What is the best carbon wheelset for the money? Should I consider Chinese carbon wheels from Yoeleo, Farsports, Light Bicycle or others? What should I expect of relatively cheap bicycle wheels that are only sold online from brands like Prime wheels, FLO Cycling, and Hunt wheels? What about those wheelsets from Profile Design or Rolf Prima that are available primarily through US retailers?

How do these compare to more expensive carbon wheelsets and the lower-priced carbon models widely available from the long-established, better-known wheel makers like Zipp, Bontrager, Reynolds, and Fulcrum?

That’s how I opened Part 1 of my Best Carbon Wheelset for the Money. In that post, I laid out a way to compare the companies making all-around wheelsets selling in the $1000-$1500 price range. I provided you, my fellow road cycling enthusiast on a tight budget yet still wanting carbon wheels, perspective on how those companies approach engineering, production, sales, and service differently.

The post also included info about how long these companies have been selling carbon wheels, how much each company appears to be involved in the design and manufacturing of the carbon wheelsets they sell, what return, crash replacement and warranty policies they offer, and what the price and design specs are for their <$1500 all-around wheelsets.

All of this was intended to help you learn more about the companies whose wheelsets you might consider buying beyond the relatively low price of their carbon wheels. I certainly have, and I imagine you all have some basic requirements that must be met before spending a good chunk of change for cycling gear from any company. Hopefully, the added knowledge about these companies, some which you may have known little or nothing about before, will help you in your decision making.

What I didn’t do in that first post was to share with you my on-the-road performance evaluations of these value carbon wheels. Once I’m good with the company behind a wheelset and the price being in my budget range, performance matters most.

First, I’ll share my experience on how the performance of value carbon wheels differs with that of full-priced performance carbon wheels and lower-priced alloy upgrade wheels. Then, I’ll first summarize how the companies selling value carbon wheels approach the business in different ways, the focus of what I laid out in Part 1.

Finally, I’ll give you my performance reviews for those value carbon wheelsets we have completed testing. You can see when I post additional reviews as we complete testing over the next few months by following us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.


Click on any red statement below to go directly to that part of the post. Click the back arrow to return to this list. 

Performance differs between value cabon, performance carbon and alloy upgrade wheels


Companies selling value carbon wheels use dissimilar approaches to hit similar price targets

These individual reviews describe the performance of a range of value carbon wheelsets


Since publishing Part 1, I’ve received impassioned, almost hysterical entreaties from a few readers who asked if I would tell them immediately which of three or four value carbon wheelsets on their radar from some of the nearly 20 companies I identified earlier they should choose. They needed to know now and their requests were written in a way that suggested it shouldn’t be that hard or take that long to simply tell them.

Well, that’s not happening. I don’t write click-bait pieces that you may see on other sites with titles like “14 of the Best (this or that) Wheels for (such and such type of) Riding” that regurgitate the specs and marketing narratives provided to their writers. Those articles have very little performance critique, little if any feedback from having ridden the wheels out on the road, and seldom include anything negative about the products being described.

If you are new to this site, know that In The Know Cycling posts in-depth and independent, category-wide and comparative, and ad-free and conflict-of-interest-free reviews. I and my fellow testers aren’t cycling industry writers. Instead, like many of you, we’re cycling enthusiasts with jobs and families outside of cycling that are the focus of our lives and our time.

Because of our passion for cycling, our nerdy/analytical/gearhead tendencies, and our desire to figure out what gear we should get next for ourselves, we ride the gear and give you honest evaluations of the good and the bad. Our reviews and recommendations are based on product performance, cognizant of price differences, circumspect of quality, warranties, and service, and curious though not affected by design, technology, and features.

To eliminate potential conflicts or perceived bias, I buy or demo and return or donate all the gear we test. I don’t run any ads on the site, go on company-paid product introduction trips, rewrite and post announcements of new gear as “first looks”, accept articles paid for or submitted by companies, stores, PR firms or guest authors, engage in any influencer marketing or charge for any content on the site.

If you like what you see, you can support what we do and help cover our gear and site costs by buying your own gear through the store links you see in the reviews or the searches you can do using the tool in the sidebar that will take you to the comparison shopping site I set up called Know’s Shop.

When you buy through the links you see to stores I selected because my research shows they have the best prices, customer satisfaction ratings, and roadie product selection, a small amount comes back to us, at no added cost to you, to help cover our expenses. If you prefer, you can also support this site by making a contribution here or by buying anything through these links to eBay and Amazon. Thank you.


I’ve frequently heard some riders say value carbon wheels, those that sell in the $1000-$1500 range get you 80%-90% of the performance at 1/2 to 1/3 of the price of full-priced or what I’ll call “performance carbon wheels”.

While that is a memorable line, it lacks the kind context to make it useful, let alone accurate.

It’s really hard to make any overarching statement like that without knowing, for example:

  • Which value carbon wheels and which performance carbon wheels are you comparing?
  • Which performance characteristics are you considering?
  • Which characteristics are most important to you in making a wheelset decision?

As you likely know and can see on the home page, I and my fellow In The Know Cycling testers review and compare a half-dozen or more wheelsets from an entire category that are intended for a similar purpose and put it into a single post for you. Which are the best climbing or all-around or aero wheelsets? Which are the best alloy upgrade wheelsets? Which are the best wheelsets in each of those categories for rim brake bikes vs. disc brake bikes?


Not sure which type of wheels to get? Check out this post:

Road Bike Wheels – How To Choose The Best For You


Looking for the best performing all-around rim brake wheels? Click here: The Best Carbon Road Bike Wheels

Looking for the best performing all-around disc brake wheels? Click here: The Best Carbon Disc Wheelset

Looking for the best performing rim or disc aero bike wheels? Click here: The Best Aero Bike Wheels

While there are performance characteristics that are unique to each category or more important when comparing wheels in some categories versus others, there are a handful of characteristics that are important across all categories.

Most of the value carbon wheels I am reviewing in search of “the best carbon wheelset for the money” are all-around category wheels. This category includes mid-depth (40-50mm) wheelsets that are intended to be used for training and road racing, on the flats and in the climbs, mostly on the road but also for a modest amount of cross or dirt riding off of it. As the “all-around” description suggests, these wheels are good in most all situations if not ideally suited for specific terrain (e.g. climbing), event (e.g. time trials) or surface (e.g. smooth, paved roads).

The performance criteria I and my fellow testers use in evaluating wheelsets in this category, and most other categories to a greater or lesser degree, are versatility, aerodynamics, stiffness, responsiveness (aka acceleration), comfort, handling, and braking. You can read more about what I mean by each of these on my wheelset selection criteria page.

In the next section, I’ve compared the performance characteristics of individual value carbon wheels we’ve tested using these same criteria.

In this section, I’ve compared some of the better and average value carbon wheels as a group against some of the better and average performance carbon wheels and alloy upgrade wheels made for rim brake and disc brake road bikes.

This is a fool’s errand but I’m a fool and am trying to provide you a general reference point of what to expect for a specific performance characteristic between wheelsets we’ve tested representative of these three different groups. This will hopefully be better than the horribly inexact and simplistic “x% of the performance at y% of the price” statement that some people lean on.

I’ve no doubt that I will get comments from some saying my $500 alloy wheelset far outperforms the $3000 carbon wheelset those I race against or ride with use in this or that situation. I won’t try to confirm or explain why your experience or evaluation differs from mine.

My fellow testers and I have ridden, compared and reviewed many, many wheelsets. You can read and compare my take on whatever wheelsets you are interested in by entering the wheelset name in the “Search reviews” box at the top of the page.

Rather, what follows is a distillation of our experience.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

The most desirable all-around wheels will provide the versatility to ride different types of terrain (hills, flats, false flats, straights, corners, sprints, mountains, fast downhills, windy roads) that you’ll experience and a range of training and many events (club races, centuries, club, charity, group rides) you’ll do without compromise.

With the growing popularity of cyclocross and gravel or dirt riding, you can add a wheelset’s ability to ride road and these off-road situations well to the versatility consideration.

Performance carbon wheelsets clearly have an advantage here. The better and many of the average rim and disc wheelsets are more aero, responsive and comfortable, and climb better than value carbon or alloy upgrade wheels we’ve ridden. That makes them more versatile for the range of terrain you might ride, events you might do, and surfaces you might traverse, especially if you are comparing the more modern disc brake wheels against each other.

The better and average value carbon wheels I’ve tested are somewhat more versatile than the better and average alloy upgrade wheels. Being deeper and with good hubs, they are better at holding aero speeds above 20mph/32kph. In quite a few cases, however, that comes with crosswind management issues that you don’t experience with the shallow alloy upgrade wheels (or the more advanced rim profile designs of the performance carbon all-around depth wheels).

While most of the value carbon wheels are wider than most of the alloy upgrade wheels, I haven’t found the former group to be any more comfortable. This limits your desire to want to ride them off-road (and in some cases on it).

To fill out the versatility consideration, I think about how much I’d like to climb with these wheels. The value carbon wheels are generally a bit heavier than the performance carbon ones. Others are not as stiff. I haven’t found any that are as light and stiff than the better and average performance carbon wheelsets.

Alloy upgrade wheelsets, though shallower than value carbon ones, aren’t noticeably lighter and often not as stiff. This limits their versatility.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

With few exceptions, this is quite clearcut and for understandable reasons. The better and even average performance carbon wheelsets tend to have more engineering invested in developing rims that are more aero in the normal 0 to 10-degree yaw angles and crosswinds than value carbon ones.

Depending on the company’s strategy and business activities (see above section), value carbon wheels generally come with rims designs used in earlier generation performance carbon wheels made by the company or are older designs from companies that just can’t afford to invest in updating the rims as often as those in performance carbon wheelsets or are copies of generation or two-old performance carbon rims.

Alloy upgrade wheels are typically in the 25mm +/- rim depth. This makes them about 20mm shallower than the value carbon and performance carbon wheelsets. At aero speeds, you will notice a difference. On the flip side, many of the value carbon wheels with their older designs require a good deal of crosswind management whereas the shallower wheels general don’t.

No, I didn’t run any of these wheels through the In The Know Cycling wind tunnel. Instead, my observations are anecdotal and based on riding a lot of wheelsets at different aero speeds over time and doing back to back rides in similar conditions.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

Stiffness is a performance characteristic that is specific to a wheelset. Some are stiffer than others regardless of the category of wheels they might fall into. There are plenty of stiff wheels that transfer your power efficiently within each category and at each price point.

You can see which wheelsets are stiffer in the charts that summarize and compare performance within each category review.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

Responsiveness is a measure of how quickly a wheelset accelerates from a stop or when you attempt to accelerate while underway from one speed to a much faster one. You accelerate most often after slowing at a stop light or sign or after making a turn. If you race or group ride, you might accelerate to start a breakaway, move past someone slowing in front of you, kick it in on a hill or when doing a sprint for the town line or finish line.

I’ve found that performance carbon wheels are some of the most responsive around. This certainly isn’t the case with all performance carbon wheels, but I’ve seldom found value carbon or alloy upgrade wheels to be as responsive.

You might wonder, if stiffness is wheelset specific why wouldn’t responsiveness be as well? It’s hard to pinpoint exactly why for a given wheelset but some combination of stiffness, aerodynamics, weight, carbon layup, hub engagement and perhaps other factors will determine how responsive a wheel is when you try to accelerate. Performance carbon wheels may be some combination of more aero, lighter, using higher grade carbon or better hubs than either value carbon or alloy upgrade wheels.

Value carbon wheels are usually more aero but heavier than alloy upgrade ones. This might explain why I’ve found little difference in their responsiveness.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

Comfort is relative and very much in the eye of the beholder or should I say hands and rear end or the biker. We used to ride around on 15C wide alloy wheels pumped up to 120 psi with nary a complaint about comfort.

Now, the focus on comfort seems to be a sub-industry unto itself with some tires and wheels sold on the premise that their width will provide you comfort.

A few things to point out first. Comfort is an outcome of a wheelset’s vertical compliance, what tires you use, and how much you inflate them. You can make a wheel more or less comfortable by running it tubeless, using better tires and lowering the pressure.

But, you can only do so much to make a wheelset comfortable given its compliance. Vertical compliance is determined by the wheel’s rim, spoke, and hub materials and how they are aligned and assembled.

All the marketing around a wider rim making for a more comfortable ride is misleading. If everything I’ve written about above is the same between two wheels, then yes, a wider rim on a wheelset could be more comfortable. But, all else is never the same between wheels from two different companies and there’s often enough different that width isn’t the dominant factor in determining comfort.

Indeed, I found a 16mm wide (internal) value carbon wheelset with 23C tubed tires inflated at 75 psi to be clearly more comfortable than a 21mm wide (internal) value carbon wheelset with 25C tubeless tires inflated at 60 psi ridden on the same roads.

While it is unusual to find that situation, it illustrates the point that wheelset width does not predict comfort. Vertical compliance along with tire choice and inflation pressure does and there’s no way to predict compliance from specs. I set up our performance carbon and value carbon wheels tubeless using the same brand, model and size tires and at the same pressures. I was also able to spec most of the value carbon wheelsets we tested with DT Swiss 240 hubs, a top performing hub used on the best wheelsets in all three groups.

Some 19C wheelsets will be more comfortable than some 21C wheelsets. One 19C wheelset will be comfortable, another will be passable while a third is harsh. It’s just not about the rim width.

For those of you focused on tire width, know also that aero performance, handling and comfort are interdependent. You just can’t put on a set of 25C tires to improve comfort without potentially affecting your aero performance and handling. I wrote this post about that subject a few years ago and it is still relevant (and much read) even today. And, one brand’s 25C tire can be a millimeter wider than a 25C tire from another brand, and both are almost never going to be as narrow as 25mm once mounted and inflated on even a 17C wheel.

So what about the vertical compliance of the three different groups of wheelsets?

Like stiffness, a lateral measure that is also dependent on the wheel’s rim, spokes, and hub materials and how they are aligned and assembled, vertical compliance is unique to a wheelset.

That said, I’ve found the better and average performance carbon wheels as a group of individual wheelsets to be more comfortable than either better and average value carbon and alloy upgrade wheels.

I’m not sure why this is but I’ll guess it’s simply a result of money. More engineering goes into performance carbon wheels than either of the other types. Companies are hip to the reality that we cyclists want comfort today so the companies making performance carbon wheels spend the money to engineer their wheels to be more compliant. The others either can’t afford to or don’t choose to.


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

This criterion, of course, relates only to rim brake wheels. For disc brake wheels, braking performance is determined by the brakes and rotors rather than the wheels, assuming the hubs and spoke bracing are structurally up to the job.

When evaluating a rim brake wheelset’s braking, I consider how much force is needed to slow or stop your wheels and how well you can modulate that force to control the rate of your deceleration as the two primary measures of braking quality.

If you use a good set of brake levers and calipers, well-maintained cables, the appropriate brake pads for the wheels, and properly aligned, spaced, and adjusted calipers, differences in braking performance are going to be all about the difference in the brake tracks.

I recognize that’s a big if so if you are unsure whether your brakes are set up right, check out this video for a little home wrenching advice.

Wheels with alloy brake tracks still perform the best in dry and wet road conditions. The better and even average performance carbon wheels are damn close in dry conditions and the better ones are not far off alloy upgrade wheels on wet roads.

The current generation of performance carbon wheels have closed the braking performance gap by texturing or treating their carbon brake tracks to increase the friction during braking, using improved resins to raise the temperature at which brake tracks heat up and fade or worse kicks in, and by advancing the manufacturing techniques in their rim lay-up process.

Unfortunately, most value carbon rim brake wheels perform more like earlier generation carbon wheels. While some use higher temperature resins, I’ve not seen any with textured or treated tracks. Manufacturing techniques vary. The force isn’t there to slow the wheels nearly as much as textured or treated tracks and you’ll experience squealing and/or fading as the tracks heat up from repeated braking.

Those from companies with several generations of experience making carbon wheels shouldn’t warp and delaminate if you don’t drag your brakes (apply them 10-15 seconds or longer) and if you do use carbon braking techniques (alternate front and back wheels, brake no longer than 5 seconds at a time, brake hard initially on wet roads to squeeze out the water).


(Comparative Performance Key: + Better, 0 Par, – Worse)

Good handling comes from a combination of several of the performance criterion described above. Good lateral stiffness is required to minimize the amount the wheel deflects in a turn. Good vertical compliance is important to soak up any unevenness in the pavement. Good braking helps you get into the turn at the right speed. A more responsive wheelset helps you accelerate out of the turn.

Handling technique plays a big role in your cornering experience as do good quality and appropriately sized and inflated tires. Especially if they need improving, your technique and tires can be far more important than all the stiffness, compliance, braking, and responsiveness built into the wheelset to great handling.

With all of that, I really can’t differentiate as much between groups of wheelsets as between individual ones. So I’ll punt on trying to compare these and continue to point out which wheelsets have better handling than others.


There are two dimensions along which I organize the companies selling “the best carbon wheelset for the money” or what I’m calling value carbon wheels that sell in the $1000-$1500 price range.

SCOPE – By scope, I’m referring to the range of business activities and operations, number and range of products, breadth of the cycling market segments served or countries and geographies the companies sell to. Those selling value carbon wheels either have a broad or focused scope.

SALES – Companies today are selling wheels (and most cycling products) through dealers, either online or at stores that represent them, or directly to cyclists from their own company websites.

Companies combine their scope and sales approach to follow one of four primary strategies shown in the chart below. You can read about each of these strategies in more detail here.

Value Carbon Wheelset Company Strategies

Within those strategies, companies either conduct or have other companies conduct for them a set of business activities shown in the chart below and described in more detail here.

Primary Wheelset Business Activities

A wheelset’s price is determined in part by how comprehensive or limited these business activities are. The price is also determined by how much margin companies need to put on top of the operating and investment costs of those activities and others supporting them to make an acceptable return and stay competitive in the market.

You can often find a lower priced wheelset if you don’t value some of these activities by buying from companies who spend less on those activities than others either by doing them more efficiently, by narrowing the scope of what goes into them or by contracting some out some of them to lower cost sources.

For example, if you don’t put a lot of value into the research or testing that goes into some bike wheels, you can typically find lower priced ones from companies that don’t spend a lot on those activities and select the rim, hub and spoke choices offered by those that have. On the other hand, if you want a set of wheels with a brand name the company has spent money to build through design, marketing, and service, you will likely pay more.

Do you care who or where the wheels are made, how long it takes to get it, how well it is made, how long the warranty is? All those preferences have costs or cost savings associated with them.

The conventional thinking is that price differences are primarily guided by whether companies sell wheels and other cycling products through their distributors or direct to consumers. The reality is that the price differences between value carbon wheelsets (and value carbon and more expensive wheelsets) come because companies make a wide range of choices about how they run their business through the strategies and activities they choose to run their business.

In The Know Cycling supports you by doing hours of independent and comparative evaluations to find and recommend the best road cycling gear and kit to improve your riding experience.

You can support the site and save yourself time and money when you buy through the links in the posts and at Know’s Shop to stores I rank among the best for their low prices and high customer satisfaction, some which pay a commission that helps cover our review and site costs.

Click here to read about who we are, what we do, and why. 


1. Integrateds 

Integrateds themselves do the activities or actively manage what others do integral to designing, producing, selling and servicing wheels. They all use distributors and sell principally through online or shop dealers though some also sell direct from their company stores.

Since the Integrateds build wheels in advance and stock their distributors and dealer, you can usually order and get value carbon wheels from them immediately or within days, the time it takes the order to ship to you.

It takes somewhere between 2 to 6 weeks to get wheels from nearly all the other companies selling value carbon wheels as they build to order.

All the Integrateds sell more expensive performance carbon wheelsets, certainly a greater range and most likely a larger number than the value carbon wheelsets they sell.

These companies do the research, design, and testing that goes into the rims and, in many cases, the hubs they sell. Many make, assemble and QC their own wheels. Others companies have subcontractors do the actual production for them using production lines and molds dedicated to their wheelsets while they as Integrateds define and oversee the material, construction, assembly, and testing methods that go into making these wheels.

Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc – Fast, stiff, good handling wheels for flat terrain

Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc

Performance: The Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc is a stiff, fast wheelset. It rolls smoothly and keeps its momentum once at speed quite well even though the hubs sound a little buzzy. I felt very confident in all aggressive handling situations on these wheels. Serious crosswinds don’t go unnoticed but the Aeolus Pro 5 isn’t terribly bothered by them and you can easily manage your way through the breezes.

The wheelset isn’t very lively or responsive. You can definitely move out quickly on these thanks to their stiffness but it’s more based on your strength rather than any snap offered by the wheelset itself. I also found taking them uphill to be a grind. Despite their ample width and running them tubeless all the way down to 55 psi, they don’t offer the compliance that would make me comfortable riding them for longer than a couple of hours.

I really enjoyed the speed, stiffness, and handling of these wheels on flatter terrain and think that is where they are best suited.

Design: The Aeolus Pro 5 are made from the same rim molds used for the original, full-price Aeolus 5 D3 wheelset that the new Aeolus XXX line replaced in 2018. Both the disc and rim brake models use the same rim that measures 19.5mm internal and 27mm external width and 50mm deep. They use a lower grade carbon than what was used in the 5 D3 and a lower spec, heavier hub as well. Save for the DT Swiss Aerolite spokes, the Aeolus Pro 5 wheelsets are made and assembled in Asia.

Claimed weight for the disc brake model is 1720 grams. Mine came in at 1806 grams including the rather hefty rim strips that Bontrager doesn’t include in their claimed weight but requires for these wheelsets to fill up the rim shelf volume to run them tubeless. I suspect the claimed 1605g rim brake wheelset which uses the same rims and strips would come in close to the 1700g mark once measured. You can save yourself some weight by pulling out the rim strips and use rim tape if you prefer to use for tubes and tires.

Quality: I found this wheelset and other Bontrager Aeolus wheels I’ve tested to be extremely well built. I stupidly was distracted one day while riding this wheelset and ran straight into a deep pothole. While my shoulders may never be the same, I didn’t even hear a burp from the Pro 5s and they remained true thru my testing.

Bontrager’s crash replacement policy for these and all their carbon wheels stands alone in the industry. They will replace or repair your wheels for free within 2 years of when you bought it no matter how they get damaged and provide a 50% discount to repair or replace them for as long as you own them after that.

They offer the industry standard 2-year materials and workmanship warranty. You can also return them if unused within 30 days for a full refund.

Price: You can click on these links to find either the Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc or Aeolus Pro 5 TLR rim brake road wheelsets that both sell for $1300 direct from the Bontrager’s parent Trek Bikes store.

Reynolds AR41 – A disappointing successor to the well-liked Assault

Reynolds AR41

Performance: As the successor to the similarly priced Assault I recommended for years as a best value, I expected the AR41 performance to get better by taking advantage of the many carbon wheelset advances in the industry during the Assault’s long run. Instead, the AR41 is a disappointment.

While the AR41 is a stiff wheelset, seemingly stiffer than the Assault, both Nate and I found it lacked the lively responsiveness that set the Assault apart from other value carbon wheelsets. The hub engages quickly but you don’t get that the same snap, or any snap at all actually, that you got from the Assault when accelerating.

The braking is also poor both on dry and wet roads using the recommended blue pads that come with the wheels. Nate and I also tried a set of Black Prince pads with no better results. The AR41 squeals after braking for a while on dry roads and is a bit scary braking on wet ones. The rims are stiff enough to allow you to set the pads close for better modulation but you have to squeeze your levers so much more on these wheels than most others to build up the braking force needed to slow them that modulation really isn’t a consideration.

The AR41 braking is clearly a step down from the Assault’s performance which was average compared to other carbon wheelsets designed mid-decade. The braking performance gap is even larger between the AR41 and what we’ve become used to from textured and treated brake tracks on today’s more expensive, performance carbon wheelsets, less expensive alloy upgrade ones and certainly the disc brake experience.

At 19mm internal and 27.5mm external, the AR41 rims are 2mm or so wider than Assault but aren’t any more comfortable. They aren’t harsh but they also aren’t comfy on long rides even if you run them tubeless and at reasonably low pressures in the 60-75psi range that Nate and I experimented with.

AR41 handling is slightly improved over the Assault. You get a confident, planted feeling likely due to the stiffer, wider platform. It isn’t on par, however, with the better, more expensive, performance carbon all-around wheelsets. The AR41 also doesn’t get pushed around as much in the crosswinds as the Assault did but again, not as good on this dimension as a the better, more expensive wheels.

There doesn’t seem to be any “free speed” coming from the AR41’s hub or rim profile to help you maintain your momentum going downhill or riding the flats at 20mph+. The freehub is also a little loud, something I don’t prefer but that some people like.

Design: I measured the AR41 at 1521 grams and 40.5mm deep. The rim is tubeless ready, has a U-shaped profile and measured 19.0mm wide between the bead hooks (“internal” width) and 27.5mm at the brake track (external).

The Reynolds brand hubset has a 10-degree engagement rear freehub. The Sapim Sprint spokes are rounded and attach to brass nipples.

The AR 41x and other ARx series wheels sell for $250 more ($1550) and use the same rims, a lighter hubset with the same engagement, and bladed Sapim CX-Sprint spokes. The AR41x’s 1480g claimed weight is 65 grams less than the claimed weight of the AR41 tested here.

Quality: Reynolds has one of the best set of policies in the wheelset business. Despite what I wrote about their performance, want to test out the AR41 wheelset yourself before committing to them? If you live in the US or Canada, you’ve got 30 days to return them for a full refund and they’ll even pay for shipping if you decide it’s not for you.

While a 2-year warranty is standard for most companies, Reynolds gives the original owner a lifetime warranty, promising to replace or repair the wheelsets if any material or workmanship issues arise. The crash protection policy also lasts for the life of the wheelset. Regardless of how they were damaged, Reynolds will provide you a 50% discount on new wheels. You can also purchase an upgrade to assure your wheelset will be replaced at no cost no matter how it gets damaged.

We evaluated these wheels shortly before Reynolds was sold. All the policies mentioned above remain in place. Reynolds’ telephone tech support line, however, is no longer operating.

Price: Retailing for $1300, you can click on this link to top-ranked store Competitive Cyclist or this link to Know’s Shop to find and order the AR41 rim and disc brake wheelsets at the best prices from the best stores.

Roval C 38 Disc – Stiff but uncomfortable on the road and twitchy in cross breezes 

Roval C 38 Disc

Performance: The C 38 disc is made only for disc brake bikes but marketed for use on both paved and dirt or gravel surfaces. I review wheels for my fellow road cycling enthusiasts and evaluate wheels on paved roads, albeit some that are in such disrepair they seem little better than what a packed dirt path might feel like.

For Roval’s sake, I hope the C 38 does better on dirt and gravel surfaces than what I experienced on paved roads.

Despite its modern 21C/21mm internal rim width, I couldn’t find a tire pressure at which it rode comfortably. On smooth paved roads at 60 psi where I normally ride 25C tubeless tires the width of these (26.6 mm outside width), my 155lb body found the C 38’s comfort no more than acceptable. On chip seal roads at pressures from 55 psi up to 75 psi, it was harsh to the point where I was backing off my speed to reduce the vibration.

The C 38 also got pushed around by steady 10 mph crosswinds. While it was disappointing that a 38mm depth wheelset would be affected so easily in these modest breezes, I was surprised at how twitchy and hard to control the wheelset was going downhill at 35mph in these crosswinds.

I did find the C 38 quite stiff and handled very wheel when on good paved surfaces. While there was no snap when I accelerated, they did respond on par with the deeper 45mm and 50mm wheels I’ve been testing in this comparison of value carbon wheelsets, most of which are also not rubber burners.

While I shouldn’t expect much aero help at the depth of these Rovals, I actually felt I was working harder to maintain my speed while doing intervals in the 20 and 25mph range than other value carbon wheelsets I’ve reviewed that are both deeper and heavier.

Roval likes to claim their performance carbon CLX wheels are more aero than others of similar depth. I don’t know whether it is the C 38’s rim depth or profile, hubs (DT Swiss 350 is the only option) or weight (1608 grams measured), but it didn’t seem any faster or better at climbing than the deeper and heavier wheelsets from the other Integrated wheelset companies.

The Zipp Tangente Speed RT25 25C tubeless tires I’m using in all the value carbon wheelset evaluations mounted easily on the C 38 rims. Once installed and inflated to the 80psi pressure I use as a benchmark, the tires measured 26.9mm wide, essentially the same width that I had previously measured for the external rim width. A 25C tire that measures slightly narrower then these rims might help its aero performance at >20mph speeds.

There’s no denying the C 38 comes at a good price with, from a company whose dealer network through parent Specialized offers great service and support. Despite all that goodness, its better than most stiffness and handling performance, these wheels weren’t fun to ride and held me back from going as hard as I normally like to.

At the end of the day, that’s what matters most to me.

Design: I measured the wheelset I tested at 1608 grams including the rim strips but not valves, slightly higher than Roval’s 1560 gram claimed weight. The difference is probably in the strips. The rims measured 38.0 mm deep, 21.3mm inside and 26.9 mm outside on the U shaped rim.

DT Swiss has been known to make complete stock wheels under the Roval brand name for parent Specialized’s bikes and may be making the C 38 as well. The wheels come with round DT Comp Race spokes, 24 both front and back attached by brass nipples and use a DT 350 hubset.

Quality: Roval provides a lifetime material and workmanship warranty to the original owner. If you buy the wheels from the original owner, Roval will still stand by them for 2 years from the original purchase. This is unique. I’ve not seen a “second owner” warranty offered by other wheelset sellers.

The 30-day return policy (new only or new and used) and crash replacement policy (“repair or replace for a fraction of a new wheel’s cost”) are less specific and probably provide discretion to the dealer to help keep the customer happy if there is an issue with the wheels.

Price: The C 38 Disc is the only carbon wheelset in Roval’s road wheelset line that sells in the value carbon price range between $1000-$1500 ($1200 to be exact). Roval’s CLX 32, 50 and 64 sell for $2400-$2500 and the 50mm deep CL version with a lesser hub still sells for $1750. You can buy the C 38 and other Roval road wheels online direct from Roval or at bike shops that sell parent Specialized’s bikes and other gear.

Zipp 302 – A stiff, aero, confidently braking kin of the original 303 Firecrest

Zipp 302

Performance: After riding the Zipp 302 rim brake wheelset on the range of course profiles, group and individual rides, hard and easier efforts, and at different speeds, it’s clear to see why Zipp started producing the 302 and moved forward to develop the NSW line.

The 302 is a younger brother of the original 303 Firecrest that for years was one of the better all-around carbon wheelsets. It uses the original 303 Firecrest rim without the golf ball-like dimples and a detuned version of the trouble-free Firecrest hubset that the company finally settled on during the 303 Firecrest’s long run.

The 302 retains the good braking of Firecrest rims, one of the better braking wheelsets of any of the carbon wheels regardless of price from the era before textured and treated brake tracks put carbon wheels nearly on par with alloy ones. They modulate nicely, there is no noise emitting from the brake tracks, and you decelerate confidently.

Their lateral stiffness provides for good and stable handling on fast descents and in the turns. While they don’t give you the “riding on rails” handling that some of the modern performance carbon wheels do, Nate and I certainly felt confident about the 302’s handling in any challenging situation.

The Zipp 302 also feels quite aero, holding your momentum nicely in the 20-22mph range and managing crosswinds well for wheels with rims of mid-40mm depth.

Beyond 22mph on the fast flats where Nate usually rides (and I do for short periods of time), they require more work to keep going than what we’ve experienced with today’s better performance carbon all-arounds with newer rim profiles. Wheels like the 303 NSW or Bontrager XXX 4 excel here and show the results of recent rim profile development.

Responsiveness is ok, nothing inspiring, but climbing is clearly one of the 302’s shortfalls. The stiffness helps transfer your power well when you are doing either of these things but the weight of these wheels likely offsets it.

The ride is decently smooth and comfortable though again suffers in comparison to more modern, wider and tubeless wheelsets with higher end hubs. You can only use tubes and clinchers with the 302, which is still the preferred combination for most roadies but you really want to stay with 23C tires for the best aero performance due to their relatively narrow rims. Despite their good speed and crosswind performance I wrote about above, not being optimized for 25C tires is a non-starter for some riders today.

The 302 is an all-around that performs reasonably well on nearly all my criteria, a combination that’s hard to find at its price. It’s certainly not on par with today’s more expensive all-around performance carbon bike wheels but the 302’s balanced performance makes it one to consider if your budget prevents you from going above its price.

Design: I wrote above about the 303 Firecrest origins of the 302. The set we tested measured 1705g (1645g claimed), 45mm deep, 16.3mm internal and between 25.8mm and 26.2mm external width along the angled brake track.

FYI, a 23C Conti Grand Prix 4000S tire (and likely the new 5000) measured 24.3mm wide, consistent with the 105% rim to tire width guideline for best aero performance. The 25C measured 26.7mm, slightly wider than the rim and likely to reduce your aero gains. If you go with the 25C, try to hold your aero position on the bike for longer to offset the wheelset losses :).

Zipp uses their own 76 and 176 front and rear hubs on these wheels and bladed, J-bend spokes. These are decent hubs free of quality problems Zipp had with hubs on the Firecrest wheelsets in the earlier years of this decade, but not on par performance wise with the ones used in the current Firecrest or NSW lines.

Quality: Zipp provides a standard 2-year warranty for materials and workmanship. They leave it to their individual dealers to determine the return policy – how long you have and what refund or credit you get if you decide you don’t want to keep them.

The crash replacement policy also appears somewhat negotiable. They do offer what they call “discount factory repair” in the US for 5 years from purchase. They don’t specify the amount of the discount. I’d ask the store about this and get it in writing before you buy this wheelset.

Price: The Zipp 302 retails at USD$1500/£1369/€1530 though UK and EU residents can often find them market priced for around £1000/€1200. You can click on these links to top-ranked stores Competitive Cyclist and Merlin Cycles or to Know’s Shop to find and order the 302 at the best prices from the best stores for both the rim and disc brake models. Due to the restrictions in their dealer agreements with Zipp, UK and EU online stores cannot sell Zipp wheelsets to US and Canadian residents.

2. Regionals 

Regionals use a similar selling approach as the Integrateds mostly using online store and local bike shop dealers but also through sales from their web store. They sell a far smaller range and number of products than the Integrateds with wheelsets being their primary focus. Most also sell performance carbon wheels as well as wheelsets for mountain biking, cross, and gravel segments.

These companies design their rims and some of the hubs used in their wheelsets. They own their rim molds but mostly have others do the production of their wheelsets.

As the name suggests, Regionals sell through dealers to cyclists in a specific geographic region. The Regionals selling value carbon wheels I’ve identified – Profile Design and Rolf Prima – are focused on the US. They have distributors around the world but no dealers outside the US.

There are many EU and AU wheelset company Regionals but none I could find selling value carbon wheels that I’m focused on for this review

Rolf Prima Ares3 LS Disc – Light and stiff for the casual rider 

Performance: The Rolf Prima Ares3 LS is a responsive wheelset that feels both light and stiff going down the road on a casual ride. It handles confidently and, set at the right pressure with the right tubeless tires, offers a comfortable if not plush ride.

While many >USD$2000 50mm deep carbon wheels have figured out how easily manage the crosswinds, this isn’t the case for most value carbon wheels of the same depth. I didn’t feel any crosswind effects on these Ares3 LS wheels, however, likely because of their relatively shallow 32mm depth rims.

When I turned up the speed on the flats, the wheelset didn’t offer any aero benefit or help maintain my momentum. And when I cranked up the power going uphill, the rims started to feel a little flexy with the rear rotor rubbing the caliper. I tried different calipers, tires, tire pressures, and rotors to find a combination that felt fast, stiff and comfortable above 20mph and 4watts/kg (about 275 watts for a 150lb/68kg rider) and just couldn’t get there.

I rode the disc brake version so can’t comment on the how the rim brake model performs in braking.

As with the other wheelsets in this review, I rode these tubeless though I had to divert from my benchmark Zipp Tangente Speed Road Tubeless tires with these wheels. The Zipp tire beads and the Ares3 LS bead hooks didn’t play well together and the combination wouldn’t hold air overnight or if I went for a ride immediately after inflating them.

No worries, the tubeless setup worked with the Continental Grand Prix 5000 TL, Hutchinson Fusion 5 Performance 11 Storm Road Tubeless, and Schwalbe Pro One Tubeless after a while. I have previously recommended all of these tires along with the Zipps for enthusiast riders.

If you aren’t a super-aggressive or powerful rider but enjoy cruising in both calm and windy conditions at a good price, the Rolf Prima Ares3 LS Disc wheelset would be one to consider.

Design: This disc brake wheelset measured 1633 grams without rim tape or valves, essentially the same as claimed by Rolf Prima. The U profile rims measured 19.0mm wide between the bead hooks, 26.4mm wide at the “brake track”, and about 26.8mm maximum across the rims.

25C road tires are well suited for the Ares3 LS rims. The Hutchinson Fusion 4 11Storm at my benchmark 80psi pressures measures essentially the same width (26.5mm) as the rim while the Continental Grand Prix 5000 TL (27.0mm) and Schwalbe Pro One Tubeless (28.0) run slightly wider. Since the rim depth is 32.0mm, these wheels aren’t intended to provide aero gains and the slightly wider tires don’t affect that equation but offer good handling and rolling resistance.

The hubs are Rolf Prima design though it’s unclear who makes them or the mechanism inside the freehub. Rolf Prima’s paired spoke design used on these Ares3 LS wheels has separated the look of all their wheels for years. There are 24 bladed Sapix CX Speed spokes on the front and rear wheels, attaching to the hubs with J-bend ends and to the rims with external nipples.

Quality: Due to a miscommunication, my wheels came with rim strips intended for a tubed tire set up which I mistook for a tubeless rim strip. After pulling those out and taping them up, 3 of the 4 models of tires I noted above sealed up but took several days and rides before they didn’t lose 5-10psi overnight.

Across the wheels in this review, this set took the longest time to settle into “tubeless equilibrium”. Rolf’s service folks were very helpful but judging from the tubeless tape and valve stems the company sent me and the time it took for the wheels to adapt to tubeless tires and sealant, you might be better off going with a conventional tube and tire set up.

Price: Both the Ares3 LS rim and disc brake models sell for USD$1299 and can be ordered directly through this link to the Rolf Prima website.

3. Branders

Branders create equity or value by building their businesses around a name that customers come to recognize and equate to offering unique attributes and benefits to them. The value of these brands in the minds of cyclists allows the companies to successfully sell their products directly rather than needing the value a distributor and dealer network can bring promoting the company’s wheelsets through their own brand, sales, and marketing efforts.

The wheelset Branders I’ve found didn’t start with rim or hub expertise to design or engineer their own wheels. While some claim to have built that expertise, they still depend largely on their ability to source the design and manufacturing of their wheelsets and market their wheels to fill needs they originally saw in the market and have built their brand around.

For most of the Branders of value carbon wheelsets, an element of their brand has been built around the need in the market for lower-priced wheelsets, carbon or alloy. Beyond that, they have differentiated themselves from other branders by, for example, the suitability of their wheelsets to the road and weather conditions where they are based or their technical insights and event focus or the wide range of wheelsets and other components they sell.

Most of the branders including the FLO and Hunt wheels reviewed here have been offering carbon wheels only since 2016 and are selling their first or second generation carbon hoops.

FLO and Hunt both use a pre-order model. They make batch orders from their suppliers and receive shipments about once a month. Unless they have stock of the wheelset you want left over from their last shipment, you reserve your wheelset with an advance deposit or payment and then have it shipped to you when the new batch arrives. Depending on demand and timing, that means you could get your wheelset shipped immediately or wait a month or two from when you order to when you are riding it.

FLO 60 – Pay no attention to the name; it may fool you

FLO 60

Performance: FLO wraps its brand around speed and, based on their marketing appears to target the triathlete as one of if not their primary customer segment. With that in mind, testing this 63.0 mm deep carbon value rim brake wheelset (thanks Mark L!) seemed to be a good way to see how well FLO’s product performance lived up to the brand image it tries to create and how it compares against equally deep performance carbon wheelsets that we reviewed here.

Bottom line, the results of the test riding Nate and I did were not what I would have expected.

The FLO 60 is clearly a stiff wheelset. Nate called it the stiffest wheelset he has ever ridden, stiffer than performance carbon aero wheels like the Bontrager XXX 6 and ENVE 5.6. We also found that it was very responsive, essentially on par with the ENVE 5.6. This was surprising for a wheelset of this depth and 1728 gram measured weight, but perhaps not when you consider how stiff it is. That stiffness translates your power very efficiently on a climb.

But wait! Isn’t this an aero, triathlon/TT wheelset or at least front wheel for a 60/90 wheelset combination? Accelerating and climbing aren’t what you do much of when you race those events.

Yes, you could also use the wheels for crits where you accelerate often so we’ll take that performance benefit. And there are plenty of time trials that include rollers so this wheelset’s climbing performance is another nice-to-have.

But how good are the FLO 60’s aerodynamics and its crosswind management? These are perhaps the two most important performance benefits triathletes and other speedy flatlanders want in their wheels.

Uh, not so good. Nate summarized it well when he said the FLO 60s didn’t perform consistent with their rim depth. “I didn’t feel the same exhilaration of flat-ground, momentum-sustaining performance as I did with the ENVE 5.6 or Bontrager XXX 6 or Zipp 404 NSW or even the 303 NSWs.”

I too was non-plussed by their ability to hold speed. They seemed no better than the 45mm-50mm depth wheels I’d tested for this review and our performance carbon all-around rim brake and disc brake wheel reviews.

They also didn’t manage the crosswinds nearly as well as modern performance carbon rims of similar depth. Nate found the crosswinds noticeable but not problematic while riding the FLO 60. I found they didn’t respond in any consistent way and took some real mental energy to keep adjusting the front wheel to my chosen line.

Neither of us found the wheels very compliant. Nate called them “harsh”. My descriptor was “horrible.” Yes, we both prefer to ride our wheels tubeless and at lower pressures and the FLO 60 are only made for tubed tire clincher tires. The rims are certainly wide enough (18mm internal, 26mm external) to be comfortable on 25C tires.

Perhaps the hubs were part of the compliance underperformance. The hub-spoke-rim component system needs to work right in combination to get a wheelset that is both laterally stiff and vertically compliant. A lot of wheelsets have a hard time getting that combination right.

The hubs performed more like those on stock wheels and certainly not at the DT Swiss 240 level of many of the other value carbon wheels in this comparative review. They didn’t roll as smoothly and the rear didn’t seem to have as many points of engagement.

Handling, likely because of the poor compliance and in spite of the great stiffness, was average at best. I didn’t feel terribly planted when cranking through a turn and coasting through one was not terribly stable.

The braking was decent though not refined and typical of better earlier generation carbon braking performance. Plenty of braking force, minimal noise and no squealing but not much modulation to be had. On or off.

If you do shorter TTs or races on hilly courses with good pavement, the FLO 60 would be a low-cost option to consider. Beyond that, you’ve got better ones available to you.

Design: Measured weight 1728g. Rim depth 63.0mm. Internal width 18.2mm. External width 26.0mm at the brake track and 26.6mm maximum. Essentially a V-shaped rim profile. Bladed Sapim CX-Ray spokes and a FLO VORTEX 2 hubset with EZO stainless bearings.

Quality: FLO provides a standard 2-year materials and workmanship warranty. You can return unused wheels within 30 days if you decide not to keep them but you’ll pay for shipping and a 10% restocking fee to do so. There is no crash replacement policy.

Price: $1200 direct from FLO Cycling.

Hunt 50 Carbon Aero Disc – Buzz Overwhelms Performance

Performance: Hunt generates a great deal of buzz for its products and brand, seemingly as much as or more than some wheelset sellers many times Hunt’s size and experience. I bought these wheels looking to experience how they actually performed, separate from the buzz.

It turns out that you can’t separate the buzz from the performance. Unfortunately, it’s the freehub buzz rather than the marketing buzz that are inseparable from these wheels.

Simply stated, the freehub sound on the Hunt 50 Carbon Aero Disc is the loudest fellow tester Miles and I have ever heard from wheels we’ve tested or ridden alongside. Far louder than a Chris King or i9 that are known for their distinct and loud freehubs but nowhere near the refined sound from the multiple points of engagement those hubs offer.

The freehub is so loud that you can’t have a conversation with a friend while coasting on these wheels. I tried it. Could hardly hear a thing he (or I) was saying.

Miles, a fan of distinct sounding freehubs, wrote in his test report: “It was not quite a chainsaw, but it was close.”  With tongue firmly planted in cheek, he added: “It was cool and will turn some heads, but I could have used a slightly quieter freewheel sound.”

My more practical concerns – 1) being able to communicate with fellow riders in a paceline and 2) wrecking the peace I so enjoy (and deserve) going downhill after a hard climb.

Aside from the freehub, the Hunt 50 Carbon Aero Disc performance is a prime example of what separates most value carbon wheelsets from higher-priced performance carbon ones.

Unfortunately, it’s not just the price. Rather, this wheelset lacks the comfort, stiffness, climbing, and handling qualities of performance carbon wheels. It also underperforms other value carbon wheels that have a strength in one or two areas that might align well with what you are looking for and cause you to overlook other weaknesses because you’re getting the wheels at a lower price.

Though it was not outstanding, the 50 Carbon Aero Disc wheelset’s aero performance was probably its strongest characteristic. They feel more like a 40mm deep wheelset with some sense that your momentum is being sustained but not to the level of a 45mm deep Zipp 302 or 50 mm deep Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc, both value carbon wheels reviewed earlier in this post.

You also feel a little bit of push from crosswinds, though nothing to move you dramatically of your line.

For those of you that enjoy sprinting hard out of the saddle, Miles found these Hunt’s responded well and shot forward with purpose. Going uphill, however, they felt quite average to both of us and offered no help from their lateral stiffness or aerodynamics.

Design: The Hunt 50 Carbon Aero Disc rims measured 50.1 mm deep with 19.5mm internal and 26.5 mm external widths. The internal width I measured was considerably less than the 21.3mm width Hunt currently lists for these rims on their site. The external widths were the same as what is listed. It’s possible that Hunt changed the source or design (or both) of these wheels in the five months time between when I ordered and reviewed them.

The rims have more of a V than U shaped profile. My benchmark Zipp Tangente Speed RT25 tubeless tires set up about 0.5mm narrower than the rims at 80psi. The tires went on the rims easily using the rim bed’s deep center channel though I needed to use my compressor to inflate them.

Hunt uses bladed and butted Pillar spokes on these wheels, 20 in the front and 24 in the back. The hubs are Hunt branded Race Season Disc straight-pull with 7.5 degree engagement. Novatec has made hubs for Hunt in the past but was unable to determine whether they make this one.

With rim strips but no valves, the wheels weighed 1579 grams on my scale or about 90 grams more than the 1487 gram weight Hunt claims for this wheelset.

Quality: The wheels themselves appeared well made and had a very even matt black finish. They came with extra spokes and other spares in case you ever need to replace them.

The quality of Hunt’s service, while very polite and well-intentioned, gave me every indication that the company lacks established processes and financial controls in important customer service areas.

The set I ordered came damaged with the freehub having come through the box. It happens and was likely caused by the shipper or a customs handler. The replacement set was shipped from the next monthly allotment unscathed and well packaged. Hunt initially charged my account to ship the damaged wheels back but refunded me after several requests.

Because I didn’t care for the wheelset’s performance, I decided to return them under Hunt’s 60-day tryout policy. It took me over 20 emails and several more exchanges with their online chat over a months time to get the wheels back and refunded.

Getting Hunt to respond to the return request, securing the shipping labels, scheduling the shipper, acknowledging the return, and then processing the refund each took at least 3 e-mail requests each from my end. (The refund process took many more than 3.)

There were 6 or 7 Hunt advisors that responded over that time with, at times, incomplete, incorrect, or contrary information, occasionally with multiple responses from different advisors and email domains to the same email from me.

Price: When I bought these wheels, they sold for USD$1079. Currently, they sell for USD$899, £740 including shipping. They are available directly from Hunt’s online store.

4. Manufacturers

Manufacturers are in business to fabricate and sell carbon products including rims, wheelsets, bike frames, and other cycling components. They sell wheelsets under their own brand names and also make them to order for lesser-known brands and wheel builders. Manufacturers are based in China and are not to be confused with the Taiwanese-based carbon frame and component OEMs that make exclusively for major bike brands.

Manufacturers sell wheelsets to individual cyclists direct from their company websites or through Amazon or eBay stores. Most give you the feel of being high-volume custom wheel builders by giving you the choice of a couple dozen or more of their carbon rims combined with a range of brand name hub and spoke options. While they ship hundreds and some over a thousand wheelsets a month, depending on what wheelset you want built, it takes them several weeks from order to receipt of your wheelset.

I don’t know whether any of the Manufacturers I identified have particular wheelset design skills or how much CFD (computational fluid dynamics), wind tunnel or in-the-field prototype testing, or other engineering they do. They don’t make claims about any of this. Carbon manufacturing and wheelset assembly appear to be their primary focus and competence. Reverse engineering is a skill many manufacturers of all sorts of cycling and other industry products often have and that some of these Manufacturers may also possess.

Yoeleo SAT C50|50 DB PRO Clincher/Tubeless – Laterally compliant, vertically stiff

Yoeleo SAT C50|50 DB PRO

Performance: While most roadies like a laterally stiff wheelset that transfers power efficiently to the road that is also vertically compliant to help cushion imperfectly paved paths, I found the Yoeleo SAT C50|50 DB PRO underperformed the better value carbon wheelsets on both measures.

As a lighter and therefore less powerful rider, I’ll typically have to work hard climbing and sprinting to notice stiffness differences. With this Yoeleo wheelset, I noticed it right away. Compared to a stiff wheelset like the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR reviewed elsewhere in this post, the SAT C50 felt imprecise pedaling up the first modest hill I hit within a mile of my house.

When I increased the tire pressure 10 psi, they rode a bit stiffer though they still weren’t stiff. And lowering the pressure the same amount didn’t really improve the comfort. The handling did improve at higher pressure.

After many rides at different pressures and considering the tradeoffs, I ended up riding them about 5 psi higher than I normally ride. This seemed to get me the best performance balance between stiffness, comfort, and handling for these wheels. Unfortunately, the Yoeleos still underperformed on all three of these criteria.

Strangely, however, the balanced underperformance seemed easier to get used to over time than wheelsets that were good performers on one of these criteria, say stiffness, and subpar performers in others, for example, comfort.

While 50mm deep and with a good DT Swiss 240 hubset, the SAT C50 didn’t feel particularly fast or helpful in maintaining aero speeds. While weighing only 1459 grams, quite light for any road disc wheelset of this depth, they didn’t climb or accelerate markedly better than far heavier, stiffer wheels like the Bontrager.

Design: The Yoeleo SAT 50|50 DB PRO would seem to have all the specs to make it one of the better performing wheelset. My conclusion that it is a below-par performer further proves that you can’t go on specs in predicting how well a wheelset will ride out on the road.

My 50.2mm deep test wheels weighed 1459 grams which compares favorably to the claimed weight of 1518g. Unlike many lower-priced carbon wheels which use Toray T700 standard modulus fiber, Yoeleo uses the higher modulus, higher tensile strength Toray T800 intermediate modulus carbon fiber for these wheels. With all else being equal (rim wall thickness, spoke bracing angles, hub flange height, etc.), this should give the wheels a higher strength to weight ratio and make them stiffer than what I experienced. Clearly, something wasn’t equal.

The rims have a classic toroid profile even more pronounced than the Zipp 302 whose predecessor 303 was one of the originators of this shape. These Yoeleo wheels measure 26.0mm wide at the brake track and 27.7 mm at their widest point. The internal rim width between the bead hooks is a healthy 18.5mm, a bit narrower than the 19 and 21mm width you find in today’s widest rim and disc brake road wheelsets, respectively.

As with all the value carbon wheelsets I could specify for this review, this SAT C50 had DT Swiss 240S hubs with Sapim CX-Ray straight pull spokes.

Quality: Similar to most Manufacturers, Yoeleo’s quality policies are relatively limited. They do offer a 3-year warranty but only cover the shipping costs for the first 3 months should there be a problem. And remember, you’d need to ship the wheelset to China.

If you decide you don’t want the wheels after they first arrive, you have just 3 days to inform Yoeleo that you want to return them and here again, you pay for shipping. They offer no crash replacement policy.

My test wheels arrived true and looked well built. While I rode them less than 1,000 miles, I encountered no quality issues with them during that time.

Price: At the time I ordered these wheels (before the US tariffs on Chinese imports were put in place), they priced out at $1225. You buy them direct from Yoeleo.

Light Bicycle WR46C02

Performance: While the performance of these all-around disc brake wheels is a long way from $2000 and up models, the Light Bicycle WR46C02 wheelset with DT Swiss 240 hubs offer the most balanced performance of any in the sub $1500 value carbon wheelset category.

That’s a qualified statement so let me break the performance down to its components and comparisons.

First, it’s not on par with stiffness, comfort, responsiveness, handling and other key performance criteria of the better all-around carbon rim brake or all-around carbon disc brake wheelsets I’ve reviewed that will cost you $2000 or more. None of the wheelsets in this category are.

Yet, while some of the wheels in this category offer performance strengths (e.g. stiffness) relative to other value carbon wheelsets only to be offset by comparable weaknesses (e.g. crosswind management), these Light Bicycle wheels impressed me and fellow tester Miles for doing most everything on our performance lists decently.

While not as stiff as say, the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR Disc wheelset reviewed above or as aero as the Zipp 302 also written up above, these WR46C02 wheels are both adequately stiff and do help hold your momentum somewhat. Though not climbing wheels, they also go uphill reasonably well and certainly better than some of the heavyset hoops in this review.

While I haven’t found any of these value carbon wheelsets to be in the same comfort ballpark as the $2000+ carbon wheels, they were comfortable enough run tubeless at the low end of my air pressure range to not wear me out when I did a 4-hour ride on them.

The handling was decent, the DT Swiss 240 hubs I speced the wheels with are relatively quiet and roll smoothly, and the rims managed the crosswinds predictably despite being an older V-shaped profile. Set up with my benchmark 25C Zipp Tangente Speed RT25 tires, they measured a mm narrower than the outside rim width which is good for aero performance.

In a flat out sprint, while not floppy, they did not feel super fast in a straight line. Instead, they seemed rather average among similarly priced wheels. While they are also made in a rim version, we weren’t able to test their braking performance since we rode the disc brake model.

It’s also worth noting that their subtle finish is attractive and the tires went on easily, sealed with only a track pump, and held air and sealant well.

Design: This wheelset tested weighed in at 1504 grams without rim strips or valve stems. Light Bicycle claims the rims weigh 435 grams though I was unable to verify that. They measured 21.3mm internal width and 28.3mm external. The rim has a classic V-shape profile and uses 28 CX-Ray J-bend spokes in the rear wheel, 24 in the front, both connected to external alloy nipples and the DT Swiss 240 hubs. You can have the wheels built with a list of more or less expensive hubs if you prefer.

Quality: The wheels looked well built and stayed true during our testing. While Light Bicycle states a 3-year warranty, the conditions of that warranty make it quite limited compared to others and don’t add up to the 3-years stated.

Light Bicycle gives you only 30 days from purchase to replace defective rims during which they pay the shipping costs. If the rim defect occurs after the first 30 days and up to 15 months, they’ll replace the rims but you have to pay for the shipping to/from their North American assembly center in Canada if you bought from there or from their Global center in China if you live outside of North America. Nothing is stated about what happens after 15 months.

If you have issues with the hubs or spokes, you need to go to the manufacturers of those parts to deal with those issues. Hub warranty terms are usually a year. There are no warranties on spokes.

Light Bicycle doesn’t warranty the workmanship surrounding the assembly of the wheels’ components. When I asked about that, they offered to write a one-year warranty on the invoice but claimed they have never had the need to provide this type of warranty.

Frankly, this warranty would make me uncomfortable buying wheels from Light Bicycle.

Light Bicycle will take care of wheels damaged in shipment as long as you refuse the shipment or make them aware of a shipment damage issue for ones that are dropped off within 10 days.

You’ve got 30 days to return unused, stock wheelsets for a refund. Non-stock orders can only be returned if there is an error made by Light Bicycle. There is a 10-25% discount on new wheels if you crash yours within an unspecified period.

Price: As specified, the WR46C02 wheelset runs $1267 if bought from their North American assembly center and $966 if purchased from their China location, not including shipping. If you live in North America, duties and taxes are already built into the price. If you don’t, those fees along with added shipping charges will be greater. It will also take you longer to get them and cost you more should you need to return them under warranty. You can purchase them directly on the Light Bicycle website.

*      *      *      *     *

Thank you for reading.  Please let me know what you think of anything I’ve written or ask any questions you might have in the comment section below.

If you’ve gotten some value by reading this post or any of the reviews or comments on the site and want to keep new content like this coming, click on the links and buy at the stores they take you to.  You will save money and time while supporting the creation of independent and in-depth gear reviews.  If you prefer to shop for your cycling gear at other stores, you can still support the site and new posts by taking a pull here or by buying anything through these links to eBay and Amazon.

And please, let’s stay connected! Use the popup form to sign up to get an email when new posts come out or the icons at the top to follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram or get post summaries sent to your RSS reader.

Thanks and enjoy your riding safely!


  • Steve-

    Let me first say thanks for taking the time and effort to produce a high volume of quality review work for cyclists. As to the content of this review: looking at the first sections, it appears that the main distinguishing features of value carbon wheels comes from the “versatility” and “aerodynamics” categories (likely related) vs. alloy upgrade wheels. In almost all aspects, performance carbon is better than value carbon (which I would hope would be the case for an often-times 2x price multiplier).

    For the individual wheel reviews, I found that you often made reference to the wheel’s performance with respect to its much more expensive brethren. I was wondering if you had any comments to add about how value carbon compares to alloy upgrades. For example – the Zipp 30 course appears to be the best-in-class alloy upgrade disc wheelset. If it was your money, would you rather have the Zipp 30 for $1000 or a value carbon for 1200-1300? What about a set of Mavic Elites discs for ~750 that include tires vs. value carbon? Those seem like more realistic comparisons than whether I should buy a roval C38 for $1200 or enve 3.4’s for $2550.

    Not to tell you how to review things – but it might be interesting to ride a mavic / zipp alloy, a value carbon and a performance carbon benchmark back-to-back-to-back. Assuming you can’t actually do this since you receive wheels for review and return them – but wondering if all you’ve been riding lately is performance carbon is there some bias creeping in. If you went back all the way down to alloy upgrades – do the value carbons actually look like a value? From the words in this review it sounds like not really – one would need to simply decide would they prefer to lay out 750 for a decent alloy set or really get performance improvements at 2500+.

    • Frank, Thanks for your comments. Most enthusiasts I hear from want carbon for performance and aesthetic reasons. And we’re all looking for ways to get carbon products at lower prices, thus the emergence of this value carbon segment. So readers constantly ask me about what are the best performing carbon wheels at a lower price than the best performing carbon wheels. Thus this review.

      Wheelset companies hear this too. The Integrateds, except for Reynolds, are relatively new to this segment and are mostly providing older generation product. The Branders and Manufacturers are rushing into it with products that have some strengths and some flaws. Enthusiasts want to know how well they perform vs. the higher priced carbon or “performance carbon” wheels.

      What I think will be interesting is to see how things develop in the next couple of years in the value carbon category. Will the Integrateds invest in it? Will the Branders and Manufacturers put some more engineering into the products to make better ones than they do now? Right now the Integrateds seem to be spending money elsewhere (e.g. “gravel”) and the Branders and Manufacturers are getting better at marketing faster than engineering.

      Wheelset companies are spending little time on innovating alloy wheelsets. They’ve made them wider but can’t make them any more aero. While there are stiff wheelsets in every group, you can’t change the strength-to-weight ratio of alloy relative to carbon. Their disadvantages are built into the material. And one of their bigger “innovations” wheelset companies have made has been coating alloy brake tracks to look like carbon ones. Gravel/off road is also a market for alloy development more so than road.

      To your basic question – alloy upgrade vs. value carbon – if you don’t feel the need to have carbon, you can do quite well with alloy upgrade at least as far as alloy can take you and depending on what you want from your wheels. I go through this in my post of How To Choose The Best Wheelset for You by asking enthusiasts to consider what their goals, riding profile and budget is to help them reach the best decision for them. Alloy is more than enough for some and a lot of performance carbon wheels are not enough for others. That’s just the nature of things. Cheers, Steve

  • I just order a set of Light Bicycle WR46C02 (DT350 hubs) which you are going to review next. Can’t wait to see what your opinion is. I can only say so far the purchasing experience has been brilliant so far. It is currently being sanded so just a few more steps to go before I receive it. And match to so 25mm GP5k. Would be interesting to hear if you tried different tyres on them. There is much discussion about the 95% rule and how 23mm GP4k stretches on a 21c Vs a 25mm gp5k. I’m particularly focussed on the tyre sidewall. Would the shape of tyres be the shape for all 21c carbon clinchers?

    • Kuan, I mounted Zipp Tangente Speed RT25 (25C) on my LB and they come in right around 95% at 80psi of the 28.3mm measured external rim width. Sidewalls pretty straight. 25C GP5K TL typically measures about 1mm wider than RT25s on rims I’ve tried them. Haven’t tried them on the LB yet. Wouldn’t put a 23C, even a GP4K on a 21C wheelset. They’ll stretch too much and give you rounded, less supported sidewall. Steve

  • Hello,
    Thank you for your reviews. I am using the reynolds Assualt for 2 years or so as per your advice. I am ok with them and I think was a great buy for the price. Although I am not thinking in upgrade the wheels right now, I am starting to think in it and see what’s new and not super expensive.
    From this review, I conclude the Zipp 302 was good, but I also want to move to tubeless, so they are out.
    My preferences are more on the “Integrated” side. From a brand perspective I would like Mavic UST or Campy WTO, but that is more emotional than rational and it is not so important.
    I also experimented a bike with DT Swiss 240 hubs and liked it a lot.
    What do you think it is a good upgrade for the Assaults considering what I wrote?

    • Miguel, Of the Integrated value carbon wheelsets I reviewed, the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR and Zipp 302 were the better ones though each has some drawbacks. Mavic and Campy don’t make anything in that price range. I haven’t reviewed Fulcrum’s Racing Quattro and Shimano’s C40 but neither of their rim brake wheelsets is tubeless. So there’s not a whole lot to choose from based on what you’ve said you want other than the Bonty. I’d suggest you consider your goals, profile and budget per my post here and, depending what comes out of that either save for a performance carbon wheelset, stay with your Assaults, or see if the Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR would be a good fit for you. If you can’t decide, keep riding the Assault and see what new value carbon wheels come out next season. Steve

      • Thanks for your input Steve.
        I will keep reading your reviews in this matter and will decide later.
        Probably I will stay/move to the 1500 to 2000 euros price range that is not enough for a performance wheelset, but maybe gives for something in between…
        Will keep you posted when I have a more definided idea about this.

      • I read the latest Fulcrum Speed 40 DB is tubeless. Perhaps you can review them in the near future?

        • Sam, I’m not likely to review it. It’s a modification of the rim brake, clincher 40 C rather than being designed from scratch for disc and tubeless. So not as wide (19C) as most of the road disc tubeless wheels now (21C), likely not as aero or easy to fit tubeless tires. It’s also pricey with a list price of around €2000 and $2000. If your budget can support those numbers, there are some true Generation 3 road disc wheels review in my post The Best Carbon Disc Wheelset. Cheers, Steve

  • Hi Steve, fantastic, detailed article as always! Marginally off topic: have you any experience with Fast Forward wheels? I have a good offer on some lightly used 50mm clinchers which would be used as everyday summer wheels while my Enve’s are saved for races. Value your input as to whether FFWD wheels are good re. build quality… any experience really! Thank you

    • Thanks George. No experience with FFWD. One of those regionals selling higher priced wheels. Saving wheels for races is a 20th century concept. Save yourself some money and enjoy what you have! Steve

  • Thanks for the great articles on carbon wheels. I just purchased a new Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc. Do you have any experience with the Giant SLR 1 wheels that it comes with?

    • Mal, No experience. If it’s a stock wheel on a $5000 bike it’s likely not great performer. Steve

  • i had spinal surgery and i am looking for a wheel set (not exceeding $1500) that will help with shock absorption, do you have any suggestions? i was interested in the c38 until i read your review.
    thank you

    • Hi Mark, good to hear you are getting back on the bike after a serious surgery. My suggestion would be to look at all of your contact points – wheels, saddle, bars, pedals – and the bike that carries them as a system. It will only be as good as the weakest (or least shock absorbing) link. You could get a wheelset with great compliance, ride it tubeless at the right pressure that might be the best contributor to your shock absorbing system from a wheel standpoint but if the bike is stiff or other parts of your system are stiff, it won’t improve your comfort a whole lot. Even something as simple as the right tape on your bars can make a big improvement. And some of the newer road endurance bikes like the Roubaix or Domane have shock absorbing mechanisms in their seat tubes and head tubes that make a world of difference in the comfort of your ride.

      If you’ve got all of that dialed in, my individual reviews will tell you which of the wheelsets are more compliant and which less. That, in combination with using the right tires at the right pressure, will lead to a more comfortable contribution from the wheelset part of the system. Steve

      • If it helps look at Ergon and Canyon VCLS seatposts. I have two 🙂 They work well to take the hits out of the road and may help your back.

  • Thanks for the great and informative reviews.

    I’ve been looking at both the Bontrager pro 5s and Zipp 302s as possible upgrades while trying to decide if I should just spend a little more and get Zipp 303 Firecrests now that so much NSW tech has trickled down to those. The price difference from 302 to 303 is ~$700. I figured the biggest difference would be in the braking and being able to better handle 25C tires. I was surprised to see you say the 302s are noticeably heavy uphill. They’re only ~150 g more than the firecrests (and NSWs), which doesn’t seem like it should make that drastic of an impact. Also, as I’d be upgrading from stock Ksyriums, I’m guessing the weight of the 302 is similar or less and would have drastically improved aerodynamics.

    Overall, when you look at the improvements from the 302 to the 303, is it worth the extra cost, or is the 302 a better value?

    • Alex, hard to know what’s important to you. If you don’t do a lot of climbing or live where it’s mostly flat, either the 302 or Pro 5 would be fine. If you have a lot of rollers. need the best braking, have a lot of crosswinds, appreciate better responsiveness, and can afford the 303 Firecrest, I’d go for it. It is a markedly better wheelset. Steve

  • Hi Steve – do you have any experience re Roval’s CL 50? I’ve been considering them as a cheaper alternative to the CLX 50, but now concerned after reading about the C 38 above. The CL 50 uses DT 350s and DT Swiss Competition Race T-head spokes. They seem to be the stock wheels on Specialized’s Pro range of road bikes (next range down from the S-Works range which uses the CLX) (Venge, Tarmac, Roubaix)

    • Paul, Best to use the search box at the top of each page to see which Roval and other wheels I’ve reviewed. Steve

  • ANy plan to test bontrager aeolus pro 3V ?

    Maybe the best carbon gravel wheelset for money on the market?!?!

    I have run mine for a 400km gravel race Very solid and stable with 25mm ID

    • Johan, thanks for your suggestion. I’m not currently planning to review the road/gravel/atr category of wheelsets that the 3V and others would fall into. That may change but for now, focusing on wheels for roadies. Steve

  • Hi Steve,
    Your website and reviews are much appreciated. I’m currently riding a Specialized Diverge with the stock Roval SLX 24 wheels and Rene Hearse Barlow Pass 38s. I’m considering a wheel upgrade and was somewhat bummed about the review of the Roval c38s. I split my riding between two pretty different locations, flat in south Louisiana with plenty of wind and western North Carolina with plenty of vertical and lots of mixed terrain. I thought the Roval c38s at their price point would be a good compromise for a second wheelset but I guess the operative word is compromise. That being said, your review of the Zipp 303s caught my attention. Would these be a good dedicated set for the two different locations I ride in? If it helps, I’m 6’2″, 185 lbs and typically ride 20-40 miles per pop. Thanks, Tommy

    • Tommy, 303s or 302s? 302s aren’t going to do it for you in the climbing or crosswinds. 303 Firecrest aren’t going to work if you want to use 38C tires. The only thing that’d be close would be the 303 NSW and if you are a strong rider at you’re weight, you might not find them stiff enough going uphill. I’m reviewing some more wheels in this value carbon category this summer and one of those might work better for you if you can wait till the testing is done. Cheers, Steve

  • I see you are still waiting to receive your Hunt wheels for review. I ordered a similar pair (carbon Aero 4050 set) and the delivery date has been delayed on three separate occasions, pushing my order back over two months. I’m curious if this is what is affecting you as well. Also, I’d be eager to know if they have had any manufacturing problems that I should be concerned about.

    • Paul, A different situation with my wheels. Pre-ordered with deposit. 6 weeks from deposit to wheels received at Hunt from their contractor. Paid balance and wheels were shipped. Damaged in transit. Returned at shipper’s expense. Replacement wheels ordered from next batch from contractor. Wheels received at Hunt about 4 weeks later and shipped to me. Received last week. About 10 weeks from pre-order to being able to begin testing.

      Company like Hunt might have multiple contractors for range of wheels they sell.

      Integrateds build ahead and stock at major online stores or at shops/distributors. You go online or to the store, order and receive them within days.

      Those that sell direct – regionals, branders, manufacturers – build or have wheels built either in batches or one at a time. Can take a few days to a few months depending on many variables. Demand forecasting, credit lines, contractor build schedules, contractor agreement/relationships, quality control can all factor in beyond basic logistical challenges. I had one company in this review turn around wheels built and shipped in two days. Another hasn’t had wheels I’ve requested available for 3 months with no forecast delivery date in site. Both are established, well-financed players. Most direct model companies will get you wheels in 3-6 weeks. Steve

  • Steve, I’m looking forward to your review on the Light Bicycle wheels. I may be placing an order before the review is ready. By chance, can you share any early impressions? Also, I’m coming from alloy rims on a CAAD12 and want to preserve ride quality in the new wheelset. LB says I should stick with 35mm deep rims, though many of my friends seem to prefer deeper rims. Can you suggest a rim depth that won’t compromise the ride much?

    Thank you,

  • Aeolus 3 Pro disc or Roval C38? Which is the better wheelset for a Trek 2019 Emonda SL6?

    • Eric, Well as you can from my review, I didn’t think much of the C 38. I’ve only ridden the Aeolus 5 Pro disc and you can see my review on that one. If you’ve got only those two options, go with the Bontrager. I do think it’s best to buy what’s best for you and not for the bike. Almost any road disc wheelset can go on that bike. Steve

      • Thanks Steve. I saw the Roval review. That made me hesitate a bit. I mainly train on the road for MTB racing. I just want a decent wheel that feels responsive.

  • Eric, If you are just doing training, what’s wrong with the Paradigm? I reviewed the rim brake version of the Paradigm Elite and it wasn’t half bad. See here: Steve

    • Yeah Steve, that wheel in disc is nice but the bike just comes with the lowest end Paradigm. Close to 1900 grams. The Elite is fairly strong and light. I’ll keep them for trading but really want some decent wheels when I ride in the fast group. Thanks. This forum is awesome.

  • Hi Steve – great reading. Have you had an opportunity to test the Aeolus Pro 3? If so, interested in your thoughts?

    • Travis, No, just the Pro 5. I’d imagine the Pro 3 would be similar except with a good deal less aero benefit but a little lighter to get around on. Steve

  • I’m happy to have found your website, it’s great to see non-advertiser supported tech reviews.

    Any chance you’ll be reviewing/testing any of the carbon wheelsets built by Alto Cycling in the near future? Their rim and hub technology intrigue me. They claim the highest rim braking induced failure temperature in the industry. As I’m not ready to upgrade to a new disc bicycle yet, I’d love to see your opinion on their wheels for us Luddites.

    • Bowen, No. Their carbon road wheels are all >$2000. Small, young brand (2014), with unverified manufacturing, technology, and performance claims. Claim you mention was relevant if true in 2014 but current gen $2000+ carbon rim brake wheelsets don’t have temp induced failure issues. Unfortunately, too many wheel brands with similar profiles for me to review. Steve

  • Hello Steve, thanks for a great review of budget carbon wheels, Steve have you any suggestions on a lower priced competitive all rounder wheel, somewhere between $1500 to $2400, looking at 40mm ish deep but not important, thanks Steve

  • Hi Steve, thank you so much for such a great review on budget carbon wheel sets. I’ve been a big fan of your site for several years and you’ve been a constant resource for cycling recommendations. I purchased the campagnolo zonda several years ago per your review as an upgrade to my stock wheels and have been very pleased. Now I’m looking to upgrade to carbon. I’ve been looking at the Rolf Prima Ares 4 ES which as far as I understand has a deeper depth section than the Ares 3 LS you reviewed as well as a better hub. I’m curious given your experience with the Ares 3 LS, are there any generalizations you can make regarding the quality of Rolf Prima and what to expect with their slightly higher end wheels? Rolf Prima is offering a 20% discount to their rim brake wheels hence part of my attraction to this wheelset. About me: I’m currently riding a Storck Durnario, weigh 165lbs, can maintain a 20-22mph on flats but overall terrain averaging closer to 18mph, ride 2x a week so consider myself more an enthusiast, and typically ride the mean suburbs of Boston (e.g. Concord, Dover, etc.). Are there any other wheelsets I should also be looking at? I greatly appreciate any feedback you can provide.

    • Sam, Thanks for your feedback. Much appreciated. You can also always show your support and help me cover the costs of gear for reviews and other site costs by buying through the links on the site to stores I recommend including some that provide a small commission when you do so. OK, enough of that.

      Regarding your question, I’m afraid it’s hard to generalize about products from a brand based on the review of one especially when there are differences between hubs, depths, and braking systems in the example you’ve given. You also haven’t said much about your goals, riding profile or budget. I’d suggest you define those and see where that leads you through the links to different types and specific models of wheelsets you might consider that I’ve embedded by coming up with answers to the questions in my post ROAD BIKE WHEELS – HOW TO CHOOSE THE BEST FOR YOU

      I will say that there are a lot of 20% off deals on wheels from a range of wheelset brands going on this month so you are looking at a good time. I’ll also say, as someone who rides those same roads you mention, there’s nothing mean about them 🙂 – it’s a great place to ride! Steve

  • Hi Steve. Have you looked at more exotic European wheels, like Schmolke? They are noticeably lighter than Zipp 303s but seem to be a similar setup, and judging by max rider weight should be strong too. Best regards.

    • Costa, Had never heard of them. Thanks for bringing them to my attention. Looking quickly at their site, they appear to be one of those “Regionals” like Rolf Prima with only one wheelset in the less than $1500 or €1500 range. True, they do claim a lighter wheelset than Zipp (and most} but their max weight is similar to others and I wouldn’t necessarily associate max weight and lateral stiffness. Unfortunately, there are too many wheelset companies and models for me to cover! Best, Steve

  • I didn’t realize I was commenting on “best value wheels”. Alto’s are definitely on the higher $ list and use some unique, exclusive technology. They’re not a regional assembler for sure. Be sure to check out their brake temp to failure video on YouTube. Their rims are
    formed around a foam core and filament wound. Their hub tolerances reportedly have near zero distortion of the bearings which allows them to spin and spin and spin…

  • Hello Steve,

    I am searching for Carbon clincher wheels and would like to ask if you can comment about the price difference between the Bonti XXX2 and the Pro 3 in relative to the quality and durability.

    Sadly, in my country the brand options to buy from local importers are limited to 3-4 known brands and wheels i do not buy online since i want to know that in case of a problem the service and the solution will be reliable and quick.

    Thank you


    • Nir, regardless of where you buy your wheels, any Bonti authorized dealer near you is obligated to service them per their dealer agreement. I don’t think there is any quality or durability difference between Bonti carbon wheels such as the two you mention. They are also covered by the same warranty, crash and return policies. The only difference should be in their performance. Steve

  • Steve,

    I’d like to hear more feedback about Light Bicycle WR46C02 wheels. It’s a red flag for me since they didn’t feel as stiff as Bontrager Aeolus Pro 5 TLR. I’m racing and training on 35mm Campagnolo Scirocco. These are a marginally stiffer over notorious Zonda that you rated well. I’m looking for instant acceleration like a greyhound, found in Campagnolo Bora wheels.

  • According to Hambini independent testing, Hunt and Flo are two companies manufacturing worst wheels around. Hambini calls them clueless, regarding aerodynamics. You will find Hunt 50 almost dead last in the tests.

  • Re Hunt, Flo and Yoeleo, fantastic to see some reviews based on actual use of the product. Cannot believe what goes on in the Cycling Media and passes as a review on this stuff.

    There seems to be a real desire these days to believe that limited knowledge start-ups can challenge industry players who have put vast amounts of time and effort into their products.

    I have a pair of Light Bicycle rims on my mountain bike. They’ve gone the distance but I really doubt that they added anything to the experience or the bike.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *