Which improves wheel strength more?

[spartanKid]

Which improves wheel strength/durability more, increase rim depth or a higher spoke count?

[tannhauser]

Both. Plus builder.

[Kontact]

I'm going to go with rim. There are a lot of entry level 20 spoke wheels out there that last fine, because of the heavy rim.

[LouDeeter]

I'd add for durability, larger tires. I'm not sure about higher pressures. If you hit a pothole at speed with super high pressures, you are really whacking the wheel, but the high pressure will probably protect from a rim dent. If running lower pressure, larger tires, you could hit the same pothole and damage the rim if the edge of the hole made contact with the rim. Not sure why you ask the question. If you plan long distance touring, strength and durability are extremely important. If you commute a lot, durability is important because you want your wheels to last.

[godfrey1112000]

Both. Plus builder.

agreed,

32 spoke DT 585 in the rear
28 spoke Dt 485 in front

very comfortable and provides peace of mind

The DT rims allow for the Conti tires to go on easy vs. the old 1.2 rims


and the builder

[spartanKid]

I'd add for durability, larger tires. I'm not sure about higher pressures. If you hit a pothole at speed with super high pressures, you are really whacking the wheel, but the high pressure will probably protect from a rim dent. If running lower pressure, larger tires, you could hit the same pothole and damage the rim if the edge of the hole made contact with the rim. Not sure why you ask the question. If you plan long distance touring, strength and durability are extremely important. If you commute a lot, durability is important because you want your wheels to last.

I'm actually asking from kind of a light-ish weight training/racing wheelset perspective. I'm a bit of a heavier rider, 185lbs, so I'm looking for some wheels to replace the ~2200g wheels that came as OE on my bike,

The 20mm deep rims with 20/24 spokes and 190lbs-ish rider limits scare me. Then you see a lot of wheels with either 20/24 and ~30mm deep rims or the same 20mm rims but with 24/28 or 28/32 counts.

I assume, of course, that a set of 30mm deep rims with 28/32 would be the strongest.

But with the goal of making a compromise with weight and durability, what seems better, lower spokes with deeper rims, or shallower rims with more spokes?

[LouDeeter]

Since you are going for lower weight, I'd go with deeper rims and fewer spokes rather than more spokes. Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about your weight. Get the wheels that you want and have fun. I'm over 200 pounds and ride light wheels all the time, but I don't race.

[tannhauser]

I'm actually asking from kind of a light-ish weight training/racing wheelset perspective. I'm a bit of a heavier rider, 185lbs, so I'm looking for some wheels to replace the ~2200g wheels that came as OE on my bike,

The 20mm deep rims with 20/24 spokes and 190lbs-ish rider limits scare me. Then you see a lot of wheels with either 20/24 and ~30mm deep rims or the same 20mm rims but with 24/28 or 28/32 counts.

I assume, of course, that a set of 30mm deep rims with 28/32 would be the strongest.

But with the goal of making a compromise with weight and durability, what seems better, lower spokes with deeper rims, or shallower rims with more spokes?

Depends on the spokes.

Contact a pro wheelbuilder for real 411.

[ultraman6970]

I weight like 190 pounds and I have low count and 36H wheels moving around, since I built my own stuff I have to agree with many comments.

The 24x16 wheelset I have holds awesome but the rims are not deep at all, just simple 25 mm height rim. IMO what does the difference are the rims that are pretty stiff and the spokes. I'm using straight pull flat spokes. A lot of tension... that I doubt i would get from a regular spoke. Never got a single issue feeling the wheel to woobble as a set of velocity spartacus i got or easton vistas that always felt weak.

Have another set 24x32, radial front, 3x in the back, regular straight gauge spokes. The rims are aluminum 40 mm or close to that. Rim obviously due to the profile is stiffer than the 25 mm wheels. Never got problems or felt them to woobble or anything. Solid stuff.

Have a set of 36H mavic GP4 wheelset 3x built. Eventho have more spokes the rim clearly is different than the other two, different eras too, box profile to start with. Aluminum 25 years ago was different than today's as well. Wheels are really smooth and I really don't know if I could get the same type of wheels using the same rim, brand and model but in 28H or 32H. IMO you simple can't, specially when your ass is heavy.

[Peter B]

Call Ergott. He'll get you set up.

[Germany_chris]

I'm heavier than all of you and I flex the crap out of low spoke count wheels. I just wouldn't go with low spoke count wheels above 150#

[oldpotatoe]

Which improves wheel strength/durability more, increase rim depth or a higher spoke count?

Too absolute, depends on too many things. Generally a heavier rim=a stronger wheel tho.

[oldpotatoe]

Since you are going for lower weight, I'd go with deeper rims and fewer spokes rather than more spokes. Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about your weight. Get the wheels that you want and have fun. I'm over 200 pounds and ride light wheels all the time, but I don't race.

Funny thing about deep(heavier) rims and low spoke count. 8 spokes weigh about 60 grams(32h vs 24h), so they reduce the weight by 60 grams then increase the weight by 150+ grams, on aluminum rims(DT415 and DT585 as examples..samo for Velocity Aerohead and Deep V). BUT more visual, low spoke count, aero-ish rims, big decals.

[e-RICHIE]

Which improves wheel strength/durability more, increase rim depth or a higher spoke count?

The improvement in wheel strength/durability and longevity are a result of width more so than depth atmo.

ps

arrange disorder

:cool::cool::cool:
:cool::cool::rolleyes:
:cool::cool:;)

[old_fat_and_slow]

The improvement in wheel strength/durability and longevity are a result of width more so than depth atmo.



I disagree.

Wheel strength is governed by rim cross-sectional area as well as pre-load (tension) on the spokes. The more cross-sectional area the rim has, the greater the amount of material there is available to distribute the load to. So if you have a massive Zipp 808 wheel with a very tall profile, there is much more area available to distribute the load to, than a 23 mm "wide" rim. Additionally, the high profile wheel is stiffer than a wide wheel, because the greater moment of inertia about the rim's neutral axis. (Think about a large bridge in your area, drive underneath and notice the depth of the I-beams or reinforced concrete beams, then go to a small county road and inspect the depth of the beams there.) Taller I-beams give you much greater bending stiffness.

Spoke preload is also very important. Without pre-load, wheels would collapse under our fat butts. That is because the spokes have almost nil compression strength. The purpose of the pre-load is to put enough tension in the spokes so that no matter how much load due to body weight and road obstacles, the spoke always stays in tension. If you hit a curb, or a huge pothole then the load on the spoke will overcome the preload, the spokes near where the wheel was hit will go into compression, the overall wheel becomes unstable, because the remainder of the wheel is in tension, and if there is any lateral force on the wheel, then the wheel tacos.

High profile wheels can get away with fewer spokes because of the inherent greater stiffness of the high profile rim cross-section. However, reducing the spoke number, does affect overall stiffness and strength. If you took a high profile wheel and laced it with 32 spokes, and compared it to a standard rim profile or even a wide profile rim, I believe you would find the tall profile wheel to be much stiffer and stronger.


For all readers of this post, you might be interested getting a copy of Jobst's book. He does a pretty good job, explaining how a wheel works.

[tannhauser]

Absolute and total poppycock.

Wheel strength is governed by rim cross-sectional area as well as pre-load (tension) on the spokes. The more cross-sectional area the rim has, the greater the amount of material there is available to distribute the load to. So if you have a massive Zipp 808 wheel with a very tall profile, there is much more area available to distribute the load to, than a 23 mm "wide" rim. Additionally, the high profile wheel is stiffer than a wide wheel, because the greater moment of inertia about the rim's neutral axis. (Think about a large bridge in your area, drive underneath and notice the depth of the I-beams or reinforced concrete beams, then go to a small county road and inspect the depth of the beams there.) Taller I-beams give you much greater bending stiffness.

Spoke preload is also very important. Without pre-load, wheels would collapse under our fat butts. That is because the spokes have almost nil compression strength. The purpose of the pre-load is to put enough tension in the spokes so that no matter how much load due to body weight and road obstacles, the spoke always stays in tension. If you hit a curb, or a huge pothole then the load on the spoke will overcome the preload, the spokes near where the wheel was hit will go into compression, the overall wheel becomes unstable, because the remainder of the wheel is in tension, and if there is any lateral force on the wheel, then the wheel tacos.

High profile wheels can get away with fewer spokes because of the inherent greater stiffness of the high profile rim cross-section.

Get a copy of Jobst's book. He does a pretty good job, explaining how a wheel works.

Jobst is controversial and your response is utterly rude.

You might be trolling for a response but I would think Richard is speaking from experience, not theory.

[Germany_chris]

Absolute and total poppycock.

Wheel strength is governed by rim cross-sectional area as well as pre-load (tension) on the spokes. The more cross-sectional area the rim has, the greater the amount of material there is available to distribute the load to. So if you have a massive Zipp 808 wheel with a very tall profile, there is much more area available to distribute the load to, than a 23 mm "wide" rim. Additionally, the high profile wheel is stiffer than a wide wheel, because the greater moment of inertia about the rim's neutral axis. (Think about a large bridge in your area, drive underneath and notice the depth of the I-beams or reinforced concrete beams, then go to a small county road and inspect the depth of the beams there.) Taller I-beams give you much greater bending stiffness.

Spoke preload is also very important. Without pre-load, wheels would collapse under our fat butts. That is because the spokes have almost nil compression strength. The purpose of the pre-load is to put enough tension in the spokes so that no matter how much load due to body weight and road obstacles, the spoke always stays in tension. If you hit a curb, or a huge pothole then the load on the spoke will overcome the preload, the spokes near where the wheel was hit will go into compression, the overall wheel becomes unstable, because the remainder of the wheel is in tension, and if there is any lateral force on the wheel, then the wheel tacos.

High profile wheels can get away with fewer spokes because of the inherent greater stiffness of the high profile rim cross-section.

Get a copy of Jobst's book. He does a pretty good job, explaining how a wheel works.

Theres some stuff in there thats right..

It seems right if the only force in the wheel was down, perpendicular to the road surface..

The problem is it's not, the force originates at the hub so the spokes not only compress also move side to side..the side to side movement of the spoke the the wheel flex we feel..I rode some 808's last fall, I believe they are 20 spoke I literally watched the wheel flex because it moved around like the tire was low..my 32 spoke tubulars I'm sure flex but I don't notice it.

[old_fat_and_slow]

Jobst is controversial and your response is utterly rude.

You might be trolling for a response but I would think Richard is speaking from experience, not theory.

Sorry you interpreted my response as being rude. I edited it, so maybe it will come across better now.

No, I am not trolling for a response. I'm just trying to correct a fallacious statement.

FYI - Just because somebody knows how to braze frame together, does not anoint them as a wheel expert or an engineer.

[tannhauser]

Sorry you interpreted my response as being rude. I edited it, so maybe it will come across better now.

No, I am not trolling for a response. I'm just trying to correct a fallacious statement.

FYI - Just because somebody knows how to braze frame together, does not anoint them as a wheel expert or an engineer.

Of course not, but the guy has run a cross race team for a very long time under the most extreme conditions. The guy knows what he's talking about here, irrespective of engineering.

This counts for way more than you anointing yourself the "wheel expert".

BTW, if you think he doesn't know anything about real-world engineering you've chosen the wrong guy to confront wrt that.

[old_fat_and_slow]

Of course not, but the guy has run a cross race team for a very long time under the most extreme conditions. The guy knows what he's talking about here, irrespective of engineering.

This counts for way more than you anointing yourself the "wheel expert".

BTW, if you think he doesn't know anything about real-world engineering you've chosen the wrong guy to confront wrt that.

I never anointed myself as a wheel expert. As I said I was just trying to correct what I perceived to be a fallacious statement.

Who pizzed in your Cheerios today.

I tried to edit my post and make it come across as less "rude", and you're still not happy

What's your deal, dude? Are you anointing yourself as the Rich defender, in hopes of getting moved up in the queue as gratitude? Maybe you should let Rich talk for himself. He's a big boy. He doesn't need you to intervene on his behalf.

I think you may have gotten this forum mixed up with across the hall. If you want to worship Rich and all his atmos, maybe you would feel more comfortable hanging out over there. Over here, his words can be questioned.

[tannhauser]

I never anointed myself as a wheel expert. As I said I was just trying to correct a fallacious statement.

Who pizzed in your Cheerios today.

I tried to edit my post and make it come across as less "rude", and you're still not happy

What's your deal, dude? Are you anointing yourself as the Rich defender, in hopes of getting moved up in the queue as gratitude? Maybe you should let Rich talk for himself. He's a big boy. He doesn't need you to intervene on his behalf.

I think you may have gotten this forum mixed up with across the hall. If you want to worship Rich and all his atmos, maybe you would feel more comfortable hanging out over there. Over here, his words can be questioned.


My Cheerios are fine, thanks. You don't have to please me and vice versa. I will defend what I feel like, whether it's here or there, on principle.

The principle of whether one is stronger or not is debateable, something you seem to want to discuss. Richard knows certain things from experience; seems like you want to draw him into a debate. His choice if he wants to or not.

My choice to tell you the obvious: you don't know more than he does about bikes, wheels and real-world stresses they undergo. That much is pretty much indisputable.

As for "not anointing yourself wheel expert" - of course you did. You said Richard was not, and proceeded to tell him he was wrong. That implies you know more and have anointed yourself a wheel expert. Seems pretty simple to me.

Mostly it sounds like you are bored and want to argue with him and now with me. I think you need to check what kind of fluid is in your own Cheerios.

PS he has no idea who I am nor am I in his queue, so stop trolling around.

PPS The main reason I'm defending this in principle is because I'd rather see a person with a wealth of real knowledge be here, rather than be driven off by endless theoretical bickering over minutiae.

[old_fat_and_slow]

My choice to tell you the obvious: you don't know more than he does about bikes, wheels and real-world stresses they undergo. That much is pretty much indisputable.


Now you're really exposing your ignorance. Just because some fellah brazes steel tubes to steel lugs, does not make him an expert on "all things bicycling related".

If you want to accept every word he utters as gospel, fine with me. Go ahead and wallow in your blind-faith ignorance. As they say... ignorance is bliss.

Are you enjoying calling me a troll? How does it feel stooping to gutter-level tactics. (Yeah, when logic and reasoning break down, there's always the fail-safe name-calling tactic. )

The principle of whether one is stronger or not is debateable, something you seem to want to discuss. Richard knows certain things from experience; seems like you want to draw him into a debate. His choice if he wants to or not.

Wrongo! I'm not looking to debate this at all. For the THIRD time, I'm just trying to correct a fallacious statement. I'm not trying to draw Rich into the debate. I'm just stating, if he disagrees with me, that is his prerogative, and he's welcome to provide his rationale to support his statement. He doesn't need others to intervene and support his case.

As a matter of fact, I haven't seen either of you present anything that supports his thesis. All he did was make a statement, and his supporting rationale was atmo. And you've really added a lot to support the case.

"Dude, Rich races cross. He knows all."

If you wanna support your position lets here some facts, theory, or test data to support it. I don't wanna hear, dude welds bikes. Dude races cross. Dude is a genius. Don't question dude's knowledge.

[tannhauser]

Now you're really exposing your ignorance. Just because some fellah brazes steel tubes to steel lugs, does not make him an expert on "all things bicycling related".

If you want to accept every word he utters as gospel, fine with me. Go ahead and wallow in your blind-faith ignorance. As they say... ignorance is bliss.

Are you enjoying calling me a troll? How it feel stooping to gutter-level tactics. (Yeah, when logic and reasoning break down, there's always the fail-safe name-calling tactic. )



Wrongo! I'm not looking to debate this at all. For the THIRD time, I'm just trying to correct a fallacious statement. I'm not trying to draw Rich into the debate. I'm just stating, if he disagrees with me, that is his prerogative, and he's willing to provide his rationale to support his statement. He doesn't need others to intervene and support his case.

As a matter of fact, I haven't seen either of you present anything that supports his thesis. All he did was make a statement, and his supporting rationale was atmo. And you've really added a lot to support the case.

"Dude, Rich races cross. He knows all."

If you wanna support your position lets here some facts, theory, or test data to support it. I don't wanna hear, dude welds bikes. Dude races cross. Dude is a genius. Don't question dude's knowledge.

You are certainly trolling and making a lot of presumptions, per usual.

Anyway, this is who I see you as: Old, Fat and Slow riding old bikes with old knowledge.

Now why would anyone want try to glean any info of any sort from a guy with this moniker?

Really, you've already demonstrated so many logical fallacies and presumed so much incorrectly how could anyone take you seriously. It's just pathetic.

[Mr. Squirrel]

mr. old makes me tingly. i feel like gathering my nuts. nuk nuk nuk!

mr squirrel


I disagree.

Wheel strength is governed by rim cross-sectional area as well as pre-load (tension) on the spokes. The more cross-sectional area the rim has, the greater the amount of material there is available to distribute the load to. So if you have a massive Zipp 808 wheel with a very tall profile, there is much more area available to distribute the load to, than a 23 mm "wide" rim. Additionally, the high profile wheel is stiffer than a wide wheel, because the greater moment of inertia about the rim's neutral axis. (Think about a large bridge in your area, drive underneath and notice the depth of the I-beams or reinforced concrete beams, then go to a small county road and inspect the depth of the beams there.) Taller I-beams give you much greater bending stiffness.

Spoke preload is also very important. Without pre-load, wheels would collapse under our fat butts. That is because the spokes have almost nil compression strength. The purpose of the pre-load is to put enough tension in the spokes so that no matter how much load due to body weight and road obstacles, the spoke always stays in tension. If you hit a curb, or a huge pothole then the load on the spoke will overcome the preload, the spokes near where the wheel was hit will go into compression, the overall wheel becomes unstable, because the remainder of the wheel is in tension, and if there is any lateral force on the wheel, then the wheel tacos.

High profile wheels can get away with fewer spokes because of the inherent greater stiffness of the high profile rim cross-section. However, reducing the spoke number, does affect overall stiffness and strength. If you took a high profile wheel and laced it with 32 spokes, and compared it to a standard rim profile or even a wide profile rim, I believe you would find the tall profile wheel to be much stiffer and stronger.


For all readers of this post, you might be interested getting a copy of Jobst's book. He does a pretty good job, explaining how a wheel works.

[e-RICHIE]

My experience with this is in the field much more so that it is with the numbers that engineers crunch to arrive at conclusions. I have raced a metric ton of miles and in hundreds of events on a lot of wheels and my points of view in this here thread veer more to the hand-builts than to the pre-builts. Before Y2k practically every wheel I used or sold was from Ric Hjertberg at Wheelsmith. My alliance with the store began in 1975. That in itself means little but I placed my trust in his experience to deliver goods that would get me to a finish line. In the big picture, I was more of a casual racer compared to his wider clientele that included working for and with pros, pro teams, and the National Team. I was a normal Cat 2 on the road and track but never had goals to race for money. A typical season for me would be 45-50 days of racing. We would do all the Somervilles, the Super Weeks, the stage races in Quebec, and whatever the schedule threw at us. No slide-rules, just pin on a number and race.

When rim cross sections were beginning to include aero shapes, it was intriguing to many of us in the sport because it appeared to be innovative. And you don't want to show up at an event at a disadvantage. Through all the brands and models that were served up, one trait seemed consistent: wheels laced to these shapes (V shapes, or the Assos rims, or the Mach 2CD2 versions from Mavic, or anyone's iteration atmo...) seems to have more trouble in the field than the conventional tubulars that we all were familiar and had a long history with. While the cross-section could cheat the wind if you exceeded a certain speed, wheels built with them while cool looking, lacked longevity. And they weighed more because the rims were not light by any stretch.

What we found was that reducing spoke count AND using wider rims (22mm at a minimum) yielded light wheels that had a remarkable service life AND weighed less to boot. That's where I come into this conversation. Pre-built and Big Box Inc wheels notwithstanding, the wheels with the most integrity (in the field) always were the ones with the wider rims. Use fewer spokes, and you have a lighter unit still. In my experience there was no downside. I raced on 28 spoke, 2 cross tubular wheels for a good twenty years and sold many of these same wheels on my made to order bicycles. But since we live in 2012 and so few among us employ the services of a wheelbuilder, much of this is moot.

And PS Enough with the venom and contentiousness and the ATH stuff and the turf war bull**** atmo. If you have to obsess about it so much that you use it to explain away your points of view, try leaving it at the door every now and then, huh.

[SoCalSteve]

Ok, time to close this one...

And please, next time, let's not make it personal or there will be repercussions.

Thanks!

[Keith A]

...

And PS Enough with the venom and contentiousness and the ATH stuff and the turf war bull**** atmo. If you have to obsess about it so much that you use it to explain away your points of view, try leaving it at the door every now and then, huh.Just wanted to add in a thank you to e-Richie for sharing his knowledge and history on this subject...and for his last comment.

Grazie!