american classic wide lightning
- Thread starter tricycle
- Start date
Rider_of_Bikes
Likes Dirt
I have sold a few. They are very light weight for their girth but I feel they prefer to stay grounded rather than land sideways. 8 have seen a few riders crack the am versions.
Thanks for that mate !
I've got a set of these in the 29er format and have had them for about 2 months, so take what I say with this is mind.
I have a 130mm/120mm trail bike and ride in the Blue Mountains and a bit of Canberra, mainly XC type stuff. I've been running Rocket Rons (Snakeskin) 2.25, Geax Saguaro 2.2 and Conti Race King (Protection) 2.2. All tubeless and typically with pressures between 22-25psi. I weigh about 85kg maybe closer to 90.
So far I love the wheels. The trail feel is great and with the low pressures they absorb a lot of the harshness. (Trails are similar to sydney, small rocks everywhere, loose, sandy). The tyres/wheels seem reasonably stiff, particularly still at these lower pressures (i do remember not checking pressure and later found i was running 20psi and they still felt great) tyres don't seem to squirm too much.
So far no dings (gave them a good check last week) but haven't really pushed them either.
My choices were either Wide lightnings or something from Light Bicycle.
The good:
- super light (particularly for cost)
- 29mm internal diametre
- tubeless ready out of the box (valves and rim tape installed)
- hubs seem super smooth and friction free
- easy to mount tubeless except Rocket Rons - but i think cause they were all folded up when i bought them new
The ok(?)
- The bead lock/rim bit is super thin (so far not a problem)
- POE rear hub not so great, but i think I'm getting used to it.
hope this helps a little.
I have a 130mm/120mm trail bike and ride in the Blue Mountains and a bit of Canberra, mainly XC type stuff. I've been running Rocket Rons (Snakeskin) 2.25, Geax Saguaro 2.2 and Conti Race King (Protection) 2.2. All tubeless and typically with pressures between 22-25psi. I weigh about 85kg maybe closer to 90.
So far I love the wheels. The trail feel is great and with the low pressures they absorb a lot of the harshness. (Trails are similar to sydney, small rocks everywhere, loose, sandy). The tyres/wheels seem reasonably stiff, particularly still at these lower pressures (i do remember not checking pressure and later found i was running 20psi and they still felt great) tyres don't seem to squirm too much.
So far no dings (gave them a good check last week) but haven't really pushed them either.
My choices were either Wide lightnings or something from Light Bicycle.
The good:
- super light (particularly for cost)
- 29mm internal diametre
- tubeless ready out of the box (valves and rim tape installed)
- hubs seem super smooth and friction free
- easy to mount tubeless except Rocket Rons - but i think cause they were all folded up when i bought them new
The ok(?)
- The bead lock/rim bit is super thin (so far not a problem)
- POE rear hub not so great, but i think I'm getting used to it.
hope this helps a little.
chrischris
Likes Dirt
Is that "I have seen..." or "8 have seen..."?
I have an All Mountain 29er AC wheel set & love them. One year of solid XC abuse on my rigid & zero issues. (My weight =72kg)
I am interested in the Wide Lightning... I'd be keen to hear any long term reviews.
P.S. For anyone interested... POE is average. I'm used to it now. And, almost zero noise from the freewheel. A slight 'click' which is almost inaudible when riding. The opposite of Hope.
Wiffle
Likes Dirt
Not the toughest wheels out there, but given the price/width/weight they're a very good option. Rode a set for as few months on rocky trails in the illawarra including some DH stuff; 1 small ding in rear wheel but didn't affect performance, and no proprietary parts means you may be able to replace the rims with something else further down the track (ERD being the same). As mentioned rear hub is a bit slow, but very smooth and quiet, and not an issue if you don't do a lot of technical, stop/start climbing.
redbruce
Eats Squid
So, after weighing up all options I have gone with AC Wide Lighnings on my Spesh Epic Expert 29.
Contenders were AC WL, LB carbon on Hope or Novatech, Roval carbon.
The width argument seems generally settled, question is how wide. I also had some concerns re cost of decent carbon wheels relative to performance and durability.
Rovals were too expensive ($1400 - $1600 depending on width) so was down to LB and AC (both around $1100, but still more than I was prepared to pay/afford). At the 29mm internal width the AC's were lighter than the equivalent size LB by nearly 100 g (with Hopes).
I have to admit the twentynineinches (http://twentynineinches.com/2014/07/06/american-classic-wide-lightning-29er-wheels-final-review/) articles on the AC's were pretty convincing and Bill Shook's comments (http://www.pinkbike.com/news/To-the-Point-Bill-Shook-on-Wheel-Building-and-Wide-Rims.html) re Al Vs Carbon summarised my feelings after a pretty wide web search on the topic.
Pushy's EOFY sale was the final trigger ($850) and in Pushy's usual style, online order was quick and easy, delivery similarly.
Of the 20 odd wheelsets I have had over the years all but a few were not built by myself, so this would be only the second high end off the rack set for me (other is DT XR1450 in 26"). Price was around what it would cost for me to build up LB based wheels in any case.
Out of the box:
As you would expect for the price, the AC's are well finished. Bearings are smooth, wheels were true and spoke tension well within spec (specs on AC wbsite). Front (9mm TA conversion but without axle) weighs 764g, rear (with 142 x 12mm conversion but without axle) weighs 864g.
The 142 x 12 and 9mm through axle kits fitted easily (check fitting instructions from website, there is a trick to getting preload correct). If you buy the 15mm front version and wish to convert to 9mm TA, a cheaper option is to buy an after market adapter to put inside the 15mm axle, because that's how AC do it (at some expense).
They have a number of nice engineering aspects. The hubs are high flange but machined for minimal weight. The Al freehub has two splines faced with a steel inserts to protect it from from cassette bite and the axle tubes have adjustable bearing preload to optimise drag. The proprietary double butted spokes (AC branded) have a longer butted section than DT comps, over the spoke length the thinner section would be 75mm longer. Also the Al nipples have only 10mm showing on the outside of the rim with the rest inside with a square section drive rather than a slot. Not many weight saving opportunities have been ignored.
I was a bit worried the lairy paint on the AC's wouldn't go with the Epic red/white paint scheme, but it is more subtle in real life than photo's suggested and is fine.
My OEM Spesh rims (DT 450SL) are 18.3 internal and the WL's 29.3mm so I was interested to see the effect on my Schwalbe RoRo front (2.25) and RaRa rear (2.25), both snakeskin versions and tubed (as I would initially also run on the AC's for direct comparison). Pressures would be the same also (23psi front, 27psi rear; 95kg smooth xc only rider).
Tyres fitted up easily, the well in the rim is generous, but I found I had to soap up the beads and pump to 45psi to get them seated in AC's bead well.
Tyre size:
On the old rims, the 2.25 RoRo measured 54mm across the tread and 53mm at the widest point of the carcas. On the AC's this grew to 56mm across the tread and 58mm across the carcass.
On the old rims, the 2.25 RaRa measured 55mm across the tread and 55mm at the widest point of the carcas. On the AC's this grew to 56mm across the tread and 59mm across the carcass.
The final carcass dimensions for the RoRo on the AC's match the 2.35 version of the tyre (on 18.3mm internal rims), so AC's claim that the wide fitment takes a tyre up one size seems to hold, albeit in volume only as the 2.35 tread width is 60mm (and a bit more aggressive).
Initial impressions:
Thanks to indifferent weather, I have only had a short ride on flowy singletrack (Hans/Candlebark in Melbourne) so far. As you would expect with a 400g reduction in wheel mass, they spin up faster and make the steering (indeed the whole bike) more lively and responsive.
Grip and ride improvements are immediately noticeable. Grip is particularly noticeable ridding through ruts and channels where the tyre seems to be able to hang onto the side of the valley better and seems less fussed generally with off camber and rock edges. The wheels are also much stiffer than the spesh ones (the front of which also has 32 spokes and DB spokes) and the bike points more confidently in corners. Ride is improved over small stutter bumps and square edge hits.
As others have mentioned, the freehub pickup is slower than some. I had an 18pt on the DT XR1450 when I got them and the upgrade to 36pt was noticeable (but not earth shattering and not worth the $100 it cost).
The OEM spesh wheels have 24 point and the AC's feel the same. I'm happy with it at this stage.
The tyre is so stable I will try dropping a few psi for the next ride. After that I will probably succumb to the the lure of more performance and lower mass (another 160g lost) from tubeless (rims are tubeless ready and come with nice valves).
Contenders were AC WL, LB carbon on Hope or Novatech, Roval carbon.
The width argument seems generally settled, question is how wide. I also had some concerns re cost of decent carbon wheels relative to performance and durability.
Rovals were too expensive ($1400 - $1600 depending on width) so was down to LB and AC (both around $1100, but still more than I was prepared to pay/afford). At the 29mm internal width the AC's were lighter than the equivalent size LB by nearly 100 g (with Hopes).
I have to admit the twentynineinches (http://twentynineinches.com/2014/07/06/american-classic-wide-lightning-29er-wheels-final-review/) articles on the AC's were pretty convincing and Bill Shook's comments (http://www.pinkbike.com/news/To-the-Point-Bill-Shook-on-Wheel-Building-and-Wide-Rims.html) re Al Vs Carbon summarised my feelings after a pretty wide web search on the topic.
Pushy's EOFY sale was the final trigger ($850) and in Pushy's usual style, online order was quick and easy, delivery similarly.
Of the 20 odd wheelsets I have had over the years all but a few were not built by myself, so this would be only the second high end off the rack set for me (other is DT XR1450 in 26"). Price was around what it would cost for me to build up LB based wheels in any case.
Out of the box:
As you would expect for the price, the AC's are well finished. Bearings are smooth, wheels were true and spoke tension well within spec (specs on AC wbsite). Front (9mm TA conversion but without axle) weighs 764g, rear (with 142 x 12mm conversion but without axle) weighs 864g.
The 142 x 12 and 9mm through axle kits fitted easily (check fitting instructions from website, there is a trick to getting preload correct). If you buy the 15mm front version and wish to convert to 9mm TA, a cheaper option is to buy an after market adapter to put inside the 15mm axle, because that's how AC do it (at some expense).
They have a number of nice engineering aspects. The hubs are high flange but machined for minimal weight. The Al freehub has two splines faced with a steel inserts to protect it from from cassette bite and the axle tubes have adjustable bearing preload to optimise drag. The proprietary double butted spokes (AC branded) have a longer butted section than DT comps, over the spoke length the thinner section would be 75mm longer. Also the Al nipples have only 10mm showing on the outside of the rim with the rest inside with a square section drive rather than a slot. Not many weight saving opportunities have been ignored.
I was a bit worried the lairy paint on the AC's wouldn't go with the Epic red/white paint scheme, but it is more subtle in real life than photo's suggested and is fine.
My OEM Spesh rims (DT 450SL) are 18.3 internal and the WL's 29.3mm so I was interested to see the effect on my Schwalbe RoRo front (2.25) and RaRa rear (2.25), both snakeskin versions and tubed (as I would initially also run on the AC's for direct comparison). Pressures would be the same also (23psi front, 27psi rear; 95kg smooth xc only rider).
Tyres fitted up easily, the well in the rim is generous, but I found I had to soap up the beads and pump to 45psi to get them seated in AC's bead well.
Tyre size:
On the old rims, the 2.25 RoRo measured 54mm across the tread and 53mm at the widest point of the carcas. On the AC's this grew to 56mm across the tread and 58mm across the carcass.
On the old rims, the 2.25 RaRa measured 55mm across the tread and 55mm at the widest point of the carcas. On the AC's this grew to 56mm across the tread and 59mm across the carcass.
The final carcass dimensions for the RoRo on the AC's match the 2.35 version of the tyre (on 18.3mm internal rims), so AC's claim that the wide fitment takes a tyre up one size seems to hold, albeit in volume only as the 2.35 tread width is 60mm (and a bit more aggressive).
Initial impressions:
Thanks to indifferent weather, I have only had a short ride on flowy singletrack (Hans/Candlebark in Melbourne) so far. As you would expect with a 400g reduction in wheel mass, they spin up faster and make the steering (indeed the whole bike) more lively and responsive.
Grip and ride improvements are immediately noticeable. Grip is particularly noticeable ridding through ruts and channels where the tyre seems to be able to hang onto the side of the valley better and seems less fussed generally with off camber and rock edges. The wheels are also much stiffer than the spesh ones (the front of which also has 32 spokes and DB spokes) and the bike points more confidently in corners. Ride is improved over small stutter bumps and square edge hits.
As others have mentioned, the freehub pickup is slower than some. I had an 18pt on the DT XR1450 when I got them and the upgrade to 36pt was noticeable (but not earth shattering and not worth the $100 it cost).
The OEM spesh wheels have 24 point and the AC's feel the same. I'm happy with it at this stage.
The tyre is so stable I will try dropping a few psi for the next ride. After that I will probably succumb to the the lure of more performance and lower mass (another 160g lost) from tubeless (rims are tubeless ready and come with nice valves).
Last edited:
redbruce
Eats Squid
I've ever only had one sidewall failure (flint slice on lightest version of 2.35 RoRo- 26") and why I now use snakeskin.
It would be interesting to hear if others experience more sidewall issues with wider rims, but risk to sidewall is probably more a function of profile at interface with ground and that may not change in the same way as the static measurements suggest simply based on carcass width measurement.
I actually recorded the static (unloaded) tyre crown shape as well out of curiosity and there was negligible difference as a function of rim ID for both tyres. In any case the fundamental form is more construction driven and so any change in the static (unloaded) shape is irrelevant to what occurs at the grip (loaded) interface.
Last edited:
outtacontrol
Likes Bikes and Dirt
Something I have considered riding on our very rocky trails, is the number of guys I ride with or have seen with the new wider rim profile, either cracking carbon or dinting or scratching their rims. I think it is because previously the rim has been somewhat protected by the tyre, where now the rim is almost the first point of contact.
I run heavy sidewall protected tyres because of our trails and Stans Arch rims and have no problems. Lots of damage to the wider rims, so maybe not best suited to very rocky trails??
I run heavy sidewall protected tyres because of our trails and Stans Arch rims and have no problems. Lots of damage to the wider rims, so maybe not best suited to very rocky trails??
bowtajzane
Likes Dirt
Outtacontrol ,I think you've hit the nail on the head. ...
Until they start making wider tires to suit the wider rims we'll keep
seeing damaged rims......
Also those of us with older frames, the width issue is another consideration
Until they start making wider tires to suit the wider rims we'll keep
seeing damaged rims......
Also those of us with older frames, the width issue is another consideration
bowtajzane
Likes Dirt
I just thought tires would get wider, so you don't have the "squaring off" of the tires. .
isn't someone making wider tires already. .:noidea:
isn't someone making wider tires already. .:noidea:
redbruce
Eats Squid
My measurements (including before/after tread profile trace) show there is actually no "squaring" off of the profile.
The width of the rim in itself has no effect on the risk of damage, the tyre pressure does though and a marketing claim for wider is that you can run lower pressures with no stability loss.
However stability is only one factor to manage, the other is adequate support (pressure) to prevent rim strike.
Irrespective, the rim is still significantly narrower than the carcass width. Rim damage is due to the same old devil, too low pressure for conditions.
Last edited:
outtacontrol
Likes Bikes and Dirt
While low pressure is obviously going to cause problems, I was talking about when you hit a rock right on the edge of the tyre and the tyre slips off. With the older narrower rims the sidewall of the tyre takes the impact, whereas I have seen the wider rims getting damaged in the same situation.
If the rim is the same width as the tyre, on very rocky trails they are going to be more exposed to rock damage. Not fussed if you dont agree, I have seen it many times first hand