Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2014-09-16 9:58 AM |
DC | Subject: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum ASSUMING I can get some Flo 60's, I'm also thinking about a pair of full carbon Reynolds. They are not as deep, but they're almost a full pound lighter. With a dish for racing, I'm thinking the Reynolds are best deal as they might be better for climbing on the roadie. Would love your thoughts. Reynolds Assault Ltd Rim Height: 46mm Rim Width: 20.8mm Spoke Count: Front: 20; Rear: 24 Weight: 1570g |
|
2014-09-16 10:15 AM in reply to: Porfirio |
Extreme Veteran 933 Connecticut | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Aero trumps weight every time. That extra pound isn't the difference between you and being faster up a hill. Aluminum brake tracks are a lot sturdier than carbon. Both Reynolds and Flo make excellent wheels and have excellent customer service. Flos are a bit harder to come by with their limited runs. I personally feel the faring on the Flo is a bit flimsy, compared to Reynolds, but ymmv. Then engine is the most important part of the bike. Spend the off season training with power instead. |
2014-09-16 10:43 AM in reply to: fisherman76 |
DC | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by fisherman76 I personally feel the faring on the Flo is a bit flimsy, compared to Reynolds, but ymmv. Then engine is the most important part of the bike. Spend the off season training with power instead. This is the first negative-ish comment I have heard about FLOs (next to the supposed weight "penalty"). Interesting. Good to hear the opposing opinion. Thanks. |
2014-09-16 10:51 AM in reply to: Porfirio |
Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum I would go with the FLO wheels. Those Reynolds wheels are on a deep discount now for a reason. And FLO also sells their pre sales out in minutes for a reason as well. If weight is a real factor for you, then get a used set of 202 or 303 tubulars. My guess though is that weight isn't a factor for your races. If it were, you wouldn't be in a triathlon forum. |
2014-09-16 11:14 AM in reply to: Jason N |
DC | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Jason N I would go with the FLO wheels. Those Reynolds wheels are on a deep discount now for a reason. And FLO also sells their pre sales out in minutes for a reason as well. If weight is a real factor for you, then get a used set of 202 or 303 tubulars. My guess though is that weight isn't a factor for your races. If it were, you wouldn't be in a triathlon forum. Thanks. Flos are my preference. I'm just outright nervous about being unable to get a pair. |
2014-09-16 11:55 AM in reply to: Porfirio |
Extreme Veteran 933 Connecticut | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Have you looked into Hed wheels? The HED Jet 7 should be on your radar as well. |
|
2014-09-16 12:42 PM in reply to: Porfirio |
35 | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum For order 15 I had everything only cart (60/90 and 30/30) ready to go but weenied out and didn't pull the trigger. Went back a couple of hours later and all were still available. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just be ready to go at beginning of next order and you should be good to go. From what I've read the disc is hard to get. |
2014-09-16 12:49 PM in reply to: Porfirio |
1055 | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. |
2014-09-16 12:50 PM in reply to: fisherman76 |
DC | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by fisherman76 Have you looked into Hed wheels? The HED Jet 7 should be on your radar as well. Thanks. Nice wheels but way out of my price range. (I'm told my kid should be in pre-school but then I wonder how bad it would be if he missed a semester or two ). |
2014-09-16 12:50 PM in reply to: abbattoir |
DC | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by abbattoir For order 15 I had everything only cart (60/90 and 30/30) ready to go but weenied out and didn't pull the trigger. Went back a couple of hours later and all were still available. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just be ready to go at beginning of next order and you should be good to go. From what I've read the disc is hard to get. This is VERY reassuring. |
2014-09-16 1:42 PM in reply to: 0 |
Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by ziggie204 Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. You can use FLOs in races that aren't governed by UCI rules. Allowed for pretty much all amateur bike racing, but I believe some forms of draft legal triathlon racing adopts those UCI rules.
Edited by Jason N 2014-09-16 1:44 PM |
|
2014-09-16 2:08 PM in reply to: Jason N |
DC | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Jason N Originally posted by ziggie204 Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. You can use FLOs in races that aren't governed by UCI rules. Allowed for pretty much all amateur bike racing, but I believe some forms of draft legal triathlon racing adopts those UCI rules.
Not that it matters, but why are flo disallowed by UCI? |
2014-09-16 2:12 PM in reply to: Jason N |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Jason N Originally posted by ziggie204 Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. You can use FLOs in races that aren't governed by UCI rules. Allowed for pretty much all amateur bike racing, but I believe some forms of draft legal triathlon racing adopts those UCI rules.
Can't be used in the Jr. Elite series for sure....and those same rules apply to all ITU draft legal races. Both use UCI rules. (when they want to ) |
2014-09-16 2:20 PM in reply to: Porfirio |
Expert 3126 Boise, ID | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Porfirio Originally posted by abbattoir For order 15 I had everything only cart (60/90 and 30/30) ready to go but weenied out and didn't pull the trigger. Went back a couple of hours later and all were still available. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just be ready to go at beginning of next order and you should be good to go. From what I've read the disc is hard to get. This is VERY reassuring.
They may have still been showing in the cart but putting them in the cart does nothing to reserve them. They are not yours until you hit the order button and receive confirmation. No way those wheels were still available a few hours later. They haven't had anything available after 30 minutes or so on any order they have had. That said their computer system works well. If you are on at the right time and have everything ready to go it is not that hard to get an order in. I had stuff in the cart and kept watching stock go down for the first 15 minutes or so until everything was gone in June. I got a screaming deal on some Zipp 404's from my LBS so I did not order the Flo's but if I had not got the great price on the 404's I would be riding a set of Flo 60's right now. May do some Flo 30's at some point for climbing and descending. |
2014-09-16 2:28 PM in reply to: Porfirio |
Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Porfirio Originally posted by Jason N Not that it matters, but why are flo disallowed by UCI? Originally posted by ziggie204 Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. You can use FLOs in races that aren't governed by UCI rules. Allowed for pretty much all amateur bike racing, but I believe some forms of draft legal triathlon racing adopts those UCI rules.
It seems that the UCI keeps a list of wheels that are approved for racing. It's not to say that FLO wheels were reviewed by the UCI and deemed to be dangerous or illegal, it's probably more likely the case that they haven't had the time or need to review them as nobody in the pro ranks has showed interest in using them. I believe when you adopt UCI rules, you probably adopt all of them...not just the ones which you think apply...but I could be wrong.
|
2014-09-16 2:37 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Jason N Originally posted by Porfirio Originally posted by Jason N Not that it matters, but why are flo disallowed by UCI? Originally posted by ziggie204 Unless you're doing bike races, I wouldn't buy the Reynolds. As far as I have heard, the Flo's still aren't on the approved list. You can use FLOs in races that aren't governed by UCI rules. Allowed for pretty much all amateur bike racing, but I believe some forms of draft legal triathlon racing adopts those UCI rules.
It seems that the UCI keeps a list of wheels that are approved for racing. It's not to say that FLO wheels were reviewed by the UCI and deemed to be dangerous or illegal, it's probably more likely the case that they haven't had the time or need to review them as nobody in the pro ranks has showed interest in using them. I believe when you adopt UCI rules, you probably adopt all of them...not just the ones which you think apply...but I could be wrong.
That's how it was explained to us.......BUT, in practice it's slow in coming along. I saw a kid get turned away at a race with Flo wheels, but I saw one allowed to race at another race. As you stated, they are NOT on the approved list, so you take your chances at an ITU race. At worlds they were turning away people with bike frames like the zipp 2001/3001....so maybe the UCI rules are not just for draft legal.....like you, I'm not sure because the rules don't seem to be universally applied yet.....with time I suspect all UCI rules will apply to ITU triathlon.
Edited by Left Brain 2014-09-16 2:38 PM |
|
2014-09-16 4:25 PM in reply to: fisherman76 |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by fisherman76 Aero trumps weight every time. That extra pound isn't the difference between you and being faster up a hill. Aluminum brake tracks are a lot sturdier than carbon. The weight savings is basically meaningless for our purposes. There is some data out there that full carbon wheels "can" be more aerodynamic as the carbon can be molded more aerodynamically than an aluminum brake track. Both Zipp and Bontrager have made those claims backed up with their CFD and aero testing. The big pain in the arse with carbon clinchers as race day wheels is having to swap out brake pads each time the wheels are used. |
2014-09-17 5:25 AM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
Extreme Veteran 933 Connecticut | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum To be clear, we agree. Those things were meant as independent points. |
2014-09-17 6:26 AM in reply to: Porfirio |
Pro 5892 , New Hampshire | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum The biggest reason why I prefer aluminum brake track on my race wheels is out of laziness… With carbon brake track, you need dedicated brake pads. It doesn't take much to swap out the pads, but it's yet another thing to remember. The brake pads will pick up microscopic pieces of aluminum chars from the training wheels, which works as a very strong abrasive on CF brake surface, hence the necessity to swap pads. CF requires CF specific pads as well (the heat is higher so you need a different compound) although there are some pads that claim they work on both. |
2014-09-17 9:18 AM in reply to: audiojan |
Member 388 Miami | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum I got a set of FLOs 60/90 and couldn't be happier. They are very durable and pretty good wheels. I had the opportunity to try a set of Reynolds as well, but I was able to buy the FLOs instead and I like them over the Reynolds. Not having to change break pads is a big plus. If you are online when they go for sale, you should have enough time to buy what you want, don't worry! |
2014-09-17 10:00 AM in reply to: 0 |
Oakville | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by davidfedez I got a set of FLOs 60/90 and couldn't be happier. They are very durable and pretty good wheels. I had the opportunity to try a set of Reynolds as well, but I was able to buy the FLOs instead and I like them over the Reynolds. Not having to change break pads is a big plus. If you are online when they go for sale, you should have enough time to buy what you want, don't worry! To reinforce the OP's decision, I also have been racing on a set of FLO 60/90s for 2 years now and love them. I also bought a wheelbuilder cover for the rear which has become a permanent fixture for all races. I was a little nervous for a few races with heavier wind gusts, but I didn't notice a difference. Pair them with some latex tubes and Conti GP4000S and they are a fast set of wheels.
Edited by Scott71 2014-09-17 10:02 AM |
|
2014-09-17 11:53 AM in reply to: Porfirio |
Pro 6582 Melbourne FL | Subject: RE: Wheels: Full carbon vs carbon/aluminum Originally posted by Porfirio There have been 3 pairs on eBay in the past week. A 60/60 sold for best offer, was listed for $799. A 60/60 set just sold auction for $699 with shipping. There's a 60/90 still on for $799 or best offer +shipping. The other site seems to have some in classifieds every once in a while too.Originally posted by Jason N I would go with the FLO wheels. Those Reynolds wheels are on a deep discount now for a reason. And FLO also sells their pre sales out in minutes for a reason as well. If weight is a real factor for you, then get a used set of 202 or 303 tubulars. My guess though is that weight isn't a factor for your races. If it were, you wouldn't be in a triathlon forum. Thanks. Flos are my preference. I'm just outright nervous about being unable to get a pair. |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
|