Kona 2006

The striking thing when counting aero wheels in Kona is the number of riders who don't have them. The quantity of contestants with no aero wheels approaches 400, and when you add those riding Mavic Ksyriums, and certain Shimano, Campy and Bontrager wheels that are not of the aerodynamic sort, and you come up with roughly 500 athletes who choose not to ride with aero wheels.

This approximates the number of those who do not ride an aero bike. We do not know to what degree these two groups overlap, but it's likely that between a fourth and a third of all Kona's athletes eschew tri-specific, aero-specific equipment.

WHEELS IN THE 2006 HAWAIIAN IRONMAN

1	ZIPP	1316
2	XENTIS	283
3	HED	260
4	MAVIC AERO	200
5	MAVIC KSYRIUM	66
6	CORIMA	62
7	BONTRAGER	136
8	REYNOLDS	13
9	ROLF	48
10	CAMPAGNOLO	37
11	SHIMANO	25

	OTHER WHEELS	254
	NO AERO WHEELS	375

This also, by the way, approaches the number of those who don't ride steep (about 600 riders chose to ride at 75 degrees of seat angle or shallower). What can be drawn from this? Is there a large minority of triathletes that is not vocal, that does not post on newsgroups and message boards, that do not read the magazines and act on the tech articles, but which just swims, bikes and runs and lives by the credo: it's not the bike, but the rider?

If so, how does this group perform? It might be interesting to match aero wheel riders to finish times and demographic data. We have done exactly that when looking at bike brands and seat angles. But we've never identified aero wheel use with specific bib numbers.

Among aero wheels, Zipp again rules the roost. Xentis, in a bit of a surprise, has lept into second place, just in front of Hed, and Mavic's aero wheels place a strong third.

When you consider the Survey in terms of brands, and not splitting things up between aero and non-aero models, Mavic jumps up into a virtual dead heat with Xentis and Hed. This is largely due to Mavic's serious penetration into the OE market with its upscale wheels.

In truth, it must be noted that Zipp also benefits from its original equipment penetration. Quintana Roo, Felt, Giant, Kuota and others all offer Zipp wheels (typically 404s) on their bikes as original equipment. This no doubt helps Zipp's Kona numbers. And it's numbers have grown to double what they were at this race seven years ago.

Over that time period Mavic's totals have declined, as have Hed's, but the drop in Hed's numbers has been less drastic. There seem to be a cadre of true believers in Hed's wheels, probably bolstered by the consistent choice of its three-spoke by the Discovery Team and in particular by Lance Armstrong. But it should also be noted Armstrong and his team chose Visiontech during his first few Tour victories and that didn't change fortunes for the struggling aerobar company -- it took a new design team and new product. Likewise, Hed's relatively consistent performance speaks to some continuity in company performance.

What has changed over the years is Hed's ambitions at this race. Its principals used to attend Kona every year, and it managed the neutral race support. Over the last decade the company and its owners have had different priorities, chiefly in the other direction, that is, East instead of West. As Hed has concentrated on European professional cycling the wheels and aerobars for the Tour riders have been the company's focus. This shifting of attention has cost Hed some of its Kona penetration.

Spinergy has fallen to almost zero, largely because its robust OE market ceased. Meanwhile Xentis, non-existent prior to the turn of the decade, has enjoyed a terrific run-up.