| |
Main
Date: 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Broken Open Pro rim
|
One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
pulled completely away.
I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 11:55:45
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 29, 12:29 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53 -0700, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> >problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> >sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> >spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> >thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> >drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> >the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> >cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> >from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> >in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> >pulled completely away.
>
> >I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> >I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> >seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> >lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> Dear Russell,
>
> Here are the new rim pictures:
>
> RimPic1.jpg http://i23.tinypic.com/10nas1x.jpg
>
> RimPic2.jpg http://i21.tinypic.com/awbxqx.jpg
>
> RimPic3.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/21x56g.jpg
>
> RimPic4.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/macrdg.jpg
>
> RimPic5.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/zx8eg3.jpg
>
> RimPic6.jpg http://i23.tinypic.com/zm1cac.jpg
>
> And here are the old rim pictures:
>
> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>
> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>
> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>
> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>
> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>
> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>
> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>
> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks for posting these to the web Carl.
The pictures labeled RimPic1 through RimPic6 are of the large crack in
the Open Pro rim. All from the Non drive side. This large crack is
the one shown in pictures Rim1-1 through Rim1-6. In several of the
pictures RimPic1 through RimPic6 you can see the crack on the side of
the rim. On all of the pictures in RimPic1 through RimPic6 you can
see the long cracks by the eyelet. I did not try to take any pictures
of the eyelets with small cracks by them since they would not show
up. Hopefully any doubters can clearly see that the eyelet with the
large crack at the eyelet and large cracks on the side of the rim are
on the Non drive side.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 11:29:14
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
>problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
>sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
>spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
>thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
>drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
>the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
>cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
>from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
>in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
>pulled completely away.
>
>I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
>I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
>seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
>lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
Dear Russell,
Here are the new rim pictures:
RimPic1.jpg http://i23.tinypic.com/10nas1x.jpg
RimPic2.jpg http://i21.tinypic.com/awbxqx.jpg
RimPic3.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/21x56g.jpg
RimPic4.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/macrdg.jpg
RimPic5.jpg http://i24.tinypic.com/zx8eg3.jpg
RimPic6.jpg http://i23.tinypic.com/zm1cac.jpg
And here are the old rim pictures:
Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 22:15:59
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 4:50 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article
> <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spams...@bowser.marioworld>,
> Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 2007-10-23, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> > > than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> > > that.
>
> > I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
> > has cracked (with or without linseed).
>
> > > Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
> > > modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>
> > But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> > to be sturdier.
>
> > Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> > of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
> > Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>
> > Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
> > buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
> > super-low weight.
>
> > Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
> > look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
>
> Mavic is in it purely for the money.
> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>
> --
> Michael Press
You can say that twice, twice. I have been unimpressed by Mavic's
offerings for years now, ever since their hubs went away.
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 14:22:57
From: Joe Riel
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org writes:
> Like, take a hack saw cut through the rim in two places so the piece
> has four spoke holes, preferably two that cracked and two that didn't.
> It can be section any way that makes sense after that.
Before transferring the spokes to the new rim, how about taking a
picture that clearly shows that the cracked holes are on the non-drive
side.
--
Joe Riel
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 20:20:29
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Joe Riel wrote:
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org writes:
>
>> Like, take a hack saw cut through the rim in two places so the piece
>> has four spoke holes, preferably two that cracked and two that didn't.
>> It can be section any way that makes sense after that.
>
> Before transferring the spokes to the new rim, how about taking a
> picture that clearly shows that the cracked holes are on the non-drive
> side.
>
abso-freakin'-lutely. without that, the assertion that the lower
tensioned spokes cracked the rim, contrary to all tenets of mechanical
principle, simply does not hold.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 23:32:51
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:ec2dnftOXe9iwbzanZ2dnUVZ_vWtnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> abso-freakin'-lutely. without that, the assertion that the lower
> tensioned spokes cracked the rim, contrary to all tenets of mechanical
> principle, simply does not hold.
Yeah, because you don't comprehend it.
Fucktard.
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 21:26:20
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:ec2dnftOXe9iwbzanZ2dnUVZ_vWtnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> abso-freakin'-lutely. without that, the assertion that the lower
>> tensioned spokes cracked the rim, contrary to all tenets of mechanical
>> principle, simply does not hold.
>
> Yeah, because you don't comprehend it.
>
> Fucktard.
>
>
ok moron, you go ahead and name any instance, for two identical pieces
loaded in the same way, one at high stress, the other at low stress,
where the low stress piece breaks first.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 26 Oct 2007 02:32:27
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:15ydnTV-2-nw8bzanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jambo wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:ec2dnftOXe9iwbzanZ2dnUVZ_vWtnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> abso-freakin'-lutely. without that, the assertion that the lower
>>> tensioned spokes cracked the rim, contrary to all tenets of mechanical
>>> principle, simply does not hold.
>>
>> Yeah, because you don't comprehend it.
>>
>> Fucktard.
>
> ok moron, you go ahead and name any instance, for two identical pieces
> loaded in the same way, one at high stress, the other at low stress, where
> the low stress piece breaks first.
When you have a component with non-uniform properties that exhibits weakness
along what should be isotropic cross-section, due to manufacturing flaws.
But your "metarials skool" wouldn't have told you that, would it, imbecile?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 26 Oct 2007 06:17:12
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:15ydnTV-2-nw8bzanZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jambo wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:ec2dnftOXe9iwbzanZ2dnUVZ_vWtnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>> abso-freakin'-lutely. without that, the assertion that the lower
>>>> tensioned spokes cracked the rim, contrary to all tenets of mechanical
>>>> principle, simply does not hold.
>>> Yeah, because you don't comprehend it.
>>>
>>> Fucktard.
>> ok moron, you go ahead and name any instance, for two identical pieces
>> loaded in the same way, one at high stress, the other at low stress, where
>> the low stress piece breaks first.
>
> When you have a component with non-uniform properties that exhibits weakness
> along what should be isotropic cross-section, due to manufacturing flaws.
> But your "metarials skool" wouldn't have told you that, would it, imbecile?
>
>
but the material /is/ uniform from eyelet to eyelet, moron. yes, the
material is anisotropic. that's why it cracks. but the anisotropy is
identical at every point along the extrusion. reading the question
carefully this time, name any instance, _for two identical pieces_,
loaded in the same way, one at high stress, the other at low stress,
where the low stress piece breaks first. feel free to take your time
and do your homework.
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 12:40:09
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 25, 12:33 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 1:39 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
> > <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> >>>> Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
> >>> Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
> >>> wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
> >>> machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
> >>> re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
> >> Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
> >> Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
> >> Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
> >> sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
> >> built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
> >> I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
> >> 2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
> >> Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
> >> years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
> >>> Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
> >>> causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
> >>> reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
> b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> > So like everyone else, I have no reasonable explanation
> > for why the rim would crack on the non-drive side. I'll try
> > an unreasonable explanation. The Open Pro has double
> > spoke sockets, which I think are two piece and peened
> > together during manufacture. Certainly something is
> > peened together to hold the socket in the rim. The spoke
> > holes are offset, so it's possible that the one-side
> > sockets are all peened at one time and the second-side
> > sockets are all peened in another go-round. Because
> > if they were all done in one round, the tool would have to
> > shift side to side to align with each hole. Someone who's
> > actually seen rims made could say how it's really done.
>
> > Now suppose the machine that peened the sockets on one
> > side was turned up to 11.5 (or out of alignment), and wacked
> > the eyelet and socket hard enough to stress the spoke bed
> > (if that's possible). Russell bought this rim and was fortunate
> > enough to build the bad side on the left. Eventually the bad
> > side failed. If he had built the bad side on the right, we would
> > have all said "Oh yeah, spoke pull through on the drive side,
> > happens all the time." Certain people would have blamed the
> > weakness of rims these days and certain people would have
> > said the spoke tension was built too high.
>
> > But that didn't happen, and Russell is a frequent poster who
> > knows the drive side from the non-drive side, so I'm left to
> > guess at a manufacturing defect that happened on one-half
> > of the spoke holes. Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
> > just that none of the other ideas are any better.
>
> That's creative. Or maybe the inserts are not offset at all, the right
> spokes being nearly vertical and the left spokes pulling the insert to
> one side? I'm reaching here too.
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
After I get the rim replaced by doing the tape the rim together and
move spokes routine, I'll send the old rim to Andy Muzi's shop in
Madison and he can inspect it and dissect it and report back to the
group. Assuming postage is not too high. I'm cheap. Don't know if
looking at an unlaced broken rim provides much information but I'm
willing. I'm picking Andy's shop because Madison is sort of close to
me so postage may not be too high. Jobst in California would be more
expensive.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 14:52:33
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
>>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
>>>>> wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
>>>>> machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
>>>>> re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
>>>> Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
>>>> Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
>>>> Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
>>>> sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
>>>> built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
>>>> I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
>>>> 2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
>>>> Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
>>>> years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
>>> "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>>>> Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
>>>>> causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
>>>>> reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
>> b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
>>> So like everyone else, I have no reasonable explanation
>>> for why the rim would crack on the non-drive side. I'll try
>>> an unreasonable explanation. The Open Pro has double
>>> spoke sockets, which I think are two piece and peened
>>> together during manufacture. Certainly something is
>>> peened together to hold the socket in the rim. The spoke
>>> holes are offset, so it's possible that the one-side
>>> sockets are all peened at one time and the second-side
>>> sockets are all peened in another go-round. Because
>>> if they were all done in one round, the tool would have to
>>> shift side to side to align with each hole. Someone who's
>>> actually seen rims made could say how it's really done.
>>> Now suppose the machine that peened the sockets on one
>>> side was turned up to 11.5 (or out of alignment), and wacked
>>> the eyelet and socket hard enough to stress the spoke bed
>>> (if that's possible). Russell bought this rim and was fortunate
>>> enough to build the bad side on the left. Eventually the bad
>>> side failed. If he had built the bad side on the right, we would
>>> have all said "Oh yeah, spoke pull through on the drive side,
>>> happens all the time." Certain people would have blamed the
>>> weakness of rims these days and certain people would have
>>> said the spoke tension was built too high.
>>> But that didn't happen, and Russell is a frequent poster who
>>> knows the drive side from the non-drive side, so I'm left to
>>> guess at a manufacturing defect that happened on one-half
>>> of the spoke holes. Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
>>> just that none of the other ideas are any better.
> A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> That's creative. Or maybe the inserts are not offset at all, the right
>> spokes being nearly vertical and the left spokes pulling the insert to
>> one side? I'm reaching here too.
russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> After I get the rim replaced by doing the tape the rim together and
> move spokes routine, I'll send the old rim to Andy Muzi's shop in
> Madison and he can inspect it and dissect it and report back to the
> group. Assuming postage is not too high. I'm cheap. Don't know if
> looking at an unlaced broken rim provides much information but I'm
> willing. I'm picking Andy's shop because Madison is sort of close to
> me so postage may not be too high. Jobst in California would be more
> expensive.
You might just break off a few cm and drop in it an 82c Flat envelope.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 21:06:45
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Andrew Muzi writes:
>>> That's creative. Or maybe the inserts are not offset at all, the
>>> right spokes being nearly vertical and the left spokes pulling the
>>> insert to one side? I'm reaching here too.
>> After I get the rim replaced by doing the tape the rim together and
>> move spokes routine, I'll send the old rim to Andy Muzi's shop in
>> Madison and he can inspect it and dissect it and report back to the
>> group. Assuming postage is not too high. I'm cheap. Don't know
>> if looking at an unlaced broken rim provides much information but
>> I'm willing. I'm picking Andy's shop because Madison is sort of
>> close to me so postage may not be too high. Jobst in California
>> would be more expensive.
> You might just break off a few cm and drop in it an 82c Flat envelope.
Like, take a hack saw cut through the rim in two places so the piece
has four spoke holes, preferably two that cracked and two that didn't.
It can be section any way that makes sense after that.
Jobst Brandt
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 21:24:14
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 24, 10:19 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> On Oct 23, 1:39 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
> > > wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
> > > machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
> > > re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
>
> > Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
> > Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
> > Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
> > sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
> > built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
>
> > I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
> > 2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
> > Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
> > years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
>
> > > Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
> > > causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
> > > reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
>
> So like everyone else, I have no reasonable explanation
> for why the rim would crack on the non-drive side. I'll try
> an unreasonable explanation. The Open Pro has double
> spoke sockets, which I think are two piece and peened
> together during manufacture. Certainly something is
> peened together to hold the socket in the rim. The spoke
> holes are offset, so it's possible that the one-side
> sockets are all peened at one time and the second-side
> sockets are all peened in another go-round. Because
> if they were all done in one round, the tool would have to
> shift side to side to align with each hole. Someone who's
> actually seen rims made could say how it's really done.
>
> Now suppose the machine that peened the sockets on one
> side was turned up to 11.5 (or out of alignment), and wacked
> the eyelet and socket hard enough to stress the spoke bed
> (if that's possible). Russell bought this rim and was fortunate
> enough to build the bad side on the left. Eventually the bad
> side failed. If he had built the bad side on the right, we would
> have all said "Oh yeah, spoke pull through on the drive side,
> happens all the time." Certain people would have blamed the
> weakness of rims these days and certain people would have
> said the spoke tension was built too high.
>
> But that didn't happen, and Russell is a frequent poster who
> knows the drive side from the non-drive side, so I'm left to
> guess at a manufacturing defect that happened on one-half
> of the spoke holes. Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
> just that none of the other ideas are any better.
>
> Ben
Ben said, "Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
just that none of the other ideas are any better."
Yeah, not that good, but please, not terrible either..
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/5a62c6d48e2ba642
--
Spike
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:19:27
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 1:39 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
<russellseat...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>
> > > Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
> > wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
> > machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
> > re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
>
> Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
> Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
> Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
> sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
> built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
>
> I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
> 2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
> Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
> years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
>
> > Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
> > causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
> > reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
So like everyone else, I have no reasonable explanation
for why the rim would crack on the non-drive side. I'll try
an unreasonable explanation. The Open Pro has double
spoke sockets, which I think are two piece and peened
together during manufacture. Certainly something is
peened together to hold the socket in the rim. The spoke
holes are offset, so it's possible that the one-side
sockets are all peened at one time and the second-side
sockets are all peened in another go-round. Because
if they were all done in one round, the tool would have to
shift side to side to align with each hole. Someone who's
actually seen rims made could say how it's really done.
Now suppose the machine that peened the sockets on one
side was turned up to 11.5 (or out of alignment), and wacked
the eyelet and socket hard enough to stress the spoke bed
(if that's possible). Russell bought this rim and was fortunate
enough to build the bad side on the left. Eventually the bad
side failed. If he had built the bad side on the right, we would
have all said "Oh yeah, spoke pull through on the drive side,
happens all the time." Certain people would have blamed the
weakness of rims these days and certain people would have
said the spoke tension was built too high.
But that didn't happen, and Russell is a frequent poster who
knows the drive side from the non-drive side, so I'm left to
guess at a manufacturing defect that happened on one-half
of the spoke holes. Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
just that none of the other ideas are any better.
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 12:33:04
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
> On Oct 23, 1:39 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>>>> Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
>>> Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
>>> wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
>>> machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
>>> re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
>> Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
>> Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
>> Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
>> sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
>> built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
>> I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
>> 2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
>> Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
>> years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
>>> Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
>>> causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
>>> reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
bjw@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> So like everyone else, I have no reasonable explanation
> for why the rim would crack on the non-drive side. I'll try
> an unreasonable explanation. The Open Pro has double
> spoke sockets, which I think are two piece and peened
> together during manufacture. Certainly something is
> peened together to hold the socket in the rim. The spoke
> holes are offset, so it's possible that the one-side
> sockets are all peened at one time and the second-side
> sockets are all peened in another go-round. Because
> if they were all done in one round, the tool would have to
> shift side to side to align with each hole. Someone who's
> actually seen rims made could say how it's really done.
>
> Now suppose the machine that peened the sockets on one
> side was turned up to 11.5 (or out of alignment), and wacked
> the eyelet and socket hard enough to stress the spoke bed
> (if that's possible). Russell bought this rim and was fortunate
> enough to build the bad side on the left. Eventually the bad
> side failed. If he had built the bad side on the right, we would
> have all said "Oh yeah, spoke pull through on the drive side,
> happens all the time." Certain people would have blamed the
> weakness of rims these days and certain people would have
> said the spoke tension was built too high.
>
> But that didn't happen, and Russell is a frequent poster who
> knows the drive side from the non-drive side, so I'm left to
> guess at a manufacturing defect that happened on one-half
> of the spoke holes. Like I said, it's not a _good_ idea. It's
> just that none of the other ideas are any better.
That's creative. Or maybe the inserts are not offset at all, the right
spokes being nearly vertical and the left spokes pulling the insert to
one side? I'm reaching here too.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:00:58
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 24, 12:14 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-24, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm inclined to view the term 'tubular' as more reasonably
> > distinguishing those hollow-section clinchers from the single-wall
> > designs they made obsolete (as opposed to a blatant error). The weight
> > is clearly wrong.
No, it's (at the weightweenies site) in the column that's full
of tubular/clincher listings. It's probably just a data entry error.
> > My earliest Mavic factory listings here (1990? 1992?) show:
> > Single-eyelet MA at 435g
> > Full socket 'double eyelet' MA2/ MA40 at 460g (465g in 27-inch)
> > Open SUP CD at 470g
>
> > For 2001, Mavic claims:
> > Open Pro 425g
> > MA3 490g
>
> > However the statement, "Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did--
> > presumably it's meant to be sturdier" seems odd as they were marketed
> > differently and in different eras.
>
> I was thinking that back in 199x, they offered the MA2/MA40 as the
> lightweight rim and the Open 4 (or similar) as a sturdier rim with a
> deeper section.
>
> The Open 4 evolved into the Open Pro (I base this assumption on the
> similar names and shapes). They just stopped making the MA2/MA40 or
> anything like it.
>
> But all kinds of things could have happened-- the "Open" shape may have
> been a better candidate for weight-reduction, for some reason, which is
> why today we have a lightweight Open Pro rather than something shaped
> more like an MA2.
This doesn't really describe what happened.
Onceupon a time, there were lightweight tubular rims -
GEL 280, 340, Montlhery, etc, and Weinmann Concave and
similar touring rims. (I'm oversimplifying and this is before my
time, so corrections are welcome.)
The Mavic Module something rim may have come along as an
intermediate type. Then at some point (early-mid 80s?) there were
Mavic GP4 (tubular) and G40 (clincher) double-eyelet box-section
rims. The MA2 and MA40 are similar looking to a G40. Compared
to lightweight tubular rims, these were sturdy - you can wack
them on a pothole and keep riding - and heavy. But narrower and
lighter than touring-bike rims of that era. People put 700x23's on
the MA2/MA40 and used them on racing-type bikes.
At some point, Mavic came with the Open 4 (maybe the
Open 4 CD) which is a little deeper, perhaps to seem more
aero - I don't think it really is deep enough to be more aero.
The "Open" just means it's a clincher rim. This was aimed
at being more racy - and more racers were riding clinchers.
That seems to have evolved into the Reflex (both tubular and
clincher) and thence the Open Pro. The Open 4 is maybe a
little lighter than an MA40 and the Reflex and Open Pro are
lighter than that. At some point Mavic discontinued the MA2
and MA40 and introduced the MA3 for less-racy applications,
but that rim seems to have disappointed a number of people
and is no longer made.
I don't own any Open Pros, but do have old-ish rear wheels
on MA40, Open 4 CD, and Reflex (clincher), and they haven't
broken - I checked last night - so it's not that they can't take
8 speed dish. It used to be that people complained about Open
Pros creaking, not breaking. Sometimes I wonder if Mavic's
shaved off too much material or has let quality control slip, and
that's why there (anecdotally! I have no hard evidence) are more
complaints on RBT now.
Ben
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 15:44:50
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 24, 5:25 pm, Paul Kopit <pko...@att.net > wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:46:24 -0700, Ozark Bicycle
>
> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> >A threadlock, such as linseed oil, is used to obviate the problem of
> >the NDS spokes going slack. I *never* suggested threadlock as a remedy
> >for a rim that was already was "begin[ing[ to crack".
>
> I use linseed oil too but I really don't think it does much as far as
> locking the spokes.
Try building two otherwise identical 130mm 9/10sp wheels on non-offset
rims, one with linseed oil, one without. Use identical DS tension on
both (and don't overtension the DS). IME, the non-linseed oil wheel
will probably have problems with the NDS spokes going slack. See what
results you get.
> It might help with galvanization of alloy nips
> and ss spokes. The linseed oil is a good lube to use while building
> and, when the smallest quantity I could find was a quart can, I have
> enough to last beyond my lifetime.
Yeah, it does go a long way. Cheap, too. Maybe if Phil Wood repackaged
it in 2oz green bottles and retailed 'em for $8.95.......
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 19:49:58
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 9:27 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ben C? writes:
> > [...]
> >> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> >> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> >> that.
> > I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the
> > rim has cracked (with or without linseed).
>
> The point is that linseed oil will not prevent cracking and when a
> crack develops, it will still cause misalignment, more so than just
> unscrewing... the feature that glues are to cover.
Oh Boy!!! Have you ever got this just completely wrong. Whoever said
that "linseed oil will prevent cracking"??? (Speaking of crack, maybe
you should get off the stuff, Jobst.)
>
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 23:05:58
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 2:09 pm, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, Larry Dickman <LDick...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spams...@bowser.marioworld>,
> > Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
> >> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> >> to be sturdier.
>
> > That seems hard to believe. Where did you get the weight information.
>
> Found it, here it is:
>
> http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims
>
> MA2 (1995, 32H): 420g
> Open Pro (2002, 32H): 430g
> Open Pro (2003, 32H): 433g
> Open Pro (2004, 32H): 435g
>
> Those are all in the "real" column-- they don't have a "claimed" for the
> MA2.
>
> And the MA2 was 27", the Open Pros are 700c. 700c is slightly smaller
> than 27", so perhaps the Open Pro is even "heavier" than it looks.
>
> But according to the link Jay Beattie posted, the Open Pro weighs less,
> and there was quite a bit variation between samples of the same rim.
>
> So I think they basically weigh about the same.
Yeah, well that site also says the MA2 in question was a 27"
tubular, and neither MA2's nor 27" were tubular. I think they
got it confused with a GP4. Damon RInard's weights page
comes up with 460g which sounds about right.
The MA2 and MA40 were fairly sturdy box section rims.
They aren't like previous generations of very light tubular
rims like GEL 280s, which most people say (I never had
the opportunity to test this personally) are just too light to
withstand 8 speed dish.
Ben
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 19:52:16
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
>>> Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>>>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>>>> to be sturdier.
>> Larry Dickman <LDick...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> That seems hard to believe. Where did you get the weight information.
> Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> Found it, here it is:
>> http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims
>> MA2 (1995, 32H): 420g
>> Open Pro (2002, 32H): 430g
>> Open Pro (2003, 32H): 433g
>> Open Pro (2004, 32H): 435g
>> Those are all in the "real" column-- they don't have a "claimed" for the
>> MA2.
>> And the MA2 was 27", the Open Pros are 700c. 700c is slightly smaller
>> than 27", so perhaps the Open Pro is even "heavier" than it looks.
>> But according to the link Jay Beattie posted, the Open Pro weighs less,
>> and there was quite a bit variation between samples of the same rim.
>> So I think they basically weigh about the same.
bjw@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
> Yeah, well that site also says the MA2 in question was a 27"
> tubular, and neither MA2's nor 27" were tubular. I think they
> got it confused with a GP4. Damon RInard's weights page
> comes up with 460g which sounds about right.
>
> The MA2 and MA40 were fairly sturdy box section rims.
> They aren't like previous generations of very light tubular
> rims like GEL 280s, which most people say (I never had
> the opportunity to test this personally) are just too light to
> withstand 8 speed dish.
I'm inclined to view the term 'tubular' as more reasonably
distinguishing those hollow-section clinchers from the single-wall
designs they made obsolete (as opposed to a blatant error). The weight
is clearly wrong.
My earliest Mavic factory listings here (1990? 1992?) show:
Single-eyelet MA at 435g
Full socket 'double eyelet' MA2/ MA40 at 460g (465g in 27-inch)
Open SUP CD at 470g
For 2001, Mavic claims:
Open Pro 425g
MA3 490g
However the statement, "Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did--
presumably it's meant to be sturdier" seems odd as they were marketed
differently and in different eras.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 02:14:03
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-24, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
[...]
> I'm inclined to view the term 'tubular' as more reasonably
> distinguishing those hollow-section clinchers from the single-wall
> designs they made obsolete (as opposed to a blatant error). The weight
> is clearly wrong.
>
> My earliest Mavic factory listings here (1990? 1992?) show:
> Single-eyelet MA at 435g
> Full socket 'double eyelet' MA2/ MA40 at 460g (465g in 27-inch)
> Open SUP CD at 470g
>
> For 2001, Mavic claims:
> Open Pro 425g
> MA3 490g
>
> However the statement, "Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did--
> presumably it's meant to be sturdier" seems odd as they were marketed
> differently and in different eras.
I was thinking that back in 199x, they offered the MA2/MA40 as the
lightweight rim and the Open 4 (or similar) as a sturdier rim with a
deeper section.
The Open 4 evolved into the Open Pro (I base this assumption on the
similar names and shapes). They just stopped making the MA2/MA40 or
anything like it.
But all kinds of things could have happened-- the "Open" shape may have
been a better candidate for weight-reduction, for some reason, which is
why today we have a lightweight Open Pro rather than something shaped
more like an MA2.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:39:20
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 1:48 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 6:01 am, Ozark Bicycle
>
>
>
>
>
> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 7:44 am, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
> > <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Oct 23, 2:28 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
> > > > On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostr...@webtv.nit> wrote:
> > > > [...]
>
> > > > > If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> > > > > non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
>
> > > > How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
>
> > > Yep. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Brass nipples. And
> > > the wheel is dished correctly. I'm not tightening the non drive
> > > spokes until the nipples are twisted off and pulling the wheel until
> > > it is touching the non drive side chainstay. The spokes on the non
> > > drive side are relatively loose compared to the drive side spokes.
>
> > Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
>
> Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
> wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
> machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
> re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
Problem with that theory is I ordered the bare rim from Performance
Bike. Not the pre built wheel. I built the bare rim onto a 1998
Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Pretty sure new spokes at the time. Not
sure though. The rim was new from the Mavic factory. It had not been
built before. Still had the plastic saran wrap around it.
I do have a Performance Bike pre built set of wheels. Bought in early
2006. Record hubs and Open Pro rims. Wheelsmith spokes. 32 spokes.
Brass nipples. 3 cross. I'll watch them carefully over the next few
years to see if they also crack at the eyelets.
>
> Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
> causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
> reactor? -- Jay Beattie.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:22:48
From: Jay Beattie
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 12:04 pm, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> > than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> > that.
>
> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
> has cracked (with or without linseed).
>
> > Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
> > modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>
> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> to be sturdier.
>
> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>
> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
> super-low weight.
>
> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
The Open Pro is <generally > lighter than the MA2. See
http://www.damonrinard.com/weights.htm. The MA2/ModeE/E2 was a
relatively light weight work-horse of a rim, but I really wonder
whether it fares much better with the lopsided tensions in 8/9/10
speed wheels. I actually cracked the spoke holes on an MA2, 8sp wheel
-- but I probably had like 150kgf on the right because I liked to wind
them up tight, and I didn't use a tensiometer back when I built them.
-- Jay Beattie.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 15:38:35
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-23, Jay Beattie <jbeattie@lindsayhart.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 12:04 pm, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>> On 2007-10-23, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
[...]
>> > Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
>> > modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>>
>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>> to be sturdier.
[...]
> The Open Pro is <generally> lighter than the MA2. See
> http://www.damonrinard.com/weights.htm.
I was going by weightweenies.com, but their site doesn't seem to be
working properly at the moment so I can't go and check.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 11:48:32
From: Jay Beattie
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 6:01 am, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 7:44 am, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 2:28 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
> > > On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostr...@webtv.nit> wrote:
> > > [...]
>
> > > > If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> > > > non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
>
> > > How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
>
> > Yep. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Brass nipples. And
> > the wheel is dished correctly. I'm not tightening the non drive
> > spokes until the nipples are twisted off and pulling the wheel until
> > it is touching the non drive side chainstay. The spokes on the non
> > drive side are relatively loose compared to the drive side spokes.
>
> Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?- Hide quoted text -
Here's one: it is a Performance pre-fab wheel that went amok on the
wheel building machine. Maybe one of the guides was mis-set, and the
machine over tensioned the left side. High paid assembler noticed and
re-did wheel -- but too late to save it.
Or, the bike was leaned on its left side against a neutron source,
causing embrittlement on left side only. Does Russell have a home
reactor? -- Jay Beattie.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 11:46:24
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 1:19 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle writes:
> >>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> >>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> >>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001
> >>> with new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring
> >>> 2001. Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the
> >>> cracks are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non
> >>> drive side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non
> >>> drive side eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One
> >>> of the eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim
> >>> around that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would
> >>> expect that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> >>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> >>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes
> >>> since they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without
> >>> breaking. And have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
> >> I just found cracks at multiple locations on the drive side of my
> >> rear 32 spoke silver Open Pro rim. 2 sockets were broken also.
> >> The wheel had a little over 6000 miles on it. Spokes were
> >> Wheelsmith 14 ga. butted laced to a Shimano Ultegra 10 speed hub.
> >> I weigh 175-180 lbs. Purchased the wheelset new from Performance.
> >> The spokes on the non-drive side kept loosening up and the wheel
> >> kept going out of true, so I tightened the spokes on the drive side
> >> 1 full turn and a lesser amount on the other side. The wheel still
> >> occasionally went out of true. I don't have a tensiometer, so I
> >> don't know what the spoke tension was.
> > IME, to avoid overtensioning the DS spokes, a gentle threadlock
> > (e.g., linseed oil) is necessary to avoid chronically loosening NDS
> > spokes on this rim with 130mm 8/9/10sp spacing. A tensionmeter
> > helps, too.
>
> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> that.
A threadlock, such as linseed oil, is used to obviate the problem of
the NDS spokes going slack. I *never* suggested threadlock as a remedy
for a rim that was already was "begin[ing[ to crack".
> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening
> are a modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
When are you going to build an MA-2 into a 130mm 8/9/10sp wheel and
put it to personal use for 1,000 miles or so? And, remember, no
threadlock!
>
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 22:25:51
From: Paul Kopit
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:46:24 -0700, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
>A threadlock, such as linseed oil, is used to obviate the problem of
>the NDS spokes going slack. I *never* suggested threadlock as a remedy
>for a rim that was already was "begin[ing[ to crack".
I use linseed oil too but I really don't think it does much as far as
locking the spokes. It might help with galvanization of alloy nips
and ss spokes. The linseed oil is a good lube to use while building
and, when the smallest quantity I could find was a quart can, I have
enough to last beyond my lifetime.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 08:23:38
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 9:58 am, Larry Dickman <LDick...@comcast.net > wrote:
> In article <1192645553.013739.98...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> "russellseat...@yahoo.com" <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> > problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> > sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> > spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> > thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> > drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> > the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> > cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> > from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> > in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> > pulled completely away.
>
> > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> > I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> > seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> > lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> I just found cracks at multiple locations on the drive side of my rear
> 32 spoke silver Open Pro rim. 2 sockets were broken also. The wheel had
> a little over 6000 miles on it. Spokes were Wheelsmith 14 ga. butted
> laced to a Shimano Ultegra 10 speed hub. I weigh 175-180 lbs. Purchased
> the wheelset new from Performance. The spokes on the non-drive side kept
> loosening up and the wheel kept going out of true, so I tightened the
> spokes on the drive side 1 full turn and a lesser amount on the other
> side. The wheel still occasionally went out of true. I don't have a
> tensiometer, so I don't know what the spoke tension was.
IME, to avoid overtensioning the DS spokes, a gentle threadlock (e.g.,
linseed oil) is necessary to avoid chronically loosening NDS spokes on
this rim with 130mm 8/9/10sp spacing. A tensionmeter helps, too.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 18:19:40
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ozark Bicycle writes:
>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001
>>> with new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring
>>> 2001. Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the
>>> cracks are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non
>>> drive side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non
>>> drive side eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One
>>> of the eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim
>>> around that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would
>>> expect that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes
>>> since they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without
>>> breaking. And have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>> I just found cracks at multiple locations on the drive side of my
>> rear 32 spoke silver Open Pro rim. 2 sockets were broken also.
>> The wheel had a little over 6000 miles on it. Spokes were
>> Wheelsmith 14 ga. butted laced to a Shimano Ultegra 10 speed hub.
>> I weigh 175-180 lbs. Purchased the wheelset new from Performance.
>> The spokes on the non-drive side kept loosening up and the wheel
>> kept going out of true, so I tightened the spokes on the drive side
>> 1 full turn and a lesser amount on the other side. The wheel still
>> occasionally went out of true. I don't have a tensiometer, so I
>> don't know what the spoke tension was.
> IME, to avoid overtensioning the DS spokes, a gentle threadlock
> (e.g., linseed oil) is necessary to avoid chronically loosening NDS
> spokes on this rim with 130mm 8/9/10sp spacing. A tensionmeter
> helps, too.
When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
that. Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening
are a modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:48:04
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle writes:
>
>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001
>>>> with new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring
>>>> 2001. Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the
>>>> cracks are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non
>>>> drive side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non
>>>> drive side eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One
>>>> of the eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim
>>>> around that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would
>>>> expect that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>
>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes
>>>> since they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without
>>>> breaking. And have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
>>> I just found cracks at multiple locations on the drive side of my
>>> rear 32 spoke silver Open Pro rim. 2 sockets were broken also.
>>> The wheel had a little over 6000 miles on it. Spokes were
>>> Wheelsmith 14 ga. butted laced to a Shimano Ultegra 10 speed hub.
>>> I weigh 175-180 lbs. Purchased the wheelset new from Performance.
>>> The spokes on the non-drive side kept loosening up and the wheel
>>> kept going out of true, so I tightened the spokes on the drive side
>>> 1 full turn and a lesser amount on the other side. The wheel still
>>> occasionally went out of true. I don't have a tensiometer, so I
>>> don't know what the spoke tension was.
>
>> IME, to avoid overtensioning the DS spokes, a gentle threadlock
>> (e.g., linseed oil) is necessary to avoid chronically loosening NDS
>> spokes on this rim with 130mm 8/9/10sp spacing. A tensionmeter
>> helps, too.
>
> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> that.
red herring.
> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening
> are a modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
no, it's function of hub geometry and spoke tension differential.
lami's theorem if you need to look it up.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 01:49:52
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:feydnbMx3IXoXYPanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
>> that.
>
> red herring.
Nah, just idiotic beamboy nonsense.
>> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening
>> are a modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>
> no, it's function of hub geometry and spoke tension differential. lami's
> theorem if you need to look it up.
Great. Read that from slashdot, did you? Tell you what beamboy, when you
go back to your janitorial work at your local library, try to read a
technical book from start to finish, rather than just looking at the
introduction page. You're really looking like an obvious fucking moron when
you throw about technical terms that you know nothing about.
Oh, and showing your little primary school pictures and diagrams in flickr
really adds to the comedy of your posts.
Fraudulent imbecile.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 14:04:42
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-23, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote:
[...]
> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> that.
I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
has cracked (with or without linseed).
> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
to be sturdier.
Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
super-low weight.
Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 14:58:50
From: James Thomson
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs > a écrit:
> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis
> used by Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
The Ambrosio Nemesis isn't a clincher rim. O'Grady rode tubs for
Paris-Roubaix.
James Thomson
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 10:25:55
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-28, James Thomson <yosnappyj@hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs> a écrit:
>
>> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
>> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis
>> used by Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>
> The Ambrosio Nemesis isn't a clincher rim. O'Grady rode tubs for
> Paris-Roubaix.
Yes of course. And Mavic do actually make a tubular rim in that sort of
shape-- the Reflex.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 19:33:56
From: James Thomson
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
>> The Ambrosio Nemesis isn't a clincher rim.
"Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs > a écrit:
> Yes of course.
What do you mean "yes of course"?
You just said exactly the opposite:
James Thomson
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 13:36:47
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-28, James Thomson <yosnappyj@hotmail.com > wrote:
>>> The Ambrosio Nemesis isn't a clincher rim.
>
> "Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs> a écrit:
>
>> Yes of course.
>
> What do you mean "yes of course"?
>
> You just said exactly the opposite:
I mean yes of course you are right and I was a fool! It was only the
other day you (I think it was) identified that rim in the picture of
Stuart O'Grady.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 02:27:47
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ben C? writes:
> [...]
>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
>> that.
> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the
> rim has cracked (with or without linseed).
The point is that linseed oil will not prevent cracking and when a
crack develops, it will still cause misalignment, more so than just
unscrewing... the feature that glues are to cover.
>> Rims that cannot be spoked tight enough to prevent loosening are a
>> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's
> meant to be sturdier.
It's a bad design if it can't hold the spoke tension. The methods
outlined in the book are a result of about 20 years of sturdy wheels
that didn't crack or allow spoke nipples to unscrew.
> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
I don't understand where the aversion to build the world's most
popular rim arose, but I can imagine that Solomon had a bit of NIH
syndrome. That's why they started out with hard anodizing right at
the start, something they back tracked on and went to cosmetic
anodizing, that has a lesser cracking problem.
> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
> super-low weight.
I don't understand what motivates todays riders but fashion has a lot
to do with is, judging from the equipment I see on our major bicycle
show-and-tell route.
> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
When talking to M. Conrad Glassey (Mavic product engr) I got the
impression that he is not asked what Mavic should offer. Over the
years at InterBike, he seems to play the role of "you face the public"
for us.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:38:04
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ben C? writes:
>
>> [...]
>>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
>>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
>>> that.
>
>> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the
>> rim has cracked (with or without linseed).
>
> The point is that linseed oil will not prevent cracking and when a
> crack develops, it will still cause misalignment, more so than just
> unscrewing... the feature that glues are to cover.
>
>>> Rims that cannot be spoked tight enough to prevent loosening are a
>>> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>
>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's
>> meant to be sturdier.
>
> It's a bad design if it can't hold the spoke tension.
so what is the spoke tension that's not being held then jobst? can you
tell from those photos?
> The methods
> outlined in the book are a result of about 20 years of sturdy wheels
> that didn't crack or allow spoke nipples to unscrew.
really? so how precise is spoke tension "as high as the rim can bear"?
why does it apply to some rims and not others? could it be a theory
that is, er, incomplete and misconceived?
>
>> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
>> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
>> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>
> I don't understand where the aversion to build the world's most
> popular rim arose, but I can imagine that Solomon had a bit of NIH
> syndrome. That's why they started out with hard anodizing right at
> the start, something they back tracked on and went to cosmetic
> anodizing, that has a lesser cracking problem.
so you say, but that statement is based on confusion about the science
and non-observation of the facts. and your reckoning is further
confused with ridiculous build recommendations that lead to excess spoke
tension which will crack any rim.
>
>> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
>> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
>> super-low weight.
>
> I don't understand what motivates todays riders but fashion has a lot
> to do with is, judging from the equipment I see on our major bicycle
> show-and-tell route.
>
>> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
>> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
>
> When talking to M. Conrad Glassey (Mavic product engr) I got the
> impression that he is not asked what Mavic should offer. Over the
> years at InterBike, he seems to play the role of "you face the public"
> for us.
red herring ad hominem drivel.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 23:50:42
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
In article
<slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld >,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
> [...]
> > When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> > than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> > that.
>
> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
> has cracked (with or without linseed).
>
> > Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
> > modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>
> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> to be sturdier.
>
> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>
> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
> super-low weight.
>
> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
Mavic is in it purely for the money.
Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:39:37
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
> Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
>> On 2007-10-23, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
>>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
>>> that.
>> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
>> has cracked (with or without linseed).
>>
>>> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
>>> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>> to be sturdier.
>>
>> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
>> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
>> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>>
>> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
>> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
>> super-low weight.
>>
>> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
>> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
>
> Mavic is in it purely for the money.
eh? do you live on an agrarian commune? presumably not since you're
posting to usenet, paid for purely by money, so how can you say that
without being an hypocrite?
> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
eh? so their touring rims are not durable? a racing rim is not a
touring rim, but i hardly think that allows blanket condemnation.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 16:32:20
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
In article
<feydnbUx3IXnI4PanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
> > Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2007-10-23, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
> >>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
> >>> that.
> >> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
> >> has cracked (with or without linseed).
> >>
> >>> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
> >>> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
> >> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> >> to be sturdier.
> >>
> >> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
> >> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
> >> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
> >>
> >> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
> >> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
> >> super-low weight.
> >>
> >> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
> >> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
> >
> > Mavic is in it purely for the money.
>
> eh? do you live on an agrarian commune? presumably not since you're
> posting to usenet, paid for purely by money, so how can you say that
> without being an hypocrite?
I wrote _purely_ for the money. Get it?
Sometimes a manufacturer works at and delivers
products well suited to the intended purpose.
> > Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>
> eh? so their touring rims are not durable?
No, they are not.
> a racing rim is not a
> touring rim, but i hardly think that allows blanket condemnation.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 20:15:08
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <feydnbUx3IXnI4PanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
>>> Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2007-10-23, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> When a rim begins to crack, tension of the affected spoke changes more
>>>>> than a half turn on a spoke nipple 0.009". Linseed oil won't cover
>>>>> that.
>>>> I don't think the suggestion is that you carry on riding after the rim
>>>> has cracked (with or without linseed).
>>>>
>>>>> Rims that cannot be spokes tight enough to prevent loosening are a
>>>>> modern mis-design in pursuit of weight saving.
>>>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>>>> to be sturdier.
>>>>
>>>> Mavic don't make a clincher rim with the very low-profile cross-section
>>>> of the MA-2 any more (although others do-- the Ambrosio Nemesis used by
>>>> Stuart O'Grady for Paris-Roubaix for example).
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps now that people increasingly race on "boutique" wheels when they
>>>> buy a traditional rim it's for training and so there's less demand for
>>>> super-low weight.
>>>>
>>>> Or perhaps Mavic are just trying to make their mid-range wheeloutaboxes
>>>> look better by not offering such light-weight traditional rims any more.
>>> Mavic is in it purely for the money.
>> eh? do you live on an agrarian commune? presumably not since you're
>> posting to usenet, paid for purely by money, so how can you say that
>> without being an hypocrite?
>
> I wrote _purely_ for the money. Get it?
i get it. but you're confusing fact-free personal prejudice with
rational analysis.
> Sometimes a manufacturer works at and delivers
> products well suited to the intended purpose.
so does mavic. you're bleating about what you think that purpose is.
>
>>> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>> eh? so their touring rims are not durable?
>
> No, they are not.
strange - i don't recall any reports of their touring rims being
problematic on this forum. have you ridden them, broken them and not
shared your experience?
>
>> a racing rim is not a
>> touring rim, but i hardly think that allows blanket condemnation.
>
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 11:16:53
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:DoqdnTTeWKihl73anZ2dnUVZ_uzinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Michael Press wrote:
>> I wrote _purely_ for the money. Get it?
>
> i get it. but you're confusing fact-free personal prejudice with rational
> analysis.
And since you're the master of the former, you'd know all about it.
>>>> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>>> eh? so their touring rims are not durable?
>>
>> No, they are not.
>
> strange - i don't recall any reports of their touring rims being
> problematic on this forum.
Two things, beamtard:
1. Why don't you look at other fora? Oh wait, they might prove you a
liar...
1. So rbt is now your gospel site? What, slashdot not cutting it anymore?
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 20:18:46
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:DoqdnTTeWKihl73anZ2dnUVZ_uzinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Michael Press wrote:
>
>>> I wrote _purely_ for the money. Get it?
>> i get it. but you're confusing fact-free personal prejudice with rational
>> analysis.
>
> And since you're the master of the former, you'd know all about it.
>
>>>>> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>>>> eh? so their touring rims are not durable?
>>> No, they are not.
>> strange - i don't recall any reports of their touring rims being
>> problematic on this forum.
>
> Two things, beamtard:
> 1. Why don't you look at other fora? Oh wait, they might prove you a
> liar...
> 1. So rbt is now your gospel site? What, slashdot not cutting it anymore?
>
>
god bless you jambo. you're /such/ a fucking moron, you've given me a
whole new appreciation for people that are merely stupid. thank you!
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 23:43:08
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:LemdnaRozoEKwbzanZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jambo wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:DoqdnTTeWKihl73anZ2dnUVZ_uzinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>
>>>> I wrote _purely_ for the money. Get it?
>>> i get it. but you're confusing fact-free personal prejudice with
>>> rational analysis.
>>
>> And since you're the master of the former, you'd know all about it.
>>
>>>>>> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>>>>> eh? so their touring rims are not durable?
>>>> No, they are not.
>>> strange - i don't recall any reports of their touring rims being
>>> problematic on this forum.
>>
>> Two things, beamtard:
>> 1. Why don't you look at other fora? Oh wait, they might prove you a
>> liar...
>> 1. So rbt is now your gospel site? What, slashdot not cutting it
>> anymore?
>
> god bless you jambo. you're /such/ a fucking moron, you've given me a
> whole new appreciation for people that are merely stupid. thank you!
Invoking god again? Won't do you any good, beamtard. Just address the
issues:
1. Why don't you look at other fora? Oh wait, they might prove you a
liar...
2.. So rbt is now your gospel site? What, slashdot not cutting it anymore?
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:09:46
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
>> ...
>> Sometimes a manufacturer works at and delivers products well suited to
>> the intended purpose.
>
> so does mavic. you're bleating about what you think that purpose is....
Looking good while the bicycle is parked at the coffee shop?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 01:45:34
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:feydnbUx3IXnI4PanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Michael Press wrote:
>> Mavic is in it purely for the money.
>
> eh? do you live on an agrarian commune? presumably not since you're
> posting to usenet, paid for purely by money, so how can you say that
> without being an hypocrite?
Geez, don't post when you're drunk, beamboy. This statement really is quite
moronic.
>> Mavic exerts no effort to build durable rims.
>
> eh? so their touring rims are not durable? a racing rim is not a touring
> rim, but i hardly think that allows blanket condemnation.
But your thinking is fucking idiotic, beamboy, so that means absolutely
nothing. Now go back to your hookers.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:53:08
From: Larry Dickman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
In article <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld >,
Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
> to be sturdier.
That seems hard to believe. Where did you get the weight information.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 16:09:31
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-23, Larry Dickman <LDickman@comcast.net > wrote:
> In article <slrnfhshfs.5oi.spamspam@bowser.marioworld>,
> Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>> to be sturdier.
>
> That seems hard to believe. Where did you get the weight information.
Found it, here it is:
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims
MA2 (1995, 32H): 420g
Open Pro (2002, 32H): 430g
Open Pro (2003, 32H): 433g
Open Pro (2004, 32H): 435g
Those are all in the "real" column-- they don't have a "claimed" for the
MA2.
And the MA2 was 27", the Open Pros are 700c. 700c is slightly smaller
than 27", so perhaps the Open Pro is even "heavier" than it looks.
But according to the link Jay Beattie posted, the Open Pro weighs less,
and there was quite a bit variation between samples of the same rim.
So I think they basically weigh about the same.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 02:37:20
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ben? writes:
>>> But the Open Pro weighs _more_ than the MA-2 did-- presumably it's meant
>>> to be sturdier.
>> That seems hard to believe. Where did you get the weight
>> information.
> Found it, here it is:
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims
> MA2 (1995, 32H): 420g
> Open Pro (2002, 32H): 430g
> Open Pro (2003, 32H): 433g
> Open Pro (2004, 32H): 435g
> Those are all in the "real" column-- they don't have a "claimed" for
> the MA2.
New 700c 36h MA-2's I have weigh 475g on the scale, not on some web
page or catalog.
> And the MA2 was 27", the Open Pros are 700c. 700c is slightly
> smaller than 27", so perhaps the Open Pro is even "heavier" than it
> looks.
> But according to the link Jay Beattie posted, the Open Pro weighs
> less, and there was quite a bit variation between samples of the
> same rim.
> So I think they basically weigh about the same.
I think there is less material in some critical places and the cross
section is taller, so the walls must be thinner and this and their
shape, weaker.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:39:57
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
<snip for clarity >
> I think there is less material in some critical places and the cross
> section is taller, so the walls must be thinner and this and their
> shape, weaker.
you "think"? you speculate based on speculation? come on jobst, be
precise. do some homework.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/1313515154/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/1313515128/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/121453841/
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 01:43:18
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:feydnbQx3IUQI4PanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> <snip for clarity>
>> I think there is less material in some critical places and the cross
>> section is taller, so the walls must be thinner and this and their
>> shape, weaker.
>
> you "think"? you speculate based on speculation? come on jobst, be
> precise. do some homework.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/1313515154/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/1313515128/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/38636024@N00/121453841/
Eh beamboy, those photos show shit. And the 3800 miles figure? Yeah, sure.
Fucking imbecilic fraud.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 07:58:56
From: Larry Dickman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
In article <1192645553.013739.98910@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com >,
"russellseaton1@yahoo.com" <russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> pulled completely away.
>
> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
I just found cracks at multiple locations on the drive side of my rear
32 spoke silver Open Pro rim. 2 sockets were broken also. The wheel had
a little over 6000 miles on it. Spokes were Wheelsmith 14 ga. butted
laced to a Shimano Ultegra 10 speed hub. I weigh 175-180 lbs. Purchased
the wheelset new from Performance. The spokes on the non-drive side kept
loosening up and the wheel kept going out of true, so I tightened the
spokes on the drive side 1 full turn and a lesser amount on the other
side. The wheel still occasionally went out of true. I don't have a
tensiometer, so I don't know what the spoke tension was.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 07:46:10
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 9:42 am, "Jambozo" <-...@-.- > wrote:
> "Paul Borg" <xpostr...@webtv.nit> wrote in message
>
> news:ffjrud$tan$1@aioe.org...
>
>
>
> > "Jambozo" <-...@-.-> wrote in message
>
> >> Of non-drive side spokes? Fucking bullshit again, beamboy.
>
> > If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> > non-drive side, then you are simply a fool. Read through this thread
> > again.
> > We have Jobst grasping at straws (umm its cracked cause no sockets, umm...
> > the rim was rebuilt, etc) and we have Beam diagnosing the situation
> > correctly.
>
> > Don't let your hatred of Beam blind you to the obvious.
>
> Borg, I think you've been assimilated by beamboy. That or you're the same
> guy.
>
> Show me exactly how the wheel in this thread, with the arrangement and
> lacing and spokes mentioned, can have the non-drive side spokes tighter than
> the drive side. Before you do that, check out this OP a couple of posts
> down the thread: "The spokes on the non drive side are relatively loose
> compared to the drive side spokes."
>
> Don't let your love of beamboy make you a fucking idiot too.
>
>
>
> >> If non-drive side eyelets are cracked due to over-tension, then drive
> >> side
> >> eyelets will also be cracked, you idiot.
What's *your* theory on this form of rim failure, genius?
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 07:31:05
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 8:33 am, Reid <rra...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I have used the "Bicycle Wheel" method to tension an Open Pro rim until
> the areas around the spoke eyelets dimple. The rim didn't begin to
> "taco" before dimpling, though the tension (in conjunction with the
> dimpling?) was great enough to split several spoke nipples.
Being that Jobst"don't need no steenkin' tensionmeter" Brandt and his
methods are unimpeachable, the Open Pro rim must be a poor design! ;-)
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 07:33:59
From: Reid
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
I have used the "Bicycle Wheel" method to tension an Open Pro rim until
the areas around the spoke eyelets dimple. The rim didn't begin to
"taco" before dimpling, though the tension (in conjunction with the
dimpling?) was great enough to split several spoke nipples.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 22:22:23
From: Paul Kopit
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 07:33:59 -0600, Reid <rramos@gmail.com > wrote:
>I have used the "Bicycle Wheel" method to tension an Open Pro rim until
>the areas around the spoke eyelets dimple. The rim didn't begin to
>"taco" before dimpling, though the tension (in conjunction with the
>dimpling?) was great enough to split several spoke nipples.
I build wheels almost to what is taught in "Bicycle Wheel". I even
do the stress relieving both the way described in the book and also by
leaning on rim. The thing I don't do is the tension to taco and then
loosen ½ turn. I don't think that the modern alloys or V shaped rims
like that. I do have a tensiometer but I can tell when I'm getting
close to the 100-105 kgF by the effort that it takes to turn the spoke
wrench, the tune that the plucked spoke makes, and squeezing the
spoke. I use the Tensiometer to check and I'm usually correct.
Peter Drucker said, "In the end, only the result matters". The wheels
I have built do hold up and need minimum maintenance.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 06:01:08
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 7:44 am, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
<russellseat...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2:28 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs> wrote:
>
> > On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostr...@webtv.nit> wrote:
> > [...]
>
> > > If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> > > non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
>
> > How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
>
> Yep. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Brass nipples. And
> the wheel is dished correctly. I'm not tightening the non drive
> spokes until the nipples are twisted off and pulling the wheel until
> it is touching the non drive side chainstay. The spokes on the non
> drive side are relatively loose compared to the drive side spokes.
Do you have any theories on what caused this failure?
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 05:44:08
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 23, 2:28 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostr...@webtv.nit> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> > non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
>
> How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
Yep. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Brass nipples. And
the wheel is dished correctly. I'm not tightening the non drive
spokes until the nipples are twisted off and pulling the wheel until
it is touching the non drive side chainstay. The spokes on the non
drive side are relatively loose compared to the drive side spokes.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 04:50:14
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 22, 9:08 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.- > wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ffjkbi$5n3$3@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>
>
> > Jambo wrote:
> >> "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> >>news:18CdnXDSEPJ9tofanZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> >>> Jambo wrote:
> >>>> "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> >>>>news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> >>>>> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
> >>>>> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when
> >>>>> all it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
> >>>> Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again
> >>>> from beamboy.
>
> >>>>> i'm waiting for the pics.
> >>>> Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
> >>>> tensiometer in place.
> >>> you're bearing false witness. or is there some kind of moron exemption
> >>> for that commandment?
>
> >> Uh, sorry beamboy, did you use duct tape instead?
>
> > Is not duct/duck tape sticky on one side?
>
> Sticky tape = usually means desktop tape such as invisible or masking
> Duct tape = Space shuttle repair kit in one
>
> Point being, beamboy = fraud.
Get a mirror, Bozo.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 00:30:37
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 1:25 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
<russellseat...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> pulled completely away.
>
> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
Possibly your rim and a portion of the other Mavic rims developing
cracks originating at the spoke sockets/eyelets do so because of
imperfections. Mavic certainly is not immune to manufacturing defects.
Specifically, though just speculating, the holes drilled to accept
the sockets could have rough or torn edges or they could become rough
or torn when the sockets are set in them. Such roughness or tearing
would serve as a crack initiator and might be produced on just one
side or both sides of the rim during its manufacture.
--
Spike
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 23:43:57
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 22, 12:59 pm, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-22, russellseat...@yahoo.com <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Here are the pictures:
>
> >> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
> >> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
> >> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
> >> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
> >> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
> >> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
> >> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
> >> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>
> Fatigue is supposed to start at an imperfection somewhere and then
> spread from there. Those extra cracks on the wall make this look like
> "trauma" rather than fatigue-- as though the wheel suddenly got a very
> high side load or something.
That doesn't really make sense. A momentary load usually
either breaks something outright or causes a crack that then
propagates through fatigue. It is very hard to see how a
side load on a wheel could neatly initiate cracks right near the
locations of several spokes on the rim wall.
I think what you're seeing is that as the socket pulls through
the rim, it's causing either the inmost surface or the lower box
section to separate from the upper rim wall. I don't have any
idea why this would happen on the non drive side either, though.
Ben
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 15:19:15
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 22, 4:25 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ben C? writes:
> > [...]
> >>> Here are the pictures:
> >>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
> >>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
> >>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
> >>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
> >>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
> >>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
> >>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
> >>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
> >> Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site
> >> but I'll assume others can see the pictures.
> > Yes, I can see them OK.
> > Fatigue is supposed to start at an imperfection somewhere and then
> > spread from there. Those extra cracks on the wall make this look
> > like "trauma" rather than fatigue-- as though the wheel suddenly got
> > a very high side load or something.
>
> By trauma you mean forced rupture in contrast to fatigue. Forced
> rupture leaves a smeared (sheared) crack in contrast to these cracks
> that are classically jagged fatigue cracks. I must assume that the
> wheel was spoked with the rim left-to-right reversed at some point and
> that cracking was initiated on a rear wheel at that time.
That was my first thought, as well. However, the OP says this was not
the case.
>
> Once a crack starts, it can grow under reduced load, such as on the
> left side of a rear wheel where tension is roughly half of that ton
> the right side.
>
> Jobst Brandt
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 15:01:25
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 22, 4:25 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Ben C? writes:
> > [...]
> >>> Here are the pictures:
> >>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
> >>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
> >>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
> >>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
> >>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
> >>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
> >>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
> >>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
> >> Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site
> >> but I'll assume others can see the pictures.
> > Yes, I can see them OK.
> > Fatigue is supposed to start at an imperfection somewhere and then
> > spread from there. Those extra cracks on the wall make this look
> > like "trauma" rather than fatigue-- as though the wheel suddenly got
> > a very high side load or something.
>
> By trauma you mean forced rupture in contrast to fatigue. Forced
> rupture leaves a smeared (sheared) crack in contrast to these cracks
> that are classically jagged fatigue cracks. I must assume that the
> wheel was spoked with the rim left-to-right reversed at some point and
> that cracking was initiated on a rear wheel at that time.
If by this you mean the rim was laced one way and then this rim was
reversed and relaced, NO. This rim was laced once and kept that way
until now. I sure as heck have not rebuilt a wheel using an old rim.
I build a wheel with a rim and it stays built until the rim dies. I
don't have enough time or energy in my day to rebuild wheels for the
fun of it unless the rim needs to be replaced. At that point I'll
also decide if the spokes can be reused or not.
As for trauma causing that one eyelet to delelop the side cracks, not
that I recall. Cracks at the eyelet are just like the cracks at the
eyelets on the other two eyelets pictured. And a couple others I did
not take pictures of. Just longer cracks at the one eyelet. I would
think a trauma would bend the rim too. Rim appears unbent, just
cracked at several eyelets.
No spoke prep was ever used on this rim. Or any wheels I build. I'm
too cheap to buy official spoke prep. I do use oil on the spoke
threads and eyelets/nipples. Oil is cheap.
>
> Once a crack starts, it can grow under reduced load, such as on the
> left side of a rear wheel where tension is roughly half of that ton
> the right side.
>
> Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 12:31:01
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 22, 1:02 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53 -0700, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> >problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> >sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> >spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> >thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> >drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> >the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> >cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> >from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> >in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> >pulled completely away.
>
> >I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> >I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> >seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> >lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> Dear Russell,
>
> Here are the pictures:
>
> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>
> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>
> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>
> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>
> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>
> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>
> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>
> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site but
I'll assume others can see the pictures. There are pictures of three
eyelets with cracks around them. There are a couple other eyelets on
the wheel that had smaller cracks I did not take pictures of. All
cracks around the eyelets are on the NON DRIVE side of the rear wheel.
Biggest cracks are on Rim1-# pictures. 6 pictures total. From both
sides of the rim. This is at 9 o'clock position on the rim when
looking from the drive side and valve stem is at 12 o'clock.
Rim2 and Rim3 are at 1 o'clock and 5 o'clock on the rim when looking
from the drive side and valve stem is 12 o'clock. These pictures were
taken from the drive side of the rim. Cracks are on NON DRIVE side
eyelets.
Rear Open Pro rim. 32 spoke. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge
spokes. Brass nipples. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Built by me
Fall of 2002 I think. Rear hub has seen three rims so far. This rim
was brand new, never used, never laced, bought from Performance Bike.
I broke One of the non drive side spokes on Friday evening's ride at
the elbow.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 19:06:18
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Oct 22, 1:02 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53 -0700, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
>>> problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
>>> sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
>>> spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
>>> thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
>>> drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
>>> the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
>>> cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
>> >from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
>>> in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
>>> pulled completely away.
>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
>>> I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
>>> seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
>>> lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>> Dear Russell,
>>
>> Here are the pictures:
>>
>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>>
>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>>
>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>>
>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>>
>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>>
>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>>
>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>>
>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site but
> I'll assume others can see the pictures. There are pictures of three
> eyelets with cracks around them. There are a couple other eyelets on
> the wheel that had smaller cracks I did not take pictures of. All
> cracks around the eyelets are on the NON DRIVE side of the rear wheel.
>
> Biggest cracks are on Rim1-# pictures. 6 pictures total. From both
> sides of the rim. This is at 9 o'clock position on the rim when
> looking from the drive side and valve stem is at 12 o'clock.
>
> Rim2 and Rim3 are at 1 o'clock and 5 o'clock on the rim when looking
> from the drive side and valve stem is 12 o'clock. These pictures were
> taken from the drive side of the rim. Cracks are on NON DRIVE side
> eyelets.
but you don't post a pic /showing/ that to be the case! you need
another shot from further away showing the spoke at any crack connecting
to the hub.
they are excellent pics by the way, and classic over-tension.
>
> Rear Open Pro rim. 32 spoke. 3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge
> spokes. Brass nipples. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus rear hub. Built by me
> Fall of 2002 I think. Rear hub has seen three rims so far. This rim
> was brand new, never used, never laced, bought from Performance Bike.
> I broke One of the non drive side spokes on Friday evening's ride at
> the elbow.
>
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 22:58:58
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:UoSdneGXNfCGyoDanZ2dnUVZ_uOmnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Rim2 and Rim3 are at 1 o'clock and 5 o'clock on the rim when looking
>> from the drive side and valve stem is 12 o'clock. These pictures were
>> taken from the drive side of the rim. Cracks are on NON DRIVE side
>> eyelets.
>
> but you don't post a pic /showing/ that to be the case! you need another
> shot from further away showing the spoke at any crack connecting to the
> hub.
No, he doesn't. You're grasping your dick yet again.
> they are excellent pics by the way, and classic over-tension.
Of non-drive side spokes? Fucking bullshit again, beamboy.
If non-drive side eyelets are cracked due to over-tension, then drive side
eyelets will also be cracked, you idiot.
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 21:05:35
From: Paul Borg
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"Jambo" <-@-.- > wrote in message
news:471d6331$0$19654$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:UoSdneGXNfCGyoDanZ2dnUVZ_uOmnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> > russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> Rim2 and Rim3 are at 1 o'clock and 5 o'clock on the rim when looking
> >> from the drive side and valve stem is 12 o'clock. These pictures were
> >> taken from the drive side of the rim. Cracks are on NON DRIVE side
> >> eyelets.
> >
> > but you don't post a pic /showing/ that to be the case! you need
another
> > shot from further away showing the spoke at any crack connecting to the
> > hub.
>
> No, he doesn't. You're grasping your dick yet again.
>
> > they are excellent pics by the way, and classic over-tension.
>
> Of non-drive side spokes? Fucking bullshit again, beamboy.
>
If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
non-drive side, then you are simply a fool. Read through this thread again.
We have Jobst grasping at straws (umm its cracked cause no sockets, umm...
the rim was rebuilt, etc) and we have Beam diagnosing the situation
correctly.
Don't let your hatred of Beam blind you to the obvious.
> If non-drive side eyelets are cracked due to over-tension, then drive side
> eyelets will also be cracked, you idiot.
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 10:42:38
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"Paul Borg" <xpostroll@webtv.nit > wrote in message
news:ffjrud$tan$1@aioe.org...
>
> "Jambo" <-@-.-> wrote in message
>>
>> Of non-drive side spokes? Fucking bullshit again, beamboy.
>>
>
> If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> non-drive side, then you are simply a fool. Read through this thread
> again.
> We have Jobst grasping at straws (umm its cracked cause no sockets, umm...
> the rim was rebuilt, etc) and we have Beam diagnosing the situation
> correctly.
>
> Don't let your hatred of Beam blind you to the obvious.
Borg, I think you've been assimilated by beamboy. That or you're the same
guy.
Show me exactly how the wheel in this thread, with the arrangement and
lacing and spokes mentioned, can have the non-drive side spokes tighter than
the drive side. Before you do that, check out this OP a couple of posts
down the thread: "The spokes on the non drive side are relatively loose
compared to the drive side spokes."
Don't let your love of beamboy make you a fucking idiot too.
>
>> If non-drive side eyelets are cracked due to over-tension, then drive
>> side
>> eyelets will also be cracked, you idiot.
>>
>>
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 02:28:04
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostroll@webtv.nit > wrote:
[...]
> If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
> non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 00:24:19
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 02:28:04 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
>On 2007-10-23, Paul Borg <xpostroll@webtv.nit> wrote:
>[...]
>> If you think it's impossible to build a wheel with higher tension spokes
>> non-drive side, then you are simply a fool.
>
>How is that possible? Assuming 3x on both sides, which this was.
Dear Ben,
I'm puzzled, too.
If we have equal numbers of spokes at the same angles on each side of
the wheel, then Lami's theorem, as Jim Beam points out, seems to
apply, and the spokes closer to vertical on the drive side should
always have more tension.
Lami's theorem for forces P-Q-R and angles a-b-c:
a
Q R
\ /
c . b
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 14:59:31
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-22, russellseaton1@yahoo.com <russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
[...]
>> Here are the pictures:
>>
>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site but
> I'll assume others can see the pictures.
Yes, I can see them OK.
Fatigue is supposed to start at an imperfection somewhere and then
spread from there. Those extra cracks on the wall make this look like
"trauma" rather than fatigue-- as though the wheel suddenly got a very
high side load or something.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 21:25:22
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ben C? writes:
> [...]
>>> Here are the pictures:
>>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>> Thanks Carl. My computer is blocking access to the tinypic site
>> but I'll assume others can see the pictures.
> Yes, I can see them OK.
> Fatigue is supposed to start at an imperfection somewhere and then
> spread from there. Those extra cracks on the wall make this look
> like "trauma" rather than fatigue-- as though the wheel suddenly got
> a very high side load or something.
By trauma you mean forced rupture in contrast to fatigue. Forced
rupture leaves a smeared (sheared) crack in contrast to these cracks
that are classically jagged fatigue cracks. I must assume that the
wheel was spoked with the rim left-to-right reversed at some point and
that cracking was initiated on a rear wheel at that time.
Once a crack starts, it can grow under reduced load, such as on the
left side of a rear wheel where tension is roughly half of that ton
the right side.
Jobst Brandt
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 12:02:10
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:53 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
>problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
>sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
>spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
>thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
>drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
>the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
>cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
>from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
>in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
>pulled completely away.
>
>I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
>I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
>seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
>lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
Dear Russell,
Here are the pictures:
Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 21:14:12
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Carl Fogel writes:
>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect
>> that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
> Here are the pictures:
> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
With the frequency of reports of cracking rims, I can only deduce that
these are not socketed rims. In all the years of riding various rims,
from Mavic, Fiamme, Ambrosio, Super Champion and the like, I never saw
a cracked rim until Mavic began hard anodizing their rims... and
subsequently when they ceased using sockets and used only eyelets to
support spoke loads on one wall of the rim. You'll not that a socket
distributes spoke loads to more than 9x the area of an eyelet alone.
http://tinyurl.com/2zr7k7
Spoke-prep was invented to allow building with low spoke tension, but
not low enough to prevent cracking.
http://tinyurl.com/22h8h3
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 16:38:35
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-22, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote:
[...]
>> Here are the pictures:
>
>> Rim1-1.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/9rk288.jpg
>> Rim1-2.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2lj2slh.jpg
>> Rim1-3.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2ebzl92.jpg
>> Rim1-4.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/20hvwaw.jpg
>> Rim1-5.JPG http://i22.tinypic.com/idzr0w.jpg
>> Rim1-6.JPG http://i23.tinypic.com/2pqri53.jpg
>> Rim2.JPG http://i24.tinypic.com/2f03ek8.jpg
>> Rim3.JPG http://i21.tinypic.com/2rxk18w.jpg
>
> With the frequency of reports of cracking rims, I can only deduce that
> these are not socketed rims.
No, they are socketed. OP said this was an Open Pro.
In fact I wonder if those secondary cracks (the ones appearing on the
sides of the rim, above the brake track as they appear in the pictures)
are somehow the result of the whole socket being wrenched sideways.
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 07:12:11
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 20, 7:05 am, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggs > wrote:
> On 2007-10-20, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> [...]
> >>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
> >>>> tension.
>
> >>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
> >>>> explanation?
>
> >>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
> >>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
> >>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
> >>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>
> >>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
> >>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
> >>>> contact with the rim.
>
> >>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
> >>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
> >>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
> >>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
> >>>lack of truth.
>
> >> Dear _,
>
> >> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
> >> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>
> >> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
> >> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>
> >> Nipples unscrewing?
>
> > Got it in one, you clever boy.
>
> They don't necessarily unscrew though. OP used oil, not linseed or
> threadlock, but even so, things can get gummed up or stick a bit.
Possible, but not likely. Most likely, the nipples will unscrew and
the NDS spokes will go slack. An experienced cyclist such as Mr.
Seaton would surely notice that slackness.
|
| |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 10:37:56
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 19, 12:18 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.- > wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>
> news:3NudnewLS5uKrYXanZ2dnUVZ_hynnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>
> > that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
> > relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
> > over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
> > drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
> > you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
> > which you're not revealing].
>
> Fud, fud, a-fudding we will go.....
Got any ideas re: that kind of rim failure, genius? Or is that beyond
yer capabilities?
|
| |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 13:38:47
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 18, 2:41 pm, "Jambo" <-...@-.- > wrote:
> "_" <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote in message
>
> news:11b2bji8yzdkf.a7wzpeth7um8$.dlg@40tude.net...
>
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:56:53 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> >> do you believe in the tooth fairy too? with all due respect to the
> >> o.p., there are only two possibilities here:
>
> >> 1. he's mistaken
>
> > Matthew 7:3 seems appropriate here...
>
> Matthew 7:5 is also applicable
Two assholes reference the Babble; how typical.
|
| |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 06:18:27
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 7:30 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Russell Seaton writes:
> >>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> >>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> >>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001
> >>> with new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring
> >>> 2001. Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the
> >>> cracks are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non
> >>> drive side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non
> >>> drive side eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One
> >>> of the eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim
> >>> around that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would
> >>> expect that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> >>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> >>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes
> >>> since they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without
> >>> breaking. And have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
> >> Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their
> >> current position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable
> >> when removed from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one
> >> (aligning the valve holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time.
> >> Used spokes removed from a wheel usually cause spoke failures
> >> because acute angle spokes (outbound) do not straighten when placed
> >> as inbound spokes and thereby flex at the elbow.
> > I haven't started the rim replacement yet. The new Open Pro rim is
> > at my parent's house and my Mom is not visiting until next weekend,
> > so I won't have the rim until then. I have built a few wheels from
> > scratch by following your book. But what you say about keeping the
> > spokes in the same spot makes sense so I will tape the new rim to
> > the old rim and transfer spokes one by one.
>
> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
> after all the spokes have been transferred. The failure to do this
> has brought us ungainly spoke wrenches that capture spoke nipples at
> their four corners like slotted socket wrenches. A flat and parallel
> jaw wrench can twist off any spoke you have without rounding spoke
> nipples, but that seems not to be obvious.
>
> > But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not
> > the drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any
> > pressure on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>
> I didn't see the dish on this wheel or the lacing pattern... or the
> cracking mode, as someone mentioned. These rims are near enough to
> cracking to respond to small differences.
>
> Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
See the post below where I describe the details of this wheel. 1998
Campagnolo Chorus rear hub is almost straight up and down on the drive
side for dish. So the non drive side spokes are generally pretty
loose and the drive side are really tight. 32 spoke. Brass nipples.
3 cross both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes.
|
| |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 06:15:33
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 8:15 pm, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> > > > eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> > > > cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
> > > > new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
> > > > Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
> > > > are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
> > > > side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
> > > > eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
> > > > eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
> > > > that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
> > > > 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> > > > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> > > > own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
> > > > they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
> > > > have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> <snipped>
>
>
>
> > But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
> > drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
> > on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>
> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
> at the time ot the build?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets. All cracks are on
the non drive side. No cracks on the drive side that I could see. 32
spoke silver Open Pro rim. 700C. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus hub. This
is about the third rim on that hub. First Open Pro broke in a crash
in 2001. Then I put on a rim that turned out to have a dent in it.
Also Open Pro. Then it was probably Fall of 2002, not Fall 2001 as I
stated earlier, that I put the current, now cracked Open Pro rim on.
Rim bought from Performance Bike. Brand new, never used, never laced
rim of course. Came wrapped in plastic from Performance. I ordered
one new rim, but Performance in their kindness sent two for the price
of one. Thus I have an extra waiting in the wings. This rim has not
been switched around on the hub to move the drive side to the non
drive side. I don't have much to do in my life, but I got enough to
do not to reverse rims for the heck of it. 3 cross lacing both
sides. Brass nipples both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Have not
broken any spokes since building the wheel. Pretty sure they were new
spokes in 2002 when this rim was installed. Hub has always been 3
cross lacing with all rims. Wheel built by me. Using my Spokey spoke
wrench that grabs all four corners of the brass nipples like a socket
wrench. I know Mr. Brandt does not like these, but I do. At the time
of building I am sure I used oil on the nipples. No thread locking
compound. Many thousands of miles on the wheels. I range between
160-195 pounds body weight plus another 20-30 pounds for the bike and
gear and water. Midwest riding mainly. Roads are usually OK.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 23:55:25
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
russellseaton1@yahoo.com aka Russell Seaton wrote:
> ...I don't have much to do in my life,...
Government employee?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 21:18:29
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Oct 17, 8:15 pm, Ozark Bicycle
> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>> <snipped>
>>
>>
>>
>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
>> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
>> at the time ot the build?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets. All cracks are on
> the non drive side. No cracks on the drive side that I could see. 32
> spoke silver Open Pro rim. 700C. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus hub. This
> is about the third rim on that hub. First Open Pro broke in a crash
> in 2001. Then I put on a rim that turned out to have a dent in it.
> Also Open Pro. Then it was probably Fall of 2002, not Fall 2001 as I
> stated earlier, that I put the current, now cracked Open Pro rim on.
> Rim bought from Performance Bike. Brand new, never used, never laced
> rim of course. Came wrapped in plastic from Performance. I ordered
> one new rim, but Performance in their kindness sent two for the price
> of one. Thus I have an extra waiting in the wings. This rim has not
> been switched around on the hub to move the drive side to the non
> drive side. I don't have much to do in my life, but I got enough to
> do not to reverse rims for the heck of it. 3 cross lacing both
> sides. Brass nipples both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Have not
> broken any spokes since building the wheel. Pretty sure they were new
> spokes in 2002 when this rim was installed. Hub has always been 3
> cross lacing with all rims. Wheel built by me. Using my Spokey spoke
> wrench that grabs all four corners of the brass nipples like a socket
> wrench. I know Mr. Brandt does not like these, but I do. At the time
> of building I am sure I used oil on the nipples. No thread locking
> compound. Many thousands of miles on the wheels. I range between
> 160-195 pounds body weight plus another 20-30 pounds for the bike and
> gear and water. Midwest riding mainly. Roads are usually OK.
>
that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
which you're not revealing].
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 18:06:45
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
>> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>>> <snipped>
>>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>> On Oct 17, 8:15 pm, Ozark Bicycle
>>> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
>>> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
>>> at the time ot the build?- Hide quoted text -
> russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets. All cracks are on
>> the non drive side. No cracks on the drive side that I could see. 32
>> spoke silver Open Pro rim. 700C. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus hub. This
>> is about the third rim on that hub. First Open Pro broke in a crash
>> in 2001. Then I put on a rim that turned out to have a dent in it.
>> Also Open Pro. Then it was probably Fall of 2002, not Fall 2001 as I
>> stated earlier, that I put the current, now cracked Open Pro rim on.
>> Rim bought from Performance Bike. Brand new, never used, never laced
>> rim of course. Came wrapped in plastic from Performance. I ordered
>> one new rim, but Performance in their kindness sent two for the price
>> of one. Thus I have an extra waiting in the wings. This rim has not
>> been switched around on the hub to move the drive side to the non
>> drive side. I don't have much to do in my life, but I got enough to
>> do not to reverse rims for the heck of it. 3 cross lacing both
>> sides. Brass nipples both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Have not
>> broken any spokes since building the wheel. Pretty sure they were new
>> spokes in 2002 when this rim was installed. Hub has always been 3
>> cross lacing with all rims. Wheel built by me. Using my Spokey spoke
>> wrench that grabs all four corners of the brass nipples like a socket
>> wrench. I know Mr. Brandt does not like these, but I do. At the time
>> of building I am sure I used oil on the nipples. No thread locking
>> compound. Many thousands of miles on the wheels. I range between
>> 160-195 pounds body weight plus another 20-30 pounds for the bike and
>> gear and water. Midwest riding mainly. Roads are usually OK.
jim beam wrote:
> that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
> relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
> over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
> drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
> you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
> which you're not revealing].
So, you're saying if it had cracked right-side-only it would be
unremarkable? We all got that far. What's up with Mr Seaton's actual
experience?
"Eppure si è spezzato" as Galileo might have said in this situation.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 07:17:38
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
A Muzi wrote:
>>> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>>>> <snipped>
>>>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>
>>> On Oct 17, 8:15 pm, Ozark Bicycle
>>>> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
>>>> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
>>>> at the time ot the build?- Hide quoted text -
>
>> russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets. All cracks are on
>>> the non drive side. No cracks on the drive side that I could see. 32
>>> spoke silver Open Pro rim. 700C. 1998 Campagnolo Chorus hub. This
>>> is about the third rim on that hub. First Open Pro broke in a crash
>>> in 2001. Then I put on a rim that turned out to have a dent in it.
>>> Also Open Pro. Then it was probably Fall of 2002, not Fall 2001 as I
>>> stated earlier, that I put the current, now cracked Open Pro rim on.
>>> Rim bought from Performance Bike. Brand new, never used, never laced
>>> rim of course. Came wrapped in plastic from Performance. I ordered
>>> one new rim, but Performance in their kindness sent two for the price
>>> of one. Thus I have an extra waiting in the wings. This rim has not
>>> been switched around on the hub to move the drive side to the non
>>> drive side. I don't have much to do in my life, but I got enough to
>>> do not to reverse rims for the heck of it. 3 cross lacing both
>>> sides. Brass nipples both sides. DT 14/15 gauge spokes. Have not
>>> broken any spokes since building the wheel. Pretty sure they were new
>>> spokes in 2002 when this rim was installed. Hub has always been 3
>>> cross lacing with all rims. Wheel built by me. Using my Spokey spoke
>>> wrench that grabs all four corners of the brass nipples like a socket
>>> wrench. I know Mr. Brandt does not like these, but I do. At the time
>>> of building I am sure I used oil on the nipples. No thread locking
>>> compound. Many thousands of miles on the wheels. I range between
>>> 160-195 pounds body weight plus another 20-30 pounds for the bike and
>>> gear and water. Midwest riding mainly. Roads are usually OK.
>
> jim beam wrote:
>> that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
>> relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
>> over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of
>> the drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the
>> failure you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing
>> going on which you're not revealing].
>
> So, you're saying if it had cracked right-side-only it would be
> unremarkable?
i don't think "unremarkable" is the right way of saying it - that rim is
not known as being unreliable. better to say that it would be expected
if tension was too high.
cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when all
it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
> We all got that far. What's up with Mr Seaton's actual
> experience?
i'm waiting for the pics.
>
> "Eppure si è spezzato" as Galileo might have said in this situation.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 10:58:51
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when all
> it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again from
beamboy.
> i'm waiting for the pics.
Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
tensiometer in place.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 09:25:04
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
>> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when all
>> it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
>
> Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again from
> beamboy.
>
>> i'm waiting for the pics.
>
> Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
> tensiometer in place.
>
>
you're bearing false witness. or is there some kind of moron exemption
for that commandment?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 21:45:54
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:18CdnXDSEPJ9tofanZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jambo wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
>>> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when all
>>> it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
>>
>> Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again
>> from beamboy.
>>
>>> i'm waiting for the pics.
>>
>> Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
>> tensiometer in place.
>
> you're bearing false witness. or is there some kind of moron exemption
> for that commandment?
Uh, sorry beamboy, did you use duct tape instead?
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 20:56:18
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:18CdnXDSEPJ9tofanZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jambo wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
>>>> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when all
>>>> it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
>>> Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again
>>> from beamboy.
>>>
>>>> i'm waiting for the pics.
>>> Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
>>> tensiometer in place.
>> you're bearing false witness. or is there some kind of moron exemption
>> for that commandment?
>
> Uh, sorry beamboy, did you use duct tape instead?
Is not duct/duck tape sticky on one side?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 22:08:22
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:ffjkbi$5n3$3@registered.motzarella.org...
> Jambo wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:18CdnXDSEPJ9tofanZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>> Jambo wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:CMOdnX3ryYSek4fanZ2dnUVZ_q2hnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>>>>> cracking from tension being "too low", as is the case with non-drive
>>>>> spokes, is like expecting an old campy record crank to fatigue when
>>>>> all it's doing is propping up a wall in the garage.
>>>> Great, non-drive sidespokes = unused crank. Brilliant idiocy yet again
>>>> from beamboy.
>>>>
>>>>> i'm waiting for the pics.
>>>> Yeah, and let's hope he doesn't use sticky tape to position his Park
>>>> tensiometer in place.
>>> you're bearing false witness. or is there some kind of moron exemption
>>> for that commandment?
>>
>> Uh, sorry beamboy, did you use duct tape instead?
>
> Is not duct/duck tape sticky on one side?
Sticky tape = usually means desktop tape such as invisible or masking
Duct tape = Space shuttle repair kit in one
Point being, beamboy = fraud.
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 13:18:43
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:3NudnewLS5uKrYXanZ2dnUVZ_hynnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
> relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
> over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
> drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
> you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
> which you're not revealing].
Fud, fud, a-fudding we will go.....
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 02:18:01
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-19, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
>> Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets.
[...]
> that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
> relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
> over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
> drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
> you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
> which you're not revealing].
It is a mystery. I wonder if the greater angle where the nipple leaves
the rim on the NDS could have something to do with it.
Another possibility is perhaps tension increases in use on the NDS for
some reason.
I know that's not supposed to happen, but when you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable etc.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 06:49:40
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-19, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> [...]
>>> Non drive side spokes are pulling out the eyelets.
> [...]
>> that makes no sense. wood cracks when over-stressed, not when it's
>> relaxed. that's the same situation with your rim - it cracks when
>> over-tensioned. the non-drive side is at about half the tension of the
>> drive side - there's no mechanical mechanism that can cause the failure
>> you describe [unless there's some weird lateral loading thing going on
>> which you're not revealing].
>
> It is a mystery. I wonder if the greater angle where the nipple leaves
> the rim on the NDS could have something to do with it.
afaik, the open pro eyelet accommodates these angles so it shouldn't be
an issue.
>
> Another possibility is perhaps tension increases in use on the NDS for
> some reason.
>
> I know that's not supposed to happen, but when you have eliminated the
> impossible, whatever remains, however improbable etc.
i think we need to see pics.
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 18:15:16
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
<russellseat...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> > > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> > > eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> > > cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
> > > new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
> > > Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
> > > are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
> > > side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
> > > eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
> > > eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
> > > that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
> > > 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> > > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> > > own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
> > > they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
> > > have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
<snipped >
>
> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
at the time ot the build?
|
| | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 21:16:51
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> <snipped>
>
>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>
> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
> at the time ot the build?
>
>
good questions. to the o.p., the single best course of action you can
follow in this rebuild is use of a tensiometer. excess tension kills
rims, as you've just discovered. google this group for the tension
required for your rim.
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 10:35:09
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:NuqdnWZ8McmpQ4vanZ2dnUVZ_qninZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> good questions. to the o.p., the single best course of action you can
> follow in this rebuild is use of a tensiometer. excess tension kills
> rims, as you've just discovered. google this group for the tension
> required for your rim.
What a complete idiot you keep turning out. The failures were on the
NON-DRIVE SIDE.
Fucktard.
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 08:42:23
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:16:51 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>>
>> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
>> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
>> at the time ot the build?
>>
>>
>
> good questions. to the o.p., the single best course of action you can
> follow in this rebuild is use of a tensiometer. excess tension kills
> rims, as you've just discovered.
What a howler - the o.p. said it was the _non-drive_ set of eyelets that
failed - the ones with *less* tension.
Perhaps you'll be following this advice now:
"2. be responsible for your own mistakes and/or misunderstandings"
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 05:56:53
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
_ wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:16:51 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> On Oct 17, 5:58 pm, "russellseat...@yahoo.com"
>>> <russellseat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>>>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>>>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
>>>>>> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
>>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
>>>>>> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>>>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>>>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
>>>>>> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
>>>>>> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>>> <snipped>
>>>
>>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>>> Did you build the now failed wheel yourself, or did you have it built
>>> on your used hub? Was the rim a known new, never laced/tensioned rim
>>> at the time ot the build?
>>>
>>>
>> good questions. to the o.p., the single best course of action you can
>> follow in this rebuild is use of a tensiometer. excess tension kills
>> rims, as you've just discovered.
>
> What a howler - the o.p. said it was the _non-drive_ set of eyelets that
> failed - the ones with *less* tension.
>
> Perhaps you'll be following this advice now:
>
> "2. be responsible for your own mistakes and/or misunderstandings"
do you believe in the tooth fairy too? with all due respect to the
o.p., there are only two possibilities here:
1. he's mistaken
2. a rim that was previously cracked drive side was swapped out.
either way, he needs a rebuild, and he needs to tension correctly. see,
that wasn't so hard, was it?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 15:31:42
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:56:53 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>>>>>>> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
>>>>>>> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
>>>>>>> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
>>>>>>> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
>>>>>>> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
>>>>>>> that eyelet also have cracks in it.
>>>>
>>>>> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>>> drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>>> on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>>>>
>>> good questions. to the o.p., the single best course of action you can
>>> follow in this rebuild is use of a tensiometer. excess tension kills
>>> rims, as you've just discovered.
>>
>> What a howler - the o.p. said it was the _non-drive_ set of eyelets that
>> failed - the ones with *less* tension.
>>
>> Perhaps you'll be following this advice now:
>>
>> "2. be responsible for your own mistakes and/or misunderstandings"
>
> do you believe in the tooth fairy too? with all due respect to the
> o.p., there are only two possibilities here:
>
> 1. he's mistaken
Matthew 7:3 seems appropriate here...
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 15:41:17
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"_" <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com > wrote in message
news:11b2bji8yzdkf.a7wzpeth7um8$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:56:53 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>> do you believe in the tooth fairy too? with all due respect to the
>> o.p., there are only two possibilities here:
>>
>> 1. he's mistaken
>
> Matthew 7:3 seems appropriate here...
Matthew 7:5 is also applicable
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 10:37:50
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:6Medncq0Ev6LxYranZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>_ wrote:
>>
>> What a howler - the o.p. said it was the _non-drive_ set of eyelets that
>> failed - the ones with *less* tension.
>>
>> Perhaps you'll be following this advice now:
>>
>> "2. be responsible for your own mistakes and/or misunderstandings"
>
> do you believe in the tooth fairy too? with all due respect to the o.p.,
> there are only two possibilities here:
>
> 1. he's mistaken
> 2. a rim that was previously cracked drive side was swapped out.
Great, the world goes against beamboy, and beamboy insists the world is
wrong.
Hey fucktard, now you're trying to say the OP was wrong, just so you can
cover up your mistaken (again) assertion before. You're a complete fucking
idiot.
> either way, he needs a rebuild, and he needs to tension correctly. see,
> that wasn't so hard, was it?
Yeah, now introduce a new and unrelated statement, to try to cover up your
mistaken statement before. Typical beamboy idiot logic.
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 16:22:54
From: Colin Campbell
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> pulled completely away.
>
> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
Your post made me hustle out to the garage and check my Mavic Open Pro /
DT Swiss / Campy Record (2005 vintage) wheel. The current silver rim
was bought to replace a blue anodized Open Pro rim that cracked at an
eyelet. It has ten visible cracked eyelets (I didn't lift up the
stickers), and they are all on the drive side.
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 16:01:06
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 4:52 pm, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net > wrote:
> russellseat...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> > problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> > sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> > spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> > thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> > drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> > the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> > cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> > from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> > in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> > pulled completely away.
>
> > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> > I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> > seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> > lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> Any way you could post pics? I'm interested in the spoke hole cracking
> pattern.
I will try but it will be Saturday at the earliest. A friend with a
digital camera (I'll tell him to bring it) should be on the ride
Saturday and I can have him take the pictures of the rim. And then
I'll send them to Carl for posting. Wheel is still rideable. Just
needs to be trued fairly often.
>
> I agree with the others, swapping in a new rim takes only an hour or so,
> inclding tensioning/stress relieving.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 22:32:25
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:01:06 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>I will try but it will be Saturday at the earliest. A friend with a
>digital camera (I'll tell him to bring it) should be on the ride
>Saturday and I can have him take the pictures of the rim. And then
>I'll send them to Carl for posting. Wheel is still rideable. Just
>needs to be trued fairly often.
Dear Russell,
Feel free to email me.
Or just post photos at the free no-registration www.tinypic.com and
paste the links into a post, which is all that I do.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 15:58:46
From: russellseaton1@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 1:54 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Russell Seaton writes:
> > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> > eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> > cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
> > new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
> > Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
> > are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
> > side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
> > eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
> > eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
> > that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
> > 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> > own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
> > they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
> > have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their current
> position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable when removed
> from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one (aligning the valve
> holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time. Used spokes removed
> from a wheel usually cause spoke failures because acute angle spokes
> (outbound) do not straighten when placed as inbound spokes and thereby
> flex at the elbow.
>
> Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I haven't started the rim replacement yet. The new Open Pro rim is at
my parent's house and my Mom is not visiting until next weekend, so I
won't have the rim until then. I have built a few wheels from scratch
by following your book. But what you say about keeping the spokes in
the same spot makes sense so I will tape the new rim to the old rim
and transfer spokes one by one.
But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 18:45:51
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:58:46 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<russellseaton1@yahoo.com > wrote:
>But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
Dear Russell,
It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
tension.
If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
explanation?
That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
contact with the rim.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 01:25:24
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:45:51 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:58:46 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
> <russellseaton1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>
> Dear Russell,
>
> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
> tension.
>
> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
> explanation?
>
> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>
> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
> contact with the rim.
>
I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
lack of truth.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:25:24 GMT, _
<jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com > wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:45:51 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:58:46 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
>> <russellseaton1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>>
>> Dear Russell,
>>
>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>> tension.
>>
>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>> explanation?
>>
>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>
>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>> contact with the rim.
>>
>
>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>lack of truth.
Dear _,
Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
(I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
Nipples unscrewing?
Something else?
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 09:26:09
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:25:24 GMT, _
> <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:45:51 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:58:46 -0700, "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
>>> <russellseaton1@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not the
>>>>drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any pressure
>>>>on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
>>>
>>> Dear Russell,
>>>
>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>>> tension.
>>>
>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>>> explanation?
>>>
>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>>
>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>>> contact with the rim.
>>>
>>
>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>>lack of truth.
>
> Dear _,
>
> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>
> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>
> Nipples unscrewing?
>
Got it in one, you clever boy.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 07:05:50
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 2007-10-20, _ <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
[...]
>>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>>>> tension.
>>>>
>>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>>>> explanation?
>>>>
>>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>>>
>>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>>>> contact with the rim.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>>>lack of truth.
>>
>> Dear _,
>>
>> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
>> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>>
>> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
>> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>>
>> Nipples unscrewing?
>>
>
> Got it in one, you clever boy.
They don't necessarily unscrew though. OP used oil, not linseed or
threadlock, but even so, things can get gummed up or stick a bit.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 14:26:53
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 07:05:50 -0500, Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-20, _ <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> [...]
>>>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>>>>> tension.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>>>>> explanation?
>>>>>
>>>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>>>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>>>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>>>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>>>>
>>>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>>>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>>>>> contact with the rim.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>>>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>>>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>>>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>>>>lack of truth.
>>>
>>> Dear _,
>>>
>>> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
>>> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>>>
>>> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
>>> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>>>
>>> Nipples unscrewing?
>>>
>>
>> Got it in one, you clever boy.
>
> They don't necessarily unscrew though. OP used oil, not linseed or
> threadlock, but even so, things can get gummed up or stick a bit.
Any "hammering" sufficient to cause rim cracking would loosen gummed up
threads long before rim cracking.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 10:05:57
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 14:26:53 GMT, _
<jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com > wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 07:05:50 -0500, Ben C wrote:
>
>> On 2007-10-20, _ <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>>>>>> tension.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>>>>>> explanation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>>>>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>>>>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>>>>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>>>>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>>>>>> contact with the rim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>>>>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>>>>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>>>>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>>>>>lack of truth.
>>>>
>>>> Dear _,
>>>>
>>>> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
>>>> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>>>>
>>>> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
>>>> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>>>>
>>>> Nipples unscrewing?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Got it in one, you clever boy.
>>
>> They don't necessarily unscrew though. OP used oil, not linseed or
>> threadlock, but even so, things can get gummed up or stick a bit.
>
>Any "hammering" sufficient to cause rim cracking would loosen gummed up
>threads long before rim cracking.
Dear _,
Really? My experience is different.
I once stopped after about 80 miles on a flat rear motorcycle tire in
Baja and used LocTite on lots of loosened spokes.
The spokes held fine for the next 100 miles, when the tire bead came
out and halted the proceedings.
I suspect that the hammering on the rocky road was far more than any
bicycle rim would survive.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 19:36:13
From: _
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 10:05:57 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 14:26:53 GMT, _
> <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 07:05:50 -0500, Ben C wrote:
>>
>>> On 2007-10-20, _ <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:13:22 -0600, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>> It does seem odd that rim cracked around the spokes with less initial
>>>>>>> tension.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If they lost all tension (rattling loose), would impact be a possible
>>>>>>> explanation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is, the higher-tension drive-side spokes just see tension falling
>>>>>>> and rising smoothly, but the lower-tension non-drive-side spokes might
>>>>>>> be loose enough that they go bang-bang-bang against the rim as they
>>>>>>> lose all tension momentairly and then reseat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The distance involved must be tiny, but it's still an impact rather
>>>>>>> than just tension rising and falling while the spoke nipples stay in
>>>>>>> contact with the rim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I rather suspect were that the case, the wheel would go out of true long,
>>>>>>LONG before the non-drive side cracks appeared. As the orignal poster
>>>>>>seems completely capable of determining which spokes are on the drive and
>>>>>>non-drive side, he would be extremely unlikely to have failed to notice the
>>>>>>lack of truth.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear _,
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would the rim go out of true before the rim cracks appeared if the
>>>>> non-drive-side spokes go completely slack?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I don't know if they were in fact going slack, I'm just wondering
>>>>> what might cause the more lightly tensioned spokes to crack the rim.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Nipples unscrewing?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Got it in one, you clever boy.
>>>
>>> They don't necessarily unscrew though. OP used oil, not linseed or
>>> threadlock, but even so, things can get gummed up or stick a bit.
>>
>>Any "hammering" sufficient to cause rim cracking would loosen gummed up
>>threads long before rim cracking.
>
> Dear _,
>
> Really? My experience is different.
>
> I once stopped after about 80 miles on a flat rear motorcycle tire in
> Baja and used LocTite on lots of loosened spokes.
>
>
Your "gum" was different too.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 00:30:14
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Russell Seaton writes:
>>> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
>>> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
>>> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001
>>> with new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring
>>> 2001. Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the
>>> cracks are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non
>>> drive side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non
>>> drive side eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One
>>> of the eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim
>>> around that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would
>>> expect that 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
>>> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
>>> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes
>>> since they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without
>>> breaking. And have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>> Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their
>> current position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable
>> when removed from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one
>> (aligning the valve holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time.
>> Used spokes removed from a wheel usually cause spoke failures
>> because acute angle spokes (outbound) do not straighten when placed
>> as inbound spokes and thereby flex at the elbow.
> I haven't started the rim replacement yet. The new Open Pro rim is
> at my parent's house and my Mom is not visiting until next weekend,
> so I won't have the rim until then. I have built a few wheels from
> scratch by following your book. But what you say about keeping the
> spokes in the same spot makes sense so I will tape the new rim to
> the old rim and transfer spokes one by one.
And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
after all the spokes have been transferred. The failure to do this
has brought us ungainly spoke wrenches that capture spoke nipples at
their four corners like slotted socket wrenches. A flat and parallel
jaw wrench can twist off any spoke you have without rounding spoke
nipples, but that seems not to be obvious.
> But why did the non drive side eyelets develop the cracks and not
> the drive side eyelets? The non drive side spokes don't have any
> pressure on the rim/eyelets compared to the drive side.
I didn't see the dish on this wheel or the lacing pattern... or the
cracking mode, as someone mentioned. These rims are near enough to
cracking to respond to small differences.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2007 23:49:14
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> ...
> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
> after all the spokes have been transferred....
Why not a dab of grease instead?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 18:11:45
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
>> ...
>> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
>> after all the spokes have been transferred....
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Why not a dab of grease instead?
Do you also think 'special sauce' is more than catsup with mayonnaise?
Grease is just oil in a soap binder
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 14:05:29
From: Paul Kopit
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:11:45 -0500, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org >
wrote:
>Do you also think 'special sauce' is more than catsup with mayonnaise?
>Grease is just oil in a soap binder
>--
>Andrew Muzi
>www.yellowjersey.org
>Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Not exactly, grease is saponified oil and has excellent lubricity. It
will stay in place and works better in applications that don't move at
high speed to generate heat. You grease headsets as example.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 01:03:44
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Andrew Muzi writes:
>>> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
>>> after all the spokes have been transferred....
>> Why not a dab of grease instead?
> Do you also think 'special sauce' is more than catsup with mayonnaise?
> Grease is just oil in a soap binder
And... it far easier to use a needle nosed oil can to place a drop of
oil at each spoke nipple that smearing grease in there. This is done
after the spokes are in place.
Del Monte spelled it Catsup, Heinz spells it Ketchup. Both are
pronounced the same.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 18:54:20
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Andrew Muzi mused:
>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
>>> ...
>>> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
>>> after all the spokes have been transferred....
>
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Why not a dab of grease instead?
>
> Do you also think 'special sauce' is more than catsup with mayonnaise?
And ketchup is a vegetable. ;)
> Grease is just oil in a soap binder
True of course, but the grease is less likely to drip on the floor,
which is a concern for the home mechanic (especially apartment dwellers).
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 01:01:14
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
In article <ffbg3f$n2d$2@registered.motzarella.org >,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Andrew Muzi mused:
> >> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> And remember to put a drop of oil on each nipple/eyelet interface
> >>> after all the spokes have been transferred....
> >
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Why not a dab of grease instead?
> >
> > Do you also think 'special sauce' is more than catsup with mayonnaise?
>
> And ketchup is a vegetable. ;)
>
> > Grease is just oil in a soap binder
>
> True of course, but the grease is less likely to drip on the floor,
> which is a concern for the home mechanic (especially apartment dwellers).
Oil is good for wood floors.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 17:52:04
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around eyelets
> problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3 cross both
> sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with new rim and
> spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001. Thousands and
> thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks are on the non
> drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive side spokes have
> the least tension. Several of the non drive side eyelets have short
> cracks extending out from them. One of the eyelets has long cracks
> from it. And the sides of the rim around that eyelet also have cracks
> in it. Pretty soon I would expect that 2 inch section of rim to be
> pulled completely away.
>
> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already own.
> I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since they
> seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And have
> lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
Any way you could post pics? I'm interested in the spoke hole cracking
pattern.
I agree with the others, swapping in a new rim takes only an hour or so,
inclding tensioning/stress relieving.
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 21:11:17
From: Andrew Martin
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On Oct 17, 11:54 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Russell Seaton writes:
> > One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> > eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> > cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
> > new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
> > Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
> > are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
> > side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
> > eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
> > eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
> > that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
> > 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> > I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> > own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
> > they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
> > have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
>
> Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their current
> position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable when removed
> from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one (aligning the valve
> holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time. Used spokes removed
> from a wheel usually cause spoke failures because acute angle spokes
> (outbound) do not straighten when placed as inbound spokes and thereby
> flex at the elbow.
>
> Jobst Brandt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Rim-Swapping is a great place to start to learn full wheel building.
None of the lacing to learn - just the true/round steps. Tape the new
rim to the old rim in 4 places and you're good to go. You can do it
while watching TV.
|
| |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 18:54:13
From:
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
Russell Seaton writes:
> One of my rear Open Pro wheels succumbed to the cracks around
> eyelets problem. 32 spoke. DT 14/15 gauge. Brass nipples. 3
> cross both sides. 1998 Chorus hub. Wheel was built Fall 2001 with
> new rim and spokes. Original rim broke in a crash in Spring 2001.
> Thousands and thousands of miles on the wheel. All of the cracks
> are on the non drive side eyelets. Seems odd since the non drive
> side spokes have the least tension. Several of the non drive side
> eyelets have short cracks extending out from them. One of the
> eyelets has long cracks from it. And the sides of the rim around
> that eyelet also have cracks in it. Pretty soon I would expect that
> 2 inch section of rim to be pulled completely away.
> I'm going to rebuild the wheel with a new Open Pro rim I already
> own. I know the spokes will fit. I plan to reuse the spokes since
> they seem strong enough to rip apart the rim without breaking. And
> have lasted thousands and thousands of miles.
Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their current
position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable when removed
from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one (aligning the valve
holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time. Used spokes removed
from a wheel usually cause spoke failures because acute angle spokes
(outbound) do not straighten when placed as inbound spokes and thereby
flex at the elbow.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 14:00:11
From: Paul Kopit
Subject: Re: Broken Open Pro rim
|
On 17 Oct 2007 18:54:13 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>Don't unspoke the wheel! The spokes have been formed to their current
>position and have shapes that are not easily identifiable when removed
>from the wheel. Lay the new rim on the old one (aligning the valve
>holes) and transfer the spokes one-at-a-time. Used spokes removed
>from a wheel usually cause spoke failures because acute angle spokes
>(outbound) do not straighten when placed as inbound spokes and thereby
>flex at the elbow.
>
>Jobst Brandt
What you say makes sense and is common practice. I've found it easier
to remove the spokes so that I can oil the threads and grease/oil the
nips. I keep the spokes in sorted order by DS/heads/in or out and nds
same sort. It has made no difference in rebuilds and is faster for
me. If the orientation changes, it doesn't seem like it would be very
much.
|
|
