Mavic XA Pro Carbon Wheels - Review
Mavic changed the wheelset market in the mid-`90s with the debut of the CrossMax. Up until that point, you either laced up your own wheelset or you sought out a Yoda-like wheelbuilder—someone who could coax crazy levels of durability out of the lightest parts possible. Then the CrossMax came on the scene and decimated the handbuilt market. The CrossMax was not only incredibly lightweight, it also took a beating. For years on end. The best wheelset out there now came pre-built, out of a yellow box.
Mavic XA Pro Carbon Details
• Intended use: trail
• Carbon rims / Mavic hubs
• 29" and 27.5" options
• Boost and non-Boost spacing available
• Weight (29" Boost): 1590 grams
• MSRP: $1,999.90 USD
• www.mavic.com
• Intended use: trail
• Carbon rims / Mavic hubs
• 29" and 27.5" options
• Boost and non-Boost spacing available
• Weight (29" Boost): 1590 grams
• MSRP: $1,999.90 USD
• www.mavic.com
Times have changed, though. Enve, DT Swiss, Reynolds, Industry Nine…I could fill up the rest of this review with the names of aftermarket wheel brands. So, we'll leave it at this instead—Mavic had to up its game. Mavic was late to the wide-rim thing and late, for that matter, to release carbon mountain bike rims. The XA Pro Carbon was designed to bring Mavic up to speed. Did they get there? More on that in a bit.
The XA Pro Carbon is available in both 29 and 27.5-inch versions. To go Boost or non-Boost? It’s your choice—they offer both. These wheels sell for $1,999.90—a bit above mid-range in the world of pricey, high-end carbon wheelsets.
Offset spoke drilling allows for more even spoke tension on the rear wheel and, ultimately, better wheelset durability.
A shift for Mavic--if you're going to go tubeless, it's a tape and sealant show now. Rim tape is provided with the wheels.
Construction
If you’re familiar with any of Mavic’s high-end CrossMax wheels, you may be surprised to find few of their features on this flagship trail wheelset. About the only thing that carries over, other than the yellow sticker, are the hub innards. The rear hub still sports Mavic’s four-pawl, ITS-4 drive mechanism.
Instead, the XA Pro Carbon features a wider (by comparison) rim made of unidirectional carbon fiber. The rim’s inner width of 26 millimeters still isn’t as cavernous as many of its competitors, but it gives plenty of support for 2.4 and 2.5-inch tires. Mavic went the hook-less rim route here as well, which they claim leads to less tire burping and a thicker, more impact-resistant rim sidewall. The UST, undrilled rim bed is gone. It’s now a more conventional rim tape and sealant affair.
The rear rim features 2-millimeter offset spoke drilling, which helps even out spoke tension and increases the odds of that wheel staying true over the long term. As for spokes, Mavic ditched their proprietary, fat, aluminum spokes for 24 steel, bladed and butted, straight-pull spokes. The spokes are laced two-cross, a pattern Mavic purposefully chose to lend some forgiveness to the XA Pro Carbon’s ride quality.
Those aren't Zicral spokes. Mavic opted for 24, straight-pull, stainless steel, bladed spokes per wheel. Say that five times fast... Front and rear hubs come in both Boost and non-Boost versions.
While the hubshell looks different, the freehub mechanism remains the same. Mavic's four-pawl ITS-4 system has been kicking around since late 2011 and offers up 7.5 degrees of engagement.
Set Up
Setting up the XA Pro Carbon is a fairly painless proposition. Mavic supplies rim tape and valves with each wheelset. I added the usual dose of Schwalbe Doc Blue sealant and ran both a set of HighRoller IIs 2.3s and a mixed set of Bontrager SE4 Team Issue 2.4s (front) and Specialized Hillbilly 2.3s (rear). In every case, the beads on each tire popped easily into place with a few strokes of my high-volume floor pump. Likewise, removing tires was a blessedly easy affair. Admittedly, my sample size here is small, but it’s a good sign all the same. I generally ran about 22 psi, front and rear—burping was a non-issue at that pressure with the aforementioned tires.
For the record, I’m a bit bummed to not see Mavic’s trademark undrilled rim bed on these wheels, but the number of times that I have had to mess with misaligned or degraded rim tape is…well, I could count them all on one hand and still have a couple digits left over. In short, if going the conventional rim-tape route reduces the sticker price at all, so be it.
Performance
Mavic has created a fairly lightweight wheelset here (the 27.5 reportedly tips the scales at 1,490 grams). No surprise, then, the XA Pro Carbons roll up to speed easily. If you are all about owning the quickest-engaging rear hub on the market, however, the 7.5-degree engagement provided by the ITS-4 hubs isn’t going to rock your world. They were plenty quick for me, but there are faster-engaging hubs out there. On the upside, they have a mellow burr-ing sort of sound and neither hub gave me any headaches over the course of a season, the latter of which is all I really care about.
Both wheels stayed nicely true. Mavic markets the XA Pro Carbon as a “trail” product—their more enduro-rific model, the DeeMax Pro weighs in at 1,700 grams, and is aimed at the gnarlier end of the riding spectrum, though it’s only available in 27.5. That said, the rider weight limit on these XA hoops is a very respectable 120 kilograms (264 pounds) and I can attest to the XA Pro Carbons taking a fair bit of sloppy riding and poor line choices. In short, I think Mavic is being a bit conservative with their labeling of these wheels…they withstand a good flogging. It's worth noting that the wheels are also backed by Mavic's two-year warranty.
I’m generally a fan of three-cross spoke lacing because I ride like a jackass, but if the two-cross pattern is what truly imparted a more subtle ride quality to the wheels, then I can live with it. True to Mavic’s intentions, the XA Pro Carbons do not rattle the living hell out of you, the way some very pricey carbon wheelsets do. If I’m going to obsess about getting the right shock tune and a frame with a solid suspension design under me, it makes sense to pick a pair of wheels that don’t give lend a jackhammer feel to rough sections of trail. Long story short, lateral flex is minimal and a degree of vertical compliance is there, even on the brief occasions when I upped the tire pressure.
What’s not to love? Obviously, as with nearly all carbon wheels, these things aren’t cheap. There’s no way to soften that blow, other than to note that you can get what amounts to the same wheel, albeit with an aluminum rim, for $749.90. That’s Mavic’s XA Elite. The Elite, however, packs another 180 grams in its 29er guise.
You might prefer J-bend spokes to straight-pull (the cycling world is evenly divided on that one), but finding replacement spokes for either style of spoke when you’re on a road trip is straightforward. Admittedly, the local shop may not also have a bladed option for you if you are in a rush...
You might prefer J-bend spokes to straight-pull (the cycling world is evenly divided on that one), but finding replacement spokes for either style of spoke when you’re on a road trip is straightforward. Admittedly, the local shop may not also have a bladed option for you if you are in a rush...
Speaking of bladed spokes, I’ve never quite grasped the need for them since my baggy shorts and Sherpa-sized hydration pack speak tomes about my absolute don’t-give-a-shit attitude towards aerodynamics. I don't think I'm alone here. If it were up to me, I’d have outfitted these wheels with round, double-butted spokes, but now I’m nitpicking. On the upside, these spokes mate with some decidedly plain-Jane nipples, which means you won't find yourself cursing your lack of a multi-tool with that fancy Mavic spoke-wrench fitting.
Rim width…. I guess this is what, really, sets the XA Pro Carbon apart from the ever-widening world of rims. Mavic sat on its haunches for years and years…it took them a day shy of forever to simply bring out an all-mountain wheelset with an inner width of more than 21 millimeters. That said, I personally like the 26-millimeter width. Yes, it’s about four millimeters shy of the norm at this point, but it also works well with the bulk of 2.35 to 2.5-inch tires that were designed in the past decade around even narrower rims.
Of course, the tire market is slowly catching up to the wheelset market (witness all of the new Maxxis new WT models), and if you are interested in going with a 27.5-inch wheel and then mounting on some 2.8-inch tires, you’d be better served with something wider than these Mavics.
Pinkbike's Take
 | The XA Pro Carbon marks a departure for Mavic, in terms of form, but not function. These wheels withstood plenty of poor riding choices, lots of mud and more than a few errant blasts of the garden hose. I haven't been kind to them. Despite their being labeled as "trail" hoops, these wheels endure a good bashing. If, however, you want the quickest-engaging rear hub or a rim with an inner width in the 30-millimeters-and-up neighborhood, Mavic's top-shelf trail wheelset may not light your fire. That said, these Mavics actually work a treat with 90 percent of the 2.3 to 2.5-inch tires on the market. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
42258 views
42258 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
@Tr011 - you actually get a rather good warranty from Light Bicycle. They have a fantastic customer support, I was rather astonished by their speed of reply. The only problem with them is the same one as with ENVE - you might need to use that customer service. If you crack an aluminium rim and best ones cost half of the price of LB, you just buy another one and move on. But if you buy a premium material you expect that replacement don't you. Oh look you saved 30 grams, you don't need to true it, they never bend, they never dent, they just delaminate or crack - and then you sit and wait being served like a king. No riding, or using some dented EX721 spare on sht ass Shimano hub, but pride is forever
I'm also with you on the aluminum rims. For cost to performance to weight ratio, for me, ZTR is just fine. Not that carbon rims aren't nice, it's just right now I'm OK with some aluminum rims.
www.dirtmerchantbikes.com/special-events/2017/4/6/2017-carbon-wheel-comparison-test-enve-m70-hv-knight-composites-enduro-light-bicycle-nox-composites-farlow-stans-flow-mk3
I'll put my cards on the table in that I have LB rims. I like them a lot. Are they for everyone? No, but then there are lots of rims out there at different pricepoints and some may suit certain styles of riding better than others and budget is always also a consideration.
My personal review is that they are stiff and light. I didn't pick the heavy duty rims but one of the newer Am wide rims. They don't seem harsh to me, certainly when you factor in lower tyre pressures through a tubeless setup, but I'm not a pro. I paid £800 for mine built with Hope hubs and DT spokes and I'm very happy with that price. I also like the wider rim trend. I tend to ride mud and wet roots, but have also smashed them into rocks in Scotland and Madeira (the bang sounds horrific) and they've a few light surface scratches but are still running fine. There's certainly nothing to suggest any structural damage. I believe an Alu rim would have been dented by the same impact but I've no doubt it would also still be fine. I don't hold back and ride them as aggressively as any other wheel, although I'm only 90kg and not a big jumper. I have had to tighten a spoke of two in the year I've had then though.
I think it is a shame that there isn't an independent review of them somewhere as there is very little information out there but for personal experience. There are regular calls for Lb rim reviews here and undoubtedly elsewhere, and I hope that one day it will actually happen. It may well be that they are utter crap compared to 'rim x' but until there is some testing from a reputable source it's all just conjecture in my opinion...
As you noted, one test rider did choose the LB wheels. In writing the test report, I'm not hiding data & I'm not fabricating data. That's why I'm showing that one rider did choose the LB wheels. The subjective comments are perhaps most useful in understanding what a wheel does and does not do well.
Also, we tested the older symmetrical version of the LB rims. The newer asymmetrical rims may indeed perform better.
In terms of testing of the LB wheels, I might suggest paying for a demo of Enve wheels and running them back-to-back with your LB wheels. Report back with what you find. It's probably going to be unlikely for a testing lab (like www.friction-facts.com) to be willing to test carbon wheels given the expense of doing the testing.
@Spectre68 - the most striking thing about the rims is that they are very light. Acceleration on them is very quick and the bike feels more lively as a result. At the same time they seem very tough, and despite 2 or 3 BIG rock strikes they are still fine. From a quick check the Stans Flow is 510g/rim, whilst mine was 385 +/- 15g. That's a significant weight saving power rim, and yes it is an AM rim rather than one of their xc models. I also like the fact they are quite stealthy and aren't being like a set of Enve's... I won't really talk about compliance as I think there is too many variables including tyre pressure and wheel build, but they certainly seem stiff enough. I've no real negatives but then I've not ridden other carbon rims to compare...
Compliance? Please... this is the biggest bag of bullcrap carbon rim makers are selling. If you want to make carbon rim hit resistant you HAVE to, you fkng have to make sidewalls thick. A 450g carbon rim is waaaay stronger than it needs to be to handle 99% of forces coming at it, it is bulked up in order to withstand hits. You could probably send a 300g carbon rim for a dozen of laps on A-line and nothing would happen to it. Get a 350g Stans Crest and see how that goes. At this point it is so stiff in every single direction that it is impossible to make it compliant with the layup. Spoke tension is bollocks and it's been demisitified by a several people in the industry. A relatively loosely tensioned wheel has less than half of a milimeter (some ridiculous nr) vertical compliance than one tensioned as fk. Finally aluminium rim is more compliant because it deforms in all ways compared to a AM worthy carbon rim. It will bend to the side a bit and come back (as long as it stays within plasticity), it will twist, it will do a couple of things that will make it feel smoother. I'm talking about a comparable alu rim off course. like Ex471, or Flow Mk3, not some Mavic EX729 juggernaut. Is there difference on clock? the only answer is another question > why the F do you care about minimal difference on the clock?
If you like carbon rims fine, it's like liking certain salad dressing, some like rough ride and feeling they have what many consider a superior product. We all want to be loved and accepted, I bought Maxxis Minion SS Exo to match my DHF tyre because of that. I thought it looks stupid with Maxxis up front and Slaughter in the rear. And slaughter GRID is better Minion SS Exo. A black Lyrik to match my black frame, I bought a carbon bike and got flattered by an offer to getting it cheaper, instead of buying a used Enduro 29. I posted my naked arse on instagram, I started a facebook page, write to one girl who is a hot nutritionist and I tell her about my progress with six pack, I want a fkng six pack after all.
I mean we all do things to feel nice about ourselves. But I don't blend common reality and physics into it. Carbon fibre composites have certain meaningful applications in cycling, this is undisputable (like full suspension MTB frames or road frames) but MTB carbon rims are not the ones that are a no brainer for use of this material. I changed Mavics CMax STs for LBs. Bike felt slower, sluggier, rougher. FELT. Sold them got Ex471s - hell yea, bike FEELS fast again. Rode my friends bike with ENVE 70s - after few hundred meters - Jesus mate, what tyre pressure are you running?! - eeem 28PSI? - no way! maybe your pump has a fkd gauge... Ah f*ck he's right. But they feel like 35 or more.
Also Raoul Luescher, the carbon guru, promised to post a video from results of his test of MTB rims where he checked how much they actually deform using actual scientific methods. Jigs, lasers and shit. He had Flow MK3 in there. So watch his space. And he says what he has found and what he thinks. I respect him for his approach and expertize, and the he's a one big pain in the arse of cycling snake oil brewers and that makes me love the guy... he sets the world on fire sometimes. Now ENVE is probably feeling a bit embarassed after he showed a cut out of their rim. But well... he has already proven how terrible idea it is to put non-anodized nipples in contact with carbon which ENVE does on their wheelsets, especially, when sealant and/or water (from mud) is involved... maybe they learned something.
eg. 1: A double butted spoke has more elasticity than a straight gauge spoke. The double butted spoke will make the ride feel "softer" compared to a straight gauge spoke that will make the ride feel "stiffer". A double butted spoke will make the wheel track the ground better where a straight gauge spoke will make the wheel deflect more. A double gauge spoke also has a longer fatigue life compared to a straight gauge.
eg. 2: A radial spoke pattern gives a wheel more radial stiffness, but less torsional stiffness. A 4-cross spoke pattern would give the wheel the most torsional stiffness but the least amount of radial stiffness. The different lacing patterns also have an affect on lateral stiffness.
eg. 3: A lower spoke count makes a lighter wheel and decreases the amount of force it takes to accelerate and brake. A higher spoke count makes a "stronger" wheel. Stronger as in they can handle higher loads from rider weight and input.
Now consider all these factors and you can create many different wheelsets just by using different combinations of spokes, lacing pattern, and spoke count.
I will find that article later. Guy calculated how much difference there is.
My comment on carbon is more in reference to 29/700c (I'm XC/Gravel/Road). I don't think I'd ever feel the want for carbon on 26-27.5 as much as I do for 29/700c as I think for the larger hoops it can help on stiffness when trying to be on the lighter side..or wanting a deeper dish. Also for plus/fat since there's a bit more rim material involved.
Can't comment on carbon saddles but I love carbon posts as they've definitely helped my alu HT/Rigid frames ride nicer in the back and I've never had any reliability issues with them.
www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel_index.html
www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Debunking_Wheel_Stiffness_3449.html
www.noxcomposites.com/wheel_building
It simply boils down to the fact that carbon rims are stiffer than aluminium rims, but the issue is that how stiff is enough? - above certain limit aluminium rims are stiff enough (like quality alloy and reasonable width around 500g) and under certain limit are a fkng cheese (like sub 350g no matter the alloy). Carbon rims are NEVER cheesy, to the point where even lightest carbon road rims cause rim brake pad rubbing, because instead of deflecting from around center to bottom, the whole fkng rim in the wheel pitches to one side. No deflection, less energy dissappation - It has to go somewhere, so it goes further up the bike, perhaps DH suspension takes it well enough. Mavic Crossmax ST were stiff enough for me in 26, but WTB STi23 on a 29er were wobbly as fk. I killed one on my friends bike on XC ride. Same with some old Cheesy Alexrims I had in 26. Even stiffest alu rims like EX729 will come out of true when you break one spoke (like it just happened to me) - even a light wieght carbon rim will not go out of true if you brake a few spokes. The whole wheel will tilt.
Anyways, that lateral deflection combined with eventual cross-sectional twist creates this FEELING of compliance of alu rim. My EX471s are laced by 28 spokes on 3cross patern are quiter and feel smoother than any carbon rim I tried, and they stay relatively true. I just don't hear this banging. Mavic Crossmaxes of all sorts feel buttery smooth and accelerate like a dream. However older Deemaxes (based on EX823) were harsh too. So are my custom wheels on EX729 - riding on roots is like bang bang bang! So no it's no just a property of all aluminium rims. I mean truing rims once per year is not much to ask for considering that maaaany custom build carbon wheels need retensioning anyways. This is why many wheelbuilders tension the spokes for carbon rims a lot, and never use alu nipples (unless the client REALLY MUST SAVE those fkng 60 grams on both wheels, oh and change those bearings to ceramic please) - so that there's less if any retensioning involved.
Tyres and tyre pressure will make a difference in perceived "stiffness" or "harshness" too. Even having or not having tubes. Perhaps DH tyres on Dh tubes along with looots of suspension mitigate this effect. So will rim width, wheel diameter. Everything matters. Stiffness is overrated anyways, it's bollocks thrown at us by carbon makers who need another bullet point on list of features. Many people hated early FOX40s including racers. Fox didn't make 40mm stanchions to increase stiffness, as if it was such a desirable property, they made them so big so that stanchions bend less, and lowers can slide onto them with less resisitance under heavy loads like G-outs. it can easily be counterproductive though becase with increased diameter you get increased friction and seal wear, which ultimately killed Totem. That was the main reason why lowers of 32 Boxxers were snapping like matches on bottom outs when someone was landing rear first. Uppers bent and lowers just couldn't slide on them. Exact reason why USD forks are so damn compliant - wheel is allowed to twist a bit and sliders are placed down at the wheel so the slide more freely due to decreased leverage of the force - not because of some unsprung mass mumbo jumbo, where weights of unsprung elements of USD and STD forks are rather comparable, because you must find some unsprung way of lubricating USD sliders that works with gravity. Now if we are talking frame, hell yea, give me all lateral stiffness you can throw at me, especially with most suspension designs, which unlike VPP do not rely on stiff cage of the swingarm attached to front triangle by short and super stiff links.
End rant, I have to save it to copy-paste it everytime such discussion comes along.
Maybe it would have changed my mind before ordering EX 471, EX 421, 240 straight pulls and CX rays...
Too late !
We make hundreds of rims in different formats, one rider might dislike one of our rims and fall in love with another. The beauty of carbon is that you can dramatically change the riding characteristics, so you need to do some research to find one that seems the most suitable for your riding style and budget. In that particular review, it seems like they preferred a lighter, deeper and stiffer rim, so why not buy one of those to test?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8fsKeQwplg
I will be honest: as I wrote above, your rims felt harsh to me (AM33 in 26"- light front, heavy rear - bought them in 2013) but it can be totally down to my subjective experience. I am fine with that sentence. They were also laced to Hope hubs which I hate for the noise, which did not make it any better. Is there some water in stiff spoke argument? I had the aero pillars. Now I have trouble destroying aluminium wheels and don't mind 50g-70g per rim more. I have seen many broken carbon rims at my friends place. Perhaps it is like ENVE rep told me: nobody photographs broken aluminium rims, and even if they do, nobody cares - but many want to see carbon bleeding. It may be the case. But I think many people out there should thank Light Bicycle for opening people's eyes that carbon does not have to be expensive, you were pioneers. Your customer service is top notch and everyone I spoke to, confirms that. I want to make it clear that my stance of being sceptical about carbon rims does not mean that I think you are doing anything wrong. I also don't blame you for any hype mongering. After all hype is always generated by poor journalism (don't necessarily mean Pinkbike, even though RC seems to drink a lot of cool aid - he is however in fully entitled to do so, given the volume of his engineering and journalism past) and those who read their reviews. I genuinely think you are great and admire and respect what you are doing.
If there is any snake oil trading I think no one else is more guilty than ENVE.
Cheers!
Personally, I've never been that enamored with the Enve wheels. Yes, they are stiff laterally, but the ride quality put me off for typical casual riding. I had the Enves available, but generally did my personal riding on Stans Arches and Flows. Those better complemented the firmly sprung, fast rolling character of the Turner bikes in my opinion. I was, however, curious about the opinion of others given the reputation of the Enve brand.
I've had a set of demo M60s since 2014 and got a set of M70 HVs for this year. We have sold Enve wheels with Turner complete bikes and still have them for sale as an option, but have now added Knight and Nox as a result of test rider feedback from this test.
And I ain't buying this Made in US, sorry. It means nothing. Employees at LB probably have more discipline than those in Utah and more on the line in terms of employment.
Sorry for being racist...
The real functional differences come from the carbon fiber manufacturing process. Determining right now what I have clearance to share about that topic.
My test process of doing back-to-back testing on the same test course, on the same day, with the same set of riders reveals more differences in performance than the typical magazine test of giving a writer one product with no other product tested at the same time as a reference point. Sure, there may be some effect of brand bias, but it will have far less impact than anything else I've seen in the consumer media.
BTW, I am weighing the costs & benefits of doing completely blind testing going forward, but know that even the rim shape can give away a brand for knowledgeable riders.
Oh and if a 26mm internal width is not enough for your club, then leave that fkng club. For your own good. may be one of the best social choices you ever made. They tell you the wider is more stable, what they don't is that if you need more tyre stability, you need thicker sidewalls for your tyres. You are either running too little pressure, or you are on the edge of becoming a better rider, and those folks telling you to do anything to keep on running 1ply tyres are fkng losers. No way around it > ride hard enough 1 ply tyres roll from under your rims > man up and run thicker and heavier tyres. No point to keep running 19mm internal rims, but remember that Jerome Clementz and Fabien Barel won some fkng races on them.
and the manual shows that the hub's axle and parts are 15mm:
tech.mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/mavic_tech.php?display=product&family=1004&subfamily=1029¯onu=23713
I was always a Mavic guy (2 pairs of deemax, d521, ust xm819) but when sourcing rims for my latest wheel building I could not find on Mavic what i have found on DTSwiss - a good combination of weight, price and features. I would like to see an updated UST rim with the specs of the EX471 for example.
Its used because there are only 24 spokes.
2 cross with 24 spokes gives the spokes the same angle out of the hub as 3 cross with 32 spokes.
Whether there is some advantage to 24 spokes in a mountain bike wheel.... I'll leave that question for someone else
I think it's laughable that you say any carbon rims could have been built to ust shape, but the shape does not alone make it ust... and there lies the issue. Anyway ust was developed in 99, a long time ago and there are bound to be market and development changes. However I don't think tubeless would be where it is now if it wasn't for the solid foundation provided by ust specs and parameters.
No?
move along please...