So much to consider!! 
Thank you.
mixed works for sure and is my preferred method, but hard to find wheelsets that allow you to do it.
I’d go for it unless you only climb.
1 Like
I got 60mm front and rear just as it decided to be the windiest it’s been in a while (Thanks storm Claris). Being 80KG, honestly it’s been zero problem. If anything I regret very slightly not getting 80mm on the rear
1 Like
I’ve had good luck with Farsports wheels. One nice thing with them is that you can buy a pair of 50mm wheels and also buy an extra matching 38mm front wheel. Three wheels can easily be under $800 depending on the hubs chosen.
1 Like
Sorry to bump but I’m having the exact same conundrum and would be interested to know what the OP ended up doing and how its going! Thanks
One thing for sure he never got to ride the Etape! It was cancelled in '20 and '21.
Just reading G’s book and he advises that “technology must be matched to your ability. For that reason there should be no deep rim wheels on club runs”. So the answer all depends on your ability to perform with them. Let’s just say I stick with 35 mm rims myself 
Go by the looks you want. If you want the fastest wheels forget mixed depth and go as deep as you can tolerate, especially on the front.
Personally, I like the same depth front and rear. Going slightly deeper on the rear isn’t going to net you much of an aero gain. Most of the gains come from the front wheel.
Cheers both, I live on edge of the dales and most of my rides are pretty hilly so I’m definitely leaning towards the 38s front and back
You’re better off focusing on faster wheels overall vs weight. Even assuming lighter wheels net you some significant savings (they don’t), you still need to descend back down and have flats in between.
Choose the deepest rim depth you can comfortably handle and you’ll have the fastest wheel set you can ride.
The general argument for the mixed-depth wheelset seems to be that the front wheel is more succeptible to crosswinds and so a more shallow front rim is easier to manage. But does a deeper rear wheel add stability in itself?
In other words, it makes sense that a 65mm rear/50mm front is more stable than 65mm front and rear, but is it more stable than 50mm on both?
I moved your post under one that is directly related. See the discussion above for current info.
Thanks. It was @Alaric83 's comment above that got me thinking about this but I wasn’t totally clear - so a 65/50 is actually more stable than 50/50 because of the differential?
bikes don’t steer from the back wheel so extra stability from the rear would not accomplish anything. In fact, really strong winds can make it feel like (and actually do at times) lift the bike off the road and carry it into the weeds. In this context, there would actually still be a negative effect on deep rear wheel.
Bikes not steering from the back is why you want to keep the center of pressure rearward. A force that is trying to push the bike laterally sideways is easier to deal with than one which is trying to turn the bike.
I honestly don’t think we’re arguing.
100%.
The OP asked if a deep rear wheel would help stabilize the bike. My post was in response to that. It’s agreed (but not relevant in this case) that the wind grabbing the front wheel is a bigger deal than wind pushing on the rear wheel.
However, having the rear of the bike catch the wind doesn’t help you.
The wind can pick up and blow the entire bike away if it’s strong enough. It’s happened during pro races, not only in tornadoes. There is just no good reason to make either part of your bike grab more wind intentionally.
No, this has been proven to not be true. A disc is more stable in almost every wind condition except for extremely high wind situations, where riding a bike is dangerous anyway. So running a 80 or 90 mm deep rear rim is not going to cause any stability issues.
There are plenty of threads on ST where this is discussed to death….
2 Likes
I’m curious what we’re talking about in terms of stability. Coming to an understanding of terms, you can define stability as:
A) a resistance to change direction (the motorcycle definition)
B) a resistance to be blown around in the wind (the bicycle definition)
A heavier wheel is more stable than a lighter one as a function of gyroscopic effect. You’d be amazed how hard you have to push on the bars to turn a motorcycle at 150mph. Even at 70. But in the motorcycle’s case it has nothing to do with the rim depth. It’s purely about spinning mass.
A heavy rear wheel is going to be more stable than a lighter one for sure. But I don’t think it’s the rim depth in and of itself which does it. The roval 50 is hardly any heavier than the 32 so I don’t think you get any gyro benefit - just more surface area to grab the wind. Sure, it’s less problematic in the rear but not beneficial.
I don’t think the extra surface area of the 50 is going to increase the stability of the bike. I can’t imagine an engineer saying “I’m so glad my bike is a solid mass. It sure makes it easy to ride in this crosswind”. He might say “I’m sure glad my wheels are heavy enough for the gyroscopic effect to outweigh the wind”
B)
Disc wheels are more stable in crosswinds. This has been proven multiple times in wind tunnels and on the road. There is not a single time where I would NOT opt for a disc wheel.
I did Racine 70.3 a few years ago in horrific conditions….was literally riding with one arm in the extensions and one arm on my base bar due to 25+mph winds with heavier gusts….but I still ran my disc with no issues.
Again, you can go search some threads on ST where they have beat this subject to death.
The same applies to a spiked aero wheel. Going from a 35mm depth to a 60mm depth rim is not going to affect your stability.