OUR NEW FORUM/BLOG IS NOW ONLINE IN BETA VERSION, WITH A SCHEDULED PUBLIC RELEASE NEXT WEEK. ANYONE WITH A USER ID FROM THE CURRENT FORUM HAS ALREADY HAD THEIR USERNAME IMPORTED TO THE NEW FORUM THOUGH PASSWORDS WERE NOT IMPORTED SO YOU'LL NEED TO USE PASSWORD RECOVERY TO GET A NEW PASSWORD. WHILE THE NEW FORUM IS NOT YET COMPLETE WITH ALL OF IT'S FEATURES IT IS FUNCTIONAL AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU THERE.
Gumgardner wrote:Good question. You may not get much feedback over here.
Fourthbook wrote: I've studied the wind tunnel data at Enve and other makers but have a difficult time applying those 'controlled' results my real world use.
Fourthbook wrote:My question is: for general use, which rim/wheelset would be most efficient/fast, the lighter but shallower/less aerodynamic Thirty-Twos, or the deeper/more aerodynamic but heavier 1.45s, or the mixed depth/more aerodynamic but nearly a half pound heavier of dynamic weight on the Smart 3.4s?
pritchet74 wrote:I would guess that the Madfiber wheels would be absolutely horrible aerodynamically due to their sharp V profile. This is why Lightweight wheels are not good aero wheels. And the problem I had with the LW wheels is that they were really effected by cross winds. I lusted for those wheels for a long time and after one ride I sold them. Huge disappointment. So, light weight doesn't mean a wheel will be a fun wheel to ride.
Ypsylon wrote:Lighter wheels might accelerate faster, but remember that you have wind resistance while accelerating as well. So while a system with lighter wheels might accelerate faster from 10 to 20 km/h, it might be the other way around if you want to accelerate from 40 to 50, in a sprint, for example.
Aero trumps weight.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests