Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    208

    Stans 355 or Arch

    Putting together a list of parts for the Mojo I am saving for and I am stuck on rims. Have decided on Stans so I can run sealant and go tubeless. My current bike has Mavic 317 and they have held up fine to my current riding which is trails, some jumps and drops and club level XC/Enduro races.

    I weigh around 176lbs with gear. Would like the weight saving of the 355 but afraid I will bend them and thinking I should play it safe and go for the Arch?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hairless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    19
    There's another option, the Crest. What is your opinion about the three rims. I have the same doubt.

  3. #3
    No dabs.
    Reputation: Robo SD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    311
    I went with the ZTR355s on DT 240s, and am real happy with the way they've held up. I ride fairly aggressive XC/AM, jumping quite a bit and aiming towards rocks whenever the chance comes up. They have no wobble after a year and a half, though I've broken 2 or 3 spokes in that time.

    When hitting extra chunky stuff like South Mtn in Phoenix, I have wondered whether a more sturdy Arch or Flow would fit my riding better, but until these give out I won't worry about it.

    I'm about your same weight. My advice would be that whatever you choose have it built by a pro, like Dave Thomas over at Speed Dream Wheels. http://speeddream.com/




  4. #4
    Slothful dirt hippie
    Reputation: verslowrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,548
    FWIW I'm looking at some similar wheel choices for husband's rig, and the Hope Pro II hubs have been highly recommended for durability + shims allowing for all the various axle diameters floating around these days. I'm just trying to figure out how much this lashup would end up weighing.
    "...Some local fiend had built it with his own three hands..."

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    23

    Tire sizes with the ZTR 355

    I'm in the same boat and I'm about to pull the trigger on a pair of ZTR 355's with King hubs and I was wondering what tire sizes you can run on these rims. Could I get away with running a 2.5 up front?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    208
    I am an Aussie, so looking to have Chain Reactions build them up on Hope hubs with Revolution spokes. 355s according to quoted weights the wheels should be around the high 1500 mark and the Arch low 1600, so not much in it.

    The Crest and the Alpine looks like a good option too, similar weight to the 355 as well.

    Now I am more confused. I might just go for a set of 355 and see how they hold up and if they go pear shaped step up to Arch. The demo Mojo I rode had stupid light wheels, not sure of the brand, I will see if I can find out and I did not bend those doing my usual jumps/drops.

    Just looking at Chain Reactions and prices have jumped on Stans Rims I am in no rush at the moment so will wait it iout.

    Thanks for the replies

  7. #7
    Ride More Work Less
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    372
    Hey ROBO,
    What brand/model are those knee/shin/elbow guards?

  8. #8
    No dabs.
    Reputation: Robo SD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by avam
    Hey ROBO,
    What brand/model are those knee/shin/elbow guards?
    Knee/shin protection is THE Industries Storm Guards:

    http://the-industries.com/protection_home.html

    I tried on a whole bunch at a shop, and these were far and away the most comfortable. Even up to 8 hour rides are fine with no rubbing areas, etc. They didn't have matching arm protection at the shop I got them at, so they are 661 and aren't quite as good as I imagine as THE arm version.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    865
    The crest looks to be the new 355 while the alpine looks to be the new olympic. Both with a newer bead lock design. At least that's my impression. FWIW, olympics have been holding up well for me in fairly rocky terrain, but then I'm 140 lbs.

  10. #10
    Grams Light Bikes
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,262
    Having used a plethora of rims (including the 355), I would make a wheel set with the Flow. Yes, its heavier, but for tougher riding, the wider rims flex less and allow a tire to sit a lot fatter.

  11. #11
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by pastajet
    Having used a plethora of rims (including the 355), I would make a wheel set with the Flow. Yes, its heavier, but for tougher riding, the wider rims flex less and allow a tire to sit a lot fatter.
    ...and wider rims allow lower pressures for easier rolling over rocks. IMO, rolling resistance is more important than weight.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by pastajet
    Having used a plethora of rims (including the 355), I would make a wheel set with the Flow. Yes, its heavier, but for tougher riding, the wider rims flex less and allow a tire to sit a lot fatter.
    I think a Flow would be overkill for me, the Stans site says around 20% stiffer for an Arch, perhaps an Arch would be the safer bet!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    313

    Go with the flow

    I have a set of olympics for racing and a set of Flows for fun. The flows are great and really not that much heavier. I run a Conti 2.5" Diesel on the front not the best tire but it was cheap and the size makes it grip really well. The worst damage I have done to the Flows was to fail clearing some rocks(I 'm blaming a head wind) and land the back wheel on a perfect square edge. I was lucky it didn't cut the tire(2.35 DH Larsen), it took a little while for the sealant to reseal the bead but the rim was still straight. When I redid the sealant the other day, I found that the rim bead was folded over and in contact with the base of the rim and the tire bead had been bent. A little work with a screw driver and then the adjustable spanner and Bob's your uncle.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    42
    On my last bike (Indy Fab) I was running Mavic 819's with DT Swiss 240 hubs, they were decent, no complaints. Just built up a Mojo SL last month and was going to go for the 355's but the owner of the LBS said the Arches were the way to go, that I would really appreciate the stiffness....With a full Camelback I am around 183-185 so not huge, but he recommended the Arches still....I laced them up to King hubs and I could not be happier...I have only got about 25 off road miles on them, but they seem way stout....In one of the other Ibis threads, a rider my size says he has had to true his 355's 2-3 times a season, but who knows what his style/terrain is like....either way, I bet you'll be stoked, but personally, I prefer bomb proof over weight savings....

  15. #15
    Monkey Wrench
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    351
    Anybody over 150lbs who isn't building a race-day wheelset needs to move away from the 355 or Crest. The Arch and Flow make much more durable wheels and you'll be much happier in the long run. We've seen too many 355's blow out way too early in life, and the new Crest is even lighter...

    I'm sure some people have run the 355 without incident, but the durability just isn't there for the majority of riders, PLUS the wider stiffer rims really do ride better.
    Let me fix your bike @ ordinarybicycle.net in Louisville, CO

  16. #16
    Slothful dirt hippie
    Reputation: verslowrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,548
    BTW just found a bicycling.com review of the Hope Pro II/Arch wheelset here:
    http://www.bicycling.com/gear/detail...2726-0,00.html

    They claim it's 805g front / 910g rear. Not much more enlightenment than what's on this thread, but that's a weight ballpark anyway. Looks like it would gain ~100g for the set with the Flow rims? That would allow for 2.7 tires. Hhhhmmm....
    "...Some local fiend had built it with his own three hands..."

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    208
    I emailed Stans and they suggested the 355, however as above I think the extra stiffness and width of the Arch would be better for trail riding and once I get the Mojo I could look at a 2nd lighter wheelset for racing.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    20
    I was in the same doubt so wrote to No tubes asking for advices and Stan recommended me the arch's rims for agressive XC on the mojo (And I am a light biker: 143 lbs)

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by shiny
    I emailed Stans and they suggested the 355, however as above I think the extra stiffness and width of the Arch would be better for trail riding and once I get the Mojo I could look at a 2nd lighter wheelset for racing.
    Doesn't the 355 and Arch share the same width??
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  20. #20
    Grams Light Bikes
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,262
    The Arch and the Flow each have that additional bracing in the rim, adding additional strength, at the expense of additional weight, as a couple of us have stated, go for the Flows, they are wider! I am 155 and the 355 are noodles in comparison to the Flows.

  21. #21
    Slothful dirt hippie
    Reputation: verslowrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by pastajet
    ...go for the Flows, they are wider!
    Question while were talking about this... how wide a tire can you reasonably fit on the back of a Mojo? I've got a SB8 2.35 back there now and there isn't much extra clearance if it starts picking up mud.

    As of yesterday, husband's getting the LBS guy to build up a set of Hope Pro II + Arch hoops.
    "...Some local fiend had built it with his own three hands..."

  22. #22
    Grams Light Bikes
    Reputation: pastajet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,262
    A fat 2.4 is about it, maybe a skinny 2.5? A tire with more girth does better then one with knobs that stick out more, with one of my 2.4's I sometimes rub the chainstay protector. Make sure to use plenty of protection tape on the chainstays and seatstays right where the tire might rub, a good 2-3 inch piece is fine. If you ride in muddy places then you might end up with a tad skinnier tire, also depends on the type of mud, where I live its sandy mud?

    Are they even called seatstays since they are not attached to the seat tube?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by shiny
    I am an Aussie, so looking to have Chain Reactions build them up on Hope hubs with Revolution spokes. 355s according to quoted weights the wheels should be around the high 1500 mark and the Arch low 1600, so not much in it.

    The Crest and the Alpine looks like a good option too, similar weight to the 355 as well.

    Now I am more confused. I might just go for a set of 355 and see how they hold up and if they go pear shaped step up to Arch. The demo Mojo I rode had stupid light wheels, not sure of the brand, I will see if I can find out and I did not bend those doing my usual jumps/drops.

    Just looking at Chain Reactions and prices have jumped on Stans Rims I am in no rush at the moment so will wait it iout.

    Thanks for the replies
    I have Hope Pro II with Revolution spokes, ZTR 355 in front and ZTR Arch in rear. 1620g without rimstrips/valve stems.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    208
    I ended up with Arch rims on Hope Pro 2 hubs with Revolution spokes. Only had 2 decent rides on them so far.

    I think total weight was higher than I hoped did not get a chance to weigh them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •