°) not aero but less spacer.
Flat stem (-17°) is aero but add more spacer that contribute more surface area, not aero.
Both ara almost the same.
I choose flat stem & spacer, cause I like the way its look.
Just forget about aero, in aussie local race, rider put a block of gopro under stem and win the race. In other national race, a rider use 400usd non uci china made t800 frameset without proper rnd and still win the national race.
GCN already test cheap rims + entry level hubs, 7s slower than Duraace 12s wheelset. Winspace hyperwheels / Superteam is more than enough or comparaple to expensive wheels.
@@apair4002 lol, mate, I think he was taking the piss.
@@apair4002 yeah, imagine the difference is probably negligible but, since PT is testing these kind of things lately, I thought this would be a good test. I see so many people using a lot of spacers on racing frames and have heard that is not ideal for safety reasons.
But I agree that aero is mostly BS. Go get yourself flexible and you are fine.
Welcome to the fat tire revolution!
Had a a hard time stomaching earlier videos where you say that wider tires are slower. Yes at outright speed it may be the case but the holistic approach you take here is what matters. Now extrapolate this thinking over 5-10 hours of riding and on even rougher roads. The longer the ride and the worse the conditions get the need for comfort increase. Then add less than ideal physical ability (core strength) resulting in the equation changing again.
Sometimes it's hard to tell who you target your findings on. Is it folks at your capacity, average Joe or the pros? Physical performance and skill combined with the right equipment choice is what matters. What the fastest equipment is may differ for those categories.
Would be interesting to hear more from you in this regard in future videos. Thanks again for killer content.
Thanks for all the work that you do in creating this review!
fantastic, i bought a pair of mavic slr 40 way over priced and my shimano 105 11 speed cassette has dug these like teeth marks into their drive 360 freehub body ive had them only about a year and not done that many miles i cannot for the life of me find abyone who has reviewed them online, probably because money is better spent elsewhere but i'd love to seea review on these or the mavic hubs at least
hmm, I think you just sold me on the ICAN aero 35's with 28mm 5K..
Out of curiosity, what did the 28mm tyres measure up considering they're on 23mm internal rims?
Would have been about 30ish, depending on pressure.
28.5mm at 76psi. See 4:38 in the wide tyre aero video (video before this one)
So the TR version of the GP5000 is faster than the non-tubeless version?
Slightly, yes.
Very much depends on what inner tube you are using. TL tyres are heavier and slower than clinchers if used with a tube. What makes them better is if you use glue as intended. However most people are using heavier inner tubes, switch to Latex or TPU and the clincher will be faster.
@@reginaldscot165 no. rollingresistance website tested that. The tubeless is ever so slightly faster than the tyre + latex version.
So what, 32 faster than 28? What about 25?
Is your enjoyment of the wider tyres part of your move to preference of disc brakes despite some of their engineering downsides?
yeah my Hunt aero 50 rim brake wheels loose tension on the non drive side. Could this be mitigated with a better spoke/nipple adhesive? I am pushing 200lbs, but only air up to 90psi. Seems like the tension on the non drive side was always low and I wonder if this because of the rim profile? Though 1 or 2 spokes have had basically no tension and when i put weight on the wheel, it seems to ride fine and is pretty true.
Raise the overall spoke tension is what I'd suggest. The higher the spoke tension, the less reliant you'll be on loctite type compounds. I've heard mixed reviews on hunt wheels layup, so be sure to not exceed the manufacturer max tension. But, get as close to that max while staying true as you possibly can.
@@dvoob agree. It largely comes down to hub/spoke angle geo and what tension you're willing to push the drive side too. A cx-ray will take way over 300kg before it breaks, but if you achieve say 140kg over 110kg you'd definitely be able to much the non drive side up a bit.
On top of Pete’s comments about CX-Rays, I’d add that rims like these being able to take quite high tension enables/requires a bit of a different wheel-building technique than I learned 25 years ago with alloy rims. I bring the drive-side tension up pretty close to the threshold Sapim alloy nipples can take before starting to deform, then pull the rim across to the non-drive side. This reduces time spent turning the drive-side nipples under high tension. I’m pretty sure this method isn’t used broadly, nor is spoke-prep applied broadly, and where both are absent wheels seem to fall apart. My wheels take an absolute ass-kicking and some of them have gone so long without needing to be tuned that I wind up finding sealant has infiltrated and corroded my nipples, necessitating a rebuild!
Peak Torque: do you find that rims with larger internal width make the tires not as tall? I'm trying to fit 28mm's on the rear of my Trek 5200 but they rub at the top(on frame, not brakes). Current rim internal width is 17mm, however. I am hoping I can fit 28's if I use modern wider rim. Just curious on your input
I think if anything it may make it taller. And if your clearances are that tight...think what damage a stone could so in there. Or worse, if a spoke brakes and the wheel goes out of radial true...
@@PeakTorque appreciated thanks man. Sticking to 25s for now
Usually taller but it can depend on how stiff/wide the tread area is on the specific tyre. You can get some pretty weird shapes
It would be interesting if you could add some of the western brands to the tests in the future - just to compare them to products that are sold directly from Asia and often praised online at the moment. For example, for aero testing it would be interesting too see if something like the Zipp NSW profile actually has it´s claimed benefits. In general, quality of western products would be interesting to see - DT Swiss, Zipp, Enve, Duke, Roval and the like. I´m not saying that I wouldn´t buy something just because it´s made / sold directly in/from China, but the western brands are simply much more common here.
Support & service are just way more accessible and can easily be reached by either visiting a shop or with short shipping times in Europe.
They are coming, don't worry 😁
Worth noting that the wider tyres are heavier and acceleration will be slower. Your testing is just about holding speed. Would love to see you test the schwalbe pro one TLE Vs the gp5000s. They are lighter and cheaper, but how much slower?
Yes, mathematically speaking. Practically speaking: no. With approx. 100 kg system weight of PT, you will NOT going to feel a difference of 30g per tire, EVER (that's the difference of a conti GP 5000 @ 28 mm vs 25 mm). That's about one part in 2000! And don't get me started on the absolute bollocks of "it's rotational mass". That doesn't make a jot of difference at the RPMs of bicycle wheels.
Even a svelte 55 kg cyclist is unlikely to be able to feel the difference in acceleration, even from a standing start, between a 25 mm tire and a 32 mm tire (80 g difference per tire). Because it's still a mere 2.5% difference in total weight. What will possibly change in a noticeable way is the gearing, as the diameter of the wheel will be larger.
Can you feel the difference in your bike between your water bottle having 700 mls in it or 500 mls? Don't think so.
This is an engineering channel so I'm going to call out this kind of nonsense point blank.
@@philipk4475 while I agree, the differences in all these tests are a few watts. So the difference is valid to point out.
@@TrickyTree84 fair point
are you sure these are genuine DT Swiss hubs? a Chinese manufacturer told me the patent had ended, and they were now freely copying them
Yeh, loads of Chinese hubs now copy the start ratchet, but these are the real deal. Got the correct serial numbers
With that tension numbers and no effect on trueness, I'd say they could have gotten away with lesser spoke count (but kept tension higher). Or there is something fishy about spokeholes, not allowing this
We have asked our wheelbuilders to up the tensions to about 130-140 on the inner side. No issues there, the rims can take it.
Haven't reduced spoke count because failure of a single spoke would have a greater effect when the spoke count is low.
@@ascentbikes good to hear you take measures on the go!
Regarding failure chance, this is basic redundancy. You could have gone 32 or 36 with traditional flange hubs to further improve this property, but we know this is beyond necessary 😁 However, more important is the failure mode... And here lower tension, straightpull design and hub specification for XC use imply the weakest (or less secured otherwise) spot to be the rim. I'd be very happy to know you put sufficient margin into the rim strength to match the redundancy, but that would also mean the structure is overbuild and you have plenty room for optimization.
@@feedbackzaloop Yep, but bear in mind, am optimized structure is less resilient to unplanned loads. That's why we overbuild it a little, while being one of the lightest rims in the depth class still.
@@ascentbikes true, that is why big brands invest so much in R&D to have everything planned and predicted. And yet failing it sometimes...
Still, I see it as you overbuild the rim not as much as the wheel in general and loosing some - say - economical potential by having margins in elements procured, not produced.
Yes, use of DT and CX-ray is a good advertising in its own, but "sub 1250 sub 2k" would sounds even tastier. This is however more to marketing research, not exactly my profile🤷♂️
Only drawback I see from experience is that fatter tyres will penalties you on climbs
The expensive tyres.....free speed......eh?!?!
But do they roll really well? Just kidding, I know you hate that phrase...
They roll amazing. Funny that, they're round!
Good review, I'm a huge fan of hookless/tubeless/low pressure setup but unfortunately there will always be people who refuse to accept proven data and progress with technology.
Me too. Since 303 Firecrest launch! The handling is a tremendous plus too.
I am fat. Not fast
Same.
Too expensive. That's my review!
Compared to Chinese brands, yes. The western brands, no
i am so tired of technology, we lost the essence of cycling.
Launch the Polaris , it doesn't scare us