Cyclocosm

the How The Race Was Won® cycling blog

Menu
  • How The Race Was Won®
  • The Recon Ride
  • The Week in Bike
  • Music
  • Rants
  • Graphics
  • Bikes vs. The World
Menu

Component Review Fail

Posted on 11 June 20096 July 2021 by cosmo

“…it won’t snap, either.”

-Lennard Zinn, on Mavic’s r-sys spokes, May. 8, 2009

I had a definite sensation that Lennard Zinn would end up ruing this tech story on Mavic’s “improved” R-Sys wheel design. I know Zinn’s got a heck of a reach, but at a beefy 190, I still wouldn’t put money against fellow VeloNewsie Ben Delaney kicking his ass—once the shoulder has healed, of course.

But seriously, I have to wonder what any domestic amateur rider is doing on a set of carbon-spoked rims. “Spinergy” has been a punch line in the cycling community for years. Other than the still hand-assembled, still ridiculously expensive Lightweights, all the wheels in wide use in the peloton have steel spokes. Badass, expensive steel spokes, but steel, none the less. So why would domestic amateurs think carbon fiber spokes were an awesome idea? Why, I simply have no clue.

The Zircal aluminum spokes that were the centerpiece of Mavic’s formerly awesome Ksyrium wheels held up pretty well, but for the most part, stainless steel is the only reasonable material for the vast majority of spoking applications. It’s not like regular old steel spokes, or any other “outdated” tech is a heinous performance hit—in my favorite pro races, box rims and 3-cross, 32 spokes are de rigueur. George Hincapie tried some fancy Bonti Aeolus wheels (still with steel spokes, though) back in ’06, but even before his crash, he didn’t exactly tear away from the peloton.

However, the point of this rant is not that steel spokes and retro-grouchery are awesome. It’s that bike publications put readers at serious risk when they publish reviews, test rides or other “news” features that are essentially promotional puff-pieces for the manufacturers whose advertisements line their pages. It may be this attitude that keeps component manufacturers from sending me stuff, but, in light of this incident, it seems like a small price to pay.

I’m truly bummed that Ben Delaney got banged up. Hard crashes suck, and doubly so when your riding had nothing to do with them. But I can’t help but feel like his tumble was a few long overdue chickens come home to roost in Boulder. Certainly, if I wrote for Pez, I might do my next few workouts on the trainer, just to be safe.

thoughts on “Component Review Fail”

  1. Spino says:
    11 June 2009 at 3:06 pm

    …Not to mention the fact that Zack Vestal’s VN online writing has been the literary equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard. Does anyone edit his shit? Ever noticed that he seems to review a disproportionate amount of Trek products??

    Reply
  2. chris RAINBOW johnson says:
    11 June 2009 at 7:30 pm

    R-SYS, never liked them, never will ,(considering you face the wind each time you ride and Alp D’huez all too infrequently). It’s a cliché and not unusual for French engineering to crack on to an idea and follow it through to its logical conclusion forgoing all considered mitigating issues.
    These wheels are another classic case in failure. They are French classically, as always without Italian elegance, German precision, nor American fear of ligation for personal harm ( or analytical technological excellence) . yes Mavic, do, some things good (remember the epic GP4, & the Open Pro equivalent, Ksyrium in its best guises ) . But too often Mavic in my mind, miss the target by the use of too much good endeavour without thought of consequence, cost and target market.

    Reply
  3. chris RAINBOW johnson says:
    11 June 2009 at 7:42 pm

    Sell an R-SYS wheel set, and never has to worry about the buyer, purchasing another wheel set from a competitors company again! Perhaps they should come with their own discounted grave and headstone, rather than a replacement policy.

    Reply
  4. David says:
    12 June 2009 at 1:40 pm

    Interesting reply from Mavic today on Velonews. They claim that the facts point away from it being a wheel failure that initiated the accident, rather a frame failure causing this sequence. My problem with this is that even if other elements went, barring a stem or such, the wheel shouldn’t then totally collapse. It seems likely (not knowing all the details) that such a cascade of catastrophe could have lead to the serious accident. Just having the frame break doesn’t seem like it would lead to the superman over-the-handlebars crash described. Call me old-fashioned but I’ll stick with metal spokes, thanks.

    Reply
  5. Tom says:
    14 June 2009 at 6:50 pm

    Leave these things to the carbon fibre, weight weeny, suckers !!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

About the Author

a headshot of Cosmo Catalano

Best known for his How The Race Was Won® video series, Cosmo Catalano began blogging about pro cycling from a bike shop in 2005. Between then and now, he's designed cycling infographics, built cycling web apps, and supplied cycling content to print and broadcast media, all in the name of backing up his near-endless criticism with proof that it can be done better. He complains about cycling on Twitter at @Cyclocosm.

Latest How The Race Was Won® Video

How The Race Was Won p/b CyclingTips - Tour de France Femmes Avec Zwift

Newsletter

Tip Jar

Archive

All Categories

Search

© 2023 Cyclocosm | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme | Privacy Policy