Satisfied with your wheel upgrade?

outfox

I'm thinking of upgrading the Shimano RS10s which came with the bike I've started racing with. There are plenty threads about wheel choice, and I'll review them when the time comes. But first, I'm wondering if boardsies who upgraded their wheels in the past think it was worth it? If you've replaced your stock wheels (say RS10s or Fulcrum 7s or similar) with some fancy clinchers like Ksyriums or Dura Ace or Zondas, did you notice an improvement in climbing or average speed? I'd appreciate the feedback - €600-1000 is a lot of money for something that may get written off in a pothole or crash.

Borderfox

Had a set of 4za stratos wheels to start off with and upgraded them to Zondas, big difference in getting them up to speed and climbing also got a set of Detec wheels 60mm on the front and 80km on the back, very impressed with them but haven't ridden the a lot as I'm only coming back from a fractured pelvis atm

fat bloke

I've had a fair selection of wheels from bog standard aksiums to zipp 808's and lots of others in between. Currently my race bike has ksyrium slr's and my conclusion is....

inconclusive!

I'm really not sure if it isn't a whole load of marketing boll0x. I did a lot of training last year in West Kerry, I had a loop around Slea Head that I timed myself on almost daily for over a month and nearly all of it was on a medium level carbon ridley on a pair of gatorskinned aksiums. Towards the end I switched to a top of the tree (though a few years old) trek madone 6.9 on superlight race-tyred carbon clinchers, and I was really interested in advance to see how much quicker I would do the same exact circuit and the answer was - not so much .

So I would say that if you're looking for actual, measurable gains then forget about it, there are too many other variables, particularly for amateur riders, and you're training and form top any and all gear upgrades. I (and others) would tell you to keep your standard wheels and buy a power meter and start training to that. (but lets not have that debate here).

But, having said that, aesthetically and feel good factor wise, wheels are the biggest change you can make and i love my posh wheels and I'm currently shopping for a 700 euro+ wheelset myself right now, when I could just as easily take my own advice and buy 3 sets of aksiums.

Beasty

Agree with fat bloke. I really struggle to see a difference in terms of speed/effort. Yes a nice set of wheels look great and I'm certainly not going to skimp when it comes to price. However my main concerns are durability and stability. I probably have 30 sets of wheels now. A few are TT or track specific. I also have some pretty fancy road wheels but when it comes down to it my "staple" wheel is the Fulcrum Racing 3 which never seems to let me down.

death1234567

I upgraded from Shimano R500 to Ksyriums and noticed a big jump in average speed, probably around 1.5 K/PH in average speed. Easier to roll along with the Ksyriums and less effort to maintain a higher speed.

ninoon

My tuppence worth. Two years ago after considerable deliberation I upgraded from Mavic Aksiums to Ksyrium SLSs.
Yes I do notice an improvement but it is hard to quantify in increased speed etc. Short burts of acceleration are definitely easier , ie closing a small gap etc. Climbing also feels a little easier especially short bursts out of the saddle.
As for rolling along at a steady speed I find no difference . Would I buy another set of light wheels ?, probably not .or at least not to the cost of the SLSs. Maybe a mid level wheel with light tyres is just as good.
I must add that I am getting on in cycling years and not racing so a younger stronger rider may get more benefit from upgraded wheels.

letape

Agree with what others have already said. I have had many top end wheels like various Mavics, campag hyperon carbon clinchers, campag shamals and fulcrum racing zeros but I'm not sure there is much difference between any of them and my Zondas. The only wheels that feel faster to me are a light set of tubulars like boras.

outfox

Thanks guys. So, apart from Death1234567, none of you have noticed much difference, although several of you note that the fancy wheels feel great and accelerate better. Is it possible that the RS500s originally used by Death1234567 were a very basic wheel, more basic than the wheels originally used by the rest of you, and that's why he/she noticed a more substantial increase?

fat bloke

outfox wrote: »

Is it possible that the RS500s originally used by Death1234567 were a very basic wheel, more basic than the wheels originally used by the rest of you, and that's why he/she noticed a more substantial increase?

Yeah, rs500's are porky in fairness.

pats22b

i went from fulcrum 7s to zeros recently and i definitely noticed them being a lot stiffer and responsive, to the point where i thought i had a puncture going over some bad terrain in enniskerry recently. I think they also roll much freer - how much better thay are than 3/4s i dont know but moving from the bottom of the range to the top i could feel a difference.

Dave1442397

I went from Shimano RS10s to Boyd Vitesse wheels, which cost me $550 a few years ago. Those wheels are no longer made, but have been replaced by the Altamont, which a few of my friends have - http://www.boydcycling.com/alloy-wheels/

I noticed a huge difference with these wheels over the RS10s, primarily when accelerating from a stop - they were much easier to spin up.

The rolling resistance was also a lot less with the Boyd wheels. I didn't notice a change in perceived effort because of that, but I'm sure I was using a little less power to keep the same speed as with the RS10s.

My new bike came with Shimano Ultegra wheels (most recent version) and I don't feel the need to upgrade at this point. If I do, I'll go with the Altamonts, or, if I have money to burn, maybe a set of HED Ardennes.

Alek

The rolling resistance was also a lot less with the Boyd wheels.

I don't think there is any scietific reasoning that could support this, as far as I understand "rolling resistance". Unless your older wheels had rubber spokes.

fat bloke

Alek wrote: »

I don't think there is any scietific reasoning that could support this, as far as I understand "rolling resistance". Unless your older wheels had rubber spokes.

Would it not reflect rotational friction of bearings and hubs?
As well as the tire I suppose.

Eamonnator

I have wheels, ranging in price from 150 Euro to about 1,800 Euro per pair.
I reckon, that the best Bang per buck, that I have had are Fulcrum Racing 3/Campagnolo Zonda.
Reasonably light/reasonably stiff/reasonably comfortable/reasonably priced/very reliable.

Dave1442397

Alek wrote: »

I don't think there is any scietific reasoning that could support this, as far as I understand "rolling resistance". Unless your older wheels had rubber spokes.

I noticed that if I set the bike upside down and got the rear wheel going at a decent speed that it took a lot longer for the Boyd to spin down to a stop than it did the RS10.
No, it's not scientific analysis by any means, but I'm sure it counts for something.

Alek

Would it not reflect rotational friction of bearings and hubs?

I noticed that if I set the bike upside down and got the rear wheel going at a decent speed that it took a lot longer for the Boyd to spin down to a stop than it did the RS10.

Bearing friction is a different matter than rolling resistance - the latter is mostly due to loss of energy required for elastic deformation in the tyre while riding. Wheels do not contibute to it, unless they deform significantly under the mass of rider+bike, which is not really possible with rigid spokes design.

If the wheel spins down faster, it means that bearings need attention. Nothing you can't solve by adjustment/cleaning/lubrication (cup&cone hubs) or bearing replacement (others).

(Heavier wheels may mask any issue with hubs for longer, having more inertia)

death1234567

outfox wrote: »

Is it possible that the RS500s originally used by Death1234567 were a very basic wheel, more basic than the wheels originally used by the rest of you, and that's why he/she noticed a more substantial increase?

I think that's correct. Once you go above a certain level, zonda's, askiums etc. its only "marginal gains" after that so you have to spend a lot just to get a small increase in performance. I wouldn't be spending anymore than €400-€500 on a wheel-set because after that you wouldn't be getting any real return on your investment (at my level anyway).

NeedMoreGears

I use shimano 510s for commuting and zondas on the weekends. Same bike, same tyres on each wheelset. I can accelerate a bit quicker with the zondas and they're a little lighter which helps up the hills. The zondas feel a bit more secure in corners (maybe because they are stiffer). The 510s are generally around the €130-€160 mark with the zondas around €320 - €350. All in all the extra €200 is worth it (and the zonda are far nicer to look at). I've no idea whether a further few hundered would be worth spending.

coppinger

The cash outlay is only worth it if you are going racing, otherwise put it into coaching or a cycling holiday.

outfox

coppinger wrote: »

The cash outlay is only worth it if you are going racing, otherwise put it into coaching or a cycling holiday.

That makes sense. I've started racing recently, and doing the Blarney summer league. Hills are a problem for me. I've no problems staying with the bunch on the flat. Hence the possible wheel upgrade (and a programme of hill training over the next few months).

furiousox

Shimano R500s cost about 90 euro and weigh 1884g .
Mavic Cosmic Carbones cost about 1000 euro and weigh 1740g.

Unknown Soldier

All I can say is that on my Mavic Ksyrium elites I seem to freewheel down hills a lot faster than most (that I've cycled with)

I'm assuming that's down to the hubs/bearings. I'm about 72kg

That's about the only difference I have noticed with "nice"wheels. I'm so far from an expert on this matter, it's unreal

rtmie

So this lad has analysed all the options and provides an interesting long read.
If you're in a hurry I can summarise the article down to "upgrade to zondas/fulcrum racing 3s" in all cases unless you're a "more competitive cyclist under 85kg" in which case go for Shimano Dura-Ace C24 CL.

No personal experience, awaiting ordered Zondas to replace stock Aksiums, more by way of a treat to myself than in expectation of massive results. I don't think any wheel will make as big an impact as me losing some ballast, and continuing to get out for more/longer cycles. But we all need a little something new every now and then :P

crosstownk

I upgraded to Zondas from the stock Giant wheels that came with my bike. Mainly because the stock wheels started to snap spokes.

Do I feel a difference? Maybe. They certainly feel livelier but maybe that's because I want them to. I'm sure they feel better from a standing start and also up a hill. I'm not sure if the difference is my head. My average speed is down since I got the Zondas but my meters climbed is way up. I'm not comparing like with like.

What I will testify to is that the Zondas seem to be bullet proof. 2,000km over all sorts of surfaces and still as true as they day they came out of the box which is a lot more than I can say for the stock wheels.

outfox

Thanks rtmie. That's a great article. He really pushes the Dura Ace for my category. Fine by me, as I'm a big Shimano fan. But €750 is a lot.

equivariant

Beasty wrote: »

.. I probably have 30 sets of wheels now. ...

:eek::eek: I thought I was doing well with one and a half!

fat bloke

outfox wrote: »

Thanks rtmie. That's a great article. He really pushes the Dura Ace for my category. Fine by me, as I'm a big Shimano fan. But €750 is a lot.

699 on Rose at the moment. Or the rs81's are near as dammit for 400

Cee-Jay-Cee

Another Zonda owner here, they were only a slight upgrade from Fulcrum Quattros which were an upgrade from CXP22's which are very dead and heavy wheels. I found a huge change going to the Quattros which were 400g lighter than the Mavics and spun up to speed and rolled much easier smoother and faster. The Zondas are an improvement in the Quattros but it's only a small difference. they just feel more lively especially on hills but there is no real difference in average speeds, they are however not as stiff as the Quattros which is a good thing for me as the Quattros could be quite jarring and tiresome on poor surfaces/roads. The zondas have a bit more spring in them without being flexi as I have less than 1mm brake pad clearance and get no rub ever. . I'm happy with them, they're a beautiful looking wheel and really compliment my bike.

torydiver

Finding this one of the most informative threads I've followed on here,
especially relevant as I'm looking to replace my wobbly aksiums in coming months....
kinda glad to hear it's fruitless spending megabucks unless your at an extremely competitive level....

outfox

Yeah, some really good views/opinions above. I'm tempted to take the plunge and go for Dura Ace. But I remember that photo posted by Buffalo a few weeks ago on the Etape Ras Mumhan thread which showed his mangled wheel (Dura Ace I think). 'Twould make you think about big spending money on wheels.

MediaMan

After a couple of years running the very basic Bontrager wheels that came with my Trek, I upgraded to Fulcrum 5's, complete with GP 4000s tyres. The difference was like night and day, with the new wheels making the Bontragers seem like cart wheels.

Then subsequently I upgraded my bike and moved the Fulcrums across to it. I also bought a pair of Wheelsmith wheels for racing and now I swap between the Fulcrums and the Wheelsmiths depending on the occasion. The Wheelsmiths are great, but so are the Fulcrums and I would have to say that I don't notice a huge difference in feel or performance despite the Wheelsmith wheels being more than twice the price.

It's not all about speed though - I'm still glad I got the Wheelsmiths - they are both rock solid and light and they run nicely. They should also be easy to service and repair when the time comes.