[bikeriderguy]

Hi All,
Just looking for opinions. Wanting to get a set of either flows or archs for my tallboy. i'm not an xc race guy but more into all around trail, distance and all mountain type of riding.
What would you choose?
thanks

 

[Shalom]

Flow. No question about it. Only 50g heavier per rim, with the extra width. And the added 'robustness' does offer a certain peace of mind IMO.

 

[DFYFZX]

^Yup

 

[MagicCarpet]

I've only used Flows and like them. I never hear anyone bagging the Arches, though. Theoretically the Flow will corner better and the Arch will ascend better. These tight descisions come down to head space for most of us and the Flow is a great thing to stare down at. I feel more confident in tyre security and tread contact with a wider rim, but as I say, I can't remember hearing any litany of complaints about any of the ZTR 24.4mm rims. I'll be riding 95km and 3000m of ascent on Saturday on a 12.9kg bike with Flows. I don't know any different. I'm not complaining.

 

[STT GUY]

I'm 190lbs and have beat the crap out of a set of arches for early 3 years on a Kona Hei-Hei 29er with excellent results, I have flows on the my Tracer VP 26 inch bike.

 

[Jwind]

The real problem with the arches are they are only 19mm wide. Not terrible On my ss with 2.35 rampages but not great.

Flows are replacing a set of 819s on my rune soon.

---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=38.587579,-109.565445

 

[Tony]

My experience with Arches was in 2007 and I think they've been redesigned since, so maybe this post is worthless.

However... my 32 hole Arches built by Larry at Mtn High lasted 1 ride on Amasa Back in Moab before they were wobbling about 5mm out of true on the back and 10+mm on the front. Had the Arches retrued at Chili Pepper in Moab and they said they couldn't get the tension right since the rims had yielded (basically they were toast.)

Larry rebuilt the same hubs with Flows and I've been riding them ever since, hundreds of rides, without a single truing needed! I have another set of Flows (36 hole from mikesee) since 2009 and those have been perfect as well.

I don't know if I just got unlucky with those Arches or what, but for my race wheels, 32 hole Flows. For my trail wheels, 36 hole Flows :thumbsup:

 

[evilsjg]

I'm running the Flow's on my Jet9, I really like the combination of a reasonably light/efficient/short-travel bike with a whole lot of wheel and tire under it. It gives me the confidence to really bomb technical descents 50-60+ miles into a race/ride and I don't think the 50g "penalty" per wheel is much of a sacrifice considering the extra confidence-inspiring footprint that the flow offers.

I'm not sure when they will be shipping, but the new Stans Arch EX is something like 20g lighter and a bit wider (same internal/external dimensions as the Crest, iirc). If I were making the decision between the new Arch EX and the Flow, I would probably go with the Arch EX.

Edit: From the notubes forum, "New Arch EX rim, updated design 20 grams lighter and 2mm wider internal shape. Coming January."

 

[stc29]

I ride arches on my FS and flows on my SS. The arches definately feel less stable in the corners but are slightly lighter which was my goal. However, I am going just flows moving forward.

 

[bikeriderguy]

Good Feedback all - thanks for your input.
I've decided that i'm going to hold off until the spring and then get me a set of the the new Arch EX's. I think that will be the best of both worlds!
thanks all

 

[cbrock450]

IMO i depends who is building them. I scored a set of arches laced to king hubs on mtbr and it did not take long for them to go out of true. I was riding them on a HT 29er and i weigh about 190 and have a motocross background. In other words i am really hard on my bikes. My LBS wanted to see if they built up a set of arches how they would do. I have been on them for quite a while and they are dead on true.

If you are going handbuilt by a reputable builder i would go arch. If you are going directly through stan's i would say flow but i would tell you not to buy from them first.

 

[bsdc]

I'm 200 lbs., I ride real rough trails and I've got bikes with 355, Crest, Arch, and Flows. Maybe I lack critical discernment skills or maybe we have some princesses who are feeling peas, but I can't tell the difference between the rims. A few grams and a few millimeters doesn't seem to matter much to me. As for durability, I've never had any problems with 355 or Crest rims over hundreds of miles of rough riding, so I'm not sure most need Arches or Flows.

When in doubt, go with the Flow.

 

[NCMt.Biker]

any of you runnin kenda's on your arch or flow? Just wondering i heard kenda's are hard to get to work on the stan rims.Thanks

 

[appleSSeed]

I run Kenda's Karma's on my Arches...no problem. Aired up with a floor pump.

Also, don't have any issues with my Arches and I built them myself. Still going to go with something wider soon.

 

[muzzanic]

Flows all the way

 

[straverse]

Another vote for the Flows here. If you're not worried about a few grams, you'll appreciate the extra durability and stiffness.

And for NCMtbiker- I have also used Nevegals on my flows (the non-tubeless ready version), and they mounted and pumped up easily with a floor pump. I couldn't say the same thing about Maxxis Ardents.

 

[masterofnone]

I went with flows and don't regret it for a second. I don't notice any slight weight penalty, the rolling resistance of whatever set of tires I'm running has ten times more effect than a few grams in the rim. BTW if you're going to use some version of tubeless, stan's rim design was the easiest by far to mount and air up.

 

[going29AZ]

I'm about 175 geared and have ran arch's for 2 plus years on my Canzo. Rear is toast and will be going with flows on the new build (I've since gone to a Nimble9 HT). I have noticed a slight amount of flex on both the front and rear, kind of wrote it off to Ti Qr's. Hopefully the flows will help with that. On the conversation about certain tires going on Stans....either I'm a big wuss or ALL tires are a PITA to mount on Stans wheels.
I have used Nevegals tubed and tubless, WTB's and Ardents...They all SUCK trying to install on both the arch's and 355's on my SS. I had mistakenly put a GEAX saguro on the arch...had to cut it off to remove it. I have broken countless plastic , aluminum and steel tire irons.
Again, not sure if it's me or Stans? Open to suggestions.

 

[Shalom]

I'm about 175 geared and have ran arch's for 2 plus years on my Canzo. Rear is toast and will be going with flows on the new build (I've since gone to a Nimble9 HT). I have noticed a slight amount of flex on both the front and rear, kind of wrote it off to Ti Qr's. Hopefully the flows will help with that. On the conversation about certain tires going on Stans....either I'm a big wuss or ALL tires are a PITA to mount on Stans wheels.
I have used Nevegals tubed and tubless, WTB's and Ardents...They all SUCK trying to install on both the arch's and 355's on my SS. I had mistakenly put a GEAX saguro on the arch...had to cut it off to remove it. I have broken countless plastic , aluminum and steel tire irons.
Again, not sure if it's me or Stans? Open to suggestions.

My experience is that Stans rims offer a tighter fit for all of the tyres I have tried mounting on them. Most of them I have been able to seat with a track pump with no issues, and have held air for extended periods of time without the need for sealant - a benefit of the tighter fit.

 

[atom29]

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/stans-arch-vs-flow-hope-ii-vs-chris-king-571627.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/all-mountain/opinions-wanted-stans-arch-vs-flow-560480.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/stans-arch-flow-352214.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/stans-arch-flow-592353.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/stans-rims-flow-arch-me-535883.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/stans-arch-flows-279038.html

:madman::madman::madman::madman::madman: