Are FLO wheels really this slow...??

Balor

Zen MBB Master
I still feel faster on my FLOs, and have no plans of giving them up. I have set of new HED wheels that I have left in the box. :cool:

Hmm, if my life's goal was to create a perfect post to troll Ed to the max, I'd be committing suicide right now - because my life's goal seems to be snatched away...
 

Balor

Zen MBB Master
All this aero talk reminds me of classic by Brown:

Scan%2B3.jpeg
 

ed72

Zen MBB Master
I still feel faster on my FLOs, and have no plans of giving them up. I have set of new HED wheels that I have left in the box. :cool:

Don't blame you. I have many sets of them. They are bulletproof. I hit a pothole at 45 mph at like at 2 am going down a mount. I hit it so hard, my teeth chipped. The wheel suffered no damage.

In very quiet air, my new 2-spoke was just a little faster. At normal riding speeds of 18-22 mph in calm conditions, the difference would not be worth the money to be honest.

I would make the same argument of Zipp 808 vs FLO60 for an upright rider, too. At 30 km/h, the differences were like 5 watts. At 50 km/hr, the differences grow to 35 watts per Hambini. Few can really travel at those speeds whether on an upright or bent. I can't quite time trial at 30 mph on my bent but I am getting very close. I also know I cannot find 35 watts in my legs, so, if the FLO wheels are even costing me 15 watts, this is why I made the costly experiment. I was a little disappointed at first but should not have been. FLO60 with the 23 mm Conti tire at zero yaw has been repeatedly been shown to be the fastest or one of the fastest combinations. My new wheel is a little faster at zero yaw. What I am having trouble getting a handle on how much superior the two NACA foil spoked wheel is in a cross wind at low speed. Truth is most people don't care if it takes then 140 watts to go 20 mph or it takes them 80 watts because they can't really feel the difference but for me, 5, 10, 20, 40 hours into a long ride, it adds up. And it is not so much about power as energy conservation.

I'm still a FLo fanboy but just not for the speeds on a bent, at least that is my new perspective.
 

ed72

Zen MBB Master
Thinking about wind tunnel testing. How is a 50 km/h wind realistic when it comes to the lift generated in the real world? Applying a 50 km/h wind at 10 degrees yaw in a wind tunnel is not the same as riding 50 km/h when it comes to estimating lift.

I am trying to understand how much lift a disk wheel can actually generate. Or in my case, the NACA 65210 foils on the 2-spoke wheel.

The lift force should be independent of forward velocity of the bike, it is the airflow from wind and its angle that matters and nothing else. On a relative basis, the effect should help most to lower speed riders and especially those with low Crr and overall low CdA (me). I have some cross wind conditions coming up to run some more trials. I am going to use a different Powertap hub and make sure I pedal all the time, I could have had some dropouts but I know I didn't pedal all the time either. I just can't imagine 40 free watts.
 

ed72

Zen MBB Master
So, I ran 10 miles up and 10 miles down the river today on the FLO60 and then switched over to the 2-Spoke for the same up and down. I analyzed power by segments and also overall 10 mile stretches. In no case did the 2-Spoke need more power or in effect, it is faster.

2-Spoke faster again but the advantage was only by 9 watts on average today at 20 mph average. There wasn't much wind to help and it was cooler. Nonetheless, I am calling the FLO60 kinda slow at this point.

What was more interesting? Overall average wattage was about 40 watts higher than the other day, meaning about 140 watts vs 100 watts. Just shows how setup matters although wind and 65-70F vs 75-80F also matters. It was easy to feel in the legs. Makes me want to set the bike up fast every day, LOL.
 
I am interested skinny tyre's up front factor. I am among those opting for wider tubeless tyres but this is saying I should run skinnier in the front but still fatter in the rear, anybody else in this camp looking at switching?
 

ed72

Zen MBB Master
In my tests, I ran 23 mm Continental Supersonics up front on both FLO60 and the 2-Spoke wheel. I am going to run the 2-Spoke with 23 mm SS up front and the 25 mm GP4000si TT version on the rear at an upcoming 12 hour race. Both Mr. Thornton (Flo) and Mr. Moens (2-spoke) have told me by email that the 23 mm is the faster for their wheels and Mr. Hambini's tests demonstrate that effect and he explains it fairly well, better than my gibberish.

My normal training tire is the Continental GP4000si 25 mm reflex reflective sidewall. The FLo rim is pretty wide and handles the 25 mm tire fairly well but at higher speeds, the smaller profile of the 23 mm tire and a better matchup to the rim in terms of width should result in a higher yaw before separation and therefore, much better overall aerodynamics. Road surfaces and speed are also factors. On rough roads, a 23 mm might not make sense. On decent paved roads and at higher speeds (say over 24 mph), the 23 mm would be faster but I know from my upright days that the 28 mm Conti GP4k with latex tubes is a very, very fast tire on bumpy roads at more pedestrian speeds of 18-20 mph but at 21-23 mph, I would go with the 25 mm tires. The speeds on any top of the line bent are so fast, especially in rolling terrain, that to be honest, I am still figuring it out. My gut feeling is anything below 20-22 mph would best to minimize rolling resistance and 25 or 28 mm tires would make sense but over 25 mph and 23 mm might make sense if roads are decent.
 
Top