I’ve got a few sets. The only downside is the wait. The basic quality is very high. Once you’ve got one of those deeper section carbon rims in your hands, you realize they are more solid than most bricks. I think the most common failure mode for a carbon rim, even a poorly made one, is for a spoke to pull out from the spoke hole or a crack to form from hitting something very very hard.
I had a set built by them and did one myself. I’d recommend just having them build it to save hassle getting the components and because they get everything as cheaply as you possibly could. I’d further recommend the cheaper Pillar spokes over the CX-Rays, so they Pillars are very fine.
1 Like
Wider front tire… comparing a 25mm on an AR series to a 30c on WR (measured 34mm on a WR series rim)…yeah above 20mph or so and in crosswinds. Generally… no. Just get teh right rim/tire combo. They measurement they give is you at the bead, not the widest point, so AR for 25/28c tires or WR for 28/30c tires. If you’re looking at 23c on a 2010-era rim to 25c on a modern width rim, no not at all.
1 Like
Thanks! Great advice on the spokes, as that was one item I definitely wasn’t certain about. I have a 2010 carbon bike that I would love to get some affordable(ish) deep section wheels for. I really appreciate the feedback!
1 Like
It’s not an option on the online builder but it is an option that’s available if you email them: DT Swiss Competition Race spokes, which are even cheaper than Pillar Aero and probably the best bang-for-buck spoke option.
Thanks! I just bookmarked your post for if/when the real boss (aka wife) agrees to another bike expense.
1 Like
One more question about wheels. Is there a way to figure out the widest rim/tire combo a fork and frame will take? I have a 2010 Motobecane Immortal Pro. I run 700x23 GP4000 tires on it and the guy I bought it off of advised against running anything much wider, but I’ve never looked into it until considering some decent wheels. Thanks!!
Well…dont take this as necessarily a statement that less is better, or that 21 is better than 24, but I do know the reasoning behind 21 spoke wheels.
21 spoke wheels are built differently…twice as many spokes on the drive side as the non drive side. This is important for multiple reasons…one of the lost important, I THINK, is that it allows you to increase tension on the non-drive side spokes significantly, as there are only 7 spokes on that side, as opposed to 12 on a 24 spoke traditionally laced wheel. Higher tension generally means they are less like to lose tension and flex when going over bumps. Spokes should always be stretched a bit.
Whether this in practice makes for a better wheel i have no idea…
As a Spesh fan (and with the utmost respect), you’re right about the asymmetric spoke distribution (14/7 and 12/6) and tension on the relevant wheels, but you’ve got the cause and effect somewhat backwards.
Manufacturers (or rather “manufacturer”, because I’m only aware of one that still does it since Giant/Cadex dumped it last year) don’t opt for the design because it’s superior, but rather because it lets them get away with running less spokes and thereby saving weight. It’s a band-aid solution.
It is noteworthy that neither top-shelf wheel manufacturers like zipp and enve (or for that matter: anyone besides Roval, off the top of my head) nor hub manufacturers offer anything like the aforementioned 21/18 spoke Rovals. In fact, I can’t think of any others whatsoever, following the Giant/Cadex decision to dump their 21 spoke front disc brake wheels. Spesh and Giant even have/had to manufacture their own hub shells and stuff them with DT Swiss internals, because neither DT Swiss nor anyone else I’m aware of makes these weird asymmetric designs.
Tl;dr: having fewer spokes doesn’t allow you to run higher tension (that’s all in the rim design), but rather it necessitates higher tension.
Agree for the most part.
Regarding tension though…I believe the ultimate goal though is not general higher tension, but specifically higher tension on the non-drive side, where the wheel dishing dictates that any level of tension will have a greater lateral pull on the rim from non drive side spokes than drive side spokes. Spoke count imbalance allows the builder to reduce spoke tension imbalance from one side to the other.
Whether this really matts at all I have no clue…the difference could be utterly insignificant…but it is a practical argument to justify the design. In practice the couple companies very well might be doing it just to claim the 25grams less in weight 
Edit: Hrmm…now I’m actually curious if there is any data on durability for 24 spoke wheels…16/8 configuration vs a normal 2 cross 12/12 wheel.
I’d measure the frame and fork clearance with a set of callipers and choose a tyre that left at least 5mm or so when fully inflated (to allow for debris and flex under differing loads).
If you currently run 23c GP4000s without issue, I can assure you that 25c GP5000s will be fine as they’re almost identically sized.
1 Like
That’s very much dependent on whether the internal width of the rims is the same for both cases, otherwise it comes out much different.
Just measured:
23c GP4000 on 14mm internal width rim - 23.5mm
25c GP4000 on 18mm internal width rim - 26.5mm
25c GP5000TL on 21mm internal width rim - 28.5mm
The GP4000 sizing was ok on old school narrow rims, but started to fall apart (as expected) once rims started getting wider. The GP5000 size is measured on a wider rim (18mm I think), which is why a 23c GP4000 is about the same width as a 25c GP5000 on an 18mm internal rim.
4 Likes
Good point! I’d assumed a rough parity between the internal widths but, given the age of the bike, there’s every chance they’ll be quite disparate.
Also, is that a typo on your second measurement? I’d have assumed a 25c on an 18mm rim would jump up more than that.
I disagree here… not for good reasons though…
- Looks - Aero spokes look way cooler because they have more flat surface. Just more light collecting area. That 2.2mm of surface is going to show way more than the 1.8mm of round spoke. The difference as you move and it changes shape adds a lot more “drama” the the look.
- (theoretical) Durability - No good data… but a CX-Ray is about 3x more durable in the same setting as a Race ( Choosing spokes – DCR Wheels ) because the center section is ‘work hardened’ - the micro imperfections in the steel have been banged out of it and ‘welded’ back together. However they use the same non-butted head/thread sections, so they’ll just break there.
- Aero - they are ever so slightly more aero in real world conditions (sub 1w at high speeds). The rectangular Pillar less so than the oval Sapim CX-Ray / DT Swiss aero spokes, especially in indirect winds.
@ rkoswald If you get the pillar spokes, again the finish isn’t nearly as even on them and it’s not as smooth. It tends to hold oils, which you can see. Maybe put some carwax on them, so they get an even coat of oil/wax right away and look nice.
Also, I don’t know if I recommended the “Satin” finish, but you can request it post-order when they follow up with you. It looks a lot nicer than either the matte or gloss finishes - kinda like the current Enve finishes… kind of a ‘dry’ clean car vs something waxed polished to the n-th degree.
For what its worth, I have a set of Tokyowheel 3.4 (38mm/43mm), paid $540 USD, and they have a similar profile to ENVE 3.4. Tokyowheel also produce a 5.6 (55mm/65mm) and a 7.10 (70mm/100mm) for around the same price. They’re UCI approved (not really sure what difference that makes), ride really nice and for the price seem like a really solid option.
thanks!
I don’t think it means anything other than they sent an application in, maybe a sample or independent test result. I know there are also EU certifications. The problem here is 1) that doesn’t mean they consistently build the certificated/tested build 2) They don’t have a US/EU/etc business to hang liability on for bad products even if they are lying and building s***. It doesn’t mean they do anything consistently. It does mean that UCI can ban the name if they have failures though. If there’s no one to sue, there’s no one to put out of business.
Any chance you can show a picture from the rear or head-on? I’d curious to see how “fat” the tires look. Just got myself an Allez Sprint Comp Disc and I’m between the AR56 and WR65 to run with GP5000 TL. Leaning towards the WR65 right now.
Is this what you’re looking for? 25c (even with rim, but looks like the rim is wider) & 28C (slightly wider than rim edge). GP5K on AR, then 30c G-One on AR. Keep in mind the AR Rim is 30mm at the widest, WR is 34(?)mm at the widest.
1 Like
That’s definitely part of wanted to see, thanks. I’m just curious how it looks on an Allez Sprint.
For anyone who may be interested in the Winspace Hyper wheels, I’ve just installed them on my CAAD13. Overall very nice, and true to advertised weight. As I’m in Canada, we’ll need to standby until at least May before I can give any on-road impressions, but so far so good in my kitchen…
These are 50mm depth, 19mm internal, 26mm external…
Edit: it’s worth noting that the Pirelli’s photographed here are 25-622, but measure about a mil wider when mounted. They don’t fit as flush with the external width, nor as true to size as the GP5000’s which is a slight disappointment.
6 Likes