| |
Main
Date: 26 Jun 2007 15:51:57
From: kwalters
Subject: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
use my existing spokes.
Thanks. Ken
And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
time.
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 12:57:08
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 28, 4:12 am, "Tim McTeague" <mctea...@comcast.net > wrote:
> "kwalters" <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1386grja0eiaid5@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
>
> > Can you speak to the longevity of DT rr?
> > Ken
>
> For a 160 lb rider would the single or double eyelet be better I wonder.
> Jim Young advises single for riders under 180 but I wonder if the double
> would be better insurance against cracking. What's 40 more grams?
>
> Tim McTeague
Neither and both. There is nothing magic about double eyelet nor
anything tragic about single or no eyelet..depends completely on the
rim.
Single eyelet DT, Velocity and Mavic are fine...double eyelet Mavic
and DT are too..as are all the no eyelet Velocity rims. MUST design
the wheel according to the rider and their needs. Don't make poor
choices here..like too few spokes, thin spokes on a light rim for a
'heavy(in terms of weight OR technique)' rider. No need for a robust
wheel for a light(like buck 20 types) rider as well. THEN build well,
proper tension, stress relieved, etc...
Remember small differences in rim weight and spoke number equal BIG
differences in wheel reliability..like 36h vs 32, 2 cross vs 3, a 420
gram rim vs a 450 gram one. Add 100 grams to a wheel, get big
advantages to wheel reliability. Remember the wheel, along with all
this other bike stuff is there to get you there. Performance gains or
loses depends mostly on the rider, not the bike.
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 12:49:06
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 11:13 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com > wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 26, 3:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
> >>Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>use my existing spokes.
>
> >>Thanks. Ken
>
> >>And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>time.
>
> > BTW-Just built another set of DT rr 1.1(dbl eyelet) wheels last night
> > and once more I am very impressed by their quality..well worth the $5
> > more than OpenPro..wish they made a 36h tho-
>
> Can you speak to the longevity of DT rr?
> Ken
Since the rims are relatively new, no but the ease of build suggests
that they are great rims..but no 36h, unfortunately.
|
| |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 12:47:16
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 5:54 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a3...@news.free.fr>,
>
>
>
> "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > Dans le message de
> >news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
> > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, =
et puis a
> > d=E9clar=E9 :
> > > On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > >> Dans le message
> > >> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> > >> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et =
puis
> > >> a d=E9clar=E9 :
>
> > >>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > >>>> Dans le message
> > >>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> > >>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et
> > >>>> puis a d=E9clar=E9 :
>
> > >>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > >>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > >>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > >>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>
> > >>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > >>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > >>>>>>>> time.
>
> > >>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
> > >>>>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have
> > >>>>>>> been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I
> > >>>>>>> don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should
> > >>>>>>> last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have
> > >>>>>>> problems.
>
> > >>>>>> overpriced ?
>
> > >>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>
> > >>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>
> > >>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
> > >>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
> > >>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
> > >>> overpriced.".
>
> > >> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
> > >> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
> > >> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
> > >> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
> > >> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will decline
> > >> when the price asked is higher than what people are willing to pay
> > >> (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly situation).
> > >> That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory until
> > >> adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute.
> > >> It's economics, not evangelism.-
>
> > > Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
> > > explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
> > > relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a wad.
> > > Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to justify you
> > > own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French interests? Something
> > > else?
>
> > Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still miss=
the
> > difference. Calling something overpriced, when that product sells
> > satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts to an opinion, _po=
orly_
> > based on available facts. It's like saying that a Corvette is an overp=
riced
> > automobile. The narrow, retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this fo=
rum
> > fails constantly to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retr=
o- or
> > not, gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire see=
ms a
> > fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in touting cli=
quish
> > opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and lore" from them. Like
> > about connecting links. I think there's a new bit of whole cloth being=
spun
> > there....
>
> Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
>
> By the numbers:
> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
Some cost more-DT
Mavic rims are fine if you build correctly with them..as are DT,
Velocity and others. I don't think $60 for a rim is outrageous at all,
when you consider replacement rims for wheelsouttaboxes are so much
more. If ya don't like them don't use them. if you love Sun(I don't),
then use them..easy to find.
> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
>
> By Mavic's definition of over-priced, their rims are not overpriced.
>
> --
> Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 20:10:14
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 28, 8:05 pm, "jim beam" wrote:
> ...
> this is not rocket surgery. use of instrumentation in mechanical
> assembly is well established. if you just crank and crank the lug nuts
> on your car, the studs will eventually break. so the manufacturer gives
> you a torque spec. and you use a torque wrench!...
Do you carry a torque wrench in the motor vehicle, or re-torque at
home after changing a flat on the road?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| | |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 07:40:43
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Johnny Sunset wrote:
> On Jun 28, 8:05 pm, "jim beam" wrote:
>> ...
>> this is not rocket surgery. use of instrumentation in mechanical
>> assembly is well established. if you just crank and crank the lug nuts
>> on your car, the studs will eventually break. so the manufacturer gives
>> you a torque spec. and you use a torque wrench!...
>
> Do you carry a torque wrench in the motor vehicle, or re-torque at
> home after changing a flat on the road?
>
depends on whether i intend on getting a flat or not.
|
| |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 07:48:54
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 28, 8:16 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <p...@vecchios.com > wrote:
> On Jun 27, 8:10 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 27, 8:21 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <p...@vecchios.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 26, 4:11 pm, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > > > use my existing spokes.
>
> > > > > Thanks. Ken
>
> > > > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > > > time.
>
> > > > you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes.
>
> > > Reusing 'old' spokes is no problem. The weak point of any wheel,
> > > except from a poor build, is the rim..not the spokes. I reuse them all
> > > the time w/o problem.
>
> > > the open pro is
>
> > > > excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> > > > I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> > > > at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>
> > > OpenPro didn't exist 10 years ago, The Open SUP was excellent, the
> > > next Mavic rim, the 'Reflex' was awful, lasted 1 year..Open Pro,
> > > except for noisey eyelets and wedge, is an OK rim. All rims crack at
> > > the sidewall when it gets thin from braking.
>
> > yeah, well, I just bought and used mavic open series rims, never
> > really noticed the difference in the names- as opposed to selling
> > them, I just rode them and liked them a lot; certainly for the smooth
> > braking surface. the point about not re-using old spokes was truing by
> > hand as opposed to tensionmeter, is that you need the same feel with
> > all the spokes, when they are used, even with a quick rim swap, I
> > found the truing process harder and "less true" with grime collected
> > on the threads for the nipples and finger-tips from spoke plucking-
> > not to mention the grain and even overall length of a used spoke will
> > interfere with that feel. Further, I find it difficult to believe that
> > a used spoke which has it's own unique bend or shape and length
> > according to it's previous life- will be able to instantly adapt to
> > the new shape required of a new rim; meaning that I believe the used
> > spoke will hold much of it's old shape and gradually adapt to the new
> > shape following which, the wheel will no longer be in balance with all
> > the forces that held it true- it will require frequent re-truing which
> > is indicative of a weaker wheel.
>
> Why, when you reuse spokes, you tape the new rim to the old and
> transfer the spokes one at a time to the same relative hole into the
> new rim so all the 'bends' will be the same. But if ya want new
> spokes, get new spokes..not expensive afterall.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
yup; been there done that
|
| |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 12:16:36
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 8:10 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 27, 8:21 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <p...@vecchios.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 26, 4:11 pm, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > > use my existing spokes.
>
> > > > Thanks. Ken
>
> > > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > > time.
>
> > > you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes.
>
> > Reusing 'old' spokes is no problem. The weak point of any wheel,
> > except from a poor build, is the rim..not the spokes. I reuse them all
> > the time w/o problem.
>
> > the open pro is
>
> > > excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> > > I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> > > at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>
> > OpenPro didn't exist 10 years ago, The Open SUP was excellent, the
> > next Mavic rim, the 'Reflex' was awful, lasted 1 year..Open Pro,
> > except for noisey eyelets and wedge, is an OK rim. All rims crack at
> > the sidewall when it gets thin from braking.
>
> yeah, well, I just bought and used mavic open series rims, never
> really noticed the difference in the names- as opposed to selling
> them, I just rode them and liked them a lot; certainly for the smooth
> braking surface. the point about not re-using old spokes was truing by
> hand as opposed to tensionmeter, is that you need the same feel with
> all the spokes, when they are used, even with a quick rim swap, I
> found the truing process harder and "less true" with grime collected
> on the threads for the nipples and finger-tips from spoke plucking-
> not to mention the grain and even overall length of a used spoke will
> interfere with that feel. Further, I find it difficult to believe that
> a used spoke which has it's own unique bend or shape and length
> according to it's previous life- will be able to instantly adapt to
> the new shape required of a new rim; meaning that I believe the used
> spoke will hold much of it's old shape and gradually adapt to the new
> shape following which, the wheel will no longer be in balance with all
> the forces that held it true- it will require frequent re-truing which
> is indicative of a weaker wheel.
Why, when you reuse spokes, you tape the new rim to the old and
transfer the spokes one at a time to the same relative hole into the
new rim so all the 'bends' will be the same. But if ya want new
spokes, get new spokes..not expensive afterall.
|
| |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 03:23:55
From: Gary Young
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 07:06:24 +0200, Sandy wrote:
> Dans le message de
> news:rubrum-4E9596.16543927062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net,
> Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>> In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a34cc@news.free.fr>,
>> "Sandy" <leurre@frree.fr> wrote:
>>
>>> Dans le message de
>>> news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
>>> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi,
>>> et puis a déclaré :
>>>> On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>>>>> Dans le message
>>>>> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
>>>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et
>>>>> puis a déclaré :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dans le message
>>>>>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a
>>>>>>> réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck
>>>>>>>>>> with Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too
>>>>>>>>>> have been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the
>>>>>>>>>> spokes. I don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since
>>>>>>>>>> spokes should last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was
>>>>>>>>>> known to have problems.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> overpriced ?
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
>>>>>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
>>>>>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
>>>>>> overpriced.".
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
>>>>> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
>>>>> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
>>>>> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
>>>>> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will
>>>>> decline when the price asked is higher than what people are
>>>>> willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a
>>>>> monopoly situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain
>>>>> in inventory until adjusted downwards to a level where there is a
>>>>> parallel substitute. It's economics, not evangelism.-
>>>>
>>>> Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
>>>> explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
>>>> relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a
>>>> wad. Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to
>>>> justify you own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French
>>>> interests? Something else?
>>>
>>> Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still
>>> miss the difference. Calling something overpriced, when that
>>> product sells satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts
>>> to an opinion, _poorly_ based on available facts. It's like saying
>>> that a Corvette is an overpriced automobile. The narrow,
>>> retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum fails constantly
>>> to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or not,
>>> gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems
>>> a fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in
>>> touting cliquish opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and
>>> lore" from them. Like about connecting links. I think there's a
>>> new bit of whole cloth being spun there....
>>
>> Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
>>
>> By the numbers:
>> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
>> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
>> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
>> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
>
> OK, so you're yet another evangelist. Your last and crowning sentence just
> had a logical hernia - inoperable - fatal.
Your argument seems to be couched in the language of economics -- if a
product clears the market, then by definition it is not overpriced.
Frankly, I'm not sure that even an economist would agree with you. It
seems to me that economists regularly talk about things like whether we're
in the middle of a housing bubble, whether the stock market is overvalued,
and so on and so forth. Those sorts of discussions wouldn't make any sense
if economists always believed that the market price was the best measure
of an asset's value. Furthermore, economists often talk about
externalities -- costs that aren't adequately reflected in the market
price.
But let's leave behind economics. This is a forum about bicycle
technology. When someone says that something is overpriced, they usually
mean that it's price is not in keeping with the product's technological
merits. Whether consumers would pay a premium because it's the same
product that Lance used is generally not our concern. If you use a little
common sense, instead of an a priori definition of "overpriced" that few
people share with you, then you probably won't have such trouble
understanding what people mean.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 18:29:51
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 6:54 pm, Michael Press wrote:
> ...
> By the numbers:
> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
How dare you call Mavic rims overpriced, when they blow Sun and Alex
rims out of the water (so to speak) on the all important category of
EUROPEAN MYSTIQUE & HERITAGE [TM]?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 18:19:37
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 6:54 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a3...@news.free.fr>,
>
>
>
>
>
> "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > Dans le message de
> >news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
> > Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, =
et puis a
> > d=E9clar=E9 :
> > > On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > >> Dans le message
> > >> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> > >> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et =
puis
> > >> a d=E9clar=E9 :
>
> > >>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > >>>> Dans le message
> > >>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> > >>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et
> > >>>> puis a d=E9clar=E9 :
>
> > >>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > >>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > >>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > >>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>
> > >>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > >>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > >>>>>>>> time.
>
> > >>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
> > >>>>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have
> > >>>>>>> been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I
> > >>>>>>> don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should
> > >>>>>>> last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have
> > >>>>>>> problems.
>
> > >>>>>> overpriced ?
>
> > >>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>
> > >>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>
> > >>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
> > >>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
> > >>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
> > >>> overpriced.".
>
> > >> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
> > >> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
> > >> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
> > >> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
> > >> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will decline
> > >> when the price asked is higher than what people are willing to pay
> > >> (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly situation).
> > >> That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory until
> > >> adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute.
> > >> It's economics, not evangelism.-
>
> > > Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
> > > explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
> > > relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a wad.
> > > Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to justify you
> > > own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French interests? Something
> > > else?
>
> > Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still miss=
the
> > difference. Calling something overpriced, when that product sells
> > satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts to an opinion, _po=
orly_
> > based on available facts. It's like saying that a Corvette is an overp=
riced
> > automobile. The narrow, retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this fo=
rum
> > fails constantly to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retr=
o- or
> > not, gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire see=
ms a
> > fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in touting cli=
quish
> > opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and lore" from them. Like
> > about connecting links. I think there's a new bit of whole cloth being=
spun
> > there....
>
> Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
>
> By the numbers:
> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
Very well said, sir!
>
> By Mavic's definition of over-priced, their rims are not overpriced.
But, then again, what is? ;-)
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 16:23:37
From: Jay Beattie
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 1:13 pm, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com > wrote:
> On Jun 27, 6:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > kwalters wrote:
> > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > use my existing spokes.
>
> > > Thanks. Ken
>
> > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > time.
>
> > Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
> > Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
> > re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
> > reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
> > the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> I've also re-rimed wheels. It is less work. I tape an existing wheel
> to a new rim, and transfer spokes. I've had no problems with spokes. I
> have had problems with rims craking at the eyelets, mavic reflex and
> maxic cxp 21. I haven't used a tensiometer, cause I don't have one. I
> havent' bought one becaue I woulnd't use it that often anyways. I used
> to assume that you could put lots of tension in the spokes and they
> rims wouldn't crack. Well, I guess that this is not the case.
Not anymore! I bought a tensiometer because it was apparent to me
that my historically optimal tensions were cracking rims. Now I
follow manufacturers suggested tensions plus about 10% because of my
weight. If that fails, I'm going to use Loctite or linseed oil.
A tensiometer was a good investment for me. I live in a neighborhood
with other bicyclists and it has become the communal tensiometer. My
riding buddy lives about four houses away, and he drops by for tools
rather than cups of sugar, etc. He is a mechanical engineer for Yakima
and gives me rack parts, so it all works out. He also gets pro deals
and has an uber-expensive bike that weighs about a pound, but he is
still racing and can justify it, sort of. -- Jay Beattie.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 16:13:00
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 10:17 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 11:40 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> Colin Campbell wrote:
> >>> raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>>> use my existing spokes.
> >>>>> Thanks. Ken
> >>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>>> time.
> >>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
> >>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> >>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> >>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
> >>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I had
> >>> a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the bike
> >>> shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was a crack
> >>> at one spoke hole.
> >>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into a
> >>> silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third try at
> >>> fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No fewer than
> >>> ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
> >>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
> >>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
> >>> soldiers on in front....
> >>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
> >> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
> >> you use a tensiometer?- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > don't know, this was before tensionmeters were invented....but I was
> > handbuilding my wheels thanx to jobst' book, tensioning by feel, dt
> > double butted spokes- wheels held true till the rim would crack- oh, a
> > LOT of kms about 2000kms per month - more in the summer, less in winter
>
> so why is it that /i/ who builds with a tensiometer, and who weighs
> #205-#210, has never had a cracked rim in a normal wheel? the only rim
> i've ever cracked is where spoke tension was above 2000N.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
luck of the gods perhaps ? I don't know; the only cracking I
experenced was at the rim flange- but I did have a wheel blow up on me
too; short ride to work, go in for a few minutes, come out 15 minutes
later and the rear wheel is in pieces- I think that's when I decided
to not go to 120psi as a rule.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 13:13:16
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 6:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net > wrote:
> kwalters wrote:
> > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > use my existing spokes.
>
> > Thanks. Ken
>
> > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > time.
>
> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
> Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
> re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
> reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
> the MA-3 was known to have problems.
I've also re-rimed wheels. It is less work. I tape an existing wheel
to a new rim, and transfer spokes. I've had no problems with spokes. I
have had problems with rims craking at the eyelets, mavic reflex and
maxic cxp 21. I haven't used a tensiometer, cause I don't have one. I
havent' bought one becaue I woulnd't use it that often anyways. I used
to assume that you could put lots of tension in the spokes and they
rims wouldn't crack. Well, I guess that this is not the case.
Andres
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 11:24:25
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr > wrote:
> Dans le message denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.c=
om,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et=
puis a
> d=E9clar=E9 :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> >> Dans le message
> >> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> >> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et pu=
is
> >> a d=E9clar=E9 :
>
> >>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> kwalters wrote:
> >>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>
> >>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>
> >>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>>>> time.
>
> >>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
> >>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been
> >>>>> forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think
> >>>>> there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through
> >>>>> many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> >>>> overpriced ?
>
> >>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>
> >> Well, they're "priced", period.
>
> > Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim makers.
> > Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole meant when
> > he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims] overpriced.".
>
> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical conclus=
ion
> that they are higher priced, only. Something like hamburger, where 20% f=
at
> is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments come in when you personally dec=
ide
> that the higher price is not justifiable for your budget. Reality shows
> that prices will decline when the price asked is higher than what people =
are
> willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly
> situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory un=
til
> adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute. It's
> economics, not evangelism.-
Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a wad.
Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to justify you
own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French interests? Something
else?
Look, Sandy, if you think Mavic rims are good value, snap up as many
as you want. Those who find them "overpriced" will look elsewhere.
- 30 -
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 21:42:54
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Dans le message de
news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>> Dans le message
>> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et puis
>> a déclaré :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>>>> Dans le message
>>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
>>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et
>>>> puis a déclaré :
>>
>>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>
>>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>>> time.
>>
>>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
>>>>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have
>>>>>>> been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I
>>>>>>> don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should
>>>>>>> last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have
>>>>>>> problems.
>>
>>>>>> overpriced ?
>>
>>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>
>>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>>
>>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
>>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
>>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
>>> overpriced.".
>>
>> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
>> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
>> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
>> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
>> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will decline
>> when the price asked is higher than what people are willing to pay
>> (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly situation).
>> That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory until
>> adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute.
>> It's economics, not evangelism.-
>
> Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
> explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
> relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a wad.
> Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to justify you
> own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French interests? Something
> else?
Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still miss the
difference. Calling something overpriced, when that product sells
satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts to an opinion, _poorly_
based on available facts. It's like saying that a Corvette is an overpriced
automobile. The narrow, retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum
fails constantly to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or
not, gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems a
fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in touting cliquish
opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and lore" from them. Like
about connecting links. I think there's a new bit of whole cloth being spun
there....
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 16:54:39
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a34cc@news.free.fr >,
"Sandy" <leurre@frree.fr > wrote:
> Dans le message de
> news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
> > On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> >> Dans le message
> >> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> >> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et puis
> >> a déclaré :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> >>>> Dans le message
> >>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> >>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et
> >>>> puis a déclaré :
> >>
> >>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
> >>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
> >>
> >>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>>>>>> time.
> >>
> >>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
> >>>>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have
> >>>>>>> been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I
> >>>>>>> don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should
> >>>>>>> last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have
> >>>>>>> problems.
> >>
> >>>>>> overpriced ?
> >>
> >>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
> >>
> >>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
> >>
> >>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
> >>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
> >>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
> >>> overpriced.".
> >>
> >> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
> >> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
> >> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
> >> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
> >> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will decline
> >> when the price asked is higher than what people are willing to pay
> >> (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly situation).
> >> That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory until
> >> adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute.
> >> It's economics, not evangelism.-
> >
> > Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
> > explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
> > relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a wad.
> > Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to justify you
> > own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French interests? Something
> > else?
>
> Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still miss the
> difference. Calling something overpriced, when that product sells
> satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts to an opinion, _poorly_
> based on available facts. It's like saying that a Corvette is an overpriced
> automobile. The narrow, retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum
> fails constantly to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or
> not, gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems a
> fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in touting cliquish
> opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and lore" from them. Like
> about connecting links. I think there's a new bit of whole cloth being spun
> there....
Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
By the numbers:
Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
By Mavic's definition of over-priced, their rims are not overpriced.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 07:06:24
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Dans le message de
news:rubrum-4E9596.16543927062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net,
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net > a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a34cc@news.free.fr>,
> "Sandy" <leurre@frree.fr> wrote:
>
>> Dans le message de
>> news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
>> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi,
>> et puis a déclaré :
>>> On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>>>> Dans le message
>>>> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
>>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et
>>>> puis a déclaré :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>>>>>> Dans le message
>>>>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a
>>>>>> réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck
>>>>>>>>> with Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too
>>>>>>>>> have been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the
>>>>>>>>> spokes. I don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since
>>>>>>>>> spokes should last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was
>>>>>>>>> known to have problems.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> overpriced ?
>>>>
>>>>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>>>
>>>>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>>>>
>>>>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
>>>>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
>>>>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
>>>>> overpriced.".
>>>>
>>>> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
>>>> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
>>>> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
>>>> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
>>>> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will
>>>> decline when the price asked is higher than what people are
>>>> willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a
>>>> monopoly situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain
>>>> in inventory until adjusted downwards to a level where there is a
>>>> parallel substitute. It's economics, not evangelism.-
>>>
>>> Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
>>> explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
>>> relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a
>>> wad. Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to
>>> justify you own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French
>>> interests? Something else?
>>
>> Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still
>> miss the difference. Calling something overpriced, when that
>> product sells satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts
>> to an opinion, _poorly_ based on available facts. It's like saying
>> that a Corvette is an overpriced automobile. The narrow,
>> retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum fails constantly
>> to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or not,
>> gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems
>> a fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in
>> touting cliquish opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and
>> lore" from them. Like about connecting links. I think there's a
>> new bit of whole cloth being spun there....
>
> Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
>
> By the numbers:
> Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
> Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
> Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
> By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
OK, so you're yet another evangelist. Your last and crowning sentence just
had a logical hernia - inoperable - fatal.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 00:41:33
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
In article <468341d0$0$10989$426a74cc@news.free.fr >,
"Sandy" <leurre@frree.fr > wrote:
> Dans le message de
> news:rubrum-4E9596.16543927062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net,
> Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> > In article <4682bdbe$0$27765$426a34cc@news.free.fr>,
> > "Sandy" <leurre@frree.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> Dans le message de
> >> news:1182968665.479128.167910@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com,
> >> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi,
> >> et puis a déclaré :
> >>> On Jun 27, 1:16 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> >>>> Dans le message
> >>>> denews:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, Ozark
> >>>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et
> >>>> puis a déclaré :
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> >>>>>> Dans le message
> >>>>>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
> >>>>>> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a
> >>>>>> réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>> kwalters wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>>>>>>>> time.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck
> >>>>>>>>> with Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too
> >>>>>>>>> have been forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the
> >>>>>>>>> spokes. I don't think there's any reason to re-spoke, since
> >>>>>>>>> spokes should last through many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was
> >>>>>>>>> known to have problems.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> overpriced ?
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Well, they're "priced", period.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim
> >>>>> makers. Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole
> >>>>> meant when he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims]
> >>>>> overpriced.".
> >>>>
> >>>> Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical
> >>>> conclusion that they are higher priced, only. Something like
> >>>> hamburger, where 20% fat is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments
> >>>> come in when you personally decide that the higher price is not
> >>>> justifiable for your budget. Reality shows that prices will
> >>>> decline when the price asked is higher than what people are
> >>>> willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a
> >>>> monopoly situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain
> >>>> in inventory until adjusted downwards to a level where there is a
> >>>> parallel substitute. It's economics, not evangelism.-
> >>>
> >>> Lesseee....Peter Cole opined that Mavic rims are "overpriced". I
> >>> explain the idea to another poster (IOW, that they are "overpriced"
> >>> relative to the competition) and *you* get your chamois all in a
> >>> wad. Why is that? Do you hold stock in Salomon? Just trying to
> >>> justify you own purchases? Feeling the need to defend French
> >>> interests? Something else?
> >>
> >> Silly to accuse me of having a background interest. But you still
> >> miss the difference. Calling something overpriced, when that
> >> product sells satisfactorily to the seller's expectations, amounts
> >> to an opinion, _poorly_ based on available facts. It's like saying
> >> that a Corvette is an overpriced automobile. The narrow,
> >> retrenched, pseudo-popular "wisdom" in this forum fails constantly
> >> to meet up with the world. Every sort of grouch, retro- or not,
> >> gets to spout off, but pointing out facts to those who inquire seems
> >> a fair thing to do. For my experience, this forum regales in
> >> touting cliquish opinions as facts and building a whole "myth and
> >> lore" from them. Like about connecting links. I think there's a
> >> new bit of whole cloth being spun there....
> >
> > Yarn is spun, cloth is woven.
> >
> > By the numbers:
> > Mavic rims are not superior to all rims out there.
> > Many rims are superior to Mavic rims.
> > Many rims superior to Mavic rims cost less. (perhaps all)
> > By this definition of over-priced, Mavis rims are over-priced.
>
> OK, so you're yet another evangelist. Your last and crowning sentence just
> had a logical hernia - inoperable - fatal.
By your lights, I am always wrong. Yes, dear.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 10:44:41
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr > wrote:
> Dans le message denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.=
com,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a r=E9fl=E9chi, et=
puis a
> d=E9clar=E9 :
>
>
>
> > On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>> kwalters wrote:
> >>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>> use my existing spokes.
>
> >>>> Thanks. Ken
>
> >>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>> time.
>
> >>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
> >>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been
> >>> forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think
> >>> there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through
> >>> many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> >> overpriced ?
>
> > "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>
> Well, they're "priced", period.
Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim makers.
Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole meant when
he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims] overpriced.".
> Until they fishhook money from your wallet,
> forcing you to buy something, it's willing buyer and willing seller. If
> they were really priced beyond what people would pay for them, they would=
be
> excess inventory. To blame marketing is to blame, at the same time, the
> failure of communication (marketing, by another term) on the part of Mavi=
c's
> competitors. And none of this at all is a big deal. We're talking about
> riding a bike, right?
> --
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 20:16:10
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Dans le message de
news:1182966281.034725.120340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> On Jun 27, 12:21 pm, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
>> Dans le message
>> denews:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com, Ozark
>> Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et puis
>> a déclaré :
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>
>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>
>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>> time.
>>
>>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
>>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been
>>>>> forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think
>>>>> there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through
>>>>> many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>>
>>>> overpriced ?
>>
>>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>
>> Well, they're "priced", period.
>
> Quite. And "priced" higher than comparable rims from other rim makers.
> Taking a wild-ass guess, I would say that is what Mr. Cole meant when
> he wrote "I think they're ["they" being Mavic rims] overpriced.".
Still not right. Your first sentence leaves one with the logical conclusion
that they are higher priced, only. Something like hamburger, where 20% fat
is cheaper than 10% fat. Value judgments come in when you personally decide
that the higher price is not justifiable for your budget. Reality shows
that prices will decline when the price asked is higher than what people are
willing to pay (or when they are compelled to pay, as in a monopoly
situation). That is when they are overpriced, and remain in inventory until
adjusted downwards to a level where there is a parallel substitute. It's
economics, not evangelism.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 08:52:56
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > kwalters wrote:
> > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > use my existing spokes.
>
> > > Thanks. Ken
>
> > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > time.
>
> > Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
> > Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
> > re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
> > reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
> > the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> overpriced ?
"overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
> think of what you are getting for that money, how many
> hours and hours of riding is bought with that money ? I don't know
> why, but I think us cyclists are about the cheapest folk on the
> planet- but really, when you look at cycling from the point of view of
> how far you can go and how many hours of enjoyment you can spend for
> that little money it's a bargain beyond compare, right up there with
> free water. just my opinion.-
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 19:21:48
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Dans le message de
news:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>
>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>
>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>> time.
>>
>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been
>>> forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think
>>> there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through
>>> many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>>
>> overpriced ?
>
> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>
Well, they're "priced", period. Until they fishhook money from your wallet,
forcing you to buy something, it's willing buyer and willing seller. If
they were really priced beyond what people would pay for them, they would be
excess inventory. To blame marketing is to blame, at the same time, the
failure of communication (marketing, by another term) on the part of Mavic's
competitors. And none of this at all is a big deal. We're talking about
riding a bike, right?
--
Sandy
--
Mobilité et stabilité ne sont pas antinomiques :
un cycliste n'est stable sur sa bicyclette
qu'en avançant.
- Chirac, J (who must have read Einstein)
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 09:43:37
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Sandy wrote:
> Dans le message de
> news:1182959576.072316.208010@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com,
> Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> a réfléchi, et puis a
> déclaré :
>> On Jun 27, 9:18 am, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> kwalters wrote:
>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>> time.
>>>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with
>>>> Open Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been
>>>> forced to re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think
>>>> there's any reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through
>>>> many rims. FWIW, the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>>> overpriced ?
>> "overpriced" relative to the competition, yes.
>>
> Well, they're "priced", period. Until they fishhook money from your wallet,
> forcing you to buy something, it's willing buyer and willing seller. If
> they were really priced beyond what people would pay for them, they would be
> excess inventory. To blame marketing is to blame, at the same time, the
> failure of communication (marketing, by another term) on the part of Mavic's
> competitors. And none of this at all is a big deal. We're talking about
> riding a bike, right?
Terribly sorry for my sloppy use of the word "overpriced", I had no idea
we were maintaining such standards. To clear up any residual confusion,
I would replace that term with "poor value".
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 07:18:48
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net > wrote:
> kwalters wrote:
> > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > use my existing spokes.
>
> > Thanks. Ken
>
> > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > time.
>
> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
> Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
> re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
> reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
> the MA-3 was known to have problems.
overpriced ? think of what you are getting for that money, how many
hours and hours of riding is bought with that money ? I don't know
why, but I think us cyclists are about the cheapest folk on the
planet- but really, when you look at cycling from the point of view of
how far you can go and how many hours of enjoyment you can spend for
that little money it's a bargain beyond compare, right up there with
free water. just my opinion.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 10:02:50
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
raamman@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> kwalters wrote:
>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>> use my existing spokes.
>>> Thanks. Ken
>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>> time.
>> Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
>> Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
>> re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
>> reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
>> the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> overpriced ? think of what you are getting for that money, how many
> hours and hours of riding is bought with that money ? I don't know
> why, but I think us cyclists are about the cheapest folk on the
> planet- but really, when you look at cycling from the point of view of
> how far you can go and how many hours of enjoyment you can spend for
> that little money it's a bargain beyond compare, right up there with
> free water. just my opinion.
>
Who gets free water any more?
Trying not to rant, but there's a difference between price and value.
Consumable expenses on bikes do add up, especially if you're maintaining
a fleet (family bikes). I've ridden $70 rims and $30 rims and I'm pretty
sure that I enjoyed the experiences equally. I used to spend $50 a pop
on bike tires, but one day realizes how crazy that was. Since then I've
enjoyed $12 tires just as much. Ditto for chains. When did frugality
become a dirty word?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 15:44:35
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
In article
<1182953928.269901.7390@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
raamman@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 27, 8:13 am, Peter Cole <peter_c...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > kwalters wrote:
> > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > use my existing spokes.
> >
> > > Thanks. Ken
> >
> > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > time.
> >
> > Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
> > Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
> > re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
> > reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
> > the MA-3 was known to have problems.
>
> overpriced ? think of what you are getting for that money, how many
> hours and hours of riding is bought with that money ? I don't know
> why, but I think us cyclists are about the cheapest folk on the
> planet- but really, when you look at cycling from the point of view of
> how far you can go and how many hours of enjoyment you can spend for
> that little money it's a bargain beyond compare, right up there with
> free water. just my opinion.
Yes, bicycling is not ocean racing. Being cheap, I will
continue to hold out for robust equipment at a price I
know is fair; a price that supports manufacture and
distribution.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 07:10:32
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 8:21 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <p...@vecchios.com > wrote:
> On Jun 26, 4:11 pm, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
> > > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > > use my existing spokes.
>
> > > Thanks. Ken
>
> > > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > > time.
>
> > you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes.
>
> Reusing 'old' spokes is no problem. The weak point of any wheel,
> except from a poor build, is the rim..not the spokes. I reuse them all
> the time w/o problem.
>
> the open pro is
>
> > excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> > I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> > at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>
> OpenPro didn't exist 10 years ago, The Open SUP was excellent, the
> next Mavic rim, the 'Reflex' was awful, lasted 1 year..Open Pro,
> except for noisey eyelets and wedge, is an OK rim. All rims crack at
> the sidewall when it gets thin from braking.
yeah, well, I just bought and used mavic open series rims, never
really noticed the difference in the names- as opposed to selling
them, I just rode them and liked them a lot; certainly for the smooth
braking surface. the point about not re-using old spokes was truing by
hand as opposed to tensionmeter, is that you need the same feel with
all the spokes, when they are used, even with a quick rim swap, I
found the truing process harder and "less true" with grime collected
on the threads for the nipples and finger-tips from spoke plucking-
not to mention the grain and even overall length of a used spoke will
interfere with that feel. Further, I find it difficult to believe that
a used spoke which has it's own unique bend or shape and length
according to it's previous life- will be able to instantly adapt to
the new shape required of a new rim; meaning that I believe the used
spoke will hold much of it's old shape and gradually adapt to the new
shape following which, the wheel will no longer be in balance with all
the forces that held it true- it will require frequent re-truing which
is indicative of a weaker wheel.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 02:50:57
From: Gary Young
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:35:48 -0700, jim beam wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>> On Jun 26, 10:40 pm, "jim beam"? wrote:
>>> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>> time.
>>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
>>>> JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
>>>> appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
>>> for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
>>> rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
>>> may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
>>> makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
Nonsense. If the time to fatigue is sufficiently long, then it's perfectly
rational to reuse spokes. The fact that some of us have been able to reuse
spokes with no problems shows that the time to fatigue is sufficiently
long.
>>
>> Well, the spokes in question have already outlasted one rim. If they
>> last at least as long as the replacement rim (an excellent possibility
>> if rim brakes are used and the bike is sometimes ridden in the rain,
>> and a good possibility anyhow, the savings in time and money would be
>> worth it, compared to replacing the spokes.
>>
>> Even if a spoke or two broke over the life of the replacement rim, the
>> bike could likely still be ridden well enough to get home.
>>
>> Pace mr. beam, but just because Jobst Brandt advocates an idea, does
>> not a priori make it a bad one.
>>
> correct, but the logic is wrong. /your/ logic is dead right. /his/
> logic is that the spokes have somehow been "cured" of their disease,
> which is pure b.s.
Just to set the record straight, the argument is that the spokes have been
stress-relieved.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 05:23:42
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 3:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com > wrote:
> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> use my existing spokes.
>
> Thanks. Ken
>
> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> time.
BTW-Just built another set of DT rr 1.1(dbl eyelet) wheels last night
and once more I am very impressed by their quality..well worth the $5
more than OpenPro..wish they made a 36h tho-
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 23:13:16
From: kwalters
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> On Jun 26, 3:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
>>Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>use my existing spokes.
>>
>>Thanks. Ken
>>
>>And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>time.
>
>
> BTW-Just built another set of DT rr 1.1(dbl eyelet) wheels last night
> and once more I am very impressed by their quality..well worth the $5
> more than OpenPro..wish they made a 36h tho-
>
Can you speak to the longevity of DT rr?
Ken
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 06:12:03
From: Tim McTeague
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
"kwalters" <kwalters@frii.com > wrote in message
news:1386grja0eiaid5@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Can you speak to the longevity of DT rr?
> Ken
For a 160 lb rider would the single or double eyelet be better I wonder.
Jim Young advises single for riders under 180 but I wonder if the double
would be better insurance against cracking. What's 40 more grams?
Tim McTeague
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 17:26:40
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
> "kwalters" <kwalters@frii.com> wrote in message
> news:1386grja0eiaid5@corp.supernews.com...
>> Can you speak to the longevity of DT rr?
Tim McTeague wrote:
> For a 160 lb rider would the single or double eyelet be better I wonder.
> Jim Young advises single for riders under 180 but I wonder if the double
> would be better insurance against cracking. What's 40 more grams?
Or a Velocity Aerohead O/C. They don't need no steenking ferrules. The
offset design is tough, 400g $60.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 05:21:37
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 4:11 pm, raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>
> > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > use my existing spokes.
>
> > Thanks. Ken
>
> > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > time.
>
> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes.
Reusing 'old' spokes is no problem. The weak point of any wheel,
except from a poor build, is the rim..not the spokes. I reuse them all
the time w/o problem.
the open pro is
> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
OpenPro didn't exist 10 years ago, The Open SUP was excellent, the
next Mavic rim, the 'Reflex' was awful, lasted 1 year..Open Pro,
except for noisey eyelets and wedge, is an OK rim. All rims crack at
the sidewall when it gets thin from braking.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 05:18:26
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 3:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com > wrote:
> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> use my existing spokes.
>
> Thanks. Ken
>
> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> time.
Open Pro ERD is 605..MA-3 was 608...MA-3 were a poor design/poor
materials. OpenSport is a much better rim and same ERD..buuilt many w/
o any problems so far.
|
| |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 08:13:13
From: Peter Cole
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
kwalters wrote:
> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> use my existing spokes.
>
> Thanks. Ken
>
> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> time.
>
Just another data point: I'm 225lb and have had good luck with Open
Pro's (although I think they're overpriced). I too have been forced to
re-rim with Mavic just to save the spokes. I don't think there's any
reason to re-spoke, since spokes should last through many rims. FWIW,
the MA-3 was known to have problems.
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 22:28:37
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 27, 12:08 am, Michael Press wrote:
> ...
> Mavic rims currently sell for much more than they are
> worth. Ask for recommendations on a more robust rim for
> far less money, such as a Sun CR-18.
butbutbut, the Sun CR-18 is so plain!
(I should know, I have a bike in my bedroom with a Sun CR-18 rim.)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 22:26:07
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 11:35 pm, "jim beam" wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 10:40 pm, "jim beam"? wrote:
> >> Johnny Sunset wrote:
> >>> On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
> >>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>>>> use my existing spokes.
> >>>>> Thanks. Ken
> >>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>>>> time.
> >>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
> >>> JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
> >>> appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
> >> for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
> >> rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
> >> may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
> >> makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
>
> > Well, the spokes in question have already outlasted one rim. If they
> > last at least as long as the replacement rim (an excellent possibility
> > if rim brakes are used and the bike is sometimes ridden in the rain,
> > and a good possibility anyhow, the savings in time and money would be
> > worth it, compared to replacing the spokes.
>
> > Even if a spoke or two broke over the life of the replacement rim, the
> > bike could likely still be ridden well enough to get home.
>
> > Pace mr. beam, but just because Jobst Brandt advocates an idea, does
> > not a priori make it a bad one.
>
> correct, but the logic is wrong. /your/ logic is dead right. /his/
> logic is that the spokes have somehow been "cured" of their disease,
> which is pure b.s.
Whether Jobst Brandt's theory of stress relief is correct or "jim
beam's" argument for better quality steel, or a combination of the two
for the improved durability of spokes does not matter much in this
case. Decent quality stainless steel spokes will generally outlast a
rim used with rim brakes. Therefore, I will continue to dissent from
"raam's" comment that "you aren't going to help things re-using old
spokes", assuming the original poster's spokes are reasonable quality.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 23:06:08
From: kwalters
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Johnny Sunset wrote:
> On Jun 26, 11:35 pm, "jim beam" wrote:
>
>>Johnny Sunset wrote:
>>
>>>On Jun 26, 10:40 pm, "jim beam"? wrote:
>>>
>>>>Johnny Sunset wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>>and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>>would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>>use my existing spokes.
>>>>>>>Thanks. Ken
>>>>>>>And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>>expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>>time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
>>>>>
>>>>>JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
>>>>>appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
>>>>
>>>>for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
>>>>rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
>>>>may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
>>>>makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
>>
>>>Well, the spokes in question have already outlasted one rim. If they
>>>last at least as long as the replacement rim (an excellent possibility
>>>if rim brakes are used and the bike is sometimes ridden in the rain,
>>>and a good possibility anyhow, the savings in time and money would be
>>>worth it, compared to replacing the spokes.
>>
>>>Even if a spoke or two broke over the life of the replacement rim, the
>>>bike could likely still be ridden well enough to get home.
>>
>>>Pace mr. beam, but just because Jobst Brandt advocates an idea, does
>>>not a priori make it a bad one.
>>
>>correct, but the logic is wrong. /your/ logic is dead right. /his/
>>logic is that the spokes have somehow been "cured" of their disease,
>>which is pure b.s.
>
>
> Whether Jobst Brandt's theory of stress relief is correct or "jim
> beam's" argument for better quality steel, or a combination of the two
> for the improved durability of spokes does not matter much in this
> case. Decent quality stainless steel spokes will generally outlast a
> rim used with rim brakes. Therefore, I will continue to dissent from
> "raam's" comment that "you aren't going to help things re-using old
> spokes", assuming the original poster's spokes are reasonable quality.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
>
>
>
Spokes are DT 14/15, don't know if a tensiometer was used; it was
built by a respected local shop. The MA-3 was a replacement for an
MA-40 that had many miles on it, including a van-supported 2900 mile
xc ride two years ago. The current MA-3 gave out in less than 2000
miles, so maybe it was over(/under)-tensioned.
Ken
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 22:08:33
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
In article <13832k4omind785@corp.supernews.com >,
kwalters <kwalters@frii.com > wrote:
> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> use my existing spokes.
>
> Thanks. Ken
>
> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> time.
Mavic rims currently sell for much more than they are
worth. Ask for recommendations on a more robust rim for
far less money, such as a Sun CR-18.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 21:36:09
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 11:40 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Colin Campbell wrote:
> > raam...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
> >>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>> use my existing spokes.
>
> >>> Thanks. Ken
>
> >>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>> time.
>
> >> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
> >> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> >> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> >> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>
> > I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I had
> > a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the bike
> > shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was a crack
> > at one spoke hole.
>
> > By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into a
> > silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third try at
> > fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No fewer than
> > ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>
> > I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
> > match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
> > soldiers on in front....
>
> > By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
>
> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
> you use a tensiometer?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
don't know, this was before tensionmeters were invented....but I was
handbuilding my wheels thanx to jobst' book, tensioning by feel, dt
double butted spokes- wheels held true till the rim would crack- oh, a
LOT of kms about 2000kms per month - more in the summer, less in winter
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 07:17:46
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
raamman@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 26, 11:40 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Colin Campbell wrote:
>>> raam...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>> time.
>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I had
>>> a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the bike
>>> shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was a crack
>>> at one spoke hole.
>>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into a
>>> silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third try at
>>> fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No fewer than
>>> ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
>>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
>>> soldiers on in front....
>>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
>> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
>> you use a tensiometer?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> don't know, this was before tensionmeters were invented....but I was
> handbuilding my wheels thanx to jobst' book, tensioning by feel, dt
> double butted spokes- wheels held true till the rim would crack- oh, a
> LOT of kms about 2000kms per month - more in the summer, less in winter
>
so why is it that /i/ who builds with a tensiometer, and who weighs
#205-#210, has never had a cracked rim in a normal wheel? the only rim
i've ever cracked is where spoke tension was above 2000N.
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 21:25:22
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 10:40 pm, "jim beam"? wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
> >> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>
> >>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> >>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> >>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> >>> use my existing spokes.
> >>> Thanks. Ken
> >>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> >>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> >>> time.
> >> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
>
> > JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
> > appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
>
> for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
> rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
> may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
> makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
Well, the spokes in question have already outlasted one rim. If they
last at least as long as the replacement rim (an excellent possibility
if rim brakes are used and the bike is sometimes ridden in the rain,
and a good possibility anyhow, the savings in time and money would be
worth it, compared to replacing the spokes.
Even if a spoke or two broke over the life of the replacement rim, the
bike could likely still be ridden well enough to get home.
Pace mr. beam, but just because Jobst Brandt advocates an idea, does
not a priori make it a bad one.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 21:35:48
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Johnny Sunset wrote:
> On Jun 26, 10:40 pm, "jim beam"? wrote:
>> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>>> On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>> time.
>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
>>> JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
>>> appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
>> for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
>> rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
>> may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
>> makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
>
> Well, the spokes in question have already outlasted one rim. If they
> last at least as long as the replacement rim (an excellent possibility
> if rim brakes are used and the bike is sometimes ridden in the rain,
> and a good possibility anyhow, the savings in time and money would be
> worth it, compared to replacing the spokes.
>
> Even if a spoke or two broke over the life of the replacement rim, the
> bike could likely still be ridden well enough to get home.
>
> Pace mr. beam, but just because Jobst Brandt advocates an idea, does
> not a priori make it a bad one.
>
correct, but the logic is wrong. /your/ logic is dead right. /his/
logic is that the spokes have somehow been "cured" of their disease,
which is pure b.s.
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 20:08:41
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>
> > Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> > and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> > would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> > use my existing spokes.
>
> > Thanks. Ken
>
> > And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> > expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> > time.
>
> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html >.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 20:40:59
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Johnny Sunset wrote:
> On Jun 26, 5:11 pm, raam? wrote:
>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, Ken Walters wrote:
>>
>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>> use my existing spokes.
>>> Thanks. Ken
>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>> time.
>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes....
>
> JB appears to disagree and his arguments for re-using spokes also
> appear rational: <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/reusing-spokes.html>.
>
for stainless spokes, since they have no endurance limit, it's not
rational at all. it may be practical if you're out in the wilds. it
may be cheap if you're doing it yourself. but as engineering advice, it
makes as much sense as re-using toilet paper.
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 15:11:34
From:
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com > wrote:
> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
> use my existing spokes.
>
> Thanks. Ken
>
> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
> time.
you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 15:49:32
From: Colin Campbell
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
raamman@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>> use my existing spokes.
>>
>> Thanks. Ken
>>
>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>> time.
>
> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>
I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I had
a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the bike
shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was a crack
at one spoke hole.
By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into a
silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third try at
fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No fewer than
ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
soldiers on in front....
By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Jun 2007 20:40:44
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Colin Campbell wrote:
> raamman@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>
>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>
>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>> time.
>>
>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>
> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I had
> a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the bike
> shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was a crack
> at one spoke hole.
>
> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into a
> silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third try at
> fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No fewer than
> ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>
> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
> soldiers on in front....
>
> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
you use a tensiometer?
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Jun 2007 21:43:11
From: Colin Campbell
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
jim beam wrote:
> Colin Campbell wrote:
>> raamman@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>
>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>> time.
>>>
>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>>
>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I
>> had a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the
>> bike shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was
>> a crack at one spoke hole.
>>
>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into
>> a silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third
>> try at fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No
>> fewer than ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>>
>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
>> soldiers on in front....
>>
>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb rider.
>
> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
> you use a tensiometer?
I used a reputable local bike shop, which had previously built me
bulletproof wheels. (There was a change of ownership, and the previous
owner built the original Mavic Open Pro blue / Campy Record / DT Swiss
wheel. Other people worked on the silver / Campy / DT wheel.)
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Jun 2007 18:05:23
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Colin Campbell wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Colin Campbell wrote:
>>> raamman@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>
>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>>>
>>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I
>>> had a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the
>>> bike shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there was
>>> a crack at one spoke hole.
>>>
>>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked into
>>> a silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the third
>>> try at fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the rim. No
>>> fewer than ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>>>
>>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
>>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
>>> soldiers on in front....
>>>
>>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb
>>> rider.
>>
>> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
>> you use a tensiometer?
> I used a reputable local bike shop, which had previously built me
> bulletproof wheels. (There was a change of ownership, and the previous
> owner built the original Mavic Open Pro blue / Campy Record / DT Swiss
> wheel. Other people worked on the silver / Campy / DT wheel.)
ooookaaaay, so did /they/ use a tensiometer???
this is not rocket surgery. use of instrumentation in mechanical
assembly is well established. if you just crank and crank the lug nuts
on your car, the studs will eventually break. so the manufacturer gives
you a torque spec. and you use a torque wrench!
bike wheel? tensiometer. $60. simple.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 13:32:49
From: Colin Campbell
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
jim beam wrote:
> Colin Campbell wrote:
>> jim beam wrote:
>>> Colin Campbell wrote:
>>>> raamman@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>>>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>>>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>>>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>>>>
>>>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike. I
>>>> had a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to the
>>>> bike shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said there
>>>> was a crack at one spoke hole.
>>>>
>>>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked
>>>> into a silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the
>>>> third try at fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the
>>>> rim. No fewer than ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>>>>
>>>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
>>>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
>>>> soldiers on in front....
>>>>
>>>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb
>>>> rider.
>>>
>>> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension? did
>>> you use a tensiometer?
>> I used a reputable local bike shop, which had previously built me
>> bulletproof wheels. (There was a change of ownership, and the
>> previous owner built the original Mavic Open Pro blue / Campy Record /
>> DT Swiss wheel. Other people worked on the silver / Campy / DT wheel.)
>
> ooookaaaay, so did /they/ use a tensiometer???
>
> this is not rocket surgery. use of instrumentation in mechanical
> assembly is well established. if you just crank and crank the lug nuts
> on your car, the studs will eventually break. so the manufacturer gives
> you a torque spec. and you use a torque wrench!
>
> bike wheel? tensiometer. $60. simple.
You have a valid point, but I'm just a customer, and don't even know
what to ask in this area. But, in my opinion, there should be some
expectation of successful results when an established shop builds a
wheel for a customer.
And there has been a good deal of posting about Mavic rim problems here,
hasn't there?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jun 2007 20:21:00
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Question - Mavic Open Pro CD rim 32 hole - rear
|
Colin Campbell wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Colin Campbell wrote:
>>> jim beam wrote:
>>>> Colin Campbell wrote:
>>>>> raamman@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 26, 5:51 pm, kwalters <kwalt...@frii.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Adequate for a 185# rider who slows down for RR tracks
>>>>>>> and dodges potholes? Open to other possibilities, but
>>>>>>> would like to keep the Open Pro profile so I can hopefully
>>>>>>> use my existing spokes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks. Ken
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, any guess as to what kind of rim longevity I might
>>>>>>> expect? Just went thru an MA-3 in a dishearteningly short
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you aren't going to help things re-using old spokes. the open pro is
>>>>>> excellent but a bit weak, I used to ride them about 10 years ago when
>>>>>> I was about 150lbs, and they would last up to a year before cracking
>>>>>> at the rim from tire psi (100-110)
>>>>>>
>>>>> I had a beautiful pair of Open Pro blue anodized rims on my bike.
>>>>> I had a spoke break, and "semi-trued" the wheel so I could get to
>>>>> the bike shop. The owner congratulated me on my work, but said
>>>>> there was a crack at one spoke hole.
>>>>>
>>>>> By then, Mavic had stopped making the blue rims, so I got talked
>>>>> into a silver one. Soon, spokes were popping, and after about the
>>>>> third try at fixing the problem, we looked really closely at the
>>>>> rim. No fewer than ten of the spoke holes showed cracks!
>>>>>
>>>>> I ended up with a Velocity Areo blue rim in the rear - not an exact
>>>>> match in color, but close enough, and no problems. The Mavic rim
>>>>> soldiers on in front....
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, I was a 190 lb rider at the time; I'm now a sub-180 lb
>>>>> rider.
>>>>
>>>> and the question to both of you is, what was your spoke tension?
>>>> did you use a tensiometer?
>>> I used a reputable local bike shop, which had previously built me
>>> bulletproof wheels. (There was a change of ownership, and the
>>> previous owner built the original Mavic Open Pro blue / Campy Record
>>> / DT Swiss wheel. Other people worked on the silver / Campy / DT
>>> wheel.)
>>
>> ooookaaaay, so did /they/ use a tensiometer???
>>
>> this is not rocket surgery. use of instrumentation in mechanical
>> assembly is well established. if you just crank and crank the lug nuts
>> on your car, the studs will eventually break. so the manufacturer gives
>> you a torque spec. and you use a torque wrench!
>>
>> bike wheel? tensiometer. $60. simple.
> You have a valid point, but I'm just a customer, and don't even know
> what to ask in this area. But, in my opinion, there should be some
> expectation of successful results when an established shop builds a
> wheel for a customer.
i would expect "good results" from a book purporting to be a technical
resource on wheelbuilding, but i've been disappointed too.
bottom line, there's a lot of misinformation out there, most importantly
spoke tension "as high as the rim can bear". if your lbs is ignoring
the spoke tension spec of the rim manufacturer, as they clearly have
been, then you need to look elsewhere. just because a shop /tells/ you
they're good, doesn't mean they /are/ good.
>
> And there has been a good deal of posting about Mavic rim problems here,
> hasn't there?
and a lot of sheeple voice criticism essentially because of the fun of
jumping on a particular bandwagon. i've built with alex, campy, araya,
ambrosio, and a whole bunch of different mavics, and for the high end
stuff, you'll be hard pressed to notice much difference. but i like
mavic because they weld the seams, they machine the braking surfaces and
they actually bother to invest in the research that have brought us
these [and other] improvements.
|
|
