Chinese Carbon MTB Forums
News:
Happy Holidays!
See likes
See likes given/taken
| Post info | No. of Likes |
|---|---|
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
@ZenCarbonBike Good Day Sir, Answer to your question: 28 mm Ideal Best balance of shape, support, rolling resistance, and aero. 30–32 mm Very good More comfort and grip; still perfectly matched to 24 mm internal. January 27, 2026, 03:55:14 AM |
1 |
|
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
Good day Chinertown members, I hope you are all well. This week we have some new rim profiles a • New rim: Wider 24 mm inner width, undulating profile widths 31/24mm and 31/25mm and 68/65mm depth • Depth: 75 mm with 34/31mm External and 24 mm inner • Also available: 32er MTB rims Following on from our VaporLite series (23 mm inner width), we now have wider 25 mm inner width rims. Here is an updated list of rim weights for 25 mm inner width: • 50/50 mm rims: 974 g • Per rim: 330 g • Spokes: 3.1 mm, 2.1 g, 40 pcs = 84 g • Ultralight Hub: 20 spokes F&R = 230 g • 65 mm rims: 1104 g – build possible • External width: 32.4 mm This gives you an overview of the options if you want to build your. We have many many option for truly bespoke build ROAD/GRAVEL/CX AND MTB so contact us today to discuss your requirements. Have a good day  Updated 2026 VaporLite Weights — 25 mm Internal Width Series VaporLite Ultra — Ultralight Hub + 3.1 mm Carbon Spokes 30 mm – 899 g 35 mm – 919 g 40 mm – 929 g 45 mm – 949 g 50 mm – 979 g 55 mm – 1049 g 60 mm – 1089 g 65 mm – 1109 g VaporLite Pro — Superlight Hub + 3.1 mm Carbon Spokes 30 mm – 940 g 35 mm – 960 g 40 mm – 970 g 45 mm – 990 g 50 mm – 1020 g 55 mm – 1090 g 60 mm – 1130 g 65 mm – 1150 g VaporLite Sport — Sapim CX‑Ray Spokes 30 mm – 1065 g 35 mm – 1085 g 40 mm – 1095 g 45 mm – 1115 g 50 mm – 1145 g 55 mm – 1215 g 60 mm – 1255 g 65 mm – 1275 g VaporLite SL Steel — Alpina HyperLite Steel Spokes 30 mm – 1013 g 35 mm – 1033 g 40 mm – 1043 g 45 mm – 1063 g 50 mm – 1093 g 55 mm – 1163 g 60 mm – 1203 g 65 mm – 1223 g VaporLite Ti — Titanium Bladed Spokes 30 mm – 996 g 35 mm – 1016 g 40 mm – 1026 g 45 mm – 1046 g 50 mm – 1076 g 55 mm – 1146 g 60 mm – 1186 g 65 mm – 1206 g February 03, 2026, 03:05:23 AM |
1 |
|
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
Good Day Everyone more new products We are now offering the Premium THR R2 hub, available in black or silver. These hubs are fully compatible with Shimano HG or SRAM XDR freehubs and can be built into any custom wheelset. THR R2 Disc Brake – Center Lock Hub Specifications: Materials: Shell: 7075‑T651 aluminum alloy Axle: TC4 titanium alloy, 17 mm front & rear Weight: Front 89 g / Rear 196 g — Total 285 g per pair Geometry: Flange diameters: Front disc 50 mm / Front non-disc 33 mm / Rear drive 74 mm / Rear disc 45 mm OLD spacing: 100 mm front / 142 mm rear Rear WR: 18.5 mm Flange distance: Front 62 mm / Rear 56 mm Lacing: 2:1 pattern, 3‑cross on drive side Bearings: Brand/type: TPI steel or TPI ceramic Front: 6803 × 2 Rear shell: 6903 × 1 + 6803 × 1 Freehub: 6803 × 2 Engagement: THR SSF low-resistance rapid-engagement ratchet 45‑tooth carbon steel / optional 72T Engagement angle: 8° / 5° Axle & End Cap: Thru-axle with dual-pressure bearing preload adjustment Push-fit end caps Sealing: Water-resistant design (no sealing ring) Key Features: Asymmetric flange design for balanced spoke tension and increased lateral stiffness Rapid engagement for instant pedal response Fully compatible with custom builds, including steel, titanium, or carbon spokes Wheel Set as Pictures 1137.5grams Superlight 100-110kg Load Limit Rim 45mm Depth 24mm Internal 31/34mm External Ushaped Profile with 3.1mm Bladed Carbon Spokes February 04, 2026, 05:05:51 AM |
1 |
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
Thanks for the feedback regarding spokes, Sander and RLA. Appreciate it. Gives me something (more) to think about. 
March 12, 2026, 02:21:55 AM |
1 |
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
Thanks for your input, Sander. I appreciate it, especially given your experience with different wheel builds. Perfect — your hub actually explains why your wheels feel solid even on 3.1 mm spokes. You’ve got a much stiffer system, not just a different spoke count. Here’s your final reply with your hub comparison added properly and factually: ⸻ Yeah, I think there are a couple of things getting mixed together here: what you can do to a wheel by hand, and how it behaves under real riding load. You can deflect pretty much any wheel far enough by hand to touch a chainstay if you try. I can do it with my own wheels too, and those ride completely fine under power. That kind of static test just isn’t a reliable indicator of real-world stiffness. When you’re riding, the wheel is rotating and loads are distributed dynamically through the spokes. That’s very different from applying a static sideways force with your hands. All wheels flex — that’s normal. What matters is how they behave under load. ⸻ Where things become clearer is the actual build and hub configuration. Your setup: * 20 front / 20 rear * 1:1 lacing (10 per side) * 3.1 mm spokes * fairly standard flange geometry (around 53 mm / 42 mm rear) For example my setup on a set of wheels with R2 hub (also 3.1 mm spokes): * 21 front / 24 rear * 2:1 lacing * rear: 16 spokes drive side / 8 disc side (3-cross on drive side) And importantly, my hub geometry is very different: * Rear drive-side flange: 74 mm (very large) * Rear disc-side flange: 45 mm * Asymmetric flange design * 56 mm flange spacing That makes a big difference. ⸻ Why this matters 1. Spoke count (rear) Going from 20 → 24 spokes = +20% spokes That alone improves how load is shared and increases lateral support. It’s not a perfect 20% stiffness gain, but it’s significant 2. Flange diameter (huge factor) Your hub: ~53 mm drive side My hub: 74 mm drive side That’s not a small change — that’s a massive increase in bracing leverage. A larger flange increases the bracing angle, which directly improves lateral stiffness. This is one of the biggest contributors to how “stiff” a wheel feels under load. 3. Lacing pattern * Your wheel: 1:1, evenly split * Mine: 2:1 with more spokes on the drive side + 3-cross That puts more structural support where the torque actually is (cassette side), which improves resistance to flex under sprinting. Spoke thickness trade-off * 3.1 mm spokes ≈ 2.1 g * 3.95 / 5.1 mm ≈ 3.5 g Total saving: ~50–60 g But: * 3.1 mm ≈ 80 kgf lateral rigidity * 3.95 / 5.1 mm ≈ 115 kgf → ~40% increase in stiffness capacity for basically a gel’s worth of weight Putting it all together Your setup: * low spoke count (20/20) * thinner spokes (3.1 mm) * standard flange geometry * even spoke distribution My setup: * higher spoke count (24 rear) * much larger drive-side flange (74 mm) * asymmetric 2:1 lacing * better bracing angles Even though we’re both using 3.1 mm spokes, the overall system stiffness is not comparable. ⸻ Bottom line I don’t think your wheel is defective. I think you’re hitting the limits of a very lightweight configuration (3.1 mm + 20/20 + standard hub geometry) at your power level (85 kg /1300 W).
* more spokes (24h rear or more) * or thicker spokes * or both May 04, 2026, 03:55:14 PM |
1 |
Re: Zen Carbon Wheels Xiamen
It depends on many things, but in most cases you do not need to go the lightest possible option. 1200-1300g is absolutely great for a wheelset. If you don't mind, how much do you weight? Could not have said it better myself! And everyone does chases numbers I'm guilty of that also but performance comes first and 1200g - 1300g is still light. Like RLA said what your total system limit, you the bike bottles, clothing the lot considering these are a 90kg Load Limit Rims May 13, 2026, 09:24:28 AM |
1 |