Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 179
  1. #26
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    My v3 SL23 averaged 424grams. That's a whole lot less than 500g.
    I did not know that Mike has an inner weight weenie. The things one learns!

    Seriously, rim and component weight is one of life's great mysteries to me. Mike, you've repeatedly said that your 50mm deep rims give you no on-bike-perceptible nor downloaded average speed traceable speed advantage over shallow rims, and any of the analytic calculators out there in the world will tell you that the aerodynamics benefit of a competent set of deeper rims over aerodynamically underperforming shallow rims is going to be multiple orders of magnitude greater than the benefit of losing 50g out of your rims. So why is everyone SO vastly tuned in to weight? Is it because everyone has a scale and no one has a wind tunnel? Are the calculators all THAT wrong? I sure don't know.

    What I do know is that you might as well be trying to sell people a raging case of bubonic plague when you tell them that a rim that's 25 or 30g heavier than another might, all else being equal, be a better rim than the lighter one. The DT460 rims are a great example of this - we stood on our heads trying to tell people how much sense they make, but they're not "wide enough" nor "deep enough" nor "light enough" to make anyone's flowers bloom when looked at on paper. We gave up.

    We've had a couple sets of Forzas on test for a few months. I think they are likely to prove better than either edition of the SL23, but time will tell. It was a year into using the SL23v2 before we saw any spoke hole issues. There have certainly been other rims that have had issues from the venerable Open Pro to newer ones that may not have gotten as much attention (when you see a newish product superseded quizzically early by a "new and improved" version, that's basically smoking gun time).

    I'm happy to see the changes made in the new Pacenti rims. The v2 rims were very nice but had too high an incidence of rim cracking and joint rattling. Time will tell if people are willing to accept "backwards progress" on weight, and how much of an effect the crop of rims that's come up will have on the Forza's popularity.

  2. #27
    changingleaf
    Reputation: changingleaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    543
    The Forza looks very promising. I haven't had any customers crack the SL23's but they did complain about mounting tubeless tires and the brake track on the second generation rim was definitely too small. So now it looks like both of those issues are solved along with a thicker spoke bed so it looks like a great rim for this weight range.

    I've sold a few of the DT R 460 rims because they make for a very inexpensive wheelset. They build excellent and come in a little overweight, which is not a concern for the customers looking for a solid inexpensive wheelset. The one thing I didn't like was that the bead seat is not quite wide enough for a tubeless tire to stay seated when the air is let out. When setting up a wheel tubeless it's always best to inflate the tire first then remove the valve core and add sealant, but when the tire doesn't stay seated this doesn't work.

  3. #28
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7,662
    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    We've had a couple sets of Forzas on test for a few months. I think they are likely to prove better than either edition of the SL23, but time will tell. It was a year into using the SL23v2 before we saw any spoke hole issues. There have certainly been other rims that have had issues from the venerable Open Pro to newer ones that may not have gotten as much attention (when you see a newish product superseded quizzically early by a "new and improved" version, that's basically smoking gun time).
    Nice to see a pragmatic 'wait and see' approach instead of the usual BS that gets tossed around.

    Just isolated incidents, tension too high, not enough spokes, need nipple washers, rider to heavy, you don't know how to mount tires, you're using the wrong rim tape, you need narrow brake pads....has been the reasons given by some to explain how problems didn't exist (but were attempted to be fixed anyway with a revision).

  4. #29
    A wheelist
    Reputation: Mike T.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,161
    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    I did not know that Mike has an inner weight weenie. The things one learns!
    Dave, I'm not a weight-weenie per se but I do take notice of weight just as much as I take note of other rim dimensions (as well as other wheelset & bike parts dimensions). I get lots of "what's the best whelset parts for me" questions, maybe because I'm an impartial source of advice (opinion?) as I have nothing to sell anyone. I'm much too short for my weight to be a raving weight weenie but then I wouldn't choose a 500+g rim for my riding needs either, just like I wouldn't go for the longevity of a pair of Phil Wood tandem hubs.

    Seriously, rim and component weight is one of life's great mysteries to me.
    It's crystal clear to me Dave. I'm no marketing major but I think it's called (drumroll please) marketing. What are the rim designers/makers going to do to sell more rims than the other guy? Low weigh is just one of the variables that will appeal to a segment of the buyers. You and I are both practical people and we know that a rim has to give up something in its quest to be the lightest and the thickest chunk of material (the nipple bed) is usually the one to get trimmed. The SL23 v2 trimmed the brake track width in its quest.
    There's got to be a practical minimum limit to rim dimensions and specs and if universally adopted then what does the rim designer/maker/marketer use to sell more rims than the other guy? Decals? A free set of steak knives?

    Mike, you've repeatedly said that your 50mm deep rims give you no on-bike-perceptible nor downloaded average speed traceable speed advantage over shallow rims, and any of the analytic calculators out there in the world will tell you that the aerodynamics benefit of a competent set of deeper rims over aerodynamically underperforming shallow rims is going to be multiple orders of magnitude greater than the benefit of losing 50g out of your rims. So why is everyone SO vastly tuned in to weight? Is it because everyone has a scale and no one has a wind tunnel? Are the calculators all THAT wrong? I sure don't know.
    I don't always believe everything I read or what everyone tells me so my years of average speed data was my measurement for the benefit of 50mm deep rims over 24mm deep ones. There was no difference outside of the normal noise of everyday riding data. Heart-stopping moments in downhill crosswinds decided my wheel choice. The 50mm carbons are someone else's problem now.

    What I do know is that you might as well be trying to sell people a raging case of bubonic plague when you tell them that a rim that's 25 or 30g heavier than another might, all else being equal, be a better rim than the lighter one. The DT460 rims are a great example of this - we stood on our heads trying to tell people how much sense they make, but they're not "wide enough" nor "deep enough" nor "light enough" to make anyone's flowers bloom when looked at on paper. We gave up.
    Ha, maybe us practical people need to contact you and ask what rims are gathering dust in the back room eh?

    We've had a couple sets of Forzas on test for a few months. I think they are likely to prove better than either edition of the SL23, but time will tell. It was a year into using the SL23v2 before we saw any spoke hole issues. There have certainly been other rims that have had issues from the venerable Open Pro to newer ones that may not have gotten as much attention (when you see a newish product superseded quizzically early by a "new and improved" version, that's basically smoking gun time).
    About 4 years ago, during my quest to find the absolute perfect rim for me I came up with my own design criteria of what (IMO) the perfect rim should be. One of my design criteria was that it be non-tubeless ready (I have zero plans of ever going tubeless). I mentioned all this to a famous rim designer/marketer and his take was that this rim would be "marketing suicide" as it was not tubeless ready. That comment was interesting as my subsequent unscientific sleuthing found that just 10% of tubeless ready rims were ever used tubeless. I did find that rim and it is the BWW Blackset Race 26 - 461grams, 26mm deep x 23mm wide and non-tubeless. I got BWW's Chris to sell me a couple of sets.

    I'm happy to see the changes made in the new Pacenti rims. The v2 rims were very nice but had too high an incidence of rim cracking and joint rattling. Time will tell if people are willing to accept "backwards progress" on weight, and how much of an effect the crop of rims that's come up will have on the Forza's popularity.
    As usual, hindsight will tell us everything we need to know eh?
    Last edited by Mike T.; 11-01-2016 at 07:23 AM.
    .
    Mike T's home wheelbuilding site - dedicated to providing Newby wheelbuilder's with motivation, information and resources.

    Everything above, up to that blue line, is IMO IMO.

  5. #30
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    I obtained a tensiometer (a Wheelfanatyk Digital) almost 4 years ago. It coincided with my first 11-spd hubs. As an interesting experiment I checked all the wheels in my possession, just to see how well I had done in tensioning my wheels by feel and gut reaction alone. I don't remember exact figures but I remember them being "low" relative to 125kgf. Let's say they were 100 - 110kgf. And they were all consistently low.
    Well, OK. You have 5 decades experience building wheels. I have....um.....one wheelset and less than a year's experience. As with most things I do, I believe in the right tools for the job. So from day one, I bought the stand, tensiometer, dishing tool and of course a few good spoke wrenches.

    Obviously you will have more tactile intuition than I will since you have way more wheelbuilding experience than I do. But I believe it comes down to some degree the way we are hardwired. Remember, I'm the guy who uses a torque wrench for everything or I will end up sheering small bolts.

    Comparing the feel of spoke tightness to other wheels is futile as there is no guarantee those are correct. Just for S&G's, I tried the plucking method, but that didn't give me very reliable info. So I came back to what is most comfortable for me - the humble Park Tool tensiometer. Do I expect it will be spot-on accurate? Of course not. But I trust it more than I trust my own tactile feeling for what is acceptable tension.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    So if "low" tension causes me no problems (I can't speak for others) and if it lowers the potential for nipple hole cracks then I will continue to adopt it.
    Understood. Time will only tell.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    What a pity I can't test 4 sets of wheels - with both 125kgf and (about) 110kgf tensions. I'm open to donations to the cause!
    Donations to the Mike Tech wheel testing fund are now being collected:



    This is our goal:



    Please help! Cash accepted!


    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    But consider this - if spokes do break from low tension fatigue and if rims do crack from high tension - which would you rather replace? Spokes or rims?
    Very valid point, Mike. However, if I just use a stronger and more consistently reliable rim with a proven trouble-free track record, wouldn't that make the spokes and nipples the weaker link in the equation?

    I find it interesting (in this thread as well as quite a few others on RBR) how the Pacenti SL23 seems to be the holy grail of alloy road rims. I am puzzled as to why when there are so many other similar choices with much fewer problems. Have you seen or heard of anybody who has cracked spoke holes on HED C2s or H+ Son Archetypes? Is 10-20g of weight really worth the potential for problems? The DT R460 looks very promising too and a great bang for the buck. I haven't heard of any problems with this one, but not sure it's been around long enough to find out. I am about to build a set of these. DT quality in general has been very good. As Changing Leaf said, they may be a problem if you are planning to run tubeless. Since I have no intensions of running tubeless, it's irrelevant.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  6. #31
    A wheelist
    Reputation: Mike T.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    Donations to the Mike Tech wheel testing fund are now being collected.
    All donations appreciated, no matter how small (or light).
    .
    Mike T's home wheelbuilding site - dedicated to providing Newby wheelbuilder's with motivation, information and resources.

    Everything above, up to that blue line, is IMO IMO.

  7. #32
    grizzly moderator
    Reputation: dcgriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,709
    Dave, you are bringing up several very good points.

    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    Seriously, rim and component weight is one of life's great mysteries to me. Mike, you've repeatedly said that your 50mm deep rims give you no on-bike-perceptible nor downloaded average speed traceable speed advantage over shallow rims, and any of the analytic calculators out there in the world will tell you that the aerodynamics benefit of a competent set of deeper rims over aerodynamically underperforming shallow rims is going to be multiple orders of magnitude greater than the benefit of losing 50g out of your rims. So why is everyone SO vastly tuned in to weight? Is it because everyone has a scale and no one has a wind tunnel? Are the calculators all THAT wrong? I sure don't know.
    Tune magazine had done some wind tunnel studies in the past regarding the aerodynamic effect on speed and they found that 80% of the aero gains or losses come from the rider's posture on the bike, the rest come from wheels, bike, clothing and helmet. I dont recall the exact % of gains attributed to aero wheels but it was something like 8% or so. What this means is that if one's posture on the bike is not aerodynamically optimum it will eclipse any gains the rider is expecting to see from the use of aero wheels. This also assumes the speeds travelled are fast enough for the aero to kick in.
    The analytical calculators are quite correct. Aero wheels may give the rider an added edge, as small as it may be in comparison, but it will not be realized unless the rest of the system (rider+bike+wheels) affecting aerodynamics on the bike is optimized.


    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    What I do know is that you might as well be trying to sell people a raging case of bubonic plague when you tell them that a rim that's 25 or 30g heavier than another might, all else being equal, be a better rim than the lighter one. The DT460 rims are a great example of this - we stood on our heads trying to tell people how much sense they make, but they're not "wide enough" nor "deep enough" nor "light enough" to make anyone's flowers bloom when looked at on paper. We gave up.
    Lighter wheels "feel" faster specially when standing up climbing due to the lateral displacement. Studies have shown that the real acceleration gains are not significant. The latest is a model commissioned by BQ and shown in their recent published article that compared wheels with weight increment of +200 grams. Folks have drunk the weight weenie kool-aid for ages now and wheels are no exception.
    Dont give up! When the dust settles, the no-nosense approach separates the true proffesionals from the rest.


    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    I'm happy to see the changes made in the new Pacenti rims. The v2 rims were very nice but had too high an incidence of rim cracking and joint rattling. Time will tell if people are willing to accept "backwards progress" on weight, and how much of an effect the crop of rims that's come up will have on the Forza's popularity.
    KP has made a lot of contributions to the community. Unfortunatelly, it seems the strive to be below a certain weight for marketing purposes has caused more trouble than maybe worth it. Started with the PL23, then SL23 v1, then SL23 v2. Nothing wrong with having "event day" wheels and recognize their limitations on durability but this distinction needs to be made abundantly clear and IMO,it is not.
    With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important.

  8. #33
    wut?
    Reputation: Clipped_in's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    444
    Nice discussion everyone! Kudos to the OP for getting it started.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    I find it interesting (in this thread as well as quite a few others on RBR) how the Pacenti SL23 seems to be the holy grail of alloy road rims. I am puzzled as to why when there are so many other similar choices with much fewer problems.
    Part of the answer is loyalty IMO. I think nearly all custom and hobby wheel-builders (which are the target market of Pacenti rims) are fueled by notion that the small independent guy can put out something better, and that readily translates into wanting to support others who are attempting to do so (Pacenti et al.) I hope the Forza meets all expectations. But again as I asked in my original post, "What sets the Forza apart?" As we have seen, loyalty in and of itself will only go so far. And, the arena of the small independent rim producer is becoming more competitive. However, the arena itself continues to grow potentially making it possible for more players to be sustainable.
    Last edited by Clipped_in; 11-01-2016 at 07:53 AM.
    There I was...

  9. #34
    wheelbuilder
    Reputation: ergott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,143
    Quote Originally Posted by dcgriz View Post
    Aero wheels may give the rider an added edge, as small as it may be in comparison, but it will not be realized unless the rest of the system (rider+bike+wheels) affecting aerodynamics on the bike is optimized.
    I'm being nitpicky. The other stuff is more important, but that doesn't mean that the aerodynamic principles aren't the same for every rider.

    I would agree that starting with the rider is always the first step. Then one can move on the other, less expensive optimizations like helmet, skinsuit (or tight fitting kit), gloves, shoe covers, and all the other gains to be had. I'd put wheels before a frame upgrade though.

  10. #35
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    416
    Quote Originally Posted by Clipped_in View Post
    But again as I asked in my origial post, "What sets the Forza apart?"
    From a technical standpoint, I think your question has already been answered: There really aren't any distinguishing features of the SL23 v3. There are a number of other rims out there with a similar profile for that ballpark weight minus the questionable quality/durability history. The SL23 v3 now comes with an asymmetric option which is nice, but again there are a few others choices (Kinlin and DT Swiss) that do as well.

    I am not saying this to flame Pacenti. I had their SL23 rims for 2+ years and was largely very happy with them. But I think there are better alternatives coming or already on the market.

  11. #36
    grizzly moderator
    Reputation: dcgriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,709
    Quote Originally Posted by ergott View Post
    I'm being nitpicky. The other stuff is more important, but that doesn't mean that the aerodynamic principles aren't the same for every rider.

    I would agree that starting with the rider is always the first step. Then one can move on the other, less expensive optimizations like helmet, skinsuit (or tight fitting kit), gloves, shoe covers, and all the other gains to be had. I'd put wheels before a frame upgrade though.
    I would too. I did not mean to give a preference to frame over wheels.
    With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important.

  12. #37
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    628
    And now I get to contribute more to thread drift! This is sort of a brain dump of things that are generally germane to the topics on hand.

    I've long wondered if there was some physiological thing that went unaccounted for with weight. Like, is the feeling of ease of acceleration that goes with light wheels actually a proxy for some benefit that you reap later, in work that you didn't have to do or muscle fiber recruitment that wasn't done, that now gets left in the jar for some later effort. I don't know.

    If the goal is overall speed, then a set of wheels with competent aerodynamics (SL23 and Kinlin XC279 were both within 12 seconds of an Enve 3.4 front in the mythical 40K TT at 30mph when we tested them) with fast tires is generally going to be faster than a set of "slow" or even bad handling tires (go race a damp crit on Gatorskins and tell me how much you LOVE that experience!!) with "fast" wheels, the wheels with faster tires win.

    There is the downside of increased likelihood of flats, but is it that big? Good tires cost more, sure, but if you use say 4 sets of "performance" tires in the lifetime of a set of wheels versus 3 sets of more durable tires over wheel lifespan, the incremental difference of buying four somewhat-more-expensive tires is dwarfed by the expense difference between carbon wheels and alloys. You're talking maybe a $250 difference versus generally $1000 or more difference.

    Deeper wheels do carry a handling penalty in crosswinds. It's not at all linear with respect to depth, and it varies with tire width (wider tires make wheels more vulnerable to crosswind effects). We've had this tested.

    So there are upsides and downsides to any choice you want to make in terms of optimization.

    No one likes to go slower than they could, obviously, but for most people the apogee of their "going fast" riding is group rides and such. The overwhelming majority of "enthusiast and above" riders don't race. Fast wheels can give you a percentage in that environment. Among other things, smart riding, knowing when you need to give gas and knowing how and when to recover, and just knowing how to draft will give you staggeringly more margin. For Strava segment hunting, I'd pick favorable wind conditions over any other factor (assuming solo riding).

    Of course we are exposed to criticism for having been part of the "hype machine" around fast wheels, but in actual fact everything we've talked about in terms of our own wheels was relative to in-category competition. We proudly take our share of credit for the paradigm of comparing deep/fast wheels to like wheels, and not to the lamest slowest aerodynamic punching dummy that could be found. And the wind tunnel trip we did with the SL23 and XC279 (which we and not their manufacturers initiated and paid for - they played no part in it at all) was really the first inflection point that really opened us up to our present perspective.

    Sorry I got super off track relative to the original topic there. And in the meantime have learned that the Forza rims have had a short production delay so the rims we were hoping to have more or less now won't be available for some period of time.

  13. #38
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    257
    Quote Originally Posted by Clipped_in View Post
    Nice discussion everyone! Kudos to the OP for getting it started.



    Part of the answer is loyalty IMO. I think nearly all custom and hobby wheel-builders (which are the target market of Pacenti rims) are fueled by notion that the small independent guy can put out something better, and that readily translates into wanting to support others who are attempting to do so (Pacenti et al.) I hope the Forza meets all expectations. But again as I asked in my original post, "What sets the Forza apart?" As we have seen, loyalty in and of itself will only go so far. And, the arena of the small independent rim producer is becoming more competitive. However, the arena itself continues to grow potentially making it possible for more players to be sustainable.
    My loyalty is to my customers, not my suppliers. Of course I like to support the suppliers that make my life easier, but if the product isn't up to snuff, I don't use it. I've built a lot of SL23s and only had three folks ever crack them. But, those few failures plus reports of others having issues caused me to make some changes as for who I recommend the SL23s to. My customers don't want the down time of returning wheels for a rebuild, even tho it doesn't cost them anything. I'm losing money by spending time rebuilding wheels and shipping them back and forth more than necessary.

    As for what the SL23/Forza offers that others don't - well, the offset rear is one thing. The new DT Swiss RR411 does have an offset rear, it's a bit lighter, but it requires use of the PHR washers, and will be more expensive. It's also not quite as wide.

    Belgium Plus is expensive. Archetype isn't tubeless, and isn't as wide.

    We're splitting hairs to an extent here, but when considering all of the variables the SL23/Forza look awesome on paper. I'm hopeful the updates to the Forza fix the few issues the SL23 had on occasion.

  14. #39
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    All donations appreciated, no matter how small (or light).


    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  15. #40
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    19
    and the Easton R90SL's where do they fit into this picture? I just got my first set of new wheels in years... from Dave. Love these, why are they not in mix of your discussion.

  16. #41
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Idsticky View Post
    and the Easton R90SL's where do they fit into this picture? I just got my first set of new wheels in years... from Dave. Love these, why are they not in mix of your discussion.
    They're fantastic rims. I actually question whether they'd have achieved the popularity they have had SL23s not become unavailable this past summer, since they are a little heavier and not quite so wide (they're also deeper and have a full height brake track). That's how manic I think "specs fascination" has gotten.

    The reason I don't mention them in the SL23/XC279 bit above is that we haven't taken them to a wind tunnel and I've seen no aerodynamics data on them, which means that I can't quantify them for purposes of this discussion. In my opinion there's no chance that they suffer any in the aero comparison to those two, but until there's an actual measurement, my opinion is all that is.

    Their mountain bike rims are, if anything, even nicer than their road rims.

  17. #42
    Wandering
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    161
    Anyone know (or suspect) how the asymmetric rim compares to it's symmetric brother in aero performance?
    --
    All the best,
    Ron
    Central-Western NJ, USA

    There's nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos.
    --- James Allen Hightower

  18. #43
    A wheelist
    Reputation: Mike T.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,161
    Quote Originally Posted by RL7836 View Post
    Anyone know (or suspect) how the asymmetric rim compares to it's symmetric brother in aero performance?
    If the wind's from the right it provides lift. Just ask November Dave
    .
    Mike T's home wheelbuilding site - dedicated to providing Newby wheelbuilder's with motivation, information and resources.

    Everything above, up to that blue line, is IMO IMO.

  19. #44
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by RL7836 View Post
    Anyone know (or suspect) how the asymmetric rim compares to it's symmetric brother in aero performance?
    Mike is correct but only if you're talking about rim brake bikes. Disc bikes are faster with the wind from the left side (I'm not even kidding, either).

    The aerodynamics of the asymmetric rim are pretty inconsequential. For one, the impact of the rear is 1/2 or less that of the front. For another, the part of aerodynamics to which no one ever gives adequate consideration is stability, but being a rear that's not an issue.

    I I had to guess, and I do, that guess would be that the aerodynamics of a bike and rider with symmetric Forza front and rear (i.e. front rim laced as a rear), compared to a bike and rider with symmetric Forza front and asymmetric Forza rear, would be within the margin of error from each other.

  20. #45
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    119
    Speaking of rim/wheel specs, I'll admit to obsessing over weight before. However I have come to realize that I'll never be able to ride sub 1500g wheelset and expect it to survive for any length of time. I'll be happy if I can get a durable wheelset that comes in around 1600g - which is still pretty light for my 185lbs. I think now I'm more concerned about internal width for larger tires and a bit of aero consideration. After I cracked my SL23 build recently and went back to the stock wheels with a narrower internal width (and external), I don't feel nearly as confident in corners as before. I'm still using the same Rubino Pro III 25ctires. But the because of the slightly higher pressure and smaller contact area,corners are a bit more sketchy if I lean into them like I did with the SL23 rims.

    As a previous user of the SL23's, I hope the Forza rims work out for Pacenti. Not necessarily because of loyalty but I like to see small businesses succeed. However, while I enjoyed my experience with building and riding the SL23's. I won't be queuing up a build of Forza's any time soon after they are available. Sorry Kirk. I wouldn't even consider them for at least a year. I simply don't want to waste the time or money on something unproven from a manufacturer that has had past problems. If I had more disposable income and time to be building/buying and rotating 3 or 4 sets of wheels per year I might consider it. But I don't so I'll look elsewhere.

    Of course now that I have said that about durability and waiting, November Dave will notice I have already contacted him regarding the AL33's which have no public user base track record. I'll admit it's contradiction, but I have been watching them since the kickstarter and I'm really interested in the brake track treatment. I still have some mountain bike rims (early Crossmax's) that have a similar brake track that have been through heck and back and are still ticking. They also tick the checkbox for wider and aero. Just waiting to see what the price is for 24/28 build when the pre-orders open.

  21. #46
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    416
    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    Mike is correct but only if you're talking about rim brake bikes. Disc bikes are faster with the wind from the left side (I'm not even kidding, either).
    I'll bite... why would the yaw aerodynamics be any different for disc brakes, the rim/hub geometry should be nearly identical?

  22. #47
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by cooskull View Post
    I'll bite... why would the yaw aerodynamics be any different for disc brakes, the rim/hub geometry should be nearly identical?
    Rim brake bikes are faster with wind from the right because of the crank.

    Disc brake bikes are faster with wind from the left because of the discs.

    It's small but it's there every time.

    @tinball I feel for your contradiction. Awfully hard to connect screen names to eat names though!

  23. #48
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by November Dave View Post
    @tinball I feel for your contradiction. Awfully hard to connect screen names to eat names though!
    No worries, I didn't know if you would put the recently cracked SL23's mention and my inquiry about the AL33's together or not. It was just one random email in the middle of a slew of inquiries that you are getting all the time.

    I just felt that if I didn't point out the contradiction, someone would call me out on it anyway!

  24. #49
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    416
    Quote Originally Posted by tinball View Post
    I still have some mountain bike rims (early Crossmax's) that have a similar brake track that have been through heck and back and are still ticking. They also tick the checkbox for wider and aero. Just waiting to see what the price is for 24/28 build when the pre-orders open.
    I'm glad you have a backup plan as I wouldn't put a lot of stock in them meeting their target release date of this month (already slipped from last month??). Also I'd speculate that they will prioritize their first rim stock to go to building their proprietary complete wheelsets which undoubtedly bring in more gold Dabloons to the company coffers than rim sales alone would.

    With that said, I hope they have all the bugs worked out in a couple of years when I'll be in the market for a new carbon steed

  25. #50
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by cooskull View Post
    Also I'd speculate that they will prioritize their first rim stock to go to building their proprietary complete wheelsets
    Actually, that is my plan to get a complete wheelset build from November. And Dave's latest blog sets the date back to early-ish December. So, yeah, I'm ok right now with the stock wheels - just biding my time and trying my best to not look at other wheels in the mean time.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Best road tubeless valve stem for Pacenti SL23
    By bobonker in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-16-2013, 11:34 PM
  2. Sette Forza Pro Ultegra VS. BMC Road Racer SL01 Ultegra
    By mike5734 in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-19-2013, 03:34 PM
  3. Sette Forza
    By TomcatD in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-17-2012, 11:54 AM
  4. Pricepoint Forza 105
    By Zeekster64 in forum Hot Deals
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-25-2011, 10:50 PM
  5. First road bike since '97: Vilano Forza
    By sxharr05 in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-26-2010, 01:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •