need opinions: 130 or 135 disc wheels?

[MorganColeman]

Hey Everyone,

If you were having a custom road frame built for disc wheels, would you choose 135 or 130 spacing? My initial thought is to go 130 (narrower chainline), but after doing some quick research on market availability, it seems I have a lot more flexibility and choices with 135. Velocity, Phil Wood and White Industry make a 130. I'd hate to limit my choices in the long run, but I'm wondering if the industry will eventually adopt 130 as more road bikes go disc. Thoughts?

Morgan

[Germany_chris]

135..

[echelon_john]

135. You need as much flange width as you can get back there.

[David Kirk]

135 for sure.

dave

[54ny77]

one three five!

you can always use lightweight mountain bike hubs. lotsa choices there up & down the price/feature spectrum.

[Mark McM]

Wider hubs generally require a larger chainline offset (offset of the chainrings from the center of the frame); does this mean that using disc brakes on a road bike results in a wider Q dimension (width between pedals)?

My legs prefer a narrow Q, so I guess that's one more reason that disc brakes might not be my first choice for a road bike.

[echelon_john]

Theoretically, sometimes, but practically, probably not. You're only pushing the rear end out by 2.5mm per side at the very furthest point from the BB; so if you have 42cm chainrings the width change at 17.5mm back from the bb (where the crankarm is closest to the chainstay) will be more like 1mm per side. Unless your crank arms are already almost touching the chainstays, it will be fine with a 5mm wider rear end.

EDIT: Sorry; realized this doesn't answer the chain line question specifically. But even if you had to shift out 2.5mm to correct for chainline, that's a minimal difference that you could probably make up with your cleat.



Wider hubs generally require a larger chainline offset (offset of the chainrings from the center of the frame); does this mean that using disc brakes on a road bike results in a wider Q dimension (width between pedals)?

My legs prefer a narrow Q, so I guess that's one more reason that disc brakes might not be my first choice for a road bike.

[jpw]

I've never seen the need for rear disc braking.

[4Rings6Stars]

I've never seen the need for rear disc braking.

No need for the troll, the OP is not asking for opinions on disc brakes on road bikes. If you want to argue that there are plenty of 10 page threads for that.


To the OP. I will go against the grain and suggest 132.5. Makes it easier to run either 130 or 135 more options. Spreading a steel frame 1.25mm isn't going to cause ANY problems.

However, I think you should probably take Dave Kirk's advice over mine.... He's a master framebuilder and a proponent for drop bar disc bikes and I'm a 23 year old accountant who loves his Soma DC.

[jpw]

No need for the troll

Er?

[MrDangerPants]

Velocity, Phil Wood and White Industry make a 130.

Great thread! I'm also in the process of planning my next road bike build and am debating going with discs.

By the way, you can also easily convert a Chris King 135 to 130.

[oldpotatoe]

Hey Everyone,

If you were having a custom road frame built for disc wheels, would you choose 135 or 130 spacing? My initial thought is to go 130 (narrower chainline), but after doing some quick research on market availability, it seems I have a lot more flexibility and choices with 135. Velocity, Phil Wood and White Industry make a 130. I'd hate to limit my choices in the long run, but I'm wondering if the industry will eventually adopt 130 as more road bikes go disc. Thoughts?

Morgan

135, stronger rear wheel due to LH center to flange distance(larger).

[ergott]

No contest, 135mm. I've been using 135mm hubs with my 'cross bike before this disc brake fad;) No chainline or shifting issues when paired with a road crankset. 135mm hubs will make for stronger wheels.

[MorganColeman]

Hey Everyone--thanks for the advice!

It's a big help.

Morgan

[DRZRM]

Never mind, off topic, I'll start a new thread.

[svelocity]

Great thread! I'm also in the process of planning my next road bike build and am debating going with discs.

By the way, you can also easily convert a Chris King 135 to 130.

CK is a good choice for this. Yes you can switch the hub between 130/135 but you also have to re-dish the wheel.

+1 on the 132.5mm option...

[miguel]

many small builders do not have the tooling for 132.5
just saying.

135
get kings

[ergott]

many small builders do not have the tooling for 132.5
just saying.

135
get kings

I'm not a frame builder. What tooling is required for different spacing (assuming a metal frame)?

[miguel]

i will try to find a photo. it is basically a flat piece of metal machined with 130/135 measurements.

brb

[miguel]

http://alexandchristine.smugmug.com/Bicycles/Framebuilding/Wetmorian11/P1060218/704133447_u9jTz-M.jpg

[quag]

Definitely worth going 135 for both the stiffness and more options for hubs. All the new disc bikes seem to be going to 135 as the standard since most disc hubs come in that width by default. I was looking into 130 disc hub options, and outside of swapping axles and end caps off 135 hubs, there isn't much out there.

[EricEstlund]

132.5 is not hard to build towards, but it's also not (in my opinion) a great option for a frame. At 132.5 it never fits anything (even though it always almost does). Why not have it fit the wheels you own, and be pressed into service if you have an emergency? Seems better then to be constantly compromised.

It "seems" like 135 is the way forward- though predicting the future is challenging at best.

[miguel]

rong

[EricEstlund]

I didn't realize they made a 132.5 hub? Fair enough if you want to lock in I guess. Still an odd combo of standardizing a non standard, but there you go.

[miguel]

woops
im wrong