They are heavy. Probably the heaviest 140 rotors out there. Thats the point, more thermal mass than anything else on the market under 180. Theyre harder and more conductive…which should tell you something about the material choice 😊 They likely wont be for sale as they are incredibly expensive to make being one piece with a spline. Its a passion project for me to surpass the bike industry in terms of performance. I think I’ve done that - its easier when you dont need to think of the commercial side of mass production and profit margin.
@@cajer30076 you will struggle to make the spline on a 4 axis. You could hob it but most wont have the necessary spindle encoder resolution to accurately sync the hobbing to the spindle.
@@PeakTorque That's a cool passion project, and they are quite literally to coolest, most unique rotors I've ever seen. Should you ever plan to sell a limited run, the extra weight is nothing compared to the "wow-factor."
As a wheel nerd; always love throwing a pair of wheels to Peaky boy and seeing what happens. Especially when we're doing similar testing, it's always reassuring to get similar results. Thanks for your time invested, and hope the wheels let you get some good road TT results.
@@Lockeness86 Yes. We want customers to have trouble-free wheels, so we constantly work with CRW (and other brands) to make sure things are as they should be.
@chinacycling , why does the 50mm wheel in the 5060 wheelset have a different rim than the 5055 wheelset, at least according to your website? Also, could you tell CRW to do a 4550 set? That would be my sweet spot :D (because really, having a 5055 and a 5060, doesn't make any sense)
A nice primer on wheels in general. Thanks. PS. in a world of liars standing on nickel, respect to you for adhering to your engineering principles, sharing your knowledge in an effort to inform and not deceive for personal gain.
Honest and true review, I simple love the geekiness of all the testing. I so nearly pushed the button on a pair of these months ago. Thanks to Joe and his team for listening to all their testers out there, they are now back in the basket for a purchase
A friend of mine bought these wheels, and the rear wheel main bearings became contaminated & rumbly in a very short time. I knocked them out and pressed in some decent steel ones for him: no further problems. Hybrid (or even full) ceramic bearings are more trouble than they are worth on a bike (not including the misplaced smug factor that they lead to amongst users of them), and as a very knowledgeable engineer once told me, ceramic bearings are designed and (used to be only) specified for very high speed/temperature/pressure applications (turbines, high speed industrial gearboxes, etc.) and have no place on a bike where rotational speeds are rarely beyond 400 rpm. They have next to no deformational tolerance, so when they are stressed beyond their design parameters (usually not those of the bike component they have been dragooned into) they do things like this: getting very grumpy very quickly. But try to disrupt the snake-oil-influenced mindsets of the average cycling engineering fashion victim (out of pocket of ££££ thereby) and you'll get scoffed at. Because (insert name of bling cycling component seller here) can't be wrong, because all the other 'engineers' at all the other companies are doing it too. Even Chris King, nowadays. I could go on.
Chris King, to my knowledge, never claimed a performance advantage for ceramic vs steel. At least, not to my knowledge. Chris King Steel bearings are very, very durable and fast rolling from my experience.
@@zygmuntthecacaokakistocrat6589 yep i agree. I said that in previous videos. Ceramic bearings are only suited to very clean environments and high rpms (thus temperatures). Have always said they are pointless in bikes. Absolutely pointless.
another advantage of ceramic bearings that doesn't apply to bikes is that they don't provide a path to earth for shaft currents that are found on motors running on VFDs. this means no discharge across the bearings (back to the motor housing) and the pitting in the races that can cause. You still might need some other for of shaft current dissipation, like a brush ring, or similar, but at least it won't go through the bearings.
@@Cynyr drones, dental drills, and for electrical isolation reasons - windmills. And skateboard bearings. I think the skateboard application has more to do with the users not getting besmirched with lubricant
The only place I’d use ceramic would be on jockey wheels, but you’d be hard pressed to find a jockey wheel that is both nylon based but with ceramic bearings. Why nylon or some soft material? Because my chain should be wearing the jockey wheel, and not the other way around
I agree with your findings on the stiffness. I have the same wheels, sort of.I have the CS5055's with the 21mm internal for front/rear. I can pull the end caps off easily. I find my Campagnolo Bora One's to be stiffer especially when taking sweeping corners. The CRW's tend to understeer compared with the Bora's. I was really not expecting that with the CRW's. I think the wheels are OK but just don't live up to the hype. Maybe I should have gone for the Magene 508's.
Regarding rim width: Lets separate the inner width and external width into two separate discussion. Internal width: There is no reason front should ever be wider than rear. I agree that they should be the same, or rear is wider. External width: Fatter rim seems to be more stable from my test. My idea of perfect wheelset would have rear wheel rim profile to be rounded V shape where it is widest near brake track for aero to weight ratio. But front rim have more bulbous,rounded U shape where it is widest below brake track for crosswind stability. This shape's ideal width is inherently wider than rounded V shape for the same tire width. So, I see why wider front external width than rear can be ideal. Roval front and rear have same 21mm internal width. But external width is wider on the front.
Your resentment for free engineering audits is utterly transparent. Start charging them a fee with no strings attached- good or bad. This way you can be happier and compensated for your education, time and effort. You’re different than the other YTubers so charge them!
It has been a long time since you showed/reviewed wheels from Light Bicycle. I'd like to see it again with their WR series of wheels - they are nice and wide like people want. (or - if you want to review climbing wheels - the AR25 rims) One thing I like a lot about them - you can fully customize the wheels - choosing hubs.. ratchet teeth (for DT - 36 or 54 tooth).. spokes.. nipple type.. whether you want spoke access holes in the rim.. I think they still sell quite a lot of wheels but don't do a lot of marketing like some of the other brands that we hear about more. But their prices are good. Customization is VERY nice. And the reviews I see from real normal people on forums are basically all positive
WR is pretty well known, well tested design now. Lightbicycle Turbo is the latest "performance: unknown" wheel design. Personally I'd vote for Lightbicycle Turbo (50mm or 65mm) to be tested first. It's different from anything else in the market whereas WR has already been a known safe choice that also have many competitors.
I think most of the comfort needs came from the front. I never had a problem with 25mm tires on the back of my stiff aero bike, but it's obviously horrible on the front. In the end they just go for 21mm internal on back to save weight. I would go for 25/25.
My memory of Roval's rationale and how they designed their wide front rim was with a thicker wall. All towards little or no lightbulbing - best aero benefit. Don't know the tire size they recommended for that result. The teams using their tires always seem to be on narrower 26-28mm. There is a trend towards wide internal rims - see Podg at the TDF on 25mm in all road stages. A Zipp original meant for gravel.
Few interesting points on this video. I would have expected giving up on a multi piece front hub that facilitate production and wheel built but has only negative sides from a mechanical standpoint. Looking forward the 6 spokes wheel test. I was expecting them more aero and flexier. We already see that with the setup you had they are not more aero… missing stiffness numbers!
Agree completely on the staggered rim tyre width philosophy! My ideal set would be a 50 ish front optimised for a 25-28 measured tyre and a 65-75 thats at least 33mm at the rim edge, probably even a bit wider, basically a gravel rim lol. Low spoke count front, pretty high spoke count rear.
Thanks, great. I am between this CRW and Elite and the price for me is very high and now after I saw your video I guess the Elite Drives are the better compromise. 🙌🏽
@Peak Torque do you know why the 5055 have both rims with a 21mm inner rim width whereas the 5060 have 21mm R and 25mm F? Do you know have them also made improvements to the 5055 set based on your initial feedback? Would you go for the 5055 or 5060 set if you were to pay for a set? Or would you look for a different wheel at a similar price point?
Would really love to see what your opinion on Brisk wheels is. Maybe you have a chance to rewiew them. I have bought a set of Aerolight 45 and so far they are pretty awesome. 1140 g for set with blades spokes, 45mm wide and aero rims is very ok for me. I have also Drive 65 and they are really good and I love them too. Customer service is super good. But they have the same open hub design as a lot of other wheels with carbon spokes. I also have Zipp 404´s, and they are now just my back up set with steel spokes.
Really nice video! I almost bought CRW wheels, now i am not sure. Can you recommend one set of wheels? Would light bicycle wheels should be considered?
@PeakTorque, a big thank you for your video, it is very interesting but I'm not sure I understood everything, are the CRWs now 100% reliable or are there still problems? I'm hesitant to take them but I see a lot of reviews with problems. What is your opinion please?
Hey there PT! I was hoping you could maybe give a bit of info on the physical mechanisms by which the lateral stiffness you're measuring impacts ride comfort? Are you using a lateral stiffness measurement as a general index of vertical stiffness? Or is lateral flexibility relevant for ride comfort on rough roads in a way that I don't understand? Thanks very much
@Peak Torque, When you say the 32mm tyre lightbulbed on the 19mm internal rim width, was that bad because it was wider than the external width (aero penalty), or that it was bad for handling? Thanks
Another great one! I would be interesting if you could do Aero test comparing these or another Chinese brand against one of the western brands like Roval or Enve, usually they test well in the windtunnel.
When will we have a video about those disc brakes rotors? It would be quite interesting. Great reviews with with engineering first in mind, keep it t up with impartiality and only objective engineering. Thanks PT and cheeres.
7:16 I ride an Orbea Orca Gen.6. The rear end is comfier and the front end is harsher. It’d make more sense to plush up the front more than the rear with hope it’ll balance things out, no?
hey, i’m currently running the elite drive 65D’s on my emonda for mostly flat racing, and i’m considering swapping them out for these to get that 150g less since it would help even more as a 59kg rider, but the 65’s do such a great job on the flats i’m concerned the 50/60s won’t be as good, any thoughts on this?
What width tyre do you run on the front wheel? I see that recent brands has come out with wider ID paired questionable OD(seems too narrow for aero benefit) may be informative for us see your view on these
It would be awesome if you could add some measure of stability in the wheel evaluations. It seems like this is where a difference might be found (and what panda podium commented on)
Ive been running 28 tire on the rear wheel and 24 on the front since 28 on the front didnt have enough clearance. I tried to google stuff about staggered setups to see if they were bad or good but didnt find much info on it. It seems like the more optimal setup up though theoretically.
I recently bought a set of 9Velo Cd 58 2.0 and ive noticed that the rear wheel wasnt particularly true and had a decent amount of out of balance in radial direction. Besides that the Shimano Freehub had a lot of play with a shimano CS 8101 11-34 casette. One more thing ive noticed is that in fast, high load corners the you can hear the front disc rubbing. I've never bought wheels before so im just curious if theses things are within what would be expected or if i got a bad set.
I still have reservations about safe tyre width. A 25c with a 25 or 28mm tyre looks like its going to blow off at a lower pressure due to the sidewalls arcing up and stretching sideways. Its probably fine but im 100% for safety and not risk.
@@PeakTorque thanks so much. I saw some No. 6 wheels that have 28 mm at the front. They do seem risky. I read there's this rule in which the tire should be between 1.4 and 2 times bigger than the internal rim width for safety reasons. I'm thinking about this in relation to gravel wheels. The internal rim width for gravel wheels is not wider than 26 mm. Why are fabricators not going larger if we are putting 45 mm gravel tires or even wider (if the frame permits it)? Yet for road, we almost have the same internal rim width as in gravel.
I currently have to decide between the CRW Works CS4045 and the ffwd ryot 44. I'll probably go for the ffwd, as I'd rather have a stable, reliable and well-proven wheelset than save 200 grams
Although you said the aero testing of the wheels is pointless, I’m interested in the basics of the aero sensor and its position. I don’t understand how having the sensor out of the front of the bike measures its aero performance? Doesn’t it just measure angle of attack or wind speed or whatever? How would it measure the turbulence created by everything behind the sensor? You see F1 cars in testing covered in those aero rakes hanging off the back wing and/or half way down the car. I’ve seen people talking about them and I’m totally confused how they work?
@@doctorscoot very simply put, it calculates total CdA by knowing the power (from the power meter), air speed and density. With an assumption of rolling resistance and drivetrain losses, the only unknown in the equation is then CdA which it calculates.
12:50 Though I’d like to see this kind of QA (and rework) done by the manufacturers themselves, or by the merchant at the latest, before the product is available to order by me, the customer. And as engineer I cannot but be sour - you’ll probably argue along value provided to your channel - about this service being provided for free to them.
i am lead to believe a slight light bulbing is preferable for comfort for a given tyre size. The sidewalls of a tyre have a more natural deformation path. that's how I've always looked at it
@@TobiMcTobeface that was my thought, but it'd be interesting to know if the manufacturers design them with bulbing in mind or they would like the sidewalls to sit straight when no load is applied.
When you get extreme lightbulb its not as stable, but thats essentially just saying wider rim is more stable and keeps you upright. In this case its not going to make a huge difference, on a 40 or 50mm tire you'll really notice.
“Is this going to be a free engineering audit or can we just ride them on a bicycle?” This have to be a staple in every intro when Peak Torque reviews something 😆
@PT how you doing bro? do you have a way of knowing that the products you receive to review aren't handpicked and we would get the same exact thing if we ordered one?
I don’t but with the amount of poor stuff i get sent they clearly are not hand picked! The original crw being a good example, the end caps were way too loose. The new Tavelo ive been sent is a dog too.
@@PeakTorque Fun fact! Tavelo don't have a hand anywhere in the development process of those bikes. They just take a frame from Adapt Cycles and slap a sticker and marketing campaign on them.
@@PeakTorque interaction I had with Joe in the comments on one of his videos: Me: Do tavelo actually do any real development or are they just selling rebranded open mold frames like winspace? Because both tavelo frames were on the adapt website, the attack is gone now but the arow is still up there. So who actually developed that bike? Joe: They develop the frames then offer them to other brand customers, but this time the demand for the Tavelo stuff is so much, they probably wont offer to other brand customers.
So the wheels is sent to you for free. Do you have to send them back to pandapodium? Both the original version and this latest one. Do you get to keep them? That wasn’t clear in the video.
Hey peak torque, I got a question. Say if I have two pair of wheels, both are 60mm. But one pair is 1350g and another is 1600g. Which will be faster and why? I believe both have the same aero benefits. But how about “holding speed” and acceleration etc. they say heavier wheel holds speed better due to momentum but what about the rest of the
Thanks. I would always select the lighter ones. Heavier wheels store more kinetic energy but require more energy to accelerate. The stored energy by the flywheel effect is tiny compared to the kinetic energy of your mass + bike.
@@MrJaycobsen yeah ok but what is it? More vibration dampening at the front? More aero? Better cornering? Does any company explain the rationale behind it?
@@Gernathius The rim shape at the front on the Roval is said to increase crosswind stability. The Overall shape is different front to back not just the width.
"Are Wider Tyres a total WIN? The Aerodynamics" ua-cam.com/video/1_e5tlM5Gi8/v-deo.htmlsi=EhseLQcdcgAH0bfb. In this, you infer that your Internal rim preference is 21mm and praise the ICAN Aero 35 for having an impressively Aero interface 5000 28 to rim. The Aero 35 is 29mm external, so presumably the 5000 28s measure up 28-29mm. You said you didn't understand the push to wider rims, both internal and external given the overall impact on the A of CdA. However, here you state a pref for 23mm internals both front and back. It's not clear to me what changed - you've not been explicit in any of the content I've seen so far - I'm very new to your channel. Is there something in comfort, aero, cross-wind stability or other that has shifted your thinking in the past 18 months? Am really appreciating your candour and insights.
@Peak Torque How much do your rotors weigh, and do you have any intention of selling them on your website?
They are heavy. Probably the heaviest 140 rotors out there. Thats the point, more thermal mass than anything else on the market under 180. Theyre harder and more conductive…which should tell you something about the material choice 😊 They likely wont be for sale as they are incredibly expensive to make being one piece with a spline. Its a passion project for me to surpass the bike industry in terms of performance. I think I’ve done that - its easier when you dont need to think of the commercial side of mass production and profit margin.
@@PeakTorque I've been meaning to make something like that for my own use, and I just got a 4 axis cnc. So will try it later this year
@@cajer30076 you will struggle to make the spline on a 4 axis. You could hob it but most wont have the necessary spindle encoder resolution to accurately sync the hobbing to the spindle.
@@PeakTorque Yea I'll likely need to send it out for wire edm of the spline at the end.
@@PeakTorque That's a cool passion project, and they are quite literally to coolest, most unique rotors I've ever seen. Should you ever plan to sell a limited run, the extra weight is nothing compared to the "wow-factor."
As a wheel nerd; always love throwing a pair of wheels to Peaky boy and seeing what happens. Especially when we're doing similar testing, it's always reassuring to get similar results. Thanks for your time invested, and hope the wheels let you get some good road TT results.
Has CRW implemented these fixes across the product lineup?
@@Lockeness86 Yes. We want customers to have trouble-free wheels, so we constantly work with CRW (and other brands) to make sure things are as they should be.
Ordered a pair of 50 60 .... Anything to be concerned with the front wheel stiffness ?
@@81antiloop Did you watch the video? :) He says if anything it's good that the wheels aren't too stiff. I'm a believer of this myself.
@chinacycling , why does the 50mm wheel in the 5060 wheelset have a different rim than the 5055 wheelset, at least according to your website?
Also, could you tell CRW to do a 4550 set? That would be my sweet spot :D (because really, having a 5055 and a 5060, doesn't make any sense)
A nice primer on wheels in general. Thanks.
PS. in a world of liars standing on nickel, respect to you for adhering to your engineering principles, sharing your knowledge in an effort to inform and not deceive for personal gain.
"nickel" ? Some sort of obscure battery tech anode/cathode reference?
Typically standing on 'a' nickel. US currency reference.
Thank you for being genuinely honest the main reason I watch your channel…👍🏼
Honest and true review, I simple love the geekiness of all the testing. I so nearly pushed the button on a pair of these months ago. Thanks to Joe and his team for listening to all their testers out there, they are now back in the basket for a purchase
the objectivity is always appreciated.
and those rotors are tight, love the no bs venting pattern on the braking surface.
those rotors are fookin MINT!
Great review as always. Good to see your update on these. And of course mate these rotors look proper techno 🤤😍
A friend of mine bought these wheels, and the rear wheel main bearings became contaminated & rumbly in a very short time. I knocked them out and pressed in some decent steel ones for him: no further problems. Hybrid (or even full) ceramic bearings are more trouble than they are worth on a bike (not including the misplaced smug factor that they lead to amongst users of them), and as a very knowledgeable engineer once told me, ceramic bearings are designed and (used to be only) specified for very high speed/temperature/pressure applications (turbines, high speed industrial gearboxes, etc.) and have no place on a bike where rotational speeds are rarely beyond 400 rpm. They have next to no deformational tolerance, so when they are stressed beyond their design parameters (usually not those of the bike component they have been dragooned into) they do things like this: getting very grumpy very quickly. But try to disrupt the snake-oil-influenced mindsets of the average cycling engineering fashion victim (out of pocket of ££££ thereby) and you'll get scoffed at. Because (insert name of bling cycling component seller here) can't be wrong, because all the other 'engineers' at all the other companies are doing it too. Even Chris King, nowadays. I could go on.
Chris King, to my knowledge, never claimed a performance advantage for ceramic vs steel. At least, not to my knowledge. Chris King Steel bearings are very, very durable and fast rolling from my experience.
@@zygmuntthecacaokakistocrat6589 yep i agree. I said that in previous videos. Ceramic bearings are only suited to very clean environments and high rpms (thus temperatures). Have always said they are pointless in bikes. Absolutely pointless.
another advantage of ceramic bearings that doesn't apply to bikes is that they don't provide a path to earth for shaft currents that are found on motors running on VFDs. this means no discharge across the bearings (back to the motor housing) and the pitting in the races that can cause. You still might need some other for of shaft current dissipation, like a brush ring, or similar, but at least it won't go through the bearings.
@@Cynyr drones, dental drills, and for electrical isolation reasons - windmills. And skateboard bearings. I think the skateboard application has more to do with the users not getting besmirched with lubricant
The only place I’d use ceramic would be on jockey wheels, but you’d be hard pressed to find a jockey wheel that is both nylon based but with ceramic bearings.
Why nylon or some soft material? Because my chain should be wearing the jockey wheel, and not the other way around
Boys and Girls sit down and enjoy the lesson, Mr. Peak Torque is about the teach us all !!!
Great job mate, chapeau
Thanks for another great video. It is great to have a channel that we can trust!
I agree with your findings on the stiffness. I have the same wheels, sort of.I have the CS5055's with the 21mm internal for front/rear. I can pull the end caps off easily. I find my Campagnolo Bora One's to be stiffer especially when taking sweeping corners. The CRW's tend to understeer compared with the Bora's. I was really not expecting that with the CRW's. I think the wheels are OK but just don't live up to the hype. Maybe I should have gone for the Magene 508's.
honest, clear and to the point....fantastic. thank you.
Still the only channel I trust as a buying guide. Good to get the follow up on these wheels. Starting to look like a contestant on Alone UK though 🙂
Where those discs are coming from ?
They are gorgeous 🙂
He designed them himself. Been teasing for some time now
@@jesseladd6864not teasing! Theyre not for sale. Just a passion project. Too expensive to make really
@@PeakTorque I think you underestimate how much are people willing to spend for niche cycling products xD
@@kovar2344 i will bear it in mind but these are not quite finished. Still not totally happy with the performance but better than gen 1.
@@PeakTorque People are paying out their nose for nonsense like OSPW, I'm sure you'll find customers.
Regarding rim width: Lets separate the inner width and external width into two separate discussion.
Internal width: There is no reason front should ever be wider than rear. I agree that they should be the same, or rear is wider.
External width: Fatter rim seems to be more stable from my test. My idea of perfect wheelset would have rear wheel rim profile to be rounded V shape where it is widest near brake track for aero to weight ratio. But front rim have more bulbous,rounded U shape where it is widest below brake track for crosswind stability. This shape's ideal width is inherently wider than rounded V shape for the same tire width. So, I see why wider front external width than rear can be ideal.
Roval front and rear have same 21mm internal width. But external width is wider on the front.
Your resentment for free engineering audits is utterly transparent. Start charging them a fee with no strings attached- good or bad. This way you can be happier and compensated for your education, time and effort. You’re different than the other YTubers so charge them!
Thanks for the kind words. Theres always a conflict there because they dont come looking for engineering help, they come looking for a free video!
It has been a long time since you showed/reviewed wheels from Light Bicycle.
I'd like to see it again with their WR series of wheels - they are nice and wide like people want. (or - if you want to review climbing wheels - the AR25 rims)
One thing I like a lot about them - you can fully customize the wheels - choosing hubs.. ratchet teeth (for DT - 36 or 54 tooth).. spokes.. nipple type.. whether you want spoke access holes in the rim..
I think they still sell quite a lot of wheels but don't do a lot of marketing like some of the other brands that we hear about more. But their prices are good. Customization is VERY nice. And the reviews I see from real normal people on forums are basically all positive
WR is pretty well known, well tested design now. Lightbicycle Turbo is the latest "performance: unknown" wheel design. Personally I'd vote for Lightbicycle Turbo (50mm or 65mm) to be tested first. It's different from anything else in the market whereas WR has already been a known safe choice that also have many competitors.
@@Hexsense Yeah I saw those today. I agree about testing those. TURBOOOOO
I think most of the comfort needs came from the front. I never had a problem with 25mm tires on the back of my stiff aero bike, but it's obviously horrible on the front. In the end they just go for 21mm internal on back to save weight. I would go for 25/25.
The new syncros aero 2 wheels are doing narrower front (23), wider rear (25).
Thanks for correcting. I think i got it wrong by saying swiss side. I really like that idea IMO syncros have got it right.
The only issue I have with the Syncros wheels is that they are hookless. That’s a big no for me, otherwise I would have a set.
I’ve hot a Scott foil on order… the wheels will be coming straight off for that reason. Wish they were lighter and hooked
@PeakTorque I think Swissside recommend a mullet tyre set up - 25f 28r but both wheels have a 20 internal. So you were on the right lines.
Bike review channel which I trust ✅
My memory of Roval's rationale and how they designed their wide front rim was with a thicker wall. All towards little or no lightbulbing - best aero benefit. Don't know the tire size they recommended for that result. The teams using their tires always seem to be on narrower 26-28mm.
There is a trend towards wide internal rims - see Podg at the TDF on 25mm in all road stages. A Zipp original meant for gravel.
The rapides are designed around a 26mm SWorks Turbo tire for best aero benefit according to Specialized
Very interesting stuff. Thanks as always.
Not stiff enough for crits vs other options? Or worth it for the low weight / excelleration?
Following
Few interesting points on this video.
I would have expected giving up on a multi piece front hub that facilitate production and wheel built but has only negative sides from a mechanical standpoint.
Looking forward the 6 spokes wheel test. I was expecting them more aero and flexier. We already see that with the setup you had they are not more aero… missing stiffness numbers!
Agree completely on the staggered rim tyre width philosophy!
My ideal set would be a 50 ish front optimised for a 25-28 measured tyre and a 65-75 thats at least 33mm at the rim edge, probably even a bit wider, basically a gravel rim lol. Low spoke count front, pretty high spoke count rear.
Thanks, great. I am between this CRW and Elite and the price for me is very high and now after I saw your video I guess the Elite Drives are the better compromise. 🙌🏽
@Peak Torque do you know why the 5055 have both rims with a 21mm inner rim width whereas the 5060 have 21mm R and 25mm F? Do you know have them also made improvements to the 5055 set based on your initial feedback?
Would you go for the 5055 or 5060 set if you were to pay for a set? Or would you look for a different wheel at a similar price point?
What are your thoughts about the roval rapide clx 2 in terms of aerodynamic stiffness and performance overall?
Thnx, I waited for this
Would really love to see what your opinion on Brisk wheels is. Maybe you have a chance to rewiew them.
I have bought a set of Aerolight 45 and so far they are pretty awesome. 1140 g for set with blades spokes, 45mm wide and aero rims is very ok for me.
I have also Drive 65 and they are really good and I love them too. Customer service is super good. But they have the same open hub design as a lot of other wheels with carbon spokes. I also have Zipp 404´s, and they are now just my back up set with steel spokes.
Really nice video! I almost bought CRW wheels, now i am not sure. Can you recommend one set of wheels? Would light bicycle wheels should be considered?
@PeakTorque, a big thank you for your video, it is very interesting but I'm not sure I understood everything, are the CRWs now 100% reliable or are there still problems? I'm hesitant to take them but I see a lot of reviews with problems.
What is your opinion please?
Hey there PT!
I was hoping you could maybe give a bit of info on the physical mechanisms by which the lateral stiffness you're measuring impacts ride comfort?
Are you using a lateral stiffness measurement as a general index of vertical stiffness? Or is lateral flexibility relevant for ride comfort on rough roads in a way that I don't understand?
Thanks very much
Nice SKX015 on the wrist there.
End cap slippage may make the wheels measure flexier but they that doesn’t mean they will ride any better
@Peak Torque, When you say the 32mm tyre lightbulbed on the 19mm internal rim width, was that bad because it was wider than the external width (aero penalty), or that it was bad for handling? Thanks
Another great one! I would be interesting if you could do Aero test comparing these or another Chinese brand against one of the western brands like Roval or Enve, usually they test well in the windtunnel.
When will we have a video about those disc brakes rotors?
It would be quite interesting.
Great reviews with with engineering first in mind, keep it t up with impartiality and only objective engineering. Thanks PT and cheeres.
7:16 I ride an Orbea Orca Gen.6. The rear end is comfier and the front end is harsher. It’d make more sense to plush up the front more than the rear with hope it’ll balance things out, no?
hey, i’m currently running the elite drive 65D’s on my emonda for mostly flat racing, and i’m considering swapping them out for these to get that 150g less since it would help even more as a 59kg rider, but the 65’s do such a great job on the flats i’m concerned the 50/60s won’t be as good, any thoughts on this?
So your aero test was done on those CRW wheels with 32mm tyres on back and 28mm on front? Amazing video as always, thanks.
What width tyre do you run on the front wheel? I see that recent brands has come out with wider ID paired questionable OD(seems too narrow for aero benefit) may be informative for us see your view on these
PT, would you go for the even deeper set than these for racing in the UK? Or is the extra depth not worth the trade off?
@@TomFitton i think they really are deep enough
The included lockrings are one of the lightest as well
It would be awesome if you could add some measure of stability in the wheel evaluations. It seems like this is where a difference might be found (and what panda podium commented on)
Ive been running 28 tire on the rear wheel and 24 on the front since 28 on the front didnt have enough clearance. I tried to google stuff about staggered setups to see if they were bad or good but didnt find much info on it. It seems like the more optimal setup up though theoretically.
Do those new ones use the ratchet system or not yet?
I hope you get some Elite Helix. I'm curious about those.
I did enjoy it, thank you.
Came to see the updates, but I left just thinking about those rotors. Name the price, we will come lol
interested in those brake discs. Want to know more about them
Think it was Simon Smart (ex f1) who did aerodynamics for Enve came up with the idea for wider front wheels
What do you think about their 65/75 pair that Jesse Coyle has? Any real value going that deep?
Around 1000 - 1300 pounds what would be your no1 recommendation wheel wise? 50mm ish 28mm tyres maybe one day go to 30
How do you prevent craft works from sending you out "special" wheels?
I recently bought a set of 9Velo Cd 58 2.0 and ive noticed that the rear wheel wasnt particularly true and had a decent amount of out of balance in radial direction. Besides that the Shimano Freehub had a lot of play with a shimano CS 8101 11-34 casette. One more thing ive noticed is that in fast, high load corners the you can hear the front disc rubbing. I've never bought wheels before so im just curious if theses things are within what would be expected or if i got a bad set.
Would the 65/75 mm crw not make a big difference
They are way deeper as tge most rims in their weight
I would go with 9Velo in this price range.
It that fancy new handlebar the new Ascent bar? I like the stats on paper.
It would be nice if you have a chance to review the roval rapids clx 2 team edition.
Great video. Thanks. Why wouldn't you want a wheelset with 25 mm of internal width on the front and back? Why 23 mm?
I still have reservations about safe tyre width. A 25c with a 25 or 28mm tyre looks like its going to blow off at a lower pressure due to the sidewalls arcing up and stretching sideways. Its probably fine but im 100% for safety and not risk.
@@PeakTorque thanks so much. I saw some No. 6 wheels that have 28 mm at the front. They do seem risky. I read there's this rule in which the tire should be between 1.4 and 2 times bigger than the internal rim width for safety reasons. I'm thinking about this in relation to gravel wheels. The internal rim width for gravel wheels is not wider than 26 mm. Why are fabricators not going larger if we are putting 45 mm gravel tires or even wider (if the frame permits it)? Yet for road, we almost have the same internal rim width as in gravel.
Those bread slicer discs must have good aero.
I currently have to decide between the CRW Works CS4045 and the ffwd ryot 44. I'll probably go for the ffwd, as I'd rather have a stable, reliable and well-proven wheelset than save 200 grams
@@Maxibsa or you buy neither and save the money, invest it, take a vacation. Just some other options 🙃
@@PeakTorque but I want some new wheels 😢😂
Build your own set. DT hubs, light bicycle hoops. Prob would be lighter and cheaper
@@jesseladd6864 definitely would not be lighter.
@@PeakTorquethats legit advice to all of us materialist nerds haha
How do you feel about the bonded joints in carbon spokes?
So, did you say in the end you get more aero gains from an aero helmet over deep section wheels?
No. I got a better result changing helmet than changing between the wheels in the test. If you pause the graphs you will see 😊
Do you think they're good value or over priced compared to all the other (chinese) wheel brands on the market?
new farsport wheels have been released will you test them？
they are pretty cheap like 60% of crw
So do the wheels now come with the new Center lock Lockring? Thanks.
Yes i believe so. Mine did
Although you said the aero testing of the wheels is pointless, I’m interested in the basics of the aero sensor and its position. I don’t understand how having the sensor out of the front of the bike measures its aero performance? Doesn’t it just measure angle of attack or wind speed or whatever? How would it measure the turbulence created by everything behind the sensor? You see F1 cars in testing covered in those aero rakes hanging off the back wing and/or half way down the car. I’ve seen people talking about them and I’m totally confused how they work?
@@doctorscoot very simply put, it calculates total CdA by knowing the power (from the power meter), air speed and density. With an assumption of rolling resistance and drivetrain losses, the only unknown in the equation is then CdA which it calculates.
@@PeakTorque ahhh right I see! Thank you!
12:50 Though I’d like to see this kind of QA (and rework) done by the manufacturers themselves, or by the merchant at the latest, before the product is available to order by me, the customer. And as engineer I cannot but be sour - you’ll probably argue along value provided to your channel - about this service being provided for free to them.
We want info on these angle grinder blades!
We going to talk about these rotors any time soooooon? phwoar
PT, regarding the lightbulbing of the tire: does it affect comfort or road grip?
@@DnDMF it makes the tyre volume and width slightly narrower so a slightly higher pressure is needed.
i am lead to believe a slight light bulbing is preferable for comfort for a given tyre size. The sidewalls of a tyre have a more natural deformation path. that's how I've always looked at it
@@TobiMcTobeface that was my thought, but it'd be interesting to know if the manufacturers design them with bulbing in mind or they would like the sidewalls to sit straight when no load is applied.
When you get extreme lightbulb its not as stable, but thats essentially just saying wider rim is more stable and keeps you upright. In this case its not going to make a huge difference, on a 40 or 50mm tire you'll really notice.
“Is this going to be a free engineering audit or can we just ride them on a bicycle?” This have to be a staple in every intro when Peak Torque reviews something 😆
@PT how you doing bro? do you have a way of knowing that the products you receive to review aren't handpicked and we would get the same exact thing if we ordered one?
I don’t but with the amount of poor stuff i get sent they clearly are not hand picked! The original crw being a good example, the end caps were way too loose. The new Tavelo ive been sent is a dog too.
@@PeakTorque 👍👍
@@PeakTorque Fun fact! Tavelo don't have a hand anywhere in the development process of those bikes. They just take a frame from Adapt Cycles and slap a sticker and marketing campaign on them.
@@invisiblescout6335 interesting. I did not know that!
@@PeakTorque interaction I had with Joe in the comments on one of his videos:
Me: Do tavelo actually do any real development or are they just selling rebranded open mold frames like winspace? Because both tavelo frames were on the adapt website, the attack is gone now but the arow is still up there. So who actually developed that bike?
Joe: They develop the frames then offer them to other brand customers, but this time the demand for the Tavelo stuff is so much, they probably wont offer to other brand customers.
So the wheels is sent to you for free. Do you have to send them back to pandapodium? Both the original version and this latest one. Do you get to keep them? That wasn’t clear in the video.
I keep them. If the company doesnt want them back they are mine to keep or sell on
Out of interest, what is the story with the grinding disk looking break rotors?
Hope you’re billing them by the hour for free consultancy…
Aero disk rotors when?
why do you give them a second chance?
We need a Seka spear review please!
Those bikes in the background are sinking.
Setting is simply HAMBINI without Princess blanket… it’s copyright infringement !!
@@SamuelBlackMetalRider i prefer the old curtain
When Joe tested them he found that the wheels were different laterally stiff in each direction. Is that still the case ?
@@jamessheard5498 yes, marginally. I measure both sides and display the average.
So... rotors? PT LD 140??
Hey peak torque, I got a question.
Say if I have two pair of wheels, both are 60mm. But one pair is 1350g and another is 1600g.
Which will be faster and why?
I believe both have the same aero benefits. But how about “holding speed” and acceleration etc. they say heavier wheel holds speed better due to momentum but what about the rest of the
Thanks. I would always select the lighter ones. Heavier wheels store more kinetic energy but require more energy to accelerate. The stored energy by the flywheel effect is tiny compared to the kinetic energy of your mass + bike.
What is crw’s rationale for going wider front rim? I genuinely don’t understand
The same as Roval and Reserve and Hunt as examples
@@MrJaycobsen yeah ok but what is it? More vibration dampening at the front? More aero? Better cornering? Does any company explain the rationale behind it?
@@Gernathius The rim shape at the front on the Roval is said to increase crosswind stability. The Overall shape is different front to back not just the width.
@@MrJaycobsen thanks!
625 Kris Squares
"Are Wider Tyres a total WIN? The Aerodynamics" ua-cam.com/video/1_e5tlM5Gi8/v-deo.htmlsi=EhseLQcdcgAH0bfb. In this, you infer that your Internal rim preference is 21mm and praise the ICAN Aero 35 for having an impressively Aero interface 5000 28 to rim. The Aero 35 is 29mm external, so presumably the 5000 28s measure up 28-29mm. You said you didn't understand the push to wider rims, both internal and external given the overall impact on the A of CdA. However, here you state a pref for 23mm internals both front and back. It's not clear to me what changed - you've not been explicit in any of the content I've seen so far - I'm very new to your channel. Is there something in comfort, aero, cross-wind stability or other that has shifted your thinking in the past 18 months?
Am really appreciating your candour and insights.
Hey Peak, there’s a tosser on UA-cam called ‘The Controversial Cyclist’ who is slagging you off………pretty slanderous stuff, FYI.
Yeh seen it. It doesn’t bother me.
@@PeakTorque all good!
FIRST!
Please stop saying “jiamen” for Xiamen. It’s “shee-ah-mun”, not “jah-men”. Sh-, not j-