New Rovals?

[C36]

Wide spokes are nothing special, the main benefit of carbon spokes is weight reduction

No weight is a nice consequence. The real benefit is the significantly higher stiffness (even gaining weight). The challenge is having a rim that supports enough tension so the spokes do not come totally slacked (being stiffer it also means that a smaller vertical deformation at the rim leads to higher tension drop compared to a SS spoke).
Hunt chased weight reduction and delivered a flexible wheel, they got it quite wrong. Cadex and Winspace (to talk about some early adopters of traditionally laced carbon spokes) did bring significant stiffness increase.

[toxin]

But stiffness on its own wasn't really a problem if you had enough spokes. If we weren't chasing weight reductions we would have stuck with that.

[C36]

But stiffness on its own wasn't really a problem if you had enough spokes. If we weren't chasing weight reductions we would have stuck with that.

I partially follow you there. Weight (and strength improvements) brought the Cx-ray as std spoke for high end wheels, that dropped stiffness and then aero dropped spoke count a bit.

But even with 28 spokes you would unlikely reach the stiffness of proper 21 carbon spokes. I asked a Chinese brand to build me a custom rear wheel exceeding 50N/mm and they failed even with 28 spokes.

[JT508]

Hello,

any updates on ETA? or more informations about release?

thank you

[JayDee81]

Carbon spoked wheel is stiffer, but that also means less comfort. Also carbon spokes are generally less aero compared to flat steel spokes.

[Hexsense]

Also carbon spokes are generally less aero compared to flat steel spokes.

Is it tested that way?
Peak Torque on YouTube found CRW 5060 to be really really aero. That's with 34mm wide 50mm deep front wheel. It's more aero than many deeper wheels.

My guess is it's due to 2 reasons:
1) Carbon spokes are so stiff so you don't need a lot of it. CRW have 16 spokes front instead of usual 24 spokes. Less spokes is more aero.
2) The oversized type of carbon spokes which require special hub is really deep.
Normal steel aero blade spokes are 0.95mm wide and 2mm deep.
My Light-Bicycle carbon spokes are 1.8mm wide and a whopping 4.5mm deep.
It has even more depth to width ratio than steel bladed spokes.
We all know deep wheels are more aero. Full disc wheel is more aero. Deeper profile spokes which fill more void in the wheel hole could steer aerodynamic towards this direction as well.

Still, I'm not a wind tunnel. So I don't really know.

[MagicShite]

Also carbon spokes are generally less aero compared to flat steel spokes.

Is it tested that way?
Peak Torque on YouTube found CRW 5060 to be really really aero. That's with 34mm wide 50mm deep front wheel. It's more aero than many deeper wheels.

My guess is it's due to 2 reasons:
1) Carbon spokes are so stiff so you don't need a lot of it. CRW have 16 spokes front instead of usual 24 spokes. Less spokes is more aero.
2) The oversized type of carbon spokes which require special hub is really deep.
Normal steel aero blade spokes are 0.95mm wide and 2mm deep.
My Light-Bicycle carbon spokes are 1.8mm wide and a whopping 4.5mm deep.
It has even more depth to width ratio than steel bladed spokes.
We all know deep wheels are more aero. Full disc wheel is more aero. Deeper profile spokes which fill more void in the wheel hole could steer aerodynamic towards this direction as well.

Still, I'm not a wind tunnel. So I don't really know.

Curious to know what alanyu thinks about this, he did mention fat carbon spokes are less aero.

I think I recalled Kirito sharing the same sentiment somewhere on weibo.

Depth obviously isn't the main indicator of aeroness, if not the old mavic ksyriums wouldn't have been so shite with their aluminum thick spokes. They need to have a good shape/profile to it.

[alanyu]

Also carbon spokes are generally less aero compared to flat steel spokes.

Is it tested that way?
Peak Torque on YouTube found CRW 5060 to be really really aero. That's with 34mm wide 50mm deep front wheel. It's more aero than many deeper wheels.

My guess is it's due to 2 reasons:
1) Carbon spokes are so stiff so you don't need a lot of it. CRW have 16 spokes front instead of usual 24 spokes. Less spokes is more aero.
2) The oversized type of carbon spokes which require special hub is really deep.
Normal steel aero blade spokes are 0.95mm wide and 2mm deep.
My Light-Bicycle carbon spokes are 1.8mm wide and a whopping 4.5mm deep.
It has even more depth to width ratio than steel bladed spokes.
We all know deep wheels are more aero. Full disc wheel is more aero. Deeper profile spokes which fill more void in the wheel hole could steer aerodynamic towards this direction as well.

Still, I'm not a wind tunnel. So I don't really know.

Curious to know what alanyu thinks about this, he did mention fat carbon spokes are less aero.

I think I recalled Kirito sharing the same sentiment somewhere on weibo.

Depth obviously isn't the main indicator of aeroness, if not the old mavic ksyriums wouldn't have been so shite with their aluminum thick spokes. They need to have a good shape/profile to it.

Yes, several points.

1. CX-ray and Aerolite II have better shape/profile, fusiform vs. rounded rectangle of carbon spoke.

2. Frontal width: CX-ray 0.9 mm, Aerolite II 0.7 mm. Carbon 0.9-1.6 mm based on different models, but the thinner the worse lateral stiffness, and it can be worse than steel spoke. (T700s composite with resin has a smaller modulus than SS302)

3. Endside. Carbon spoke has beefier cylinder part, and it's usually longer.

Can less carbon spokes conpensate the aeroness? 4, I don't think so, but 8 probably yes if they don't use too fat ones.

[JayDee81]

What alanyu said. Carbon spokes are less aero, but it can probably be compensated by having fewer such spokes. The question is what's the threshold.

[tmrace]

My local shop knows nothing about new wheels. Has anyone heard anything different from somewhere else?

[cajer]

Also carbon spokes are generally less aero compared to flat steel spokes.

Is it tested that way?
Peak Torque on YouTube found CRW 5060 to be really really aero. That's with 34mm wide 50mm deep front wheel. It's more aero than many deeper wheels.

My guess is it's due to 2 reasons:
1) Carbon spokes are so stiff so you don't need a lot of it. CRW have 16 spokes front instead of usual 24 spokes. Less spokes is more aero.
2) The oversized type of carbon spokes which require special hub is really deep.
Normal steel aero blade spokes are 0.95mm wide and 2mm deep.
My Light-Bicycle carbon spokes are 1.8mm wide and a whopping 4.5mm deep.
It has even more depth to width ratio than steel bladed spokes.
We all know deep wheels are more aero. Full disc wheel is more aero. Deeper profile spokes which fill more void in the wheel hole could steer aerodynamic towards this direction as well.

Still, I'm not a wind tunnel. So I don't really know.

Curious to know what alanyu thinks about this, he did mention fat carbon spokes are less aero.

I think I recalled Kirito sharing the same sentiment somewhere on weibo.

Depth obviously isn't the main indicator of aeroness, if not the old mavic ksyriums wouldn't have been so shite with their aluminum thick spokes. They need to have a good shape/profile to it.

Yes, several points.

1. CX-ray and Aerolite II have better shape/profile, fusiform vs. rounded rectangle of carbon spoke.

2. Frontal width: CX-ray 0.9 mm, Aerolite II 0.7 mm. Carbon 0.9-1.6 mm based on different models, but the thinner the worse lateral stiffness, and it can be worse than steel spoke. (T700s composite with resin has a smaller modulus than SS302)

3. Endside. Carbon spoke has beefier cylinder part, and it's usually longer.

Can less carbon spokes conpensate the aeroness? 4, I don't think so, but 8 probably yes if they don't use too fat ones.

Aerolite 2 seems to have much better shaping + thickness. Is it possible to get those to build into off the shelf hubs.

[alanyu]

Is it tested that way?
Peak Torque on YouTube found CRW 5060 to be really really aero. That's with 34mm wide 50mm deep front wheel. It's more aero than many deeper wheels.

My guess is it's due to 2 reasons:
1) Carbon spokes are so stiff so you don't need a lot of it. CRW have 16 spokes front instead of usual 24 spokes. Less spokes is more aero.
2) The oversized type of carbon spokes which require special hub is really deep.
Normal steel aero blade spokes are 0.95mm wide and 2mm deep.
My Light-Bicycle carbon spokes are 1.8mm wide and a whopping 4.5mm deep.
It has even more depth to width ratio than steel bladed spokes.
We all know deep wheels are more aero. Full disc wheel is more aero. Deeper profile spokes which fill more void in the wheel hole could steer aerodynamic towards this direction as well.

Still, I'm not a wind tunnel. So I don't really know.

Curious to know what alanyu thinks about this, he did mention fat carbon spokes are less aero.

I think I recalled Kirito sharing the same sentiment somewhere on weibo.

Depth obviously isn't the main indicator of aeroness, if not the old mavic ksyriums wouldn't have been so shite with their aluminum thick spokes. They need to have a good shape/profile to it.

Yes, several points.

1. CX-ray and Aerolite II have better shape/profile, fusiform vs. rounded rectangle of carbon spoke.

2. Frontal width: CX-ray 0.9 mm, Aerolite II 0.7 mm. Carbon 0.9-1.6 mm based on different models, but the thinner the worse lateral stiffness, and it can be worse than steel spoke. (T700s composite with resin has a smaller modulus than SS302)

3. Endside. Carbon spoke has beefier cylinder part, and it's usually longer.

Can less carbon spokes conpensate the aeroness? 4, I don't think so, but 8 probably yes if they don't use too fat ones.

Aerolite 2 seems to have much better shaping + thickness. Is it possible to get those to build into off the shelf hubs.

Possible if you are willing to do a bit reaming. Shelf hubs usually don't have large enough spoke holes. Also Aerolite 2 has less stiffness (lateral and torsional) than CX ray.

[cajer]

Curious to know what alanyu thinks about this, he did mention fat carbon spokes are less aero.

I think I recalled Kirito sharing the same sentiment somewhere on weibo.

Depth obviously isn't the main indicator of aeroness, if not the old mavic ksyriums wouldn't have been so shite with their aluminum thick spokes. They need to have a good shape/profile to it.

Yes, several points.

1. CX-ray and Aerolite II have better shape/profile, fusiform vs. rounded rectangle of carbon spoke.

2. Frontal width: CX-ray 0.9 mm, Aerolite II 0.7 mm. Carbon 0.9-1.6 mm based on different models, but the thinner the worse lateral stiffness, and it can be worse than steel spoke. (T700s composite with resin has a smaller modulus than SS302)

3. Endside. Carbon spoke has beefier cylinder part, and it's usually longer.

Can less carbon spokes conpensate the aeroness? 4, I don't think so, but 8 probably yes if they don't use too fat ones.

Aerolite 2 seems to have much better shaping + thickness. Is it possible to get those to build into off the shelf hubs.

Possible if you are willing to do a bit reaming. Shelf hubs usually don't have large enough spoke holes. Also Aerolite 2 has less stiffness (lateral and torsional) than CX ray.

How dangerous is that? As it seems that area in hubs should be a highly stressed part with stress concentrators in the form of holes

[alanyu]

Possible if you are willing to do a bit reaming. Shelf hubs usually don't have large enough spoke holes. Also Aerolite 2 has less stiffness (lateral and torsional) than CX ray.

How dangerous is that? As it seems that area in hubs should be a highly stressed part with stress concentrators in the form of holes

It will be highly risky on light hubs such as carbon ti/extralite/etc, but it's OK to ream the holes (along the wide direction of aerolite II) on "heavy" hubs with beefy flange.

[cajer]

Possible if you are willing to do a bit reaming. Shelf hubs usually don't have large enough spoke holes. Also Aerolite 2 has less stiffness (lateral and torsional) than CX ray.

How dangerous is that? As it seems that area in hubs should be a highly stressed part with stress concentrators in the form of holes

It will be highly risky on light hubs such as carbon ti/extralite/etc, but it's OK to ream the holes (along the wide direction of aerolite II) on "heavy" hubs with beefy flange.

Yea that makes sense. Have you done this before? Also will the newer DT swiss T-head spoked hubs take aerolite 2 without reaming? Finally I did a quick search and can't even find anywhere to buy aerolite 2 spokes.