I'm thinking about getting the new 2010 Easton EC90 TT tubular wheelset. They are about 1400g and 90mm deep. Would it be practical to use these wheels in RR's as well as in TT's? And how much of a factor is the weight of the rider?
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
cabmab said:I'm thinking about getting the new 2010 Easton EC90 TT tubular wheelset. They are about 1400g and 90mm deep. Would it be practical to use these wheels in RR's as well as in TT's? And how much of a factor is the weight of the rider?
nightfend said:The Easton TT's are not the stiffest wheels out there. Under hard sprinting/climbing efforts, you can definitely get the wheels to move around on you. So for that reason, I'd look at another wheelset.
RoadieBeast said:The Easton R4 hubs are insanely fast
nightfend said:The Easton TT's are not the stiffest wheels out there. Under hard sprinting/climbing efforts, you can definitely get the wheels to move around on you. So for that reason, I'd look at another wheelset.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:Exactly. Those Eastons and most other super deep rims are happiest in a straight line under ideal wind conditions. Can't imagine anyone suggesting a 90mm deep wheel set for dual purpose RR/TT, maybe the rear but not the front.
Bustedknuckle said:
RDV4ROUBAIX said:Some guys are adopting that 90/60 set up. Haven't tried it yet myself, but can't imagine it makes any difference at club level, other than looking cool. I have yet to see a 90 on the front in a RR though, maybe at the Nature Valley GP last year I did spot one set or two. I could probably handle a 90 front in a crosswind because I'm heavy enough, but I most likely won't even bother. 60mm or so f & r is plenty deep for most, and is a better balance of spoke length vs. rim depth.
Bustedknuckle said:The OP was looking for a wheelset to do both RR and TT. Maybe a 60/90 would be a good combo for him, or 60/60. I don't think either would make a huge difference unless it's really windy.
Altho no fan of Zipp, the 808 is actually 82mm...22mm, less than a CM in depth, when compared to the 60.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:And that's just it. Don't you love it when the OP is posted, then the person who posted this doesn't chime in at all to see what direction they want to go in relation to all the advice we've given. Where just left talking about something that doesn't even matter anymore. This person signed up just to ask for advice, but now nowhere to be found.
Hey Busted, what was your gripe with Zipp rims? You mentioned it before, I think it was pulling nips through the spoke holes or something.. Personally I've never had any problems with Zipp rims, standard or OEM versions from other wheel brands. I've heard from others about minor issues with them ...me, never. Am I just lucky so far?
ImmaculateKadence said:I'm surprised there has been no mention of Mavic in this thread. I swear by em.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:Mavic's street cred took a severe hit this time last year. Remember the R-Sys fiasco?
IMHO they've been on a fairly constant decline since they sold out to Salomon in the mid 90's. Seems when corporate board members and marketing gurus get in the way of common sense, you end up building wheels by committee, the result of which happened to be the biggest recall in the bike industry of 2009.
I would have more respect for Mavic if they went back to square one and built a decent, high mileage, mid range wheel set with standard stainless j-bend spokes. Durable enough to train on everyday, light enough to be race worthy, and without having to apply 50g of decals on the rims to look more ‘cool’. The problem is that Mavic has always stayed away from the standards when it comes to wheels, in turn makes serviceability a real pain in the neck.
ImmaculateKadence said:I knew the R-Sys situation would be mentioned.
I've only been a cyclist for about 5 years now, so I can't really comment on the Salomon deal or the quality before they sold out. I can say that I've loved all the Mavics I've ridden on both road and dirt. I've always found them to be reliable, dependable, and fast. The R-Sys situation hurt them (I have not ridden those wheels), but they sorted it out.
I know what your saying though about the decals and the serviceability. When I was a bike tech it was SRAM and Mavic that gave me the most fits. I would normally try to pass wheel jobs to somebody else. The ironic thing is, my Mavics never gave me trouble. They always stayed true, spokes never broke, etc, etc. Maybe I just had better luck with mine.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:No company is safe from wheels blowing up. HED had some wheel explosions last season too, but not on the scale of what happened to Mavic. I've never had any problems with Zipp rims, but there are builders like Bustedknuckle, whom I know is one of the best, had some bad experiences with them, I've been lucky in that regard. All in all, I think carbon tech in cycling has come a long way, spokes are a different story. Unless you can repair a wheel at your LBS if you have a problem with a spoke, hub, or rim, it just ain't worth it for the general consumer to deal with warranty departments and proprietary parts that are costly and have to wait for. IMHO the best wheels are built with J-bend spokes, the standard. You can find 'em in every bike shop in every corner of the world. Once the standard changes, I'll be all over that.
ImmaculateKadence said:The J-Bend spokes are the standard, but they weaken overtime. I've had, and seen, many rides ruined due to weak and broken J-bends. It was never a problem to have them repaired, but they broke neverthless. That was something that initially attracted to me to my first set of Mavics, the straight pull spokes. So far, no trouble. Hell, the pair on my mountain bike I've only had to true once, and I've ridden them for nearly two years.
ihavenolimbs said:I don't think that wheelbuilding is that tricky, it just takes a while if you aint that flash.
I spent most of a Saturday pulling apart a no-name, factory-built, rear wheel, changing a hub, and putting it back together. First time building a wheel ever. And I was very naughty, used all the old spokes, an old hub, and the same dodgy rim.
It used to break a spoke every two weeks, never broken one since (three years ago). I concede that the sample size of my experiment is small, so not very scientific.
Regarding the thread topic, are Easton wheels developed in wind tunnels, like what Zipp and HED do?
I like that HED gives so much data, including for HED, Zipp, and a couple of other wheels.
http://www.hedcycling.com/aerodynamics_technology/
(I realize that this is just marketing until independently verified.)
And the previous version of the EA90TT wheels, the Tempest II, only saves 4 W @ 50 kph (just the front wheel, the rear wheel will be about half this) according to:
http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-15505311.html
(So only about 3 W @ 40 kph, in total?)
My next big purchase will probably be a HED Stinger 4 wheelset. Probably faster than the Eastons, probably less cross-windage too, slightly lighter, and about the same cost.
ImmaculateKadence said:My difficulty stems from how tedious it is. Not my style. I love working on bikes, but I'm always looking for someone else to do the wheel work.
This thread has got me interested in new wheels. I'm looking around and the HED Bastogne has caught my eye. I'm not a serious road racer, so I don't need anything aero. Besides, I've always been drawn more to traditional wheels. The Bastogne are a tad lighter than the Ksyrium SL (less expensive too), and I like the Stallion build option. I'm only 155 lbs, but I fancy myself a sprinter, so the stiffer wheels would be nice when I do race. Any feedback from personal experience or otherwise?