[2xPneu]

Edge Rim Redux: AM or XC??

If anyone has riding experience w/both the Edge AM rim and the XC rim I'd appreciate feedback on the appreciable differences, if any.

I assume the AM rim gives a better footprint with wider tires, but the biggest I'll be running is maybe Rampages, Nevegals or 2.4 Mt Kings, and for the most part will be using 2.0 or 2.1 tires. What I'm trying to find out is if there are any noticeable differences in stiffness, acceleration, whatever between the rims.

Weight difference is 70g (on paper) and I figure that's not a huge difference, but 70g is 70g. Width difference is 24mm for the XC and 30mm for the AM, and I'm thinking 6mm might be worth 70g.

I've got a set of AM rims on the way but I'm also going to ask Edge to send a set of XC rims, I'll return the ones I don't build.

Thanks for the help, as usual I'm overanalyzing this move to death and no matter which decision I make I'll always think I should have gone the other way...

 

[vwvoodoo]

I can't speak to a direct comparison of the 2, but I have used the AM version for 9 months on my trail bike (Sultan) and couldn't be happier. They are super stiff and put the tires in a super nice high-volume shape (I run Captain 2.2/Eskar 2.3). I have hit them on things that would have killed an alloy rim and have run them tubeless since new. For trail wheels you can't get a better rim (if cost isn't an issue).

That said, if I was counting grams or looking for more of a race-weight everyday wheelset I would not hesitate to get the XC rim instead. I am likely to build my next wheels with the XC rim and 190's to make a light stiff race setup.

 

[shiggy]

If anyone has riding experience w/both the Edge AM rim and the CX rim I'd appreciate feedback on the appreciable differences, if any.

I assume the AM rim gives a better footprint with wider tires, but the biggest I'll be running is maybe Rampages, Nevegals or 2.4 Mt Kings, and for the most part will be using 2.0 or 2.1 tires. What I'm trying to find out is if there are any noticeable differences in stiffness, acceleration, whatever between the rims.

Weight difference is 70g (on paper) and I figure that's not a huge difference, but 70g is 70g. Width difference is 24mm for the CX and 30mm for the AM, and I'm thinking 6mm might be worth 70g.

I've got a set of AM rims on the way but I'm also going to ask Edge to send a set of CX rims, I'll return the ones I don't build.

Thanks for the help, as usual I'm overanalyzing this move to death and no matter which decision I make I'll always think I should have gone the other way...

The Nevegals will work better on the AM than the XC (not CX, which commonly means cyclocross). I have found that 27-30mm seems to be the sweet-spot for rim width with most tires.

The 24mm width is great with narrower tires and some models of wider tires (such as the Rampage).

If I was going to use mostly the 2.0-2.1 tires I would pick the XC.

 

[syl3]

yeah most xc rims are the same width, arches, mavic tn719, are about the same and tyres work great with them anyway.

 

[2xPneu]

After some trial and error I went with the AMs...they weighed in at 463 and 470, the XCs were 398 and 403, so ~65g difference. I tried a bunch of different tires on each one, from Bonty 1.8s, Bonty Jones 2.2, Rampages, Mt Kings (pictured), Nanos, whatever. I liked the profiles on the wider rims, and the tires seemed to be happier on the AM rims. The XC rims just looked too narrow to justify the loss of 65g, and the AMs will give me more confidence, whether or not it's reality is irrelevant. I'll race once in awhile on these and wish I had gotten the XCs, but for everyday riding these will be better.

The XCs are on the way back, and I'll be turning an extra 130g with every revolution of the wheels.

 

[flafonta]

The volume difference is surprising!

Or maybe it is a visual effect because of the dirt on the smaller one.

 

[bmw]

The volume difference is surprising!

Or maybe it is a visual effect because of the dirt on the smaller one.

Profile looks pretty different too. I like the AMs.

 

[ftajiri]

larger rims = plus tire larger ?
straight rims = minus tire width?

ps: using the same tire

 

[Ghostrider]

After some trial and error I went with the AMs...they weighed in at 463 and 470, the XCs were 398 and 403, so ~65g difference. I tried a bunch of different tires on each one, from Bonty 1.8s, Bonty Jones 2.2, Rampages, Mt Kings (pictured), Nanos, whatever. I liked the profiles on the wider rims, and the tires seemed to be happier on the AM rims. The XC rims just looked too narrow to justify the loss of 65g, and the AMs will give me more confidence, whether or not it's reality is irrelevant. I'll race once in awhile on these and wish I had gotten the XCs, but for everyday riding these will be better.

The XCs are on the way back, and I'll be turning an extra 130g with every revolution of the wheels.

Did you go with the 32 hole? I talked with Edge and they said the difference between the 28 and 32 would hardly be noticeable, if at all.

I am on the fence about XC and AM also and may go AM for the front and XC on the rear. I run a 2.55 Weirwolf LT in the front most of the time on a rigid SS.

 

[2xPneu]

Did you go with the 32 hole? I talked with Edge and they said the difference between the 28 and 32 would hardly be noticeable, if at all.

I am on the fence about XC and AM also and may go AM for the front and XC on the rear. I run a 2.55 Weirwolf LT in the front most of the time on a rigid SS.

Since the rear is going on a Rohloff I went 32 spokes all around.

I actually thought about the AM front/XC rear, but liked the profile of tires on the AM rim, even for the 1.8s (which I'll likely never use)...it just looked better. I'd probably never notice the difference on the trail, but it makes me feel better.

 

[jms]

AM's for you

I am on the fence about XC and AM also and may go AM for the front and XC on the rear. I run a 2.55 Weirwolf LT in the front most of the time on a rigid SS.

Patrick, I'd go AM 28 hole for you: The AM's extra volume would help the ride quality on a rigid front end, and the bigger footprint will also help in the loose terrain @ AZ - helps the tire float over sand. I'm sure the AM wheels will be plenty strong w/28 spokes - my XC's certainly are.

 

[shiggy]

After some trial and error I went with the AMs...they weighed in at 463 and 470, the XCs were 398 and 403, so ~65g difference. I tried a bunch of different tires on each one, from Bonty 1.8s, Bonty Jones 2.2, Rampages, Mt Kings (pictured), Nanos, whatever. I liked the profiles on the wider rims, and the tires seemed to be happier on the AM rims. The XC rims just looked too narrow to justify the loss of 65g, and the AMs will give me more confidence, whether or not it's reality is irrelevant. I'll race once in awhile on these and wish I had gotten the XCs, but for everyday riding these will be better.

The XCs are on the way back, and I'll be turning an extra 130g with every revolution of the wheels.

I have ridden MK 2.2s on 24mm rims and 36mm rims. Loved them in the narrower rim. Not so much on the wider where they were more prone to pinch flats and poor directional control on loose surfaces.

 

[2xPneu]

I have ridden MK 2.2s on 24mm rims and 36mm rims. Loved them in the narrower rim. Not so much on the wider where they were more prone to pinch flats and poor directional control loose surfaces.

I'd agree with that, 12mm is a pretty big difference. The MKs pictured are used, stretched out 2.4s, and they just looked way too big on the 24mm rims. They might look too small on your 36mm rims, but they looked just right on the 30mm Edges. Mama Bear. Obviously looks and ride are two different things, but as the internal width on the Edge XC was ~17.5mm, I just felt more comfortable (from a psychological bang-through-rocks-and-not-worry standpoint) with them on the AM with an internal width of ~23+mm.

 

[crepitus]

I thought that Milk Money in the background look familiar.