| |
Main
Date: 09 Oct 2007 16:45:08
From: Kerry Montgomery
Subject: rim recommendations?
|
Hi all,
I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
180 pounds.
Thanks,
Kerry
|
|
| |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 19:15:56
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 14, 11:01 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> spikenett...@earthlink.net wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 9:38 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3in...@speakeasy.net>,
> >>> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article <femghf$qq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> >>>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>>>>>>> spoke holes.
> >>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>>>>>>> Adequate.
> >>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >>>>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >>>>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
> >>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
> >>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
> >>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
> >>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
> >>> What values of tension?
> >> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
> >> rims?
>
> > Mavic seems to be all over the place with their tension
> > specifications.
>
> > According to their technical site they caution to use between 70 to 90
> > kg tension for "cross three pattern" wheels, front and rear drive
> > side:
>
> >http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/produ...
>
> > But elsewhere on the same site they instruct to tension to a final
> > tension of 90 - 119 daN ( 1 daN - 0.980 kg ) for front and rear drive
> > side spokes:
>
> >http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic...
>
> > And in yet another location they recommend 75 - 110 daN front and 90 -
> > 120 daN rear for their classic wheel sets using, presumably, their
> > conventional Reflex and Pro rims:
>
> >http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/theme...
>
> > So much for reliable proper tension specifications from manufacturers,
> > at least as far as Mavic goes. I don't know . Maybe it's the case that
> > when Salomon acquired Mavic, they assigned their own technical people
> > the unfamiliar additional task of developing new rims and wheels and
> > this accounts for Mavic's current mixed results and mixed tension
> > messages.
>
> > If one ventures to use a manufacturer's specifications, given the
> > apparent vagaries of some manufacturer's tension specifications and of
> > tensiometers, one ought to always use in the the first instance
> > Brandt's classic wheel spoke squeezing method, if only to check that
> > the tension is safe. To suggest otherwise would be irresponsible.
>
> er, you're not reading your own citations properly. where they discuss
> specific rims, they state the individual tensions for those rims. for
> generic documents, they state general principle. simple, not sinister
> or irresponsible.
Nice try, but it doesn't wash.
There are different tension values given at different places on
Mavic's technical site for the same, specific wheel set. And the
conflicting "general, generic values", as you characterize them, also
ambiguously apply because they are not otherwise qualified. That's the
problem as stated before; Mavic is all over the place with their
tension values. You don't know which value to rely on.
-----
As a specific example, the specification sheet for the Classics SSC
wheel set specifies: 80 - 100 kg for the front and right rear wheels:
http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic/uk/sources/Produits/ROUTE/Roues/ClassicsSSC/ClasSSCSpareParts.pdf
But the tensiometer manual on the site specifies, at page 10, 75 -100
daN front and 90 -120 daN (1 daN = 0.980 kg ) rear for this same wheel
set:
http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/themes/2_6.pdf
Winter and summer values, no doubt.
-----
Spike
|
| | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 21:06:51
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:01 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> spikenett...@earthlink.net wrote:
>>> On Oct 13, 9:38 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3in...@speakeasy.net>,
>>>>> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <femghf$qq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
>>>>>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>>>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>>>>>>> Adequate.
>>>>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>>>>>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>>>>>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>>>>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>>>>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>>>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>>>> What values of tension?
>>>> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
>>>> rims?
>>> Mavic seems to be all over the place with their tension
>>> specifications.
>>> According to their technical site they caution to use between 70 to 90
>>> kg tension for "cross three pattern" wheels, front and rear drive
>>> side:
>>> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/produ...
>>> But elsewhere on the same site they instruct to tension to a final
>>> tension of 90 - 119 daN ( 1 daN - 0.980 kg ) for front and rear drive
>>> side spokes:
>>> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic...
>>> And in yet another location they recommend 75 - 110 daN front and 90 -
>>> 120 daN rear for their classic wheel sets using, presumably, their
>>> conventional Reflex and Pro rims:
>>> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/theme...
>>> So much for reliable proper tension specifications from manufacturers,
>>> at least as far as Mavic goes. I don't know . Maybe it's the case that
>>> when Salomon acquired Mavic, they assigned their own technical people
>>> the unfamiliar additional task of developing new rims and wheels and
>>> this accounts for Mavic's current mixed results and mixed tension
>>> messages.
>>> If one ventures to use a manufacturer's specifications, given the
>>> apparent vagaries of some manufacturer's tension specifications and of
>>> tensiometers, one ought to always use in the the first instance
>>> Brandt's classic wheel spoke squeezing method, if only to check that
>>> the tension is safe. To suggest otherwise would be irresponsible.
>> er, you're not reading your own citations properly. where they discuss
>> specific rims, they state the individual tensions for those rims. for
>> generic documents, they state general principle. simple, not sinister
>> or irresponsible.
>
> Nice try, but it doesn't wash.
>
> There are different tension values given at different places on
> Mavic's technical site for the same, specific wheel set. And the
> conflicting "general, generic values", as you characterize them, also
> ambiguously apply because they are not otherwise qualified. That's the
> problem as stated before; Mavic is all over the place with their
> tension values. You don't know which value to rely on.
>
> -----
> As a specific example, the specification sheet for the Classics SSC
> wheel set specifies: 80 - 100 kg for the front and right rear wheels:
>
> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic/uk/sources/Produits/ROUTE/Roues/ClassicsSSC/ClasSSCSpareParts.pdf
>
>
> But the tensiometer manual on the site specifies, at page 10, 75 -100
> daN front and 90 -120 daN (1 daN = 0.980 kg ) rear for this same wheel
> set:
>
> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/themes/2_6.pdf
>
>
> Winter and summer values, no doubt.
no rim specified = generic instruction.
rim listed with defined spoke tension = specific instruction.
end of story.
|
| |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 16:48:27
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 13, 9:38 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3in...@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <femghf$qq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> >>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>>>>> spoke holes.
>
> >>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>>>>> Adequate.
>
> >>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
> >>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
> >>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>
> >> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
> >> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>
> > What values of tension?
>
> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
> rims?
Mavic seems to be all over the place with their tension
specifications.
According to their technical site they caution to use between 70 to 90
kg tension for "cross three pattern" wheels, front and rear drive
side:
http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/products/2_119.pdf
But elsewhere on the same site they instruct to tension to a final
tension of 90 - 119 daN ( 1 daN - 0.980 kg ) for front and rear drive
side spokes:
http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic/uk/sources/Produits/ROUTE/Jantes/GalJtesRte/SpokeTension.pdf
And in yet another location they recommend 75 - 110 daN front and 90 -
120 daN rear for their classic wheel sets using, presumably, their
conventional Reflex and Pro rims:
http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/themes/2_6.pdf
So much for reliable proper tension specifications from manufacturers,
at least as far as Mavic goes. I don't know . Maybe it's the case that
when Salomon acquired Mavic, they assigned their own technical people
the unfamiliar additional task of developing new rims and wheels and
this accounts for Mavic's current mixed results and mixed tension
messages.
If one ventures to use a manufacturer's specifications, given the
apparent vagaries of some manufacturer's tension specifications and of
tensiometers, one ought to always use in the the first instance
Brandt's classic wheel spoke squeezing method, if only to check that
the tension is safe. To suggest otherwise would be irresponsible.
--
Spike
|
| | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 21:01:43
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
spikenettles@earthlink.net wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:38 am, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3in...@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article <femghf$qq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
>>>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>>>>> Adequate.
>>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>>>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>>>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>> What values of tension?
>> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
>> rims?
>
> Mavic seems to be all over the place with their tension
> specifications.
>
> According to their technical site they caution to use between 70 to 90
> kg tension for "cross three pattern" wheels, front and rear drive
> side:
>
> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/products/2_119.pdf
>
>
> But elsewhere on the same site they instruct to tension to a final
> tension of 90 - 119 daN ( 1 daN - 0.980 kg ) for front and rear drive
> side spokes:
>
> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/tech-mavic/uk/sources/Produits/ROUTE/Jantes/GalJtesRte/SpokeTension.pdf
>
>
> And in yet another location they recommend 75 - 110 daN front and 90 -
> 120 daN rear for their classic wheel sets using, presumably, their
> conventional Reflex and Pro rims:
>
> http://www.tech-mavic.com/tech-mavic/technical_manual/data/docs/themes/2_6.pdf
>
>
> So much for reliable proper tension specifications from manufacturers,
> at least as far as Mavic goes. I don't know . Maybe it's the case that
> when Salomon acquired Mavic, they assigned their own technical people
> the unfamiliar additional task of developing new rims and wheels and
> this accounts for Mavic's current mixed results and mixed tension
> messages.
>
> If one ventures to use a manufacturer's specifications, given the
> apparent vagaries of some manufacturer's tension specifications and of
> tensiometers, one ought to always use in the the first instance
> Brandt's classic wheel spoke squeezing method, if only to check that
> the tension is safe. To suggest otherwise would be irresponsible.
>
er, you're not reading your own citations properly. where they discuss
specific rims, they state the individual tensions for those rims. for
generic documents, they state general principle. simple, not sinister
or irresponsible.
|
| |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 18:53:00
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jim beam wrote:
>
> Michael Press wrote:
> >
> > jim beam wrote:
> >>
> >> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
> >> rims?
>
> > For both. I do not think so.
>
> don't "think", be certain - google exists for this reason. as does
> calling 888-go-mavic and actually asking.
If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
the other chosen by the legal department.
Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
Chalo
|
| | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 14:14:36
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 16, 10:47 am, "Tom Nakashima" <t...@slac.stanford.edu > wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1192547124.929988.206300@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 9:34 am, "Tom Nakashima" <t...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >> <carlfo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:9bq7h3hqcc2cubbum7ds6i6i4ssmmpq5hf@4ax.com...
>
> >> > Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
> >> > shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
> >> > embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
> >> > the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Carl Fogel
>
> >> I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city
> >> commute
> >> bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike
> >> that you can do on your modern bike.
>
> >> I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt
> >> new
> >> technology, and embrace improvement."
> >> Or else what?
> >> -tom
>
> > Else all the hip cyclists will call ya "RetroGrouch"! ;-)
>
> Yea, I've seen that before.
> Pretty embarrassing when one of those "RetroGrouchies" passes one
> of those "LightweightWeenies" on the climbs.
> -tom
Ain't that fun!?! :-))
|
| | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 08:05:24
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 16, 9:34 am, "Tom Nakashima" <t...@slac.stanford.edu > wrote:
> <carlfo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:9bq7h3hqcc2cubbum7ds6i6i4ssmmpq5hf@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
> > shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
> > embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
> > the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
> > Cheers,
> > Carl Fogel
>
> I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city commute
> bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike
> that you can do on your modern bike.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt new
> technology, and embrace improvement."
> Or else what?
> -tom
Else all the hip cyclists will call ya "RetroGrouch"! ;-)
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 08:47:07
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote in message
news:1192547124.929988.206300@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 16, 9:34 am, "Tom Nakashima" <t...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> <carlfo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:9bq7h3hqcc2cubbum7ds6i6i4ssmmpq5hf@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
>> > shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
>> > embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
>> > the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
>> > Cheers,
>> > Carl Fogel
>>
>> I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city
>> commute
>> bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike
>> that you can do on your modern bike.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt
>> new
>> technology, and embrace improvement."
>> Or else what?
>> -tom
>
> Else all the hip cyclists will call ya "RetroGrouch"! ;-)
>
Yea, I've seen that before.
Pretty embarrassing when one of those "RetroGrouchies" passes one
of those "LightweightWeenies" on the climbs.
-tom
|
| | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 16:57:12
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-14, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com > wrote:
[...]
> If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
> section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
> comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
> identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
> the other chosen by the legal department.
>
> Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
> loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
If you've got the same rim, with the same cross-section, .e.g. Open Pro
in 28H, 32H or 36H, then you might expect slightly higher tensions for
the 28H and 32H than for the 36H version. But I don't think they bother.
All I can find is "90-110 daN". I guess use 90 for a 28H, 100 for a 32H
and 110 for a 28H.
Otherwise, if the rim is stiffer and stronger, rather than higher
tension you might get the same or similar recommended tension but fewer
spokes.
If we knew how to solve the jim beam equation for the tension to match
spoke load capacity and rim strength, it might turn out that optimal
tension for 36H on a stiff rim was far too high for the spoke bed to
support. So fewer spokes is the solution.
In the Mavic pdfs:
Boutique Wheels
---------------
70 - 90 kg for a front Crossride or Cosmos wheel.
110 - 130 kg for a front Cosmic Carbone SSC wheel.
Ksyrium SSC : 90 - 110 kg for the front wheel and 130 - 150 kg for
the rear wheel on the free wheel side.
Crossmax UST : 100 - 120 kg for the front wheel and 130 - 150 kg for the
rear wheel on the free wheel side.
Normal Wheels (I think)
-----------------------
90 - 110 daN on the front wheel.
90 - 110 daN on the free wheel side of the rear wheel.
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 15:13:19
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-14, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>> If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
>> section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
>> comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
>> identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
>> the other chosen by the legal department.
>>
>> Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
>> loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
>
> If you've got the same rim, with the same cross-section, .e.g. Open Pro
> in 28H, 32H or 36H, then you might expect slightly higher tensions for
> the 28H and 32H than for the 36H version. But I don't think they bother.
> All I can find is "90-110 daN". I guess use 90 for a 28H, 100 for a 32H
> and 110 for a 28H.
spoke tension is determined by the rim stiffness and the spoke bed
strength, not spoke count. it's not laziness by a manufacturer to
publish the same tension numbers for all three drillings.
>
> Otherwise, if the rim is stiffer and stronger, rather than higher
> tension you might get the same or similar recommended tension but fewer
> spokes.
>
> If we knew how to solve the jim beam equation for the tension to match
> spoke load capacity and rim strength, it might turn out that optimal
> tension for 36H on a stiff rim was far too high for the spoke bed to
> support. So fewer spokes is the solution.
>
> In the Mavic pdfs:
>
> Boutique Wheels
> ---------------
>
> 70 - 90 kg for a front Crossride or Cosmos wheel.
> 110 - 130 kg for a front Cosmic Carbone SSC wheel.
>
> Ksyrium SSC : 90 - 110 kg for the front wheel and 130 - 150 kg for
> the rear wheel on the free wheel side.
>
> Crossmax UST : 100 - 120 kg for the front wheel and 130 - 150 kg for the
> rear wheel on the free wheel side.
>
> Normal Wheels (I think)
> -----------------------
>
> 90 - 110 daN on the front wheel.
> 90 - 110 daN on the free wheel side of the rear wheel.
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 17:36:17
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-14, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Ben C wrote:
>> On 2007-10-14, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
>>> section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
>>> comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
>>> identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
>>> the other chosen by the legal department.
>>>
>>> Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
>>> loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
>>
>> If you've got the same rim, with the same cross-section, .e.g. Open Pro
>> in 28H, 32H or 36H, then you might expect slightly higher tensions for
>> the 28H and 32H than for the 36H version. But I don't think they bother.
>> All I can find is "90-110 daN". I guess use 90 for a 28H, 100 for a 32H
>> and 110 for a 28H.
>
> spoke tension is determined by the rim stiffness and the spoke bed
> strength, not spoke count. it's not laziness by a manufacturer to
> publish the same tension numbers for all three drillings.
OK, here is my reasoning:
If you have fewer spokes, the load is shared between fewer spokes.
So if your wheel is limited by spoke load capacity, you will need more
tension if you reduce the spoke count to keep spoke load capacity the
same. So considering spoke load capacity alone, you would increase the
tension for fewer spokes.
But, the fewer spokes you have, the longer the unsupported spans between
spokes. So the rim will yield at a lower load (bigger bending moment)
and so can afford to give away less of its compressive strength. So you
would use a lower spoke tension to match rim strength and spoke load
capacity.
So for a stiff rim you have a choice between:
1. The same number of spokes and the same tension, which is just wasting
rim strength.
2. The same number of spokes and higher tension, which makes an optimal
though unnecessarily strong wheel and probably requires a reinforced
spoke bed.
3. Fewer spokes and about the same tension.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 21:01:07
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-14, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Ben C wrote:
>>> On 2007-10-14, Chalo <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
>>>> section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
>>>> comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
>>>> identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
>>>> the other chosen by the legal department.
>>>>
>>>> Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
>>>> loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
>>> If you've got the same rim, with the same cross-section, .e.g. Open Pro
>>> in 28H, 32H or 36H, then you might expect slightly higher tensions for
>>> the 28H and 32H than for the 36H version. But I don't think they bother.
>>> All I can find is "90-110 daN". I guess use 90 for a 28H, 100 for a 32H
>>> and 110 for a 28H.
>> spoke tension is determined by the rim stiffness and the spoke bed
>> strength, not spoke count. it's not laziness by a manufacturer to
>> publish the same tension numbers for all three drillings.
>
> OK, here is my reasoning:
>
> If you have fewer spokes, the load is shared between fewer spokes.
>
> So if your wheel is limited by spoke load capacity,
which it isn't. a single spoke can bear the whole load of the rider + bike.
> you will need more
> tension if you reduce the spoke count to keep spoke load capacity the
> same.
no. strength has nothing to do with tension. i challenge you to find a
single engineering formula that shows that!
> So considering spoke load capacity alone, you would increase the
> tension for fewer spokes.
only if you think that tension has anything to do with strength! which
it doesn't.
>
> But, the fewer spokes you have, the longer the unsupported spans between
> spokes. So the rim will yield at a lower load
a rim yields at yield stress. it doesn't care if it's become more
elastic because a spoke or 4 have gone slack. if the hoop compression
of a rim means any given point is closer to yield, its load capacity is
reduced.
> (bigger bending moment)
> and so can afford to give away less of its compressive strength. So you
> would use a lower spoke tension to match rim strength and spoke load
> capacity.
see above.
>
> So for a stiff rim you have a choice between:
>
> 1. The same number of spokes and the same tension, which is just wasting
> rim strength.
indeed.
> 2. The same number of spokes and higher tension, which makes an optimal
> though unnecessarily strong wheel and probably requires a reinforced
> spoke bed.
nothing optimal about it if it's cracking the rim.
> 3. Fewer spokes and about the same tension.
which is what we find with wheel manufacturers where they haven't been
influenced by "the book" and mistake increasing tension for increasing
strength.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 01:39:10
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Ben C wrote:
[...]
>> you will need more
>> tension if you reduce the spoke count to keep spoke load capacity the
>> same.
>
> no. strength has nothing to do with tension. i challenge you to find a
> single engineering formula that shows that!
I was careful to say "spoke load capacity", not "strength". By "spoke
load capacity" I mean the load the wheel can take before the spokes go
slack.
[...]
>> But, the fewer spokes you have, the longer the unsupported spans between
>> spokes. So the rim will yield at a lower load
>
> a rim yields at yield stress. it doesn't care if it's become more
> elastic because a spoke or 4 have gone slack. if the hoop compression
> of a rim means any given point is closer to yield, its load capacity is
> reduced.
I'm OK with all that. But the question is, for a given load on the axle,
and fewer spokes, isn't there a bigger load on the rim, once you take
into account bending?
If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
[...]
>> So for a stiff rim you have a choice between:
>>
>> 1. The same number of spokes and the same tension, which is just wasting
>> rim strength.
>
> indeed.
>
>> 2. The same number of spokes and higher tension, which makes an optimal
>> though unnecessarily strong wheel and probably requires a reinforced
>> spoke bed.
>
> nothing optimal about it if it's cracking the rim.
Yes. It seems to me there are three variables: rim strength, spoke load
capacity, and spoke bed strength. The idea is you want them all (plus
any so-far less-discussed or unknown variables) to converge, or
something's over- or under-engineered.
>> 3. Fewer spokes and about the same tension.
>
> which is what we find with wheel manufacturers
Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
it?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 06:08:03
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Ben C wrote:
> [...]
>>> you will need more
>>> tension if you reduce the spoke count to keep spoke load capacity the
>>> same.
>> no. strength has nothing to do with tension. i challenge you to find a
>> single engineering formula that shows that!
>
> I was careful to say "spoke load capacity", not "strength". By "spoke
> load capacity" I mean the load the wheel can take before the spokes go
> slack.
>
> [...]
>>> But, the fewer spokes you have, the longer the unsupported spans between
>>> spokes. So the rim will yield at a lower load
>> a rim yields at yield stress. it doesn't care if it's become more
>> elastic because a spoke or 4 have gone slack. if the hoop compression
>> of a rim means any given point is closer to yield, its load capacity is
>> reduced.
>
> I'm OK with all that. But the question is, for a given load on the axle,
> and fewer spokes, isn't there a bigger load on the rim, once you take
> into account bending?
>
> If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
> floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
nice analogy! but you're not just pressing down with your hands, you're
compressing it circumferentially too.
in addition, you'd need to show how much the "hertzian" rim deformation
zone is affected by spoke spacing.
>
> [...]
>>> So for a stiff rim you have a choice between:
>>>
>>> 1. The same number of spokes and the same tension, which is just wasting
>>> rim strength.
>> indeed.
>>
>>> 2. The same number of spokes and higher tension, which makes an optimal
>>> though unnecessarily strong wheel and probably requires a reinforced
>>> spoke bed.
>> nothing optimal about it if it's cracking the rim.
>
> Yes. It seems to me there are three variables: rim strength, spoke load
> capacity, and spoke bed strength. The idea is you want them all (plus
> any so-far less-discussed or unknown variables) to converge, or
> something's over- or under-engineered.
>
>>> 3. Fewer spokes and about the same tension.
>> which is what we find with wheel manufacturers
>
> Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
> it?
the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 09:35:53
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Ben C wrote:
[...]
>> If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
>> floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
>
> nice analogy! but you're not just pressing down with your hands, you're
> compressing it circumferentially too.
In the case of the wheel. I'm assuming that that stress just gets added
to the bending stress.
> in addition, you'd need to show how much the "hertzian" rim deformation
> zone is affected by spoke spacing.
What's "Hertzian" deformation?
I'm not sure exactly how spoke spacing affects rim bending, but it seems
like it should, roughly according to the railroad ties analogy.
And that seems like a logical reason why you'd want more spokes on a
low-profile rim like an MA-2 than on a 40cm deep carbon fibre rim.
[...]
>> Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
>> it?
>
> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
So why do (conventional) wheels have so many spokes?
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 21:15:09
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
forgot other points...
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Ben C wrote:
> [...]
>>> If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
>>> floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
>> nice analogy! but you're not just pressing down with your hands, you're
>> compressing it circumferentially too.
>
> In the case of the wheel. I'm assuming that that stress just gets added
> to the bending stress.
on the compressive side of the bend, yes.
>
>> in addition, you'd need to show how much the "hertzian" rim deformation
>> zone is affected by spoke spacing.
>
> What's "Hertzian" deformation?
bearing elasticity.
there was some stuff on tribology-abc.com iirc. if not, google.
>
> I'm not sure exactly how spoke spacing affects rim bending, but it seems
> like it should, roughly according to the railroad ties analogy.
bending, yes, but spokes aren't solely responsible for rigidity.
>
> And that seems like a logical reason why you'd want more spokes on a
> low-profile rim like an MA-2 than on a 40cm deep carbon fibre rim.
see above.
>
> [...]
>>> Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
>>> it?
>> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
>> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
>> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
>
> So why do (conventional) wheels have so many spokes?
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 21:06:38
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Ben C wrote:
> [...]
>>> If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
>>> floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
>> nice analogy! but you're not just pressing down with your hands, you're
>> compressing it circumferentially too.
>
> In the case of the wheel. I'm assuming that that stress just gets added
> to the bending stress.
>
>> in addition, you'd need to show how much the "hertzian" rim deformation
>> zone is affected by spoke spacing.
>
> What's "Hertzian" deformation?
>
> I'm not sure exactly how spoke spacing affects rim bending, but it seems
> like it should, roughly according to the railroad ties analogy.
>
> And that seems like a logical reason why you'd want more spokes on a
> low-profile rim like an MA-2 than on a 40cm deep carbon fibre rim.
>
> [...]
>>> Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
>>> it?
>> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
>> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
>> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
>
> So why do (conventional) wheels have so many spokes?
because in the old days, crappy spokes fatigued and broke all the time.
more spokes meant sufficient redundancy to get you home.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 12:04:54
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:35:53 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
>On 2007-10-15, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Ben C wrote:
>[...]
>>> If I want to straighten an aluminium banana by pressing it against the
>>> floor, the further apart I put my hands, the better.
>>
>> nice analogy! but you're not just pressing down with your hands, you're
>> compressing it circumferentially too.
>
>In the case of the wheel. I'm assuming that that stress just gets added
>to the bending stress.
>
>> in addition, you'd need to show how much the "hertzian" rim deformation
>> zone is affected by spoke spacing.
>
>What's "Hertzian" deformation?
>
>I'm not sure exactly how spoke spacing affects rim bending, but it seems
>like it should, roughly according to the railroad ties analogy.
>
>And that seems like a logical reason why you'd want more spokes on a
>low-profile rim like an MA-2 than on a 40cm deep carbon fibre rim.
>
>[...]
>>> Yes, but why is that if length of unsupported spans doesn't come into
>>> it?
>>
>> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
>> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
>> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
>
>So why do (conventional) wheels have so many spokes?
Dear Ben,
Tradition? Worked well enough? Took a while to get spokes that lasted?
Over-engineering? Seat-of-pants design?
Here's a circa 1890 bicycle with 36-rear radial, 34-spoke radial front
(never seen another 34-spoke), which used solid tires:
http://i19.tinypic.com/6bwj72t.jpg
Here's another solid-tire bike from 1889, a lady's model with 32 rear,
and only 24 front:
http://americanhistory.si.edu/ONTHEMOVE/collection/object_22.html
In 2007, a whole generation is probably looking at 36-spoke wheels in
much the same way that we look at those old bikes, the ignorant
whippersnappers! Ditto for discussions of MA2 and MA40 rims, long
since out of production.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 11:34:59
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:6n97h3plh2eptv3k83sfh06hr1akqvrge5@4ax.com...
>
> Here's a circa 1890 bicycle with 36-rear radial, 34-spoke radial front
> (never seen another 34-spoke), which used solid tires:
>
> http://i19.tinypic.com/6bwj72t.jpg
>
> Here's another solid-tire bike from 1889, a lady's model with 32 rear,
> and only 24 front:
>
> http://americanhistory.si.edu/ONTHEMOVE/collection/object_22.html
>
> In 2007, a whole generation is probably looking at 36-spoke wheels in
> much the same way that we look at those old bikes, the ignorant
> whippersnappers! Ditto for discussions of MA2 and MA40 rims, long
> since out of production.
> Cheers,
> Carl Fogel
How are they different from discussions of rims from 1890-1889?
Unless any rim over a century old is exempt.
-tom
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 16:38:52
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:34:59 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
<tom@slac.stanford.edu > wrote:
>
><carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:6n97h3plh2eptv3k83sfh06hr1akqvrge5@4ax.com...
>>
>> Here's a circa 1890 bicycle with 36-rear radial, 34-spoke radial front
>> (never seen another 34-spoke), which used solid tires:
>>
>> http://i19.tinypic.com/6bwj72t.jpg
>>
>> Here's another solid-tire bike from 1889, a lady's model with 32 rear,
>> and only 24 front:
>>
>> http://americanhistory.si.edu/ONTHEMOVE/collection/object_22.html
>>
>> In 2007, a whole generation is probably looking at 36-spoke wheels in
>> much the same way that we look at those old bikes, the ignorant
>> whippersnappers! Ditto for discussions of MA2 and MA40 rims, long
>> since out of production.
>> Cheers,
>> Carl Fogel
>
>How are they different from discussions of rims from 1890-1889?
>Unless any rim over a century old is exempt.
>-tom
Dear Tom,
Er, they're not. That's the point.
We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to
consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be
old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims
from the 1980's.
("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique
MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers)
who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as
pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and
wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 07:34:57
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:9bq7h3hqcc2cubbum7ds6i6i4ssmmpq5hf@4ax.com...
>
> Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
> shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
> embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
> the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
> Cheers,
> Carl Fogel
I still have a friction shifter 6-speed freewheel on my on my city commute
bike. It shifts and rides fine. I'm sure I can do anything with that bike
that you can do on your modern bike.
I'm not sure what you mean by; "You have to change with the times, adopt new
technology, and embrace improvement."
Or else what?
-tom
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 01:47:06
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-15, carlfogel@comcast.net <carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote:
[...]
> Dear Tom,
>
> Er, they're not. That's the point.
>
> We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to
> consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be
> old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims
> from the 1980's.
>
> ("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique
> MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
>
> There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers)
> who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as
> pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and
> wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
[...]
Here is Mr O'Grady's 19^H^H2007 Paris-Roubaix winning bike, with plenty
of spokes:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/?id=ogrady_paris_roubaix
They also rave about how nice the 27c tyres are!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 15:09:20
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:47:06 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs > wrote:
>On 2007-10-15, carlfogel@comcast.net <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote:
>[...]
>> Dear Tom,
>>
>> Er, they're not. That's the point.
>>
>> We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to
>> consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be
>> old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims
>> from the 1980's.
>>
>> ("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique
>> MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
>>
>> There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers)
>> who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as
>> pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and
>> wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
>[...]
>
>Here is Mr O'Grady's 19^H^H2007 Paris-Roubaix winning bike, with plenty
>of spokes:
>
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/?id=ogrady_paris_roubaix
>
>They also rave about how nice the 27c tyres are!
Dear Ben,
I'm impressed with only 32 spokes for Paris-Roubaix, where the
cobblestones at speed do things to wheels that most riders never
suffer.
Interestingly, the name of the box-section aluminum double-eyelet
tubular rims is missing from the article.
Even more interesting is the comment that the anonymous rim was "laced
in a durable (and compliant) three-cross pattern."
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 16 Oct 2007 16:27:16
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-16, carlfogel@comcast.net <carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:47:06 -0500, Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs> wrote:
[...]
>>Here is Mr O'Grady's 19^H^H2007 Paris-Roubaix winning bike, with plenty
>>of spokes:
>>
>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/?id=ogrady_paris_roubaix
>>
>>They also rave about how nice the 27c tyres are!
>
> Dear Ben,
>
> I'm impressed with only 32 spokes for Paris-Roubaix, where the
> cobblestones at speed do things to wheels that most riders never
> suffer.
There's probably not much to choose between 32 and 36 for these
purposes. I can't see O'Grady getting off, tying a broken spoke to the
one next to it, retruing the wheel and continuing.
> Interestingly, the name of the box-section aluminum double-eyelet
> tubular rims is missing from the article.
I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do
look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than
the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
Perhaps they're made by someone other than the usual wheel-sponsor for
that team who insisted on taking their competitor's stickers off.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 10:44:25
From: James Thomson
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs > a écrit:
> I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do
> look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than
> the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
O'Grady was riding Ambrosio rims during the race, probably their "Nemesis"
model. You can see the telltale gold-coloured balance weights in this
picture:
http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg
http://www.ambrosiospa.com/catalog_eng/
They're missing from the Cycling News pictures though:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2007/tech/probikes/ogrady_paris_roubaix/Stuart_OGradys_Team_CSC_Cervelo_R3_PR_BB.jpg
James Thomson
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 12:09:16
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-17, James Thomson <yosnappyj@hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs> a écrit:
>
>> I know, and I couldn't see any stickers in the pictures either. They do
>> look very "low-profile"-- a similar sort of depth to MA-2s rather than
>> the deeper U-shape of an Open Pro.
>
> O'Grady was riding Ambrosio rims during the race, probably their "Nemesis"
> model. You can see the telltale gold-coloured balance weights in this
> picture:
>
> http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg
That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles. But
where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say you balance these
rims like one would a car tyre?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 20:28:53
From: James Thomson
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs > a écrit:
>> http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg
> That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles.
> But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say
> you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to
the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the
pin at the rim joint.
James Thomson
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 16:41:10
From: Ben C
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On 2007-10-17, James Thomson <yosnappyj@hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs> a écrit:
>
>>> http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg
>
>> That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles.
>> But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say
>> you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
>
> Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to
> the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the
> pin at the rim joint.
I did see what looked like a bit of gold foil around there. So that was
it.
You'd think the valve stem would more than counter-balance the pin at
the rim joint.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 21:18:15
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ben C wrote:
> On 2007-10-17, James Thomson <yosnappyj@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Ben C" <spamspam@spam.eggs> a �crit:
>>
>>>> http://www.cervelo.com/wallpaper/1/w037_2560ws.jpg
>>> That's a great picture, you can really see the size of the cobbles.
>>> But where are the gold balance weights? Do you mean to say
>>> you balance these rims like one would a car tyre?
>> Look at the base of the valve stem. Ambrosio attach a little metal plate to
>> the rim at the valve hole, supposedly to counterbalance the weight of the
>> pin at the rim joint.
>
> I did see what looked like a bit of gold foil around there. So that was
> it.
>
> You'd think the valve stem would more than counter-balance the pin at
> the rim joint.
it usually does. i'm not sure that ambrosio have that figured out.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 18:25:50
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
>> <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote
>>> Here's a circa 1890 bicycle with 36-rear radial, 34-spoke radial front
>>> (never seen another 34-spoke), which used solid tires:
>>> http://i19.tinypic.com/6bwj72t.jpg
>>> Here's another solid-tire bike from 1889, a lady's model with 32 rear,
>>> and only 24 front:
>>> http://americanhistory.si.edu/ONTHEMOVE/collection/object_22.html
>>> In 2007, a whole generation is probably looking at 36-spoke wheels in
>>> much the same way that we look at those old bikes, the ignorant
>>> whippersnappers! Ditto for discussions of MA2 and MA40 rims, long
>>> since out of production.
> "Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> How are they different from discussions of rims from 1890-1889?
>> Unless any rim over a century old is exempt.
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> Er, they're not. That's the point.
> We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to
> consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be
> old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims
> from the 1980's.
> ("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique
> MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
> There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers)
> who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as
> pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and
> wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
> Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
> shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
> embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
> the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
Huh.
We do a good, steady business in 32 and 36 spoke custom wheels to
replace the ones with not-enough-spokes. Mostly twentysomethings who've
run through a couple sets of 'trendy' wheels already, not all greybeards
pining for rims of an earlier age.
In my opinion, asymmetric Aeroheads are as good a 400g rim as we have
ever had. Cheaper, lighter stronger- where exactly was the problem? (for
big loads or big riders or abusive conditions/riders we've always had
heavy tough rims)
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 18:29:45
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:25:50 -0500, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org >
wrote:
>>> <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote
>>>> Here's a circa 1890 bicycle with 36-rear radial, 34-spoke radial front
>>>> (never seen another 34-spoke), which used solid tires:
>>>> http://i19.tinypic.com/6bwj72t.jpg
>>>> Here's another solid-tire bike from 1889, a lady's model with 32 rear,
>>>> and only 24 front:
>>>> http://americanhistory.si.edu/ONTHEMOVE/collection/object_22.html
>>>> In 2007, a whole generation is probably looking at 36-spoke wheels in
>>>> much the same way that we look at those old bikes, the ignorant
>>>> whippersnappers! Ditto for discussions of MA2 and MA40 rims, long
>>>> since out of production.
>
>> "Tom Nakashima" <tom@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>> How are they different from discussions of rims from 1890-1889?
>>> Unless any rim over a century old is exempt.
>
>carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> Er, they're not. That's the point.
>> We (meaning current posters of dignified age and experience) tend to
>> consider 20-spoke steel (and wood) wheels from 1889 to be
>> old-fashioned and inferior to "modern" (aluminum) MA2 and MA40 rims
>> from the 1980's.
>> ("Modern" is in quotes because the only well-known source of antique
>> MA2's is probably unwilling to part with any.)
>> There's a whole generation of bicyclists out there (whippersnappers)
>> who look at 36-spoke MA2 and MA40 rims as being just as quaint as
>> pre-1900 rims. They buy and ride low-spoke-count deep aero rims and
>> wonder why we keep squabbling about antiques.
>> Me, I just wonder why some riders insist on obsolete 6-speed fricton
>> shifters. You have to change with the times, adopt new technology, and
>> embrace improvement. Once you try _seven_ speed friction shifters like
>> the ones that I use, you'll never look back!
>
>Huh.
>We do a good, steady business in 32 and 36 spoke custom wheels to
>replace the ones with not-enough-spokes. Mostly twentysomethings who've
>run through a couple sets of 'trendy' wheels already, not all greybeards
>pining for rims of an earlier age.
>
>In my opinion, asymmetric Aeroheads are as good a 400g rim as we have
>ever had. Cheaper, lighter stronger- where exactly was the problem? (for
>big loads or big riders or abusive conditions/riders we've always had
>heavy tough rims)
Dear Andrew,
Thirty-two spokes?
[Gasp!]
Do you hoard the missing four spokes and nipples with the valve caps,
or just run a 9 wheels for the price of 8 sale?
:-)
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 14:24:18
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Chalo wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> jim beam wrote:
>>>> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
>>>> rims?
>>> For both. I do not think so.
>> don't "think", be certain - google exists for this reason. as does
>> calling 888-go-mavic and actually asking.
>
> If Mavic spec the same tension for all their rims regardless of cross-
> section or spoke count, then the spec is essentially meaningless--
> comparable to the radically different sidewall pressures on
> identically sized tires, one chosen by the marketing department and
> the other chosen by the legal department.
>
> Different rims support different spoke tensions, to support different
> loads. That's why we have different rims to choose from.
>
> Chalo
>
but different rims /do/ have different tension specs - check your facts.
don't simply presume, then try to use it as a basis for criticism.
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 17:37:53
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 12, 7:01 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <femghf$qq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> > Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>>> spoke holes.
>
> >>>>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>>> Adequate.
>
> >>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >>> after red herring consumption, right?
> >> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>
> > The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>
> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
But, MA-40s cracked much more readily than did MA-2s. AFAICT, the only
difference was that the MA-40s were "hard anodized" while the MA-2s
were not.
> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 00:13:37
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:13:39 -0700, Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <bgbvg3t54bocv4tbtu3h51t0h1ljis5ec6@4ax.com>,
> still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:53:03 -0500, Tom Sherman
>> <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"jim beam" wrote:
>>
>> >> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>> >> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>> >> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>> >
>> >What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>> >anodizing?
>>
>> I believe the original inference was the other way around - that you
>> wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the alleged
>> brittleness of anodized rims.
>>
>> (I make no statement as to brittleness or sockets).
>
> Nevertheless that socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke
> holes. Sockets distribute strain between the inner and outer wall. The
> outer anodized wall was asked to take some of the strain and cracked in
> the process.
Don't trouble jim with the facts. If he wants he can check the
metallurgical textbooks about the deleterious effects of anodizing on the
fatigue resistance of aluminum. It's been well-known for a long time and
explains the observations made by many people over the past 25-30 years:
all other things being equal, anodized rims are more prone to cracking.
He likes to toss out the red herring of spoke tension in order to divert
responsibility from poor little old Mavic et al, not realizing that doing
so is tacit acceptance the problems caused by anodizing
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 06:27:06
From: landotter
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 12, 6:56 am, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Oct 11, 10:12 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > "jim beam" wrote:
> > >> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > >>> "jim beam" wrote:
> > >>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > >>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> > >>>>>>> someone writes:
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> > >>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> > >>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor
> > >>>>>>>>> deep
> > >>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> > >>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> > >>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> > >>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>
> > >>>>>> Horseshit
>
> > >>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> > >>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> > >>>>> spoke holes.
>
> > >>>> what is your spoke tension?
>
> > >>> Adequate.
>
> > >> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> > >> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized
> > >> rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
> > > What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
> > > anodizing?
>
> > when you refer to "polished alu" as if that is something other than an
> > aesthetic benefit, it's you drinking the jobstian kool-aid about rim
> > cracking being caused by anodizing. hence my question about spoke
> > tension.
>
> May I add some clarity here?
>
> The OP asked for rims that were "silver" and that "look[ed] vintage".
> Another poster, Landotter, posted a link to Sun CR-18 rims "in
> polished alu". IMO, that was for the visuals, not for any anodized/
> unanodized issues.
You still read the velo-troll's posts? Pity. Aren't most colored rims,
other than velocity, powder coated and machined, anyway? I like the
look of plain aluminum myself.
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 04:56:27
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 11, 10:12 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
> > "jim beam" wrote:
> >> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor
> >>>>>>>>> deep
> >>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>
> >>>>>> Horseshit
>
> >>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>> spoke holes.
>
> >>>> what is your spoke tension?
>
> >>> Adequate.
>
> >> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized
> >> rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
> > What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
> > anodizing?
>
> when you refer to "polished alu" as if that is something other than an
> aesthetic benefit, it's you drinking the jobstian kool-aid about rim
> cracking being caused by anodizing. hence my question about spoke
> tension.
May I add some clarity here?
The OP asked for rims that were "silver" and that "look[ed] vintage".
Another poster, Landotter, posted a link to Sun CR-18 rims "in
polished alu". IMO, that was for the visuals, not for any anodized/
unanodized issues.
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 19:45:25
From: Jay Beattie
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 11:32 pm, spikenett...@earthlink.net wrote:
> On Oct 10, 12:10 am, Hank Wirtz <h...@wirtznet.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>
> > > <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
> > > >Hi all,
> > > >I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> > > >clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> > > >silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> > > >180 pounds.
> > > >Thanks,
> > > >Kerry
>
> > > You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
> > > while. Then ur still vintage.
>
> > Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
> > Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
> > tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
> > Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
> > retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
> > true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
> > often.
>
> > Andy Muzi has this to say on his page for the Rigida 1622 classic
> > touring rim (http://www.yellowjersey.org/1622.html):
>
> > "These classic design rims build well in 120mm and 125mm formats. They
> > are simply neither heavy enough nor stiff enough to build a modern
> > 130mm or 135mm wheel with its concomitantly high and uneven tension.
> > If that isn't clear to you, you and I should correspond."
>
> I have always liked the unique and honest look of this whole site,
> with its BIG pictures, and how it works --- hope it doesn't change.
> But, I'm not sure if that caution applies to those 560g 36 hole
> Rigidas, to those cowering lightweights pictured below it, or to
> both.
It's the same cross section as a Mod 58. I built on both those rims,
and they were super tough. I am sure either could handle a modern
8/9/10 wheel. It was the Rigida 1320s that were disposable, IMO. --
Jay Beattie.
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 01:17:30
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 11, 7:27 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> > Sun CR-18 double wall rear is so good that itsa build and
> > forgetaboutit component using brake prep reducing surface wear wit a
> > dash of FL teflowax on the inserts.
>
> No wonder my rims only go 12 or 15 years. Gotta get that Florida wax!
> --
> Andrew Muziwww.yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
WELL, after boogling over "our discovery" for lubing hub spoke holes
with FINISH LINE teflon with wax http://www.universalcycles.com/company.php?Company=Finish%20Line
we moved toward lubing mating surfaces of spoke nipple and rim insert
then sealing the gaps formed by nipple and rim as the nipple exits
inward with the spoke toward the hub. finesse equals zero dysfunction.
while urahear deal with zero plus:
http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=7807
|
| | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 14:18:28
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
> ...
> while urahear deal with zero plus:
> http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=7807
>
From the webpage:
"The Finish Line Metro Bike Spray leans (sic) and lubes in one step."
Leaning lube?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 23:02:03
From: datakoll
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Sun CR-18 double wall rear is so good that itsa build and
forgetaboutit component using brake prep reducing surface wear wit a
dash of FL teflowax on the inserts.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 18:27:34
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
datakoll wrote:
> Sun CR-18 double wall rear is so good that itsa build and
> forgetaboutit component using brake prep reducing surface wear wit a
> dash of FL teflowax on the inserts.
No wonder my rims only go 12 or 15 years. Gotta get that Florida wax!
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 09:27:50
From: JG
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Another vote for Sun-Ringle CR-18's. They appear to be almost half
the price of Velocity Razors...
The Mavic A719 has thimbles, but does anyone else do that these days?
JG
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 07:30:06
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 11, 7:23 am, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Oct 10, 10:59 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tom Sherman writes:
> > >>> someone writes:
> > >>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
> > >>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
> > >>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
> > >>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> > >>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> > >>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> > >>> No sockets! No good
> > >> Horseshit
> > > The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> > > size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> > > spoke holes.
>
> > My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> > and never got a crack in more than 30 years.
>
> My boneshaker's wheels are still straight after a hunnerd years!
> Socketless, I might add.
>
> Ten years of service from a set of wheels is plenty for most of us.
> Then they'll hopefully explode, so you can cackle from your dark
> tower.
"No sockets! No sockets!" , shrieked the old crow. ;-)
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 07:23:19
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 11, 12:04 am, "Kerry Montgomery" <kamon...@teleport.com > wrote:
> <jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
>
> news:470d9f9d$0$14118$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
>
>
> > Tom Sherman writes:
>
> >>>> someone writes:
>
> >>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
> >>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
> >>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
> >>>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>
> >>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> >>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>>> No sockets! No good
>
> >>> Horseshit
>
> >> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >> spoke holes.
>
> > My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> > and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
> > years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
>
> > Jobst Brandt
>
> Thanks to all for the suggestions.
> Am leaning strongly toward Velocity Razor rims with eyelets. Any thoughts?
> Thanks again,
> Kerry
Would be fine, just don't overtension them...
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 05:23:37
From: landotter
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 10, 10:59 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
> >>> someone writes:
> >>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
> >>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
> >>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
> >>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>> No sockets! No good
> >> Horseshit
> > The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> > size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> > spoke holes.
>
> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> and never got a crack in more than 30 years.
My boneshaker's wheels are still straight after a hunnerd years!
Socketless, I might add.
Ten years of service from a set of wheels is plenty for most of us.
Then they'll hopefully explode, so you can cackle from your dark
tower.
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 12:02:28
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Kerry Montgomery wrote:
>
> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> 180 pounds.
If the tubie rims held up OK under you, then the Sun M13-II would
probably work. It's an old-fashioned looking rim to my eyes, but
attractive. It has a rounded profile in contrast to the wider CR-18's
faceted shape.
Either of these Sun rims looks far better in the bright polished
finish than in a matte anodized finish.
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 04:05:42
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 11:18 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >> someone writes:
> >>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >> No sockets! No good
>
> > Horseshit
>
> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
>
Thanks for agreeing that Brandt's comments ("No sockets! No good") are
horseshit.
Does this put your lifetime membership in the "I Brown Nose for
Brandt" club in jeopardy? ;-)
|
| | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 19:57:14
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Oct 9, 11:18 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>> No sockets! No good
>>> Horseshit
>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
>> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
>>
>
> Thanks for agreeing that Brandt's comments ("No sockets! No good") are
> horseshit.
>
> Does this put your lifetime membership in the "I Brown Nose for
> Brandt" club in jeopardy? ;-)
I have disagreed with Jobst about recumbent bicycles and pavements
(DAGS). In the latter field, I have some professional expertise, which I
doubt Jobst has.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 03:48:12
From: landotter
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 10, 12:01 am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>>> No sockets! No good
>
> >>> Horseshit
>
> >> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
> >> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
>
> > what is your spoke tension.
>Adequate.
[applause]
I usually tension till all go ping instead of pong.
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 01:44:05
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article <13go4kbkovvio6d@corp.supernews.com >,
"Kerry Montgomery" <kamontgo@teleport.com > wrote:
> Hi all,
> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> 180 pounds.
Sun CR18. Shiny, strong, durable, cheap.
Hard to believe. Check it out.
<URL:http://www.lickbike.com/productpage.aspx?PART_NUM_SUB='2084-32' >
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 23:32:53
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 10, 12:10 am, Hank Wirtz <h...@wirtznet.net > wrote:
> On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>
> > <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
> > >Hi all,
> > >I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> > >clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> > >silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> > >180 pounds.
> > >Thanks,
> > >Kerry
>
> > You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
> > while. Then ur still vintage.
>
> Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
> Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
> tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
> Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
> retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
> true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
> often.
>
> Andy Muzi has this to say on his page for the Rigida 1622 classic
> touring rim (http://www.yellowjersey.org/1622.html):
>
> "These classic design rims build well in 120mm and 125mm formats. They
> are simply neither heavy enough nor stiff enough to build a modern
> 130mm or 135mm wheel with its concomitantly high and uneven tension.
> If that isn't clear to you, you and I should correspond."
I have always liked the unique and honest look of this whole site,
with its BIG pictures, and how it works --- hope it doesn't change.
But, I'm not sure if that caution applies to those 560g 36 hole
Rigidas, to those cowering lightweights pictured below it, or to
both.
--
Spike
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 22:10:49
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>
> <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> >clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> >silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> >180 pounds.
> >Thanks,
> >Kerry
>
> You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
> while. Then ur still vintage.
Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
often.
Andy Muzi has this to say on his page for the Rigida 1622 classic
touring rim ( http://www.yellowjersey.org/1622.html ):
"These classic design rims build well in 120mm and 125mm formats. They
are simply neither heavy enough nor stiff enough to build a modern
130mm or 135mm wheel with its concomitantly high and uneven tension.
If that isn't clear to you, you and I should correspond."
|
| | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 10:41:38
From: _
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:10:49 -0700, Hank Wirtz wrote:
> On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>>
>> <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>>Hi all,
>>>I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
>>>clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
>>>silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
>>>180 pounds.
>>>Thanks,
>>>Kerry
>>
>> You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
>> while. Then ur still vintage.
>
> Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
> Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
> tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
> Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
> retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
> true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
> often.
>
That must be a chore, unsoldering and resoldering each spoke every time you
true the wheel.
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 06:03:07
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
_ wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:10:49 -0700, Hank Wirtz wrote:
>
>> On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>>>
>>> <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
>>>> clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
>>>> silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
>>>> 180 pounds.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Kerry
>>> You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
>>> while. Then ur still vintage.
>> Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
>> Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
>> tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
>> Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
>> retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
>> true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
>> often.
>>
>
> That must be a chore, unsoldering and resoldering each spoke every time you
> true the wheel.
not necessary. it's the rim that adjusts relative to the spoke, not the
spoke relative to the rim.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 22:41:08
From: Kerry Montgomery
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"Hank Wirtz" <hank@wirtznet.net > wrote in message
news:1191993049.633714.291760@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 9, 7:29 pm, still me <wheeled...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
>>
>> <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
>> >Hi all,
>> >I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike
>> >to
>> >clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
>> >silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm
>> >about
>> >180 pounds.
>> >Thanks,
>> >Kerry
>>
>> You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
>> while. Then ur still vintage.
>
> Be careful with that unless you're sticking with freewheels, though.
> Many older rims can't take the higher drive-side vs. non-drive-side
> tension imbalance of 8/9/10 speed freehubs. I have a Super Champion
> Record Du Monde laced to a Veloce freehub as part of a set of semi-
> retro, tied & soldered sewups on my PX-10. I pretty much have to re-
> true that rear after every ride, so I don't ride those wheels very
> often.
>
> Andy Muzi has this to say on his page for the Rigida 1622 classic
> touring rim ( http://www.yellowjersey.org/1622.html ):
>
> "These classic design rims build well in 120mm and 125mm formats. They
> are simply neither heavy enough nor stiff enough to build a modern
> 130mm or 135mm wheel with its concomitantly high and uneven tension.
> If that isn't clear to you, you and I should correspond."
>
Hank,
Thanks for the warning - that shouldn't be a problem, as will build 'em with
120mm hubs.
Thanks again,
Kerry
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 02:29:59
From: still me
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:45:08 -0700, "Kerry Montgomery"
<kamontgo@teleport.com > wrote:
>Hi all,
>I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
>clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
>silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
>180 pounds.
>Thanks,
>Kerry
You can still get 1970/80 700c rims NOS on Ebay if you watch for a
while. Then ur still vintage.
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 19:10:45
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> someone writes:
> >> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> > can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> No sockets! No good
Horseshit
> although they might "look" right.
>
> Jobst Brandt
|
| | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 23:18:45
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>> someone writes:
>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>
>> No sockets! No good
>
> Horseshit
The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 03:59:25
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman writes:
>>> someone writes:
>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
>>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>> No sockets! No good
>> Horseshit
> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> spoke holes.
My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 20:00:09
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
>>>> someone writes:
>
>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
>>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
>>>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>
>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
>>>> No sockets! No good
>
>>> Horseshit
>
>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>> spoke holes.
>
> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
> years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
Hard to say, since both bicycles were purchased used. However, I do know
both bicycles were built in 2001 using Sun CR-18 wheels, and according
to the previous owners the wheels are original. One bicycle was
reportedly even ridden in the Alps.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 02:00:13
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman writes:
>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
>>>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not
>>>>>>> aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>> Horseshit
>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>> spoke holes.
>> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
>> and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
>> years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
> Hard to say, since both bicycles were purchased used. However, I do
> know both bicycles were built in 2001 using Sun CR-18 wheels, and
> according to the previous owners the wheels are original. One
> bicycle was reportedly even ridden in the Alps.
I guess I should have been more explicit. My tubular tire wheels
haven't been used in more than 30 years, since the time I switched to
clinchers... and haven't broken a spoke or developed a crack in that
time. What I wanted to know is how many miles and on what sort of
terrain rather than how long ago you got them?
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 09:14:54
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article <470d9f9d$0$14118$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net >,
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
> >>> someone writes:
>
> >>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
> >>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
> >>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not
> >>>>> aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>
> >>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> >>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> >>> No sockets! No good
>
> >> Horseshit
>
> > The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> > size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> > spoke holes.
>
> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
> years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
Well, another anecdotal point is my set of wheels which were built up
with the predecessor to the CR-18, the Sun CR-16. Polished aluminum, no
sockets or ferrules, 11 years and a paltry 25,000-30,000 miles before
the rear rim cracked at two spoke holes. In this case, this was a 26"
rim with very little dish due to being a 7 sp/135 mm setup and had 36
spokes none of which have ever broken. Examining the rim I noted that
there was a reinforcing rib around the rim running from spoke hole to
spoke hole on the inside, the width of the spoke holes and about 2-3 mm
tall; perhaps that contributed to the rim not cracking much sooner.
The point being that this old socketless and eyeless polished rim lasted
about 12.5 times as long as the longest-lasting Mavic Open Pro I have
used. There's more to it than sockets. I think I'd rather have a
non-socketed polished rim than an anodized socketed rim, based on the
service life I have observed with my bikes. We'll see if the CR-18 that
replaced the CR-16 holds up as well. I'll get back to you in 2018 if
not before.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 20:12:04
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <470d9f9d$0$14118$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>
>> Tom Sherman writes:
>>
>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
>>>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not
>>>>>>> aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>> Horseshit
>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>> spoke holes.
>> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
>> and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
>> years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
>
> Well, another anecdotal point is my set of wheels which were built up
> with the predecessor to the CR-18, the Sun CR-16. Polished aluminum, no
> sockets or ferrules, 11 years and a paltry 25,000-30,000 miles before
> the rear rim cracked at two spoke holes. In this case, this was a 26"
> rim with very little dish due to being a 7 sp/135 mm setup and had 36
> spokes none of which have ever broken. Examining the rim I noted that
> there was a reinforcing rib around the rim running from spoke hole to
> spoke hole on the inside, the width of the spoke holes and about 2-3 mm
> tall; perhaps that contributed to the rim not cracking much sooner.
>
> The point being that this old socketless and eyeless polished rim lasted
> about 12.5 times as long as the longest-lasting Mavic Open Pro I have
> used.
since others seem to manage just fine on those rims, myself included,
all that tells us is that you over-tensioned. that's hardly mavic's fault.
> There's more to it than sockets. I think I'd rather have a
> non-socketed polished rim than an anodized socketed rim, based on the
> service life I have observed with my bikes. We'll see if the CR-18 that
> replaced the CR-16 holds up as well. I'll get back to you in 2018 if
> not before.
|
| | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 23:04:19
From: Kerry Montgomery
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote in message
news:470d9f9d$0$14118$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
>>>> someone writes:
>
>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you
>>>>>> would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero
>>>>>> nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>
>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
>>>> No sockets! No good
>
>>> Horseshit
>
>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>> spoke holes.
>
> My tubular wheels (that I don't use anymore) haven't broken a spoke
> and never got a crack in more than 30 years. What do you mean by 7
> years old? Where have you ridden these wheels and how far?
>
> Jobst Brandt
Thanks to all for the suggestions.
Am leaning strongly toward Velocity Razor rims with eyelets. Any thoughts?
Thanks again,
Kerry
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 01:47:50
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article <fehjr5$s33$2@registered.motzarella.org >,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >> someone writes:
> >>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>
> >> No sockets! No good
> >
> > Horseshit
>
> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
I wish they had sockets but there is no Easter Bunny either.
My 630 CR18 wheels are turning after a similar elapsed time.
I used the tension until buckle scheme when building them.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 21:49:43
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>> someone writes:
>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>
>>> No sockets! No good
>>
>> Horseshit
>
> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
>
what is your spoke tension?
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 Oct 2007 18:05:21
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jim beam wrote:
>
> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
Then it goes without further explanation that _your_ wheels need only
four spokes. Good luck with that.
Chalo
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Oct 2007 19:20:07
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Chalo Colina wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> the strength of the unsupported span far exceeds your ability to deform
>> it. unless you're real heavy, i expect a totally unsupported rim will
>> support your whole bodyweight. my rims do at any rate.
>
> Then it goes without further explanation that _your_ wheels need only
> four spokes. Good luck with that.
Five spoke wheels: <http://www.aerospoke.com/ >.
Three spoke wheels: <http://www.hedcycling.com/wheels/hed3.php >.
Split the difference?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 00:01:28
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>
>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>
>>> Horseshit
>>
>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm size)
>> are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the spoke holes.
>>
> what is your spoke tension?
Adequate.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 06:03:56
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>
>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>
>>>> Horseshit
>>>
>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>> spoke holes.
>>>
>> what is your spoke tension?
>
> Adequate.
>
er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
after red herring consumption, right?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 19:53:03
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>
>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>
>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>
>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>
>> Adequate.
>>
>
> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> after red herring consumption, right?
What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 13:11:13
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>
> >>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>> spoke holes.
> >>>>
> >>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>
> >> Adequate.
> >>
> >
> > er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> > you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> > after red herring consumption, right?
>
> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 17:01:31
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>> Adequate.
>>>>
>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>
> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>
but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 22:31:18
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article
<naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> > Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>>> spoke holes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>>> Adequate.
> >>>>
> >>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >>> after red herring consumption, right?
> >> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
> >
> > The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
> >
> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
What values of tension?
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 07:38:15
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>>> Adequate.
>>>>>>
>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>>>
>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>
> What values of tension?
>
it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
rims?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 00:40:35
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article
<2_WdnfHjB7XKRY3anZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@speakeasy.net >,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> > jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> >>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
> >>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
> >>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
> >>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> >>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
> >>>>>>>>> Horseshit
> >>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
> >>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
> >>>>>>>> spoke holes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
> >>>>>> Adequate.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
> >>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
> >>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
> >>>
> >> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
> >> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
> >
> > What values of tension?
> >
>
> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
> rims?
For both. I do not think so.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2007 08:14:21
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <2_WdnfHjB7XKRY3anZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <naWdndMRq-5Gl43anZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article <femghf$qqi$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
>>>>> Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>>>>> Adequate.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>>>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>>>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes anyway.
>>>>>
>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>> What values of tension?
>>>
>> it was posted just recently - ~90kgf iirc. mavic "vintage" or "legacy"
>> rims?
>
> For both. I do not think so.
>
don't "think", be certain - google exists for this reason. as does
calling 888-go-mavic and actually asking.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 00:42:30
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims
>>>>>>>>>>> you would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage
>>>>>>>>>>> (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180
>>>>>>>>>>> pounds.
>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO
>>>>>>> 406-mm size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking
>>>>>>> around the spoke holes.
>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>> Adequate.
>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>>> anodizing?
>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes
>> anyway.
> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 18:28:31
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims
>>>>>>>>>>>> you would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>> (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180
>>>>>>>>>>>> pounds.
>
>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>
>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>
>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO
>>>>>>>> 406-mm size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking
>>>>>>>> around the spoke holes.
>
>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>
>>>>>> Adequate.
>
>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>>>> anodizing?
>
>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes
>>> anyway.
>
>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>
> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>
but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a tensiometer,
and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to tension spokes "as
high as the rim can bear".
given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about properties
of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to attribute blame
to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own misunderstanding
that is at issue.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 14:15:03
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>
>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>
>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
>> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
>> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
>> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
>> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
>> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>>
>
> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a tensiometer,
> and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to tension spokes "as
> high as the rim can bear".
>
> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about properties
> of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to attribute blame
> to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own misunderstanding
> that is at issue.
Citation for the degree of anisotropy in extruded aluminium alloy
bicycle rims?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 13:50:46
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>>
>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>>
>>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
>>> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
>>> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
>>> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
>>> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
>>> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>>>
>>
>> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
>> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
>> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
>>
>> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
>> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
>> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
>> misunderstanding that is at issue.
>
> Citation for the degree of anisotropy in extruded aluminium alloy
> bicycle rims?
>
only someone unfamiliar with extrusion microstructure would ask a
question like that. i suggest you go to one of your testing sources and
provide them with some rim section for examination, then let /them/ tell
you. post the metallography pics you get please.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 16:47:26
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>>>
>>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>>>
>>>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
>>>> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
>>>> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
>>>> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
>>>> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
>>>> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
>>> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
>>> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
>>>
>>> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
>>> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
>>> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
>>> misunderstanding that is at issue.
>>
>> Citation for the degree of anisotropy in extruded aluminium alloy
>> bicycle rims?
>>
>
> only someone unfamiliar with extrusion microstructure would ask a
> question like that. i suggest you go to one of your testing sources and
> provide them with some rim section for examination, then let /them/ tell
> you. post the metallography pics you get please.
And do your work for you?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 15:19:17
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's from
>>>>> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
>>>>> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
>>>>> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
>>>>> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
>>>>> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
>>>> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
>>>> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
>>>>
>>>> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
>>>> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
>>>> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
>>>> misunderstanding that is at issue.
>>>
>>> Citation for the degree of anisotropy in extruded aluminium alloy
>>> bicycle rims?
>>>
>>
>> only someone unfamiliar with extrusion microstructure would ask a
>> question like that. i suggest you go to one of your testing sources
>> and provide them with some rim section for examination, then let
>> /them/ tell you. post the metallography pics you get please.
>
> And do your work for you?
>
no, you're doing the work for yourself, for your own education.
fact is, i don't have access to the facilities any more, otherwise i
would. you otoh, do. i've seen extruded microstructure like this many
times. i've cited examples. if you don't believe, do your own homework.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 17:33:22
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The same
>>>>>> riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were such
>>>>>> that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface leaving
>>>>>> a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later MA-40 rims
>>>>>> seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
>>>>> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
>>>>> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
>>>>>
>>>>> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
>>>>> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
>>>>> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
>>>>> misunderstanding that is at issue.
>>>>
>>>> Citation for the degree of anisotropy in extruded aluminium alloy
>>>> bicycle rims?
>>>>
>>>
>>> only someone unfamiliar with extrusion microstructure would ask a
>>> question like that. i suggest you go to one of your testing sources
>>> and provide them with some rim section for examination, then let
>>> /them/ tell you. post the metallography pics you get please.
>>
>> And do your work for you?
>>
>
> no, you're doing the work for yourself, for your own education.
>
> fact is, i don't have access to the facilities any more, otherwise i
> would. you otoh, do.
News to me!
Structural steel inspection in the field is generally limited to visual
observation, torque testing of fasteners, and ultrasonic checks on
welds. (Some bridge inspections uses radiographic methods.)
Coupons are taken from structural members at the manufacturing source
for testing. I do not have free services from the metallurgical
laboratories that perform this testing.
> i've seen extruded microstructure like this many
> times. i've cited examples. if you don't believe, do your own homework.
For bicycle rims?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 03:10:59
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180
>>>>>>>>>>>>> pounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO
>>>>>>>>> 406-mm size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking
>>>>>>>>> around the spoke holes.
>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>>>> Adequate.
>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do
>>>>> with anodizing?
>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes
>>>> anyway.
>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's
>> from my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The
>> same riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were
>> such that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface
>> leaving a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later
>> MA-40 rims seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
> misunderstanding that is at issue.
"blame the rim manufacturer" for the collection of un-cracked but used
up rims that I have. I don't see the logic. Where is the conncetion?
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 20:35:23
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> http://www.jimbeam.com/beam/default.aspx? writes:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1970s) bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you would recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about 180
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pounds.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Horseshit
>
>>>>>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO
>>>>>>>>>> 406-mm size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking
>>>>>>>>>> around the spoke holes.
>
>>>>>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>
>>>>>>>> Adequate.
>
>>>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
>>>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do
>>>>>> with anodizing?
>
>>>>> The socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke holes
>>>>> anyway.
>
>>>> but ma2's crack around the spoke hole at excess spoke tension too.
>>>> neither rim cracks if spokes are tensioned correctly.
>
>>> Not in my experience, and I have a large stack of worn out MA-2's
>>> from my bicycle and others who descend fast on rough roads. The
>>> same riders that had rim failure with MA-40's. These failures were
>>> such that rims cracked circumferentially through the brake surface
>>> leaving a rim held together by spoke sockets and eyelets. Later
>>> MA-40 rims seemed to have thinner (cosmetic) anodizing.
>
>> but only a couple of days ago, you told us you don't use a
>> tensiometer, and you've been telling the rest of us for ages to
>> tension spokes "as high as the rim can bear".
>
>> given the above, and given that you ignore known facts about
>> properties of anisotropic materials, you're hardly in a position to
>> attribute blame to the rim manufacturer when in fact it is your own
>> misunderstanding that is at issue.
>
> "blame the rim manufacturer" for the collection of un-cracked but used
> up rims that I have. I don't see the logic. Where is the conncetion?
the "connection" is that the over-tension you achieve by your
ill-considered and unscientific spoke tensioning technique is what is
causing the failures!
you disregard fact in every presumption you ever present as "analysis",
yet when challenged, you question the challenger, not the points raised.
and here you've done that yet again.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 17:29:51
From: still me
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:53:03 -0500, Tom Sherman
<sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
>"jim beam" wrote:
>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>> after red herring consumption, right?
>
>What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
I believe the original inference was the other way around - that you
wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the alleged
brittleness of anodized rims.
(I make no statement as to brittleness or sockets).
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 13:13:39
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
In article
<bgbvg3t54bocv4tbtu3h51t0h1ljis5ec6@4ax.com >,
still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:53:03 -0500, Tom Sherman
> <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"jim beam" wrote:
>
> >> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
> >> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
> >> after red herring consumption, right?
> >
> >What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>
> I believe the original inference was the other way around - that you
> wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the alleged
> brittleness of anodized rims.
>
> (I make no statement as to brittleness or sockets).
Nevertheless that socket and anodized MA-40
cracked around the spoke holes. Sockets distribute
strain between the inner and outer wall. The outer
anodized wall was asked to take some of the strain
and cracked in the process.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 00:33:27
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Michael Press writes:
>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>>> anodizing?
>> I believe the original inference was the other way around - that
>> you wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the
>> alleged brittleness of anodized rims. (I make no statement as to
>> brittleness or sockets).
> Nevertheless that socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke
> holes. Sockets distribute strain between the inner and outer
> wall. The outer anodized wall was asked to take some of the strain
> and cracked in the process.
As I mentioned at the time these rims were popular, grazing incident
light exposed the crazed pattern around spoke holes in the anodized
layer. I also sent a section of MA-2 and MA-40 (both having the same
extruded form) to a metallurgy (ALCAN) lab where they were sectioned
and polished exposing surface cracks from the anodized layer into the
base metal on the MA-40 and not on the MA-2. Both rims having
significant mileage. The MA-2 was shiny and, if anodized, had such a
thin layer that it made no optical effect on the polished aluminum.
Those who experienced the days will recall that we had no cracked rims
before dark (hard) anodized rims appeared and were advertised as being
strengthened by hard anodizing. My comment was that it was analogous
to a hard scab on an abrasion that, when stressed, cracked and caused
bleeding because the crack propagated into the base material (flesh).
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 18:23:25
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Michael Press writes:
>
>>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing
>>>>> then? you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of
>>>>> unanodized rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
>>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>>>> anodizing?
>
>>> I believe the original inference was the other way around - that
>>> you wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the
>>> alleged brittleness of anodized rims. (I make no statement as to
>>> brittleness or sockets).
>
>> Nevertheless that socket and anodized MA-40 cracked around the spoke
>> holes. Sockets distribute strain between the inner and outer
>> wall. The outer anodized wall was asked to take some of the strain
>> and cracked in the process.
>
> As I mentioned at the time these rims were popular, grazing incident
> light exposed the crazed pattern around spoke holes in the anodized
> layer. I also sent a section of MA-2 and MA-40 (both having the same
> extruded form) to a metallurgy (ALCAN) lab where they were sectioned
> and polished exposing surface cracks from the anodized layer into the
> base metal on the MA-40 and not on the MA-2.
so you say, but presence of cracks, as indeed there is in many new mavic
rims sold today, does not mean the anodizing cracks cause the rim crack.
especially when the rim crack is observed to be at 45 degrees or
greater to any local anodizing crack.
agreed, anodizing cracking can indeed cause fatigue, but rim cracking
does not bear any of the traditional evidence that single it out as a
fatigue problem.
> Both rims having
> significant mileage. The MA-2 was shiny and, if anodized, had such a
> thin layer that it made no optical effect on the polished aluminum.
>
> Those who experienced the days will recall that we had no cracked rims
> before dark (hard) anodized rims appeared and were advertised as being
> strengthened by hard anodizing. My comment was that it was analogous
> to a hard scab on an abrasion that, when stressed, cracked and caused
> bleeding because the crack propagated into the base material (flesh).
given the observations:
1. about rim crack orientation relative to anodizing cracks,
2. that the cracks do not evidence fatigue symptoms such as beach marks,
3. given also that we know the rim extrusion to be highly anisotropic
[with the effects that has on mechanical properties],
4. that the cracking occurs strictly along the extrusion axis,
regardless of where, and
5. that anodizing has substantial benefits in terms of corrosion
prevention in climates that exist outside of palo alto,
i'd say that you're barking up the wrong tree. especially when simply
using the manufacturer specified spoke tension eliminates the problem.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 17:01:47
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <bgbvg3t54bocv4tbtu3h51t0h1ljis5ec6@4ax.com>,
> still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 19:53:03 -0500, Tom Sherman
>> <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized rims
>>>> after red herring consumption, right?
>>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with anodizing?
>> I believe the original inference was the other way around - that you
>> wouldn't want an anodized rim without the sockets due to the alleged
>> brittleness of anodized rims.
>>
>> (I make no statement as to brittleness or sockets).
>
> Nevertheless that socket and anodized MA-40
> cracked around the spoke holes.
at spoke tension "as high as the rim can bear" or at 100kgf?
> Sockets distribute
> strain between the inner and outer wall. The outer
> anodized wall was asked to take some of the strain
> and cracked in the process.
see above.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 20:12:34
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor
>>>>>>>>> deep
>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>
>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>
>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>
>>> Adequate.
>>>
>>
>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized
>> rims after red herring consumption, right?
>
> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
> anodizing?
>
when you refer to "polished alu" as if that is something other than an
aesthetic benefit, it's you drinking the jobstian kool-aid about rim
cracking being caused by anodizing. hence my question about spoke
tension.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2007 14:09:13
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 8:58 pm, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
>>>>>>>> someone writes:
>>>>>>>>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage
>>>>>>>>>> (1970s)
>>>>>>>>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>>>>>>>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor
>>>>>>>>>> deep
>>>>>>>>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>>>>>>>>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>>>>>>>> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No sockets! No good
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Horseshit
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The two hand built wheels I have with Sun CR-18 rims (ISO 406-mm
>>>>>> size) are now about 7 years old, and show no cracking around the
>>>>>> spoke holes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> what is your spoke tension?
>>>>
>>>> Adequate.
>>>>
>>>
>>> er, so that allows you to correlate rim cracking with anodizing then?
>>> you /did/ mean that when you were advocating the use of unanodized
>>> rims after red herring consumption, right?
>>
>> What does the presence or lack thereof of sockets have to do with
>> anodizing?
>>
> when you refer to "polished alu" as if that is something other than an
> aesthetic benefit, it's you drinking the jobstian kool-aid about rim
> cracking being caused by anodizing. hence my question about spoke tension.
The Swedish terrestrial otter mentioned polished aluminium alloy, not me.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 18:37:58
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 5:35 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Oct 9, 6:45 pm, "Kerry Montgomery" <kamon...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> > clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> > silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> > 180 pounds.
> > Thanks,
> > Kerry
>
> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
Science says Landotter is correct.
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 17:35:08
From: landotter
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
On Oct 9, 6:45 pm, "Kerry Montgomery" <kamon...@teleport.com > wrote:
> Hi all,
> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s) bike to
> clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would recommend? Need to be
> silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep V), and good quality. I'm about
> 180 pounds.
> Thanks,
> Kerry
can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
|
| | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 01:58:50
From:
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
someone writes:
>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
No sockets! No good although they might "look" right.
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 22:42:19
From: Kerry Montgomery
Subject: Re: rim recommendations?
|
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote in message
news:470c31da$0$14112$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> someone writes:
>
>>> I want to build a pair of 700C wheels to convert a vintage (1970s)
>>> bike to clincher tires. Was wondering what rims you would
>>> recommend? Need to be silver, 36h, look vintage (not aero nor deep
>>> V), and good quality. I'm about 180 pounds.
>
>> can't go wrong with some Sun cr-18s in polished alu.
>
> http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPRMRDSUN/RM8491
>
> No sockets! No good although they might "look" right.
>
> Jobst Brandt
Jobst,
Any suggestions for rims that will both be good and look right?
Thanks,
Kerry
|
|
