[jekyll2003]

I am debating between the 29er Arch and Flow rims. I have found some big discrepency in listed weights for them, most notable at the Stan's website, which I can only assume would be the most accurate. I am not against getting the Flows if they fit my weight/riding style better, but would like to shed the weight difference, particularly if difference is as much as on the Stans website (470 vs 525 g, other places generally show 470 for Arch and 480 for the Flow).

About me: 200 lbs with riding gear, rigid SS on rocky technical New England singletrack. No big jumps or tricks, just a lot of up over and down rocks and roots.

Going to lace to Hope Pro2. Which rim do you folks think would fit me best?

 

[b-kul]

im gonna wager an educated guess here. the arch is better for a lighter rider using a smaller tire. given your weight id go with the flows (plus i know what riding ne trails can do to a set of rims).

 

[FrostyStruthers]

I have both. With your size, I would go Flow, but the Arches are proving to be pretty tough wheels. I would think they could handle your weight no problem, but when things start to speed up, I would want the Flows.

Usually I would just say Flow and forget about it, but with SS... up, down, up, down powering etc rocks and roots... I think the Arch would be more than fine. The Flow is wider so it does set up a tire a bit better in my opinion...

I can't help much with the weights. Sorry.

 

[Guest]

I am running the Archs on my FS and HT..I weigh around 194 right now...winter weight..never no issues with the rims at all...I have put them through some rough stuff on my FS..I got a few buddies who run the Flows but they ride a lot more aggressive than I do...when it comes to wheels I would not worry so much about weight but more about strength and durability depending on how you ride..

 

[mcstumpy]

Flows are great for me at 160lbs. I have them laced to a set of Hope Pro 2s also, the wider flows allow you to run lower pressure and not have to worry about bumping the rim on a sharp rock. You also get better accuracy on advertised tire width.
I have a set of Archs also, great rims too. For a HT you really can't go wrong with the flows. Especially up in NH I think the Flows will be perfect with almost no weight penalty.
Ride and smile

 

[b-kul]

this thread is actually really encouraging about the strength of stans rims. i was on the fence a bit about getting a wheel build with crests but now im confident they will be fine.

 

[jadedbee]

This is something I'm confused about: wouldn't a wider rim with the same volume tire mean the distance between the rim and the ground would be shorter, and therefore more likely to have a sharp rock hit the rim.

I went through a hand built rear wheel with Arch's in a matter of months because of the flat spots messing up the spoke tension (hardtail with mostly 2.1 or 2.2 tires, minimal jumps/drops, but lots of rocks and ledges).

I'm wondering if the wider Flow would really hold up better for my next build than the Arch. Wouldn't it be just as likely, if not more so, to get flat spots?

 

[yourdaguy]

Flow actually spreads the width of the tire out more and the larger area lessens the impact by spreading the force over a larger area. Another way of looking at it is there is more air in a cross section of the tire/rim on a Flow than an Arch. I have both and would only buy Flows going forward.

Advantages: Stiffer, better ride, better traction, less chance of rim/tire damage. Even though the rims weigh more, you could conceivably use a smaller, lighter tire to the same effect which would cancel the weight penalty, but possibly cancel the advantages too.

Disadvantages: heavier and not that much.

 

[Veda]

With 29er I'd choose the stiffer one, everytime...

 

[jadedbee]

According to the Stan's site, the weight difference is only 55 grams. That's easy to save by switching to a different tire, especially if it will make a 2.1 act more like a 2.2 tire. Plus, since the tire is farther out rotationally than the rim, you should feel the 55 grams there more than at the rim.

Anybody run 2.1 tires on wider rims like the Flows? Like an Ignitor, for example? (Although I see the new IKON with EXO sidewall protection is around 30 grams lighter than the Ignitor, yet rated a 2.2!)

 

[One Pivot]

Theres a LOT of rims out there. Why limit it to only stans?

2.1 and 2.2 tires are pretty small these days. Id wager that most people run tires larger than that on most 25-28/flow sized rims.

 

[yourdaguy]

I am running an Ignitor on a Flow on the rear of a SS hardtail. It has really good mud traction for an all-arounder and otherwise good all around traction too. This in combination with a Wolverine/Arch front is what I consider my "mud" setup.

 

[jadedbee]

Theres a LOT of rims out there. Why limit it to only stans?

I'm building the wheels myself and have been very happy with the ease of setting Stan's rims up tubeless - a big plus for me. I also work at a shop that deals Stan's rims, so price is a factor.

What other wide, light-ish, inexpensive, 29er tubeless ready rim would YOU recommend for aggressive XC and all mountain use?

2.1 and 2.2 tires are pretty small these days. Id wager that most people run tires larger than that on most 25-28/flow sized rims.

'Guess it depends where and for what. Most guys with 29er hardtails in NorCal run "small" rear tires to save weight/resistance since the 29er wheel is heavier but has better traction for getting up our steeps.

I have run big tires in the back (2.3 Nevegals and Rampages), and loved the traction for climbing, just not the weight. I am open to going back, but my 2.1 Ignitor (which some here say is more like a 1.9) has decent traction on my Arch, and I'm thinking it will have even more on a wider rim, like a Flow. Maybe I can even run a lighter tire on the heavier rim for no net weight gain.

And yes, I know there are tires lighter AND larger than the Ignitor (the new Ikon comes to mind); if they have the traction for standing climbing on a 1X10 and setup tubeless, I will try them.

 

[buddhak]

I wager that that was the first time anybody has accused Stan's rims of being inexpensive.

My p35 front, rhyno lite rear combo has been bulletproof in the rock strewn trails of Eastern PA.

 

[yourdaguy]

Stans wheels might not be exactly "inexpensive" but they are not that expensive for how well they actually work. A reasonable semi-custom set of Stans wheels is around $6-800 and look at the Reynolds and Edge/Enve that are not that much lighter and a little stiffer and only marginal at running tubeless that are over $4000.

Those of you in the US will understand my analogy that the Stan's wheels are the "small block Chevy" of mountain bike wheels. For the rest of the world back in the 60's, 70's, 80's most (like 75%) of the guys that hopped up cars used the GM small block engine because there were so many available and so many parts available and they were relatively cheap, and there was a huge body of knowledge, etc.

 

[jadis3]

I am debating between the 29er Arch and Flow rims. I have found some big discrepency in listed weights for them, most notable at the Stan's website, which I can only assume would be the most accurate. I am not against getting the Flows if they fit my weight/riding style better, but would like to shed the weight difference, particularly if difference is as much as on the Stans website (470 vs 525 g, other places generally show 470 for Arch and 480 for the Flow).

About me: 200 lbs with riding gear, rigid SS on rocky technical New England singletrack. No big jumps or tricks, just a lot of up over and down rocks and roots.

Going to lace to Hope Pro2. Which rim do you folks think would fit me best?

Redargling your weigh you will feel the Flows are stiffer, it is more impotant of all and outperform a weight penalty.

Advantages: Stiffer, better ride, better traction, less chance of rim/tire damage. Even though the rims weigh more, you could conceivably use a smaller, lighter tire to the same effect which would cancel the weight penalty, but possibly cancel the advantages too.

Disadvantages: heavier and not that much.

 

[pointerDixie214]

I can't speak to these two specific models (yet), but I can tell you what I learned recently about stiffness in a 29er rim

I ran some fairly light rims on my 29er for the first year. I always loved it, but the bike just never seemed to be right somehow. The wheels were old and I got tired of replacing spokes, so I replaced them with some cheap WTB rims. These rims are built like tanks. They are heavy as heck, but stiff and durable as can be.

I LOVE riding these wheels more than my others, even though they weigh a LOT more.

Methinks you would rather have the stiffness at a small weight sacrifice, considering I would take the stiffness with my huge weight sacrifice.

Will be ordering my Flows just as soon as I can get the moolah.

 

[Zen Cyclery]

I would advise to go with the Flow simply because of your weight. This will ensure that rigidity is maintained, as well as durability. Now, you would probably be able to "get away" with the Arch, but I never like to advise parts for people that might work for them. The Flow is a hoop that will for sure be up to the abuse you put at it.

 

[slyfink]

I'm clocking in at 215 right now. I ride a 2005 Specialized Enduro in Ontario, Quebec, and every once in a while, NY and Vermont. I've never been known as a gentle rider. I ran a pair of Flows for three years. Eventually the rear developed a bit of a flat spot and one dent. I could have kept riding it, but I needed a new rear hub so I decided to build an entirely new wheel and try the Arches to save a bit of weight. I figured since the Flows had been so durable, I might be able to get away with the Archs. So far so good after half a season. I didn't notice a difference in stiffness, and I can't comment on that for a 29er. I'd say save the weight and go for the Arches.

 

[madsedan]

I'm 225-ish depending on how many beers I had last night and I had my shop build me a set of Flow's, I run 2.2 tires and its nice. Totally transformed the way the bike felt when I yanked the cheapass stock rollers, huge difference in lateral stiffness and how much better the tire worked spread out on the wider rim.
I will stick with Flow's when I replace the hubs with nicer units on mine, no reason not to.