Hi everyone, I wanted to share a quick update on the XMCS 52/36 chainrings since they don't get talked about much these days.

Note: These are just my initial unboxing impressions—I can't install them yet due to an issue with my crankset, so I haven't tested the shifting performance.

For context, I had shifting issues with the first-generation version on my Ultegra 12-speed setup. This newly revised version shows some clear updates:
Visuals & Construction: The new chainrings look distinctly different (the new one is top/left in the photo).
Outer Chainring: The rivets have been repositioned, the back is no longer milled out like the original, and the crank arm opening has been reworked.
Weight: The design changes are reflected in the weight—the new pair comes in at 182.3g, compared to 198.9g for the old set (weighed on my kitchen scale).
Inner Chainring: The small ring now features a carbon finish. Interestingly, it's on the side facing the outer ring, so it won't really be visible once installed—correct me if I'm wrong on that!
While I can't speak to the shifting quality just yet, I’ll post another update once my crankset issue is sorted out. Overall, I’m really happy with how constructive the process was and it’s great to see the brand making tangible revisions.

if you re happy w 170mm, best value in 24mm is probably Riro / Racework. If you want 165mm or less, in 24mm, it gets expensive and complicated.
as long as you buy something that fits your need (length, spindle, chainring interface, Q factor, then i would treat them all interchangeably.
I ve installed 5 pairs of racework carbon cranks years ago, they re still running. i did break one NDS crank ark, but they changed the design since.

How did you break yours? Mine broke yesterday on another brand aswell.

I’m also not hating on my 48d and it has been great but it’s very stiff.
In the end I was much more satisfied with it than my giant propel. But that may also be due to the fact that I expected a bit more from a frameset that cost 3x more.

Only drawback could’ve been communication with Justin

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).

 

• Hand-flex test not meaningful on its
   Real load behaviour that’s what matters
  Your symptoms (flex, noise, rub) consistent with a stiffness limit
  

If you want to fix it, the biggest gains will come from:

* more spokes (24h rear or more)
* or thicker spokes
* or both

Were all your wheels set up like this? This seems to refer to your latest purchase.
Otherwise your AI analysis does not really cover his question wrt to your extensive wheel experience.

Fantastic

[b]GOOD DAY MEMBERS OUR EASTER PROMOTION IS NOW LIVE!  [/b]

🔥 Easter Promotion — VaporLite • AeroSix • MTB • Gravel • Trinity TT
Factory‑Direct Performance • Limited Time Only

🚴‍♂️ VaporLite Road (50mm examples — all depths 30–65mm)
🔥 VaporLite Ultra — 979g
3.1mm Carbon Spokes (20/20)
$999 → $899

🔥 VaporLite Pro 2020 — 1019g
3.1mm Carbon Spokes (20/24)
$899 → $799

🔥 VaporLite Pro 2024 — 1043g
3.1mm Carbon Spokes (20/24)
$899 → $799

🧵 VaporLite SL Steel — 1089g
Alpina HyperLite
$849 → $799

🧵 VaporLite S Steel — 1119g
Alpina HyperLite
$825 → $775

🔩 VaporLite Ti SL — 1070g
Titanium Bladed
$799 → $749

🔩 VaporLite Ti S — 1099g
Titanium Bladed
$775 → $725

🪶 VaporLite Sport SL — 1139g
Sapim CX‑Ray
$749 → $699

🪶 VaporLite Sport S — 1168g
Sapim CX‑Ray
$725 → $675

⚡ AeroSix Carbon — Easter Pricing
✅ AeroSix 50 (1540g)
$699 → $624
✅ AeroSix 40W / 40T (1700g)
$699 → $624

🚵‍♂️ VaporLite MTB — $50 OFF
22mm depth • 30mm internal
Rims: 250g / 270g / 290g
Spokes: Carbon / Ti / CX‑Ray
$699 → $649 (CX‑Ray build)
$849 → $799 (Titanium build)

🌾 VaporLite Gravel — $50 OFF
22mm depth • 30mm internal
RRP $849 depending on spec
As low as $675
Examples:
✅ CX‑Ray • SR308 • 290g rim → $675
✅ Titanium • SR330 • 250g rim → $799

🛠 Custom Builds — Extra 5% OFF
Road • Gravel • MTB
Choose your spokes, hubs, rims, load rating, finish & depth.

🕑 Trinity TT — Easter Bundles
✅ Tri‑Spoke + Tri‑Spoke → $1,199
✅ Tri‑Spoke + Rear Disc → $1,199
✅ 80/88 + Disc (CX‑Ray) → $899
✅ 80/88 + Disc (Carbon Spokes) → $999–$1,049

📩 Contact for full specs / custom builds
✅ Email: info@zencarbonbike.com
✅ WhatsApp (Zara): +86 151 6072 6618
✅ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61582482801913
✅ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zen_carbon_bike/
✅ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zencarbonbike?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet&igsh=ZDNlZDc0MzIxNw==

I was interested but I’d suggest to provide more information next time you’re running promotions. I don’t understand the difference between all the vaporlite options (I.e. internal/external width)

Hygge showed off the S-Aura with much better logo placement on instagram
https://www.instagram.com/p/DS4svVwEjUk/

It’s also on their shop
https://www.hyggecycle.com/products/model-s-aura-2026-uci-approved-frameset-ud-laser