Hunt introduces 42mm deep Limitless gravel wheel with the promise of “maximum aerodynamic benefit”

Everyone's releasing aero gravel bikes now. 3T Exploro, Ridley Kanzo, Cervelo Aspero.. any frame with an O at the end basically. Perfect for all those riders who want to pretend their adventurous spirit knows no bounds but also don't want to get dropped on the big Sunday bun run 

Some people can cycle quite fast, you know. I've seen them passing me.

There are many different styles of gravel riding (e.g. see this piece https://off.road.cc/content/feature/opinion-we-need-to-be-more-specific-...). This sort of product is squarely aimed at the "race" sub-style, which I would agree is niche in the UK (but gaining popularity) but probably less niche elsewhere (especially USA).

Personally I'm not about to drop £1,000+ on a pair of aero gravel wheels, but if Hunt want to make them and other people want to buy them, so be it!

Do elaborate - how did you get a test set and what type or movement did you get from how many spokes over what type of riding etc etc?

Rather simplifying things. The Mavic distribution of drag method they reference weights the drag at different yaw angles to give you an effect "real world" figure.

If they had just take the zero Yaw number which looks to be about 50grams less drag, equates to about 4.5w at 32km/h. For me that's a difference of about 0.25km/h for the same power, saving 4m37s over 10 hours at 32km/h. Still pretty marginal, but my point is they didn't go with this figure which really is if the wind is "just right" as you suggest, instead they just claimed their wheels are at least as good as some industry leading examples. At the same time they can demonstrate less lateral force in the wind tunnel. Overall real world gain? Hmm, maybe, maybe not, but they are trying to sell these, and the idea of a cheaper wheel that's at least as good as wheels that are double the price is appealing, don't you think?

andystow wrote:

Talk about the most marginal of marginal gains! 13 seconds over ten hours? And only if the wind is just right (well, just wrong, really)?

Are gravel races ever that close?

Gkam84 wrote:

 certainly not for cheap imported wheels

You'd be hard pressed to find any wheels that aren't imported these days. At least they are designed in the UK.  

Though I do agree all this nonsense about marginal aero gains and yaw angles matters bugger all to the majority of riders who are not smashing along at near pro level speeds, especially off road. 

if content is sponsored, it says it's sponsored, at the top. this isn't sponsored content, it's a tech news story.

Quote:

wind tunnel testing does NOT compute to real-world cycling and certainly not for cheap imported wheels

in the same way that wind tunnel testing doesn't compute to real-world flying of planes, or formula 1, or whatever. come on. you can certainly argue that the gains here are marginal, because they definitely are. but that doesn't mean wind tunnel testing is invalid as a result.

I can't speak to planes, because I don't have that experience, but F1, for sure they use wind tunnels to test full cars, parts and prototypes. They also use real world to finish their testing. Whether that be a scheduled test as allowed within the rules or on a Friday/Saturday practice session. They don't just stick them in a tunnel and say "that's that".

After his views about other things, I'm not going to name him, but there is a "5 year old" who took a number of wheels and tested their claims, many did not live up to what they stated. I'm not saying wind tunnel data is invalid, just that it is marketing guff and means nothing in real-world terms, also, it's always inhouse testing, never independently verified. I could buy the same wheels from Asia and claim anything, make up some graphs and numbers. 

This is a nice video... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bb7eCgLbLI

Difficult to know what a company is to do. By definition they can't organise independent tests. All Hunt have done is the best testing they can, given the resources of a small company. They've been honest about the results (the marginal gain over Zipp's is indeed miniscule, but the price gain is not). What more should they do to make the best wheelset they can, and communicate what they've done to their potential customers? 

Quote:

I could buy the same wheels from Asia

i can guarantee that you can't. Hunt own the IP on their Limitless rim, it's a proprietary process that's exclusive (for now) to them

Quote:

They don't just stick them in a tunnel and say "that's that".

no, nor does anyone else, hunt included. but real world testing isn't controllable enough to quantify any gains made, which is why they're derived from a controlled test. it's not like hunt are an outlier here: basically anything with a claimed aero advantage will quantify the advantage based on a controlled test.

I think it must be my OCD, but please could you at least attempt to use correct punctuation and garmmar? After all, as a journalist, the written word ought to be something you are familiar and competent with. Thank you.

Garmmar? An ironic joke perhaps? As a grammar pedant, spelling ought be something you are familiar and competent with. Thank you.

njblackadder wrote:

I think it must be my OCD, but please could you at least attempt to use correct punctuation and garmmar? After all, as a journalist, the written word ought to be something you are familiar and competent with. Thank you.

I think the claims would have more validity if the uncertainty associated with the measurements was also published. It is standard practice in "proper" engineering to calculate an overall uncertainty associated with the test process and measurement. This may be compared with the results and improvements to determine whether they are valid and material, respectively.

Can/will Hunt provide the overall test uncertainty for comparison with their claim of a 0.05W improvement? If they cannot, then I agree that this is just marketing BS.

sure focus on whether the wheels are 0.05w better or 0.05w worse, and not which wheels they are testing against. Sure if they were 0.05 watts better than a £300 wheelset it would be nonsense. But Essentially (according to their testing) these wheels are on a par with Zipp 303. While being £300 cheaper.

Gkam84 wrote:

..... not for cheap imported wheels. ..... 

There is so much more to a purchase than the product, as this short tale might demonstrate.  

About six months ago I ordered, and put down a deposit, on a pair of Hunt's less expensive wheels, to be delivered a couple of weeks later.  Hunt were to email me when the wheels were ready and to ask for payment of the outstanding balance.

There then followed a series of computer cock-ups and mistakes on my part, all too tedious to recount here, but which must have left Hunt wondering if they were dealing with a complete fool.  Eventually order was restored and, to their eternal credit the company assumed total responsibility for the delay, opened a special account to take my money ( this was during the lockdown and the guy was working from his kitchen ) and shipped the wheels first-class.  They arrived next day, and were followed by a phone call, checking that all was   to my satisfaction.  Service such as this is a rare thing.

Incidentally, the wheels are super.  Light, evenly strung and with that 'raring-to-go' feeling, they haven't missed a beat during their daily journeys.  I'll buy more when the time comes.

Gkam84 wrote:

*PAID FOR AD MUCH??....

Why would they pay, when they can throw out a press release and have it copied and pasted for free?