Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1

    Easton XC One -or- Fulcrum Red Metal 5

    Just as the title says...

    I'm looking at getting a new wheel-set and have narrowed it down to these two choices.

    Easton XC One (2009) $300

    Fulcrum Red Metal 5 $260

    Both have favorable reviews from what I have read thus far.
    I am light (140 lbs), and ride a mix of local singletrack and asphalt.
    I try not to leave the ground with my bike as much as I can.

    My goal is to shed some weight from my bike. Currently I have a Rhynolyte/Deore Disc wheel-set with Panaracer Fire XC tires.

    I will be getting some Schwalbe Racing Ralph Evo tires, and may look to going tubeless.

    Thanks for any advice.

  2. #2
    Rub it............
    Reputation: frdfandc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,775
    The Easton is a much better wheel for lower cost. I ran the XC Ones for 2 years on my Kona FS26 bike. Loved them.

    To run tubeless on the Eastons, you will need the Stans conversion kit or use the ghetto method.

    The Eastons are 1585 grams where as the Fulcrums are almost a full 3/4 lb heavier at 1805 grams.

  3. #3
    banned
    Reputation: Flankerdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by frdfandc
    The Easton is a much better wheel for lower cost. I ran the XC Ones for 2 years on my Kona FS26 bike. Loved them.

    To run tubeless on the Eastons, you will need the Stans conversion kit or use the ghetto method.

    The Eastons are 1585 grams where as the Fulcrums are almost a full 3/4 lb heavier at 1805 grams.
    How do you figure? Ever run the Fulcrums?

    I have a set on my road bike, very nice spin and engagement.

    I had Fulcrum SL's on my 29er and bashed the ***** out of 'em for three years, no problems.

    In my opinion, Fulcrum doesn't get the respect they do, soley due to the need for flashy brand names, mostly from this dumb ass site.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    447
    I run the Fulcrum Red Metal 3's. I would easily recommend them to anyone looking for quality wheel set at decent weight, and UST with wide rim.

    Knew nothing about the Fulcrum brand, but I must say I am very pleased with this set. The people complaining about spare parts on review boards are misguided. There are plenty of places to order your own spare parts all over the web, and they are easily found.

    +1 for Fulcrums. I would opt for the UST rim over the RM5 though. That's just me.
    ... And I Am You,
    And What I See Is Me!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    36
    I have fulcrum red fire dh wheels .They are two years old and still perfect. They are owned by Campagnolo

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by whatnoise
    I am light (140 lbs), and ride a mix of local singletrack and asphalt...My goal is to shed some weight from my bike
    With your weight, riding habits, and goal, the standout is the easton xc ones. ~300g lighter.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timroz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    339
    You guys need some 3rd grade math SKILLS.

    1lb = 454 grams.

    1805 grams - 1585 grams = 220 grams.

    Less than 1/2 lb difference.

    I have no opinion on either wheelset.

    You may continue...

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by timroz
    1805 grams - 1585 grams
    wow, so the fulcrum rear is 1805 and front is 1585 = 3390?!?!?

    The eastons are 1585. 3390 - 1585 = 1805 / 454 = 3.9757

    So you will save almost FOUR pounds by going with the eastons!

    Does my math look better now?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: timroz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    339
    No. But you get 1/2 credit for showing your work.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    566
    FM5 user. It's been good so far. It tolerates abuse well. It's even stated in the manual that the FM5 is rated for XC & AM style of riding.

    The internal width is 19mm for the FM5 and the EASTON (XC One SS) is 18mm. Not sure exectly what difference does it makes, but I came from a 17mm internal width wheels before the FM5. The tires (especially larger ones) tends to fold easier and squirmy when running low pressures on the narrower wheels.

    But then again, if you're pure XC type of riding, every weight counts and 300gm is alot, especially on a wheelset.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    211
    Interesting tidbit that could influence your decision:

    Pricepoint weighed the Red Metal 5's and found real world weight to be 1904g (866g F 1038g R). The 3/4 lb estimate may not be too far off.

    source:http://tinyurl.com/45b2bql

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    566
    Is the weigh done with skewers? I weighted mine last time, IIRC, close or same with published weight.

  13. #13
    Rub it............
    Reputation: frdfandc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Flankerdog
    How do you figure? Ever run the Fulcrums?

    I have a set on my road bike, very nice spin and engagement.

    I had Fulcrum SL's on my 29er and bashed the ***** out of 'em for three years, no problems.

    In my opinion, Fulcrum doesn't get the respect they do, soley due to the need for flashy brand names, mostly from this dumb ass site.


    Never said the Fulcrums were junk. Most consumers compare wheels via price and weight. So going with that - as most understand this - the Fulcrums 5, when comparing apples to apples, are priced similar to the Easton XC Two's closer to the Fulcrums as far as weight and construction goes.

    The XC Ones are closer to the Fulcrum 3's.

    I think Fulcrums are a great wheel. A tad bit over priced IMHO, since it is a Campagnolo brand, and their prices, when compared to other component manufacturers, are usually more expensive for a like item.

    As far as "this dumb ass site" goes, If you don't like it. Stay away.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: knl2stl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    202
    When my xc ones arrived from Jenson, the front was at least 1/4 inch out of true and the rear almost as much, with hops in both. The rear was easy to take care of, but the front was a bit of a struggle, since so many of the spoke/nipple interfaces were all bound up. Have not finished the bike build yet, so cannot say how they ride.

    Easton did not start from scratch with these wheels. Easton bought Velomax, which made the Climax MTB set. I drove these hard for ten years, trued them a hundred times, but never broke a spoke. My favorite wheel set to date. For 300 bucks, I will try the xc one. Just not happy with how out of true they were.

    Yes, the xc ones are built by hand, but not in America.

  15. #15
    Rub it............
    Reputation: frdfandc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,775
    If they were so bad, did you think of contacting Jenson or Easton?

    I've never had an issue with XC Ones. Even have a few co-works with over 2 years of riding with out any problems, other than a broken spoke due to a crash.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: knl2stl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    202
    Of course I thought about it; but I figured it would be easier to true them than to re-box and send them back. That was mostly the case, except the bound-up spoke/nipples gave me a little trouble. Due to alloy nipples I guess.

Posting Permissions

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