A more recent edition of this test was performed in November 2024, in which we took 18 wheelsets (including a mix of newer models and some of those found here) for a more thorough and up-to-date test. 

Head to our 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:2024 wind tunnel wheels test to read that article. 

The data in the article below is still valid. 

When it comes to buying aero wheels for a road bike, there are a few considerations cyclists need to make. Compatibility with your bike, groupset and brakes are naturally going to be top of the priority list to ensure you can actually use them, but that's not exactly why we're buying them in the first place, is it? Tyre compati🍸bility is another factor, and while we all get passionate when discussing why we prefer tubeless or clincher tyres over the other,ꦡ it's still not what gets our blood pumping. 

There are two main motives when it comes to choosing the 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:best road bike wheels: those worried abou𓃲t riding uphill will focus on weight, l♌ikely before rattling off a rant about rotating weight being worth double (a still annoyingly common myth), but for the majority of us, the most important metric will be aerodynamics. Want to go faster for less effort? Of course you do. 

Brands know this, so rare is the day that a brand launches a new set of aero road bike wheels without ♋some sort of claim about how they're faster than their predecessor or the competition. The claim often originates from some sort of wind tunnel or aerodynamics testing, and looks something like "these new wheels are three watts faster than…" or "will save you 32 seconds over a 40km time trial". Naturally, we are forced to take these claims with a pinch of salt, ꦫas each brand is biased towards marketing its own product. 

With that in mind, when we were invited to Silverstone Sports Engineering Hub wind tunnel and offered the chance to bring a few wheelsets along, w🎃e jumped at the chance to be able to provide independent testing across various different wheelsets. We reached out to as many brands as possible and managed to get our hands on 10 pairs, and we've outlined the results below. 

Aerodynamics is measured in CdA, or the Coefficient of drag x Area, which is quantified in metres squared, or M². The drag coefficient is effectively a definition of how easily air passes over an item's surface. This is primarily affected by the shape of the item - for example, a bullet will have a lower drag coefficient than a coin, even when their size (or Area) is the same, due to its shape - but it can also be affected by surface material, and that's why many cyclists wear aero socks instead of bare legs. The area is quite simply the item🃏's frontal area, or size.&n🐷bsp;

To go faster, you need a lower CdA (in the context of aerodynamics, at least) and this can be achieved by making your area smaller, or by making it easier for air to pass over your surface - by adjust💫ing your shape, making your surface smoother or by using clever fabrics. Put in simple terms, the less you can disturb the air through which you pass, the more aerodynamic you'll be.

Returning our focus to road bike wheels, there's an important balance to be struck with reducing CdA while also ensur💫ing the wheels perform well in other areas, such as handling, comfort, and weight. For example, a solid wheel known as a disc wheel will regularly produce the lowest CdA numbers in a wind tunnel, but they are also considerꦿably heavier than a spoked wheel and more affected by wind, which makes accelerating slower, the overall bike heavier, handling more difficult, and crashes more likely. 

That's where mid-section wheels come into their own. Averaging around 50- to 65mm deep, these wheels aren't as aerodynamic as their 80- to 90mm deep counterparts, nor are they as light or responsive as the 168澳洲5最新开奖结果:best lightweight wheels, which are often 30- to 40mm deep. They strike a Goldilocks balance and make for the ideal choice for most riders, who are looking for extra speed, without sacrificing handling ability orไ adding too much weight. 

For that reason, we fo𒈔cussed our attention on mid-section wheels for our testing. ♏;

The wheels

We limiteꦇd our testing to wheels ranging from 50 to 65mm, and our efforts resulted in the following list of 10 wheelseꦦts: 

• Shimano Dura-Ace C60 (R9200 series)
• Roval CLX II 60mm
• HED Vanquish RC6 Pro
• Hunt 60 Limitless Aero Disc
• Vision Metron 60 SL
• Enve Foundation 65
• Reserve 50/65
• FFWD Ryot 55
• Zipp 404 Firecrest (58mm)
• DT Swiss Arc 1100 DiCut 62 DB

The test

An admission: I didn't perform the testing myself. I was present and involved, but definitely not in charge of the wind tunnel. Even if I were allowed, I wouldn't have wanted to since the🧔 calibre of experts present on the day was immense. I was lucky enough to have Jamie Lowden, aerodynamics specialist at Wattshop, as well as Casper von Folsach, one of the aero masterminds behind the Danish federation's 2020 Olympics track success. They were both entirely happy to indulge our wheelset curiosity.

Naturally, the test was standardised, meaning the same conditions were met for each wheelset during each data capture. These included𒉰 the bike, the wind speed, the tyres and more. 

Each wheelset was fitted to the same frame for testing, without a rider present. However, prior to the test, we spent a long period of time testing various wheelsets with a pedalling rider. We saw very similar differences between wheels, but with increased noise (variance in the resulting CdA figures). To achieve the same accuracy of results across all of our testing, we would have needed a lot more testing time and repeats to get the same information. Having found 🌠the same differences with less noise using less testing time and fewer repeats, it was a no-brainer to continue the testing without a rider. 

We tested with an airspeed of 45km/h (27.96mph).ꦯ This is representative of professional peloton speed𓆉s. Naturally, we ensured the wheels were spinning at the same speed, because the behaviour of airflow over the rim and spokes is very different on a static wheel, and not at all representative of the real world. 

Holding the bike in place was a set of stanchions, and no corrections were made for these, since they were the same across all tests. We're interested in the difference between wheels here, not the absolute values.&🙈nbsp;

Each wheel was fitted with 25mm Schwalbe Pro One tubeless tyres. Some wheels in this ꦅtest were designed to be fitted with 28mm tyres. We will note those as paꦫrt of the results below. 

Each data capture ꧃was performed in five-degree increments from -15 to +15 degrees of yaw. That means seven capture points of -15, -10, -5, 0, +5, +10 and +15 degrees. Each capture was performed in a sweep in the same direction (negative to positive) for consistency. 

Some caveats

Below, you'll fin🍷d the results of our day spent in the tunnel. However🐲, first, a few caveats:

• I will order them from worst to best based on the average CdA across all seven yaw angles. I will then use this average to calculate the average power required to ride at 30km/h (18.64mph) and 40km/h (24.85mph) based on the following calculation: Power (watts) = 0.5 x AirDensity x CdA x Velocity^3. 
• Given we have the CdA of the bike alone, rather than a bike with a rider on it, the actual CdA and wattage numbers are small. An approximate CdA for the best time triallists will be around 0.17, rising to around 0.3 for a road cyclist, whereas the CdA values here are between 0.09 and 0.1. The approximate wattage to ride at 40km/h here works out at around 78 watts, which is obviously unrealistic. So, instead of quoting that number, I've calculated the watts saved vs the slowest wheelset on this test. 
• The results of our testing are representative of just that: our testing. We understand that manufacturers might find different results based on different testing protocols. We don't intend to claim that our results are the final word in road wheel aerodynamics testing, but rather a separate stream of independent testing and knowledge for our readers. 
• We also understand that aerodynamics is just one of a number of factors that define the best road bike wheels. Weight, durability, width, crosswind stability, ease of servicing, how easily a tyre is fitted, and how easily a tubeless tyre seats and inflates are just some examples of other factors to bear in mind. 

The results

With those caveats out of the way, let's get int💝o wha﷽t you're actually here for… the results. 

10: Reserve 65/50

In 10th and last place in our testing comes a relative outsider to the mainstay wheel brands, Reserve, which is the subsidiary brand of Santa Cruz and Cervelo, and is the wheel sponsor to Jumbo Visma'🍷s women's team. 

The brand very recently won the Green Jersey beneath Marianne Vos at the Tour de France Femmes, and was also used by Wout van Aert for his victory in the men's Tour de France stage 20 time trial. The wheelset in question is the 50/65 - essentially pairing a 50mm deep front wheel with a 65mm rear. Its +10 and +15 degree values actually came out slightly faster than both 8th and 9th place, but the average CdAꦦ across the board is 0.00007 higher (and therefor👍e slower) than 9th place. Importantly, that's almost nothing at 0.06 of a watt. 

• Average CdA: 0.09687
• Rim depth: 50mm front / 65mm rear
• Internal rim width: 21mm
• Wheelset weight: 1670g
• Watts to hold 30kph: 33.6w
• Watts to hold 40kph: 79.7w