With the roads as they are I wouldnt consider CF wheels for my bike. As it is I have magnesium on my 916. The race version and these worry me on our pot hole ridden roads. My 1198 has standard wheels and TBH these are fine. However it seems that pot holes arent the reason for their failure, but I'd still not use them on the road.
far too much worry over this. all wheels have their pro's and cons. after having carbon fibre wheels for many years on my cycles. I am convinced of their benefits personally. . they have proven to be more durable than any sets of wheels I have ever owned. yes yes yes I hear you's muse to yourselves 'ahh but this is different - this is on a motorbike and they are subject to harsher forces' im confident in the people who build these wheels and of the benefits in strength with carbon fibre. id take carbon over magnesium in a heartbeat.
Ride down my road and you'd reconsider. I live on a 'private' road. I need a frickin crosser sometimes. Outside my garage there are two large pot holes of 5" of depth. Plus theres numerous on the remainder of my road and surrey roads are bad. I remember the class's for material engineering during my degree many years ago. Composite's are very good material but the matrix can be more prone to ageing and thus lose strength over time. Fine if you can afford to replace them periodically. I cant thus i have to consider whats right for my budget. The same may be said for magnesium. You wouldnt want it anywhere near salt and some 6 & 7 series aluminiums also have an aversion to salt and stress so you takes your chances. I am pretty sure the people who build them are at the top of their game but for me as a general user magnesium is probably as far as I could go. My bikes get used sometimes during the winter and they even see rain. My mags are coated and I send them to marvic to get this done and for them to check them out every couple of years. Theyre the unbraced maresechini's and they are very light. Maybe not as light as CF but durability would be better. I guess its a compromise on what you need from your wheels and i agree lighter wheels will be the best modification you will ever make. But I do remember the stress/strain tests in the lab with CF, especially the CF exposed to ultra violet and how it weakened the matrix markedly. I'd guess they lacquer them nowadays to prevent this and CF has moved on considerably since my uni days. But for me tbh I wouldnt see or be able to exploit the difference in weight as I am no track god.
Just to be clear I don't hold bad feelings towards dymag as I was very lucky and didn't crash.However I think like funky but as many have said its a new company so I guess its not so straight forward. This post is simply a warning to anyone using DYMAG CA5 CARBON SINGLE SIDED REAR WHEEL- GET EM BACK TO DYMAG FOR SAFETY CHECK AS ADVISED BY DYMAG THEMSELVES AS THIS IS A SAFETY CRITICAL FAULT. As for me im going to talk to owner and see if a better deal than trade can be done being as it nearly cost me my life or ability to walk again. I wouldn't be fooled into thinking you have to be a track god either for carbon wheels to be worthwhile.The point is they massively improve handling,braking ,acceleration in every riding environment UNLESS THEY TRY AND PART WITH BIKE LIKE MINE LOL.I have felt the benefits round town and on motorways and on my favourite roads they really are something else. Ive fitted the standard 5 spoke alloy marchesini wheels back on for now and my god they are shite.I can feel the engine struggling now if not in right gear on motorway on the way home where as with carbon the motor would just spin up the rev range no problems.Acceleration now feels like ive got the back brake on.Braking is noticeably different ie shit.Ive gone from loving my bike to fucking hating it. Take it from me a 15yr old 916/996sps with carbon wheels is as good if not a lot better than any modern superbike out now running alloy wheels on UK roads. So for me its carbon wheels and same for future bikes.Id rather own a 999R or 1198 than a fannygale and buy a set of carbon wheels with money saved.The end result is you have a much better bike for less money. Best way to get my confidence back it to thrash the shit out of it when carbon wheels are back on.
Everything I read tells me carbon wheels are structurally better than mag But seems its one of those items that buy new only really applies, unless they have been back to the manf for a test and refurb
Ricky's right. And I'd never trust a Marvic wheel or swingarm anyway, they were a resin transfer moulding process, so they're resin rich as buggery. Blackstone tech are better as they are hand layed prepreg, and yes they meet all TUV approval etc, but the fact is that the only safe insert material to use in a carbon structure for a road vehicle is stainless for glavanic reasons. It's all very well using magnesium and alloy centres, and inserts, fine, but its fine when you know at the end of the season they're going in the skip or through a band saw, which is what people who by such ex race stuff don't get into their heads, or fail to understand - more than likely its just they don't know. Even blackstone Tech's wheels, it would be interesting to see their layup in respect to the hub area, and also the hub itself.
imagine walking everywhere with hob nail boots on.... go for a jog, run for a bus, walk to work, go to the gym, play football. now do it all again with trainers !!!! thats my analogy with carbon wheels lol carbon rules... theres 2 types of people in this world those with carbon wheels and those that want them heheee
Yep the problem could be same for all carbon wheels.However Dymag assure me this is the first one they have seen so could be a one off.The fact they have issued a safety alert to me means they are not 100% sure so er on side of caution and get em all checked before anyone gets hurt.They have not had a problem with hub area in any of there other carbon wheels in there range.Only the single sided one. Any of you BST owners know about hub construction of your wheels.Dymag state they use magnesium hubs where as BST use ally. For me the reason I like the Dymags is I think the design looks the dogs danglies on 916 or 999 bikesand are UK based company if any problems occur.Might take a drive down there and check there set up out . Also interested in chatting to them about there modification of how it irradicates this hub failure problem.
Don't get me wrong, I love the stuff - if I didn't I'd be fucked! but the most common thing I see in road vehicle carbon is that time and deterioration is never taken into account. It's not good enough to just bang the just lice a race bike tag on everything and watch the wannabees pay through the nose for it. Regular day to day use year after year is a brutal environment, and not just for aircraft. Yes, the youtube vid of the carbon wheel having a skip dropped on it is impressive, I'd be more impressed by a youtube vid showing that wheel in an environmental chamber and a shake rig simulating 5 years of flat driving, and coming out at the end of it. Sure, we all want the nicest trainers, but unlike Bolt, the bloke who pays out for them won't be getting a new pair every race, and that's the big difference.
Good point Sev yep I totally agree about test showing how they hold up after 5 yrs plus. Probably why BST and Dymag give a 2 year warranty.I guess at the end of every other year you should skip these wheels and buy a new set. Bloody expensive but great for these companies.Would be nice to see a 10 yr or lifetime warranty from these companies.I guess that's the million dollar question how long does it last how much will UV degrade resin etc etc etc.But alloy wheels fail to so it all risky.My mate stuffed his bike good and proper when his chain snapped.Nothing is indestructible on motorbikes I guess especialy on these crap UK roads.
all well and good. but not backed up in any meanigful way with evidence an odd spurious failure always brings the doubters out.. aka k5 gsxr 1k a few years ago I had one of those in 2006 with bst wheels. what were my chances hey lol
absolutely Matt, and that's why the enviromental durability and shake rig is so important. It's not whether they're ally or mag centres, its the mechanism used to interface them. If the hub centre carrier interface for instance is first laminated with GRP then you won't really have a problem, however commonly what happens is that it's made as a blank and machined out, so you're left with a raw carbon state which the hub is then bonded/bolted into. Initially this isn't a problem, and indeed it's not a problem of the lifespan of the thing is limited, when it does become a problem however is over time, and in the case of magnesium doubly so as it corrodes a lot quicker against carbon than an ally hub, which is further compounded as with mag they cheapen further by not doing a proper surface coating treatment on it. I've seen a lot of old road and race composite cars and chassis components after even a couple of years who's inserts and alloy fittings and fastenings are absolutely shagged just through glavanic corrosion. I rebuilt a crash structure on a composite chassis, who's suspension mounts were rattling in the laminate due to them being magnesium which had corroded away. At the time though it was accepted that an acid etch and chromate dip would be sufficient. In the end, the same inserts were reproduced in mag and used for historical accuracy, but we made sure that there was a barrier layer of glass between insert and composite. It's worth investigating that centre, as if it's not damaged the laminate it can be replaced and repaired in the right hands.
I guess carbon engineers have never heard of vibration and UV fatigue hey. the just knock them out and cross their fingers and toes and every two years rename the company lol someone better tell lamborghini they have just put carbon wheels on their latest supercar.
Just to be clear folks Only carbon wheels with safety recall are Dymag CA5 Carbon REAR SINGLE SIDED 2001 - 2009 REAR ONLY NOT FRONT NO OTHER CARBON WHEELS HAVE A PROBLEM AS FAR AS IM AWARE MINE IS THE ONLY FAILURE KNOWN TO DYMAG BUT RECALL IS FOR ALL THE ABOVE REAR WHEELS FOR SAFETY CHECK & HUB MODIFICATION DUE TO SAFETY CONCERNS DYMAG CONTACTED ME WITHIN 24HRS OF MY INITIAL EMAIL AND ISSUED SAFETY RECALL NOTICE 24HRS AFTER RECIEVING MY WHEEL FOR INSPECTION IF YOU HAVE ONE OF THESE REAR WHEELS GET THEM BACK TO DYMAG FOR SAFETY CHECK AND HUB MODIFICATION ASAP AS OLD DESIGN RUNS THE RISK OF POSSIBLE WHEEL FAILURE
Well I have so I don't see any excuse other than they're being cheap. testing and approval is where the money gets swallowed big time, as does proper engineering - anyone can get a mould and keep throwing plies in it till it's stiff enough, the craft comes in engineering the material for purpose, otherwise all you're doing is making the metal component out of carbon - which defeats the point. Dymag's only fault was the production method - I spoke at length with them many years ago about their wheels, and there'd be nothing wrong with Lamborghini's rims as it'd have to go through all the tests I've mentioned. Don't joke about the rename after every two years either!
as would BSTs my point wasnt aimed at you necessarily its just all this bollox collectively - armchair experts who have probably never seen a carbon wheel let alone used one... ooh I wouldnt touch them because > comedy answer here < oooh vibrations ooooh sunshine UV oooh resin rich what a load of cobblers these are made by experts with the know how. not the bloody young-foo-choo carbon co from ebay theres one from the family album lol
resin infusion and RTM is a shit production make carbon rims. BST don't do it, but Dymag did which is pretty shite in my opinion, and it is only my opinion. But I'd personally never engineer a wheel the way they did, I thought their car rims they did were total bollocks but again that's my opinion. To compensate they worked on a huge safety margin. which is there isn't a phenomenal weight difference to be had, but then most manufacturers do or should do as there is due diligence to consider if nothing else, and in doing that you have the twofold benefit of not having to pay stress engineers and FE cluster time.
Phill, Theres been umpteen publications which urge caution to carbon wheels used for the road. Hence people reticence. BST are good quality wheels and carbon has likely moved on from those detailed in many publications. You seem to sit on your arse and moan about armchair experts on a lot of things and yet you cannot even see any irony in your posts. Adding a doesnt make your posts any the more interesting. Carbon wheels are not going to give me any advantage on a road bike over mag. Neither is it going to on a track day. I am simply not good enough to extract the best out of them thus they are just eye candy. Thats fair enough, nought wrong with eye candy. But unless you are a handy track day hoon then the wheels, as nice as they are, would be pointless to many. Myself included. Far better I spend money on a set halfway between OEM and those. That way I get some benefits more suited to the talent I dont have.
yeh you keep harping on about this and how youll never be good enough so you cant understand why others bother.. like a stuck record dunno why your pressing the point. you just seem to sit on you arse and spout off why you think they are a waste pf time - tiring really 'umpteen publications' my arse. for every 1 you can find ill find ten that contra it. thats the thing with the internet...look hard enough and youll find black is actually white. just get over it. those that have em love em
Even seasoned experts are divided. From example, I know a guy, knows his stuff when it comes to bikes, who won't run carbon wheels even on track. Simply because, in his experience, they don't seal as well and can allow pressure to change too quickly. I know another guy, who knows his stuff when it comes to bikes, who loves carbon wheels and thinks everyone should have them as, in his experience, they often a massive step forward in manoeuvrability, acceleration and are as robust as most other std cast wheels he sees. Cant both be right, cant both be wrong.
