Hookless and updated ISO Standards - Thomas De Gendt Crash

[TobinHatesYou]

So now we're left to speculate if the hooked rim failed first or if Jonas rode a flat until the rim failed. Could it be that maaaaaybe wheels are getting too light for real-world racing despite passing ISO tests with 90deg impacts from blunt anvils?

[TLN]

But... I'm riding a 32mm tire on a 25mm internal rim, at a max of 55 psi, normally lower. I'm completely confident in this combo.

Hooked or not?

[DHG01]

This article may be of interest to some.
https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/ho ... -opinions/

Thank you; it is interesting.

I do think Cyclingnews is lacking opinions on the other side though.

[JWTS]

But... I'm riding a 32mm tire on a 25mm internal rim, at a max of 55 psi, normally lower. I'm completely confident in this combo.

Hooked or not?

Hookless. I feel there's plenty of headroom with this setup, and the rims are a bit more impact resistant. I have about 25,000 miles on them at this point as they're my main wheels and I've had them quite a while.

[mikehhhhhhh]

So now we're left to speculate if the hooked rim failed first or if Jonas rode a flat until the rim failed. Could it be that maaaaaybe wheels are getting too light for real-world racing despite passing ISO tests with 90deg impacts from blunt anvils?

Been saying it since the start of this thread, but...

A combination of higher demands of pro racing, continuing to ride with problems because it's incentivised and just the fact that tubeless in general is inherently less tolerant of this behaviour than tubular setups of the past.

Another observation I've been making since the start of this thread is that there's also a bit of a theme emerging with Vittoria tyres and liners.

[EtoDemerzel]

You know it's a bad idea when guys like Josh Poertner and JP Ballard of Swiss Side, who test hundreds of tyre and wheel combinations in wind tunnels, refuse to endorse road hookless due to all the blowoffs they've witnessed.

Zipp are only now heeding ETRTO because they're terrified of what a UCI ban will do to their business. No doubt the adverse publicity is affecting sales already.

What's guaranteed is that we'll see more hookless blowoffs in upcoming races that won't be so easy to explain away, and Zipp and Enve will soon resume making hooked wheels.

Zipp are now advising all teams using their wheels with 25 internal rim width to use 29mm+ tyres:

https://road.cc/content/tech-news/zipp- ... cle-307385

That'll mean tyres wider than the external rim width, it will be interesting to see if teams will be happy to comply given the potential aero penalties.

Escape collective just released a podcast where they talk with Zipp directly about hookless.
https://escapecollective.com/question-t ... de-safety/

There is also a long article included.

haven't listed to that, but Nathan Schickel from Sram was also guest in the german besenwagen podcast to talk about hookless. It was just a big sram/zipp commercial and gave no transparency at all.
They happily explained the Degendt and Adamietz case, where they can blame external factors. But what about those Movistar failures? Riders from both teams, male and female, had their tires come off. Not only this year.

Yeah, all quiet about those failures because they happened in races hardly anyone watches. And of the recent cases we know of imo the most damning case is the one that happened to Baril. The AlUla Tour case that happened to men's team is most likely just a case of trying to ride on a flat tire considering where it happened.

That's a good article.
It's clear that Zipp is in full denial mode and hookless is even more half-assed than I thought. The amount of times Zipp denies current ISO standards, then turns around and uses ISO standards as proof of safety made me dizzy.

The way they "don't recommend NSW for rough races like Strade Bianchi, and Firecrest are tougher" but then turn around and say NSW's are just as impact resistant is the double-sided logic they apply to everything.

First of all, WTF. They don't recommend NSW's for Strade Bianchi? Do they have a disclaimer for consumers on what road surface you can use NSWs?

They don't follow ISO recommendations. But they advise pro teams to follow ISO recommendations.
They now officially have two different standards for safety on what tires will blow off rims. Let that sink in.

They don't advise NSW's for Strade Bianchi, but all their pro team results are on NSW's at Strade Bianchi.

They follow ISO dimensional standards for some measurements, but not for others.
They also say critical dimensions are the tire companies responsibility not theirs.
Passing the buck sounds like a big problem with hookless.

Here's our wheels at ISO standard (or the ISO standards we feel like following) and if the tire blows off bc the tire bead isn't compatible, not our problem.
The further I read, the worse Zipp's logic gets.

The only loser is the consumer. The onus of safety is completely skirted by doubletalk, and if you're picking teeth off the pavement, that's on you or the tire. It could never be them.

Circles back to basic question: outside of lower manufacturing cost and higher yields, what do consumers have to gain? Because hooked wheels do it all...

Basically nothing, it looses all the advantages hooked wheels have. There is an argument that the wheels are cheaper to manufacture but I still don't see them getting considerably cheaper than hooked, and it locks you into running only specific TL hookless approved tyres which are - more expensive.

25 pages of discussion basically boils down to people not wanting to risk hookles vs hookless wheel owners that are trying to justify it

straight from Zipp- no changing the facts. People can try and change the topic bizzarely to "well chinese hooked wheels aren't safe" or "everything can blow off" which just proves if you can't address the facts, change the argument.
It remains that hookless "standards" are as solid as warm butter.

[mikehhhhhhh]

straight from Zipp- no changing the facts. People can try and change the topic bizzarely to "well chinese hooked wheels aren't safe" or "everything can blow off" which just proves if you can't address the facts, change the argument.
It remains that hookless "standards" are as solid as warm butter.

No one said Chinese hooked wheels aren't safe, there's just no evidence they would be any safer put in the same scenario we've seen tyres fail on hookless.

Given hooked and hookless tyres have dismounted in the pro peloton, there's no evidence there that hookless is any less safe either.

So what we're left with is anecdotes and laymen assessing ETRTO guidelines - in short, speculation.

The standards for blow off testing are a bit of a mess, but we now know that all the big manufacturers' testing protocols far exceed them.

[EtoDemerzel]

straight from Zipp- no changing the facts. People can try and change the topic bizzarely to "well chinese hooked wheels aren't safe" or "everything can blow off" which just proves if you can't address the facts, change the argument.
It remains that hookless "standards" are as solid as warm butter.

No one said Chinese hooked wheels aren't safe, there's just no evidence they would be any safer put in the same scenario we've seen tyres fail on hookless.

Given hooked and hookless tyres have dismounted in the pro peloton, there's no evidence there that hookless is any less safe either.

So what we're left with is anecdotes and laymen assessing ETRTO guidelines - in short, speculation.

The standards for blow off testing are a bit of a mess, but we now know that all the big manufacturers' testing protocols far exceed them.

There's plenty of evidence that not addressing hookless issues directly, and trying to bring chinese hooked wheels (which in itself is a bizarre thing to raise) into the discussion as deflection.

Zipp currently has two different safety recommendations for the same wheels. That is not speculation. That is straight from Zipp.

[Jaisen]

straight from Zipp- no changing the facts. People can try and change the topic bizzarely to "well chinese hooked wheels aren't safe" or "everything can blow off" which just proves if you can't address the facts, change the argument.
It remains that hookless "standards" are as solid as warm butter.

No one said Chinese hooked wheels aren't safe, there's just no evidence they would be any safer put in the same scenario we've seen tyres fail on hookless.

Given hooked and hookless tyres have dismounted in the pro peloton, there's no evidence there that hookless is any less safe either.

So what we're left with is anecdotes and laymen assessing ETRTO guidelines - in short, speculation.

The standards for blow off testing are a bit of a mess, but we now know that all the big manufacturers' testing protocols far exceed them.

There's plenty of evidence that not addressing hookless issues directly, and trying to bring chinese hooked wheels (which in itself is a bizarre thing to raise) into the discussion as deflection.

Zipp currently has two different safety recommendations for the same wheels. That is not speculation. That is straight from Zipp.

That's not unique to Zipp, every single manufacturer has to first pass the same ISO standard to qualify for certification, they then test internally to their higher standards. ISO requires a 1.1x, but Cadex, Hunt, and Zipp test to 1.5x after passing the 1.1x factor and Enve tests to 1.8x.

[EtoDemerzel]

That's not unique to Zipp, every single manufacturer has to first pass the same ISO standard to qualify for certification, they then test internally to their higher standards. ISO requires a 1.1x, but Cadex, Hunt, and Zipp test to 1.5x after passing the 1.1x factor and Enve tests to 1.8x.

No.
They have a safe recommended tire/wheel combination for consumers which does not meet ISO.
and, they recommend ISO for pro teams for the same wheels.

[Jaisen]

That's not unique to Zipp, every single manufacturer has to first pass the same ISO standard to qualify for certification, they then test internally to their higher standards. ISO requires a 1.1x, but Cadex, Hunt, and Zipp test to 1.5x after passing the 1.1x factor and Enve tests to 1.8x.

No.
They have a safe recommended tire/wheel combination for consumers which does not meet ISO.
and, they recommend ISO for pro teams for the same wheels.

Oh that is what you are referring to. The UCI informed all World Pro teams and manufacturers in December of 2023 they would have to now comply with the ISO and ETRTO standards going forward starting in 2024. They did not inform the Pro teams of this, like Lotto Destiny. Then after the De Gendt incident, the UCI opened an internal investigation. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the UCI will soon make the same demands upon all Pro teams as they do World Pro teams, and it may well be that in light of the UCI investigation into hookless, Zipp is being proactive by rolling out the new standards that fall in line with the latest ISO and ETRTO standards to all their World Pro and their Pro teams.

So why haven't Zipp decided to make the same recommendation for consumers? Well in the Escape Collective interview they addressed this. First, they noted that there is an internal discussion at Zipp as to whether they will revise the consumer guidance to bring it in line with the UCI and ISO standards. Second, Zipp noted that when you look at the automotive industry, when new standards are implemented that doesn't immediately mean all the older cars are recalled and updated to new regulations. The old standards aren't suddenly obsolete but rather it is just the new equipment that must comply with the changed regulations.

So Zipp said that is something they are also taking into consideration. They said from their internal data of both consumers and pro riders they don't believe their current consumer recommendation are unsafe and are they unsure a revision is necessary.

Personally I think they should just revise the recommendations to make them not only consistent across the board but also to be in conformity with ISO, for the sake of consumer clarity. The whole hookless tire pressure limits is already confusing enough, it needs simplification for the average consumer and Zipp is doing themselves a disservice sticking to their guns. But their position isn't unreasonable when all the factors are taken into consideration, even if I disagree with it.

[BigBoyND]

... The old standards aren't suddenly obsolete but rather it is just the new equipment that must comply with the changed regulations.

If a standard is updated because it is unsafe, then of course the old one should be considered obsolete

[6fu]

ISO standard has 1.1 safety factor and 28 vs 29 tyres are being discussed as 1mm could be determining factor between riding safely and tyre spontaniously blowing off. I mean, tyres labeled same width from different manufacturers vary by more than that. I think that says a lot about hookless. Hooked wheel will always be safer than hookless counterpart.

[garbageman]

https://www.uci.org/pressrelease/use-of ... Q2d7bAiRy7

[Jaisen]

... The old standards aren't suddenly obsolete but rather it is just the new equipment that must comply with the changed regulations.

If a standard is updated because it is unsafe, then of course the old one should be considered obsolete

Perhaps, but cars designed in the 1980s passed the impact tests of the time, they would no longer pass today's impact test, yet they are still considered road legal. They haven't been pulled off the roads. Similarly, Zipp's wheels when released were ISO approved for 28c tires on 25mm ID rims, that standard has been revised and the combo is no longer allowable. Zipp disagrees with ISO and thinks the combo is still safe. So they are reluctant to change their guidelines for consumers. I disagree with their position, but at least they have been transparent with their reasoning.