Mavic SSC rims and also GP4 are heavyweights at 400g! ( I don't know what an ounce is).
Modern wheels with wired-on rims save weight with lighter hubs and spokes but then the rims and tyres are heavier. I reckon the lighter and more supple tub and sprint rim combo gives a better ride but of course less practical to use.
I've recently acquired a Dourdoigne Grand Prix de Nations Silk on a Mavic hub/Assos aero rim/bladed spoke front wheel.
Even the name sounds good, but I don't like the look of aero rims. Some of my stash:
The Dourdoignes are No 2 bis and No 3 bis, not silk though.
"Service des Course"
Good looking tyres? They're tyres FFS. They're round and that's about it. And who really cares? They're for riding on, not looking at.
Furthermore most people, even cyclists, couldn't spot the difference between a clincher and a tubular at a range of more than a few feet.
Most people, including most cyclist, would say the same "who cares what a bike and its parts look like", so what? I would guess most people on the forum do care about aesthetics. To my eyes, tyres and rims make a huge difference to how a bike looks. Many photos of older bikes on the web really look out of place with their all black or multi-coloured tyres and deep section rims.
As already said, some people can tell the difference. It's very easy to see the difference between a typical modern clincher tyre with black sidewalls and coloured tread, and a classic traditional tub with amber sidewalls and black tread. Of course a lot of tubs now have the same black sidewalls and colours as clinchers tyres, so you have go close up and see the edge of the base tape to tell it's a tub.