| |
Main
Date: 07 Jun 2007 16:21:57
From:
Subject: history of tying and soldering
|
There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
recently appeared.)
The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
contemporary explanations.
Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
"Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
--Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX04u.pdf
So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
pretty much demolished the strength theory.
I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
explanation:
" . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
double tied spokes . . ."
http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
(Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
53x11.)
Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
"New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_518.jpg
Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
don't do much restraining:
http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
(Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
vanishing.)
Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=EK&size=large
For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003
The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
straight if a spoke breaks."
This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
_might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
(They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
would be fantastic.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
|
| |
Date: 08 Jun 2007 05:36:30
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
On Jun 7, 4:21 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
> recently appeared.)
>
> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
> contemporary explanations.
>
> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>
> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>
> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX...
>
> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>
> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>
> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
> explanation:
>
> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
> double tied spokes . . ."
>
> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>
> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
> 53x11.)
>
> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>
> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>
> http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cb...
>
> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
> don't do much restraining:
>
> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>
> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
> vanishing.)
>
> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>
> http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=E...
>
> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=r...
>
> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
> straight if a spoke breaks."
>
> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>
> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>
> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>
> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
> would be fantastic.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
I am sure Jobst will blast me for this, he always does but I often t/s
left side since the tension is lower and if somebody wacks the rim a
wee bit, lowering tension in one spot, t/s reduces spoke movement at
the flange, reducing broken spokes...since most break
there...anecdotal info only...do this, get few broken spokes.
|
| |
Date: 08 Jun 2007 00:25:33
From: DougC
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
> recently appeared.)
> .....
>
> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
> straight if a spoke breaks."
>
> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
> ....
I dunno nuts about tying spokes on "regular" bicycles.
I do know that for one type of modern bicycle-engine kit, the spokes
tend to abrade each other at the crossings if not tied.
The belt-drive kits from Golden Eagle use a big plastic ring that snaps
onto the spokes as the drive method. From reading the
motoredbicycles.com forums, in the past (as of a couple years ago) the
trend was to wire and solder at the crossings, but it seems that using
small zip-ties works just as well and is easier to do.
At one point somebody at that forum had photos up of a wheel that hadn't
been tied, and it was visible how the crossed spokes had worn 50% of the
way through each other.
------
I got on Google to try to find pictures of this (concerning motored
bicycles) and found..... lots of other people zip-tying their bicycle
spokes as well.... though I don't know why. Never tied any spokes of my
(non-motorized) bicycle wheels, and they never seem to have suffered as
a result of it.
~
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 20:25:54
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:icug63p8242a97jkkplbtsumssg6relb7n@4ax.com...
> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
> recently appeared.)
>
> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
> contemporary explanations.
>
> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>
> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>
> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4
>
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX04u.pdf
>
> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>
> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>
> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
> explanation:
>
> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
> double tied spokes . . ."
>
> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>
> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
> 53x11.)
>
> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>
> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>
>
http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_518.jpg
>
> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
> don't do much restraining:
>
> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>
> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
> vanishing.)
>
> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>
>
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=EK&size=large
>
> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>
>
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003
>
> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
> straight if a spoke breaks."
>
> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>
> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>
> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>
> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
> would be fantastic.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
Years ago someone with a replica high wheeler showed me the benefits of
tied and soldered spokes on his bike - it seems to have increased lateral
rigidity on a wheel that size.
I built one set of tied and soldered HF 36 hole sewup wheels. It
supposedly increased lateral rigidity on fast descents. I don't know what
ever happened to them but I decided it wasn't worth the effort.
Chas.
|
| | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 22:15:26
From:
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 20:25:54 -0700, "* * Chas"
<verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
>
><carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:icug63p8242a97jkkplbtsumssg6relb7n@4ax.com...
>> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
>> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
>> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
>> recently appeared.)
>>
>> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
>> contemporary explanations.
>>
>> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>>
>> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
>> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
>> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>>
>> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4
>>
>http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX04u.pdf
>>
>> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
>> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
>> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>>
>> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
>> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
>> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>>
>> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
>> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
>> explanation:
>>
>> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
>> double tied spokes . . ."
>>
>> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>>
>> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
>> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
>> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
>> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
>> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
>> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
>> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
>> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
>> 53x11.)
>>
>> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
>> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
>> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
>> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
>> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>>
>> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
>> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
>> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
>> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>>
>>
>http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_518.jpg
>>
>> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
>> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
>> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
>> don't do much restraining:
>>
>> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>>
>> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
>> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
>> vanishing.)
>>
>> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
>> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
>> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
>> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
>> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>>
>>
>http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=EK&size=large
>>
>> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
>> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>>
>>
>http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003
>>
>> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
>> straight if a spoke breaks."
>>
>> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
>> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
>> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>>
>> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
>> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
>> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>>
>> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
>> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>>
>> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
>> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
>> would be fantastic.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>Years ago someone with a replica high wheeler showed me the benefits of
>tied and soldered spokes on his bike - it seems to have increased lateral
>rigidity on a wheel that size.
>
>I built one set of tied and soldered HF 36 hole sewup wheels. It
>supposedly increased lateral rigidity on fast descents. I don't know what
>ever happened to them but I decided it wasn't worth the effort.
>
>Chas.
Dear Chas,
Generations of dwarf safety riders have insisted that tying and
soldering tangent spokes at the crossings made their wheels stronger
and more rigid.
They never have any clear explanation of how.
Nor do they ever have any test measurements.
If someone ever does demonstrate a measurable change in wheel strength
due to lashing spokes together at the crossings, I expect that RBT
will hear about it.
The only test that I've seen is in the back of "The Bicycle Wheel." No
change in lateral rigidity was observed with a micrometer.
As for bigger wheels, the mysterious effect would be less, since the
crossings are proportionally even closer to the hub than on itty-bitty
700c wheels.
Of course, if you habitually pose like the three riders in the
foreground of this picture, you'll probably try anything in hopes of
increasing lateral rigidity:
http://www.nostalgic.net/index.asp?S=arc/pre1920/1885+bicycle+club+photo%2Ejpg
But what I want can't be found by measuring wheel rigidity with
weights.
I want to know what they were _saying_ around 1880 when they first
began tying and soldering tangent spokes. Not what we think they
should have said or whether they were right or wrong, but just
whatever people like Grout or Starley or Rudge claimed (not that I
even know if those specific makers ever said anything).
That's going to take someone with a book or an internet link or a good
library or a patent search. The truth may be out there--Jobst thinks
that he remembers a book saying something about Starley and
highwheelers and twine as a safety measure. But until someone finds
it, we don't know how well remembered it is or how contemporary it
was.
And I'd love to stumble over a catalogue from the 1890's equivalent of
BikeToolsEtc or LooseScrews, advertising those odd little disks
soldered onto the Pope shaft-drive's spoke crossings.
"New! Improved! Fogel's Self-Soldering Spoke-Securing Safety-Enhancing
and Strength-Enabling Disks! As used by S. Brown and J. Brandt! Accept
No Substitutes! Sold in Packets of Seventeen!"
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 23:44:12
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:5bkh6318quekef93jr3ku8c3vevkhpf4ep@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 20:25:54 -0700, "* * Chas"
> <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
> >
> ><carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:icug63p8242a97jkkplbtsumssg6relb7n@4ax.com...
> >> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
> >> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
> >> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
> >> recently appeared.)
> >>
> >> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
> >> contemporary explanations.
> >>
> >> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
> >>
> >> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
> >> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
> >> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
> >>
> >> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4
> >>
>
>http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX04u.
pdf
> >>
> >> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was
commenting
> >> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
> >> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
> >>
> >> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
> >> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
> >> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
> >>
> >> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
> >> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
> >> explanation:
> >>
> >> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
> >> double tied spokes . . ."
> >>
> >> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
> >>
> >> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
> >> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
> >> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
> >> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
> >> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the
rim
> >> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
> >> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet
long.
> >> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
> >> 53x11.)
> >>
> >> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers
were
> >> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
> >> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
> >> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
> >> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
> >>
> >> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
> >> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
> >> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
> >> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
> >>
> >>
>
>http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp
_his_trans_vb_518.jpg
> >>
> >> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this
wheel.
> >> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
> >> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
> >> don't do much restraining:
> >>
> >> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
> >>
> >> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
> >> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
> >> vanishing.)
> >>
> >> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an
1897
> >> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
> >> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
> >> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
> >> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
> >>
> >>
>
>http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=EK&si
ze=large
> >>
> >> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
> >> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
> >>
> >>
>
>http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=rouba
ix_bikes1/IMG_0003
> >>
> >> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
> >> straight if a spoke breaks."
> >>
> >> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
> >> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
> >> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
> >>
> >> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
> >> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
> >> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
> >>
> >> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied
and
> >> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
> >>
> >> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering,
please
> >> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A
patent
> >> would be fantastic.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Carl Fogel
> >
> >Years ago someone with a replica high wheeler showed me the benefits of
> >tied and soldered spokes on his bike - it seems to have increased
lateral
> >rigidity on a wheel that size.
> >
> >I built one set of tied and soldered HF 36 hole sewup wheels. It
> >supposedly increased lateral rigidity on fast descents. I don't know
what
> >ever happened to them but I decided it wasn't worth the effort.
> >
> >Chas.
>
> Dear Chas,
>
> Generations of dwarf safety riders have insisted that tying and
> soldering tangent spokes at the crossings made their wheels stronger
> and more rigid.
>
> They never have any clear explanation of how.
>
> Nor do they ever have any test measurements.
>
> If someone ever does demonstrate a measurable change in wheel strength
> due to lashing spokes together at the crossings, I expect that RBT
> will hear about it.
>
> The only test that I've seen is in the back of "The Bicycle Wheel." No
> change in lateral rigidity was observed with a micrometer.
>
> As for bigger wheels, the mysterious effect would be less, since the
> crossings are proportionally even closer to the hub than on itty-bitty
> 700c wheels.
>
> Of course, if you habitually pose like the three riders in the
> foreground of this picture, you'll probably try anything in hopes of
> increasing lateral rigidity:
>
>
http://www.nostalgic.net/index.asp?S=arc/pre1920/1885+bicycle+club+photo%2Ejpg
>
> But what I want can't be found by measuring wheel rigidity with
> weights.
>
> I want to know what they were _saying_ around 1880 when they first
> began tying and soldering tangent spokes. Not what we think they
> should have said or whether they were right or wrong, but just
> whatever people like Grout or Starley or Rudge claimed (not that I
> even know if those specific makers ever said anything).
>
> That's going to take someone with a book or an internet link or a good
> library or a patent search. The truth may be out there--Jobst thinks
> that he remembers a book saying something about Starley and
> highwheelers and twine as a safety measure. But until someone finds
> it, we don't know how well remembered it is or how contemporary it
> was.
>
> And I'd love to stumble over a catalogue from the 1890's equivalent of
> BikeToolsEtc or LooseScrews, advertising those odd little disks
> soldered onto the Pope shaft-drive's spoke crossings.
>
> "New! Improved! Fogel's Self-Soldering Spoke-Securing Safety-Enhancing
> and Strength-Enabling Disks! As used by S. Brown and J. Brandt! Accept
> No Substitutes! Sold in Packets of Seventeen!"
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
There was a logical reason that spokes were soldered on big wheels but I
can't remember why. Maybe it was to keep them from rattling?
Like I said, I built one set of wheels that I tied and soldered. That was
at a time when TV in Albuquerque signed off at 10:00PM, I was living
alone, I wore sandals most of the time so I didn't have much of a sock
drawer to arrange. ;-)
Shortly afterward I switched to 36H 4x LF wheels and the issue of lateral
rigidity was never an issue again.
Chas.
|
| | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 21:25:22
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 20:25:54 -0700, "* * Chas"
> <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
>> <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:icug63p8242a97jkkplbtsumssg6relb7n@4ax.com...
>>> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
>>> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
>>> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
>>> recently appeared.)
>>>
>>> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
>>> contemporary explanations.
>>>
>>> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>>>
>>> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
>>> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
>>> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>>>
>>> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4
>>>
>> http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX04u.pdf
>>> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
>>> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
>>> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>>>
>>> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
>>> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
>>> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>>>
>>> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
>>> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
>>> explanation:
>>>
>>> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
>>> double tied spokes . . ."
>>>
>>> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>>>
>>> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
>>> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
>>> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
>>> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
>>> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
>>> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
>>> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
>>> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
>>> 53x11.)
>>>
>>> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
>>> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
>>> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
>>> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
>>> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>>>
>>> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
>>> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
>>> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
>>> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_518.jpg
>>> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
>>> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
>>> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
>>> don't do much restraining:
>>>
>>> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>>>
>>> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
>>> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
>>> vanishing.)
>>>
>>> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
>>> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
>>> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
>>> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
>>> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=EK&size=large
>>> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
>>> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>>>
>>>
>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003
>>> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
>>> straight if a spoke breaks."
>>>
>>> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
>>> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
>>> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>>>
>>> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
>>> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
>>> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>>>
>>> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
>>> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>>>
>>> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
>>> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
>>> would be fantastic.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Carl Fogel
>> Years ago someone with a replica high wheeler showed me the benefits of
>> tied and soldered spokes on his bike - it seems to have increased lateral
>> rigidity on a wheel that size.
>>
>> I built one set of tied and soldered HF 36 hole sewup wheels. It
>> supposedly increased lateral rigidity on fast descents. I don't know what
>> ever happened to them but I decided it wasn't worth the effort.
>>
>> Chas.
>
> Dear Chas,
>
> Generations of dwarf safety riders have insisted that tying and
> soldering tangent spokes at the crossings made their wheels stronger
> and more rigid.
>
> They never have any clear explanation of how.
>
> Nor do they ever have any test measurements.
>
> If someone ever does demonstrate a measurable change in wheel strength
> due to lashing spokes together at the crossings, I expect that RBT
> will hear about it.
>
> The only test that I've seen is in the back of "The Bicycle Wheel." No
> change in lateral rigidity was observed with a micrometer.
actually, it doesn't say that. it describes the measuring method, it
describes measuring deflection 2% different from before, and then
concludes that there is no difference.
now, they may not be any difference, but the methodology is that of
reinforcing a preconception, not following the conclusion presented by
results - because no results are presented. objective, method, RESULTS,
[analysis] conclusion. again, results [and analysis] have been omitted.
>
> As for bigger wheels, the mysterious effect would be less, since the
> crossings are proportionally even closer to the hub than on itty-bitty
> 700c wheels.
>
> Of course, if you habitually pose like the three riders in the
> foreground of this picture, you'll probably try anything in hopes of
> increasing lateral rigidity:
>
> http://www.nostalgic.net/index.asp?S=arc/pre1920/1885+bicycle+club+photo%2Ejpg
>
> But what I want can't be found by measuring wheel rigidity with
> weights.
>
> I want to know what they were _saying_ around 1880 when they first
> began tying and soldering tangent spokes. Not what we think they
> should have said or whether they were right or wrong, but just
> whatever people like Grout or Starley or Rudge claimed (not that I
> even know if those specific makers ever said anything).
>
> That's going to take someone with a book or an internet link or a good
> library or a patent search. The truth may be out there--Jobst thinks
> that he remembers a book saying something about Starley and
> highwheelers and twine as a safety measure. But until someone finds
> it, we don't know how well remembered it is or how contemporary it
> was.
>
> And I'd love to stumble over a catalogue from the 1890's equivalent of
> BikeToolsEtc or LooseScrews, advertising those odd little disks
> soldered onto the Pope shaft-drive's spoke crossings.
>
> "New! Improved! Fogel's Self-Soldering Spoke-Securing Safety-Enhancing
> and Strength-Enabling Disks! As used by S. Brown and J. Brandt! Accept
> No Substitutes! Sold in Packets of Seventeen!"
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 16:51:55
From: Sir Ridesalot
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
On Jun 7, 6:21 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
> recently appeared.)
>
> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
> contemporary explanations.
>
> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>
> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>
> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX...
>
> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>
> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>
> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
> explanation:
>
> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
> double tied spokes . . ."
>
> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>
> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
> 53x11.)
>
> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>
> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>
> http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cb...
>
> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
> don't do much restraining:
>
> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>
> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
> vanishing.)
>
> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>
> http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=E...
>
> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=r...
>
> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
> straight if a spoke breaks."
>
> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>
> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>
> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>
> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
> would be fantastic.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
Hi there.
I wonder if the tying and soldering was/is believed to strengthen the
wheel because a broken spoke would be at least partially supported by
the unbroken spoke it was/is soldered to thereby keeping the broken
spoke under more tension than an unsoldered broken spoke.
Cheers from Peter
|
| | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 19:33:07
From:
Subject: Re: history of tying and soldering
|
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:51:55 -0700, Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca > wrote:
>On Jun 7, 6:21 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> There seem to be two dubious modern explanations for tying and
>> soldering the spokes of tangent-laced wheels at the spoke
>> crossings--strength and safety. (Read on--a third modern explanation
>> recently appeared.)
>>
>> The practice began with highwheelers, but it's hard to find any
>> contemporary explanations.
>>
>> Here's the oldest comment that I've found so far, but it's from 1902:
>>
>> "Tying the spokes where they cross is still the custom with some
>> manufacturers who claim to thus secure increased rigidity; but the
>> majority of makers have abandoned the practise."
>>
>> --Caspar Whitney in "Outing" magazine, v40.4http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/Outing/Volume_40/outXXXX04/outXXXX...
>>
>> So by the turn of the century, a bike magazine reviewer was commenting
>> in passing that tie-and-solder was supposedly for strength and that
>> bikes came with tied spokes from some factories.
>>
>> No one has produced measurements showing any significant increase in
>> wheel strength from tying and soldering. The only test, by Jobst,
>> pretty much demolished the strength theory.
>>
>> I've found a description (but alas no picture) of a _double_ tied
>> Beale and Strawe, which strikes me as supporting the strength
>> explanation:
>>
>> " . . . a Beale and Strawe fitted with its original head badge and
>> double tied spokes . . ."
>>
>> http://www.cyclemuseum.org.uk/vintagedetail.htm
>>
>> The other usual explanation is safety--tying the spoke down near the
>> hub stops broken spokes from flopping around dangerously. Again, it's
>> a nice theory, but it doesn't seem to hold up well with bicycle
>> wheels. Their spokes usually break at the hub, and even a cross-3
>> lacing usually holds such spokes in place. A spoke breaking at the rim
>> is likely to wave around no matter what's done at the hub,
>> particularly on a highwheeler, where spokes may be over two feet long.
>> (Some of them had 62-inch wheels, roughly the equivalent of a modern
>> 53x11.)
>>
>> Another problem with the safety explanation is that manufacturers were
>> tying and soldering expensive bikes at the factory. Manufacturers
>> might tie and solder in hopes of making their wheels look stronger (a
>> positive feature), but they would be reluctant to encourage any fears
>> that their spokes would break and kill the customers.
>>
>> But broken spokes might have been more of a problem than our modern
>> lacing habits lead me to think. Here's the earliest highwheeler that
>> I've found with tied spokes, a circa 1888 St. George's Engineering
>> "New Rapid" model with cross-8 lacing:
>>
>> http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cb...
>>
>> Maybe the tie-and-solder was applied for safety reasons on this wheel.
>> Notice in this view that the first spokes aren't interleaved for the
>> first 7 crossings, unlike like our modern cross-3 wheels, so they
>> don't do much restraining:
>>
>> http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg
>>
>> (Incidentally, 1888 is the last gasp for highwheelers. Starley's
>> safety bike had been out for three years and highwheelers were
>> vanishing.)
>>
>> Here's a nice example of what looks like OEM tie-and-solder on an 1897
>> Pope shaft-drive bike. The shaft drives cost about twice as much as
>> chain drives, and Pope was the biggest bike maker in the world back
>> then. This wheel apparently used little metal disks instead of wire
>> for fast soldering or in hopes of greater strength:
>>
>> http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=1gci&pic_id=120248&v=E...
>>
>> For people obsessed with the current century, here's the most recent
>> dwarf safety bicycle picture that I've noticed with tied spokes:
>>
>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=r...
>>
>> The caption introduces even more confusion: "helps keep the wheel
>> straight if a spoke breaks."
>>
>> This weird modern notion of strength surviving broken spokes suggests
>> that people might well have just made up explanations back in the
>> 1880's after they finished fooling around with their soldering irons.
>>
>> I'm not so much interested in arguments about what we now think
>> _might_ be logical explanations as I'm interested in finding out what
>> our great-grandfathers _thought_ they were doing.
>>
>> (They may, of course, had _both_ explanations in mind as they tied and
>> soldered their way around 80-spoke highwheelers.)
>>
>> If anyone has older text or pictures about tying and soldering, please
>> post them. A catalog selling the odd Pope disks would be fun. A patent
>> would be fantastic.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>
>Hi there.
>
>I wonder if the tying and soldering was/is believed to strengthen the
>wheel because a broken spoke would be at least partially supported by
>the unbroken spoke it was/is soldered to thereby keeping the broken
>spoke under more tension than an unsoldered broken spoke.
>
>Cheers from Peter
Dear Peter,
I doubt that there was any real theory in the modern caption about
tied spokes keeping rims true after a spoke breaks.
I think that it's just a good example of well-meant wishful thinking:
tying the spokes together must do _something_ because people wouldn't
do something that had no useful effect, would they?
Two crossed spokes pull on the rim at widely separated points.
If each spoke has 200 pounds of tension, tying them together a few
inches from the hub won't keep the rim true if you cut a spoke at the
hub or the rim.
It's the tension and the direction of the tension between the hub hole
and the rim hole that matters, and that tension is lost as soon as you
break a spoke at either end.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
|
