28 spoke wheel, 2x or 3x

[R3awak3n]

Did a little search online and seems to be all over the place.

Thinking about building a 28 spoke wheel, first time for me usually do 32 spoke, 3 cross.

It will be 28 in the front and 28 in the back. What are people doing this days? 2x all around or should I do 3x in the rear wheel and 2x in the front?

[AngryScientist]

personally with 28h i would go 3x/3x.

[David Tollefson]

"28 spoke wheel, 2x or 3x"

Yes.

Personally, I'd do 2x in front, and 3x drive/2x non-drive in the rear. Just because.

[cmbicycles]

I've always done 2x for 28h, but either would likely be fine. With 2x/3x it still only physically touches one spoke, but depending on the hub it may look better with one versus the other. 3x is perhaps slightly stronger based on the amount of material the spoke is pulling against at the hub. What hub are you using? How hard are you on your wheels? I am 6'5" 200# but am not hard on wheels, while some of my lighter, shorter friends seem to thrash wheels left and right.

[R3awak3n]

Im not super hard on my wheels, very careful, unweight the bike on bumps, ects. Not sure what hubs yet but probably tune.



I like the 2x in front and 2x/3x in back.

[bshell]

2X will have better spoke angles/nipple to rim angles.

[R3awak3n]

thanks guys. This is going to be a nice wheelset.

So with 28 spokes instead of 32, tension will be a bit higher?


also super undecided about rims...

belgium c2s
pacenti forzas
hplusson archtype (already have a set of these so might not go for these)
Kinlin XR31T

Leaning towards the Kinlin, nice weight for a 30mm deep rim and cheaper than the belgiums or pacentis. Pacentis are in second place because not only I like buying from Kirk but because my other pacenti rims have been amazing to build and have been great.

[ColonelJLloyd]

I'd go Forza. Rear OC FTW!

[AngryScientist]

if you can find the forza rear!

dt swiss 460 best cost effective option.

[R3awak3n]

I might do the forza. Is the rear forza out of stock or something?

edit: yeah the OC is not on the site. hmmmm. I am not building these for a couple more weeks so maybe it will be come available.

[AngryScientist]

I might do the forza. Is the rear forza out of stock or something?

i just posed the question on the Pacenti thread in the vendor section. as far as i know the rears never hit his website, fronts only. maybe PM ergott, he has connections.

[R3awak3n]

i just posed the question on the Pacenti thread in the vendor section. as far as i know the rears never hit his website, fronts only. maybe PM ergott, he has connections.

ahah will do when I am ready to buy. This could convince me to go forza, not that I ever had a problem with a "normal" rim but interested in this and should make tensions closer together making a better wheel.

Going to do Sapin Laser spokes and brass nipples.

Goal is to make a strong under 1500g alloy wheel without going silly low spoke count or alloy nipples. Excited about this (as yall can see, I need a project here, feeling bored lately.... zwift is not cutting it haha)

[Tony T]

"The number of crosses in the lacing pattern has no effect on the performance of the wheel, so if you are building a road or mountain bike wheel with 36, 32 or 28 spokes use a 3-cross lacing pattern, for 24 spoke wheels use a 2-cross pattern"
—Roger Musson, Professional Guide to Wheelbuuilding.

[cmbicycles]

"The number of crosses in the lacing pattern has no effect on the performance of the wheel, so if you are building a road or mountain bike wheel with 36, 32 or 28 spokes use a 3-cross lacing pattern, for 24 spoke wheels use a 2-cross pattern"
—Roger Musson, Professional Guide to Wheelbuuilding.

I'm curious, if it truly has no effect on wheel performance then why does Musson recommend 3x? Just because it's more traditional? Why not 1x or 2x? If it doesn't matter then it doesn't matter...
I understand why you use fewer crossings on low spoke count wheels, but does he give a rationale for his comment elsewhere?

[steelbikerider]

I'm 200 lbs. been riding 28 spoke wheels for 10+years with no issues. Currently have front 2x with DA hubs and HED or Archetype rims, rear 3x with same rims, Sapim race or cx-ray spokes.

[Mark McM]

So with 28 spokes instead of 32, tension will be a bit higher?

Generally, yes. Static tension must be sufficient to prevent the spokes from completely slackening under load. At a given static tension, with less spokes it takes less force to slacken the spokes, so the static tension should be raised to compensate.

[Mark McM]

I'm curious, if it truly has no effect on wheel performance then why does Musson recommend 3x? Just because it's more traditional? Why not 1x or 2x? If it doesn't matter then it doesn't matter...
I understand why you use fewer crossings on low spoke count wheels, but does he give a rationale for his comment elsewhere?

The point of crossing spokes is not that the spokes themselves cross, but to increase the angle that the spokes pull on the flange. (In other words, if we run the spokes from the hub at an angle, as a consequence they will cross other spokes on their way to the rim).

The reason it is good to run the spokes at an angle from the flange is because the flanges are stronger to tangential forces, and weak to radial forces. p

As Musson points out, from a performance standpoint crossing spokes makes no meaningful difference. So, if more crossings results in a better spoke angle at the hub, then spoke/hub angles (crossings) should be maximized for best reliability.

[oldpotatoe]

Did a little search online and seems to be all over the place.

Thinking about building a 28 spoke wheel, first time for me usually do 32 spoke, 3 cross.

It will be 28 in the front and 28 in the back. What are people doing this days? 2x all around or should I do 3x in the rear wheel and 2x in the front?

Unless a yuge flange, 3cross rear, 2cross front. Inside pulling. Less severe angle of 'stressed' spoke over hub flange on way to rim.

[R3awak3n]

thanks everyone. It will be 3X rear and 2X front. :hello:

[dcgriz]

Since you seem to worry a bit too much about the lacing pattern which is rather insignificant, performance wise, between 2x or 3x, I wonder why you settled on 28f/28r rather than possibly 24f/28r or even 20f/28r?

[zzy]

I suspect it's cuz he's building rims to hubs he already has..

[dcgriz]

I suspect it's cuz he's building rims to hubs he already has..

Possibly, but he does say that this is the first time with 28h

[oldpotatoe]

Possibly, but he does say that this is the first time with 28h

Maybe he wants to save the YUGE 2 ounces..8 spokes. :)

[R3awak3n]

I dont have the rims or the hubs and I may go 24 in the front but I dont see a reason. Reason I am going 28 and not 32 is because I may get a good deal on a 28 rear. If I go with new hubs I may go 32/28

[Tony T]

There is a lot less weight supported by the front, so fewer spokes are needed on the front wheel.
Also less weight (but not much),
and looks cooler :)

Edit:
Putting fewer spokes in the front wheel may seem reasonable because it carries less of the rider’s weight, but under braking the weight is shifted towards the front and under extreme braking where the rear wheel lifts off the ground the whole weight is taken by the front. So it’s best not to reduce the number of spokes in the front wheel and keep it the same as the rear.
—Professional Guide to Wheelbuilding - Musson

[chrisroph]

On a rim brake build, generally, you can get away with fewer front spokes because the tension l to r is more even than on the rear because there is less dish. With disc wheels, there are different forces involved so the calculus is different. But 2x front 3 x rear will be fine.

[YesNdeed]

thanks guys. This is going to be a nice wheelset.

So with 28 spokes instead of 32, tension will be a bit higher?


also super undecided about rims...

belgium c2s
pacenti forzas
hplusson archtype (already have a set of these so might not go for these)
Kinlin XR31T

Leaning towards the Kinlin, nice weight for a 30mm deep rim and cheaper than the belgiums or pacentis. Pacentis are in second place because not only I like buying from Kirk but because my other pacenti rims have been amazing to build and have been great.

I'm getting ready to build up a 28/28 set myself, so this is a good discussion. As for rims, this is a gravel/cross build, so Belgium Plus (I insist on tubeless) seems to be the "be done with it" rim for this type of use. Any other suggestions?

[thunderworks]

On a rim brake build, generally, you can get away with fewer front spokes because the tension l to r is more even than on the rear because there is less dish. With disc wheels, there are different forces involved so the calculus is different. But 2x front 3 x rear will be fine.

Spoke tension should be even. Front wheels (rim brake) are symmetrical. There is no differential dish.

[bshell]

I built some Belgium+ into a tubeless CX wheelset with King 28/28 hubs about 18 months ago and I've been really happy.

I'm 185 lbs and I take that bike on MTB trails all of the time (at a slower speed). This was my first foray into tubeless and the ride feels pretty sweet but now that I'm running 40 lbs(wide rims) instead of 70 lbs (narrow rims/tubes) the risk of dinging the rim from striking a rock is much greater.

[oldpotatoe]

I'm getting ready to build up a 28/28 set myself, so this is a good discussion. As for rims, this is a gravel/cross build, so Belgium Plus (I insist on tubeless) seems to be the "be done with it" rim for this type of use. Any other suggestions?

Velocity A23

[Clancy]

H Plus Sons Archtype- just laced up a pair, very impressed.

[R3awak3n]

H Plus Sons Archtype- just laced up a pair, very impressed.

The archtypes build well for sure, I have a set already and why I want to try something else.

A veeeeerrrryyyy nice forum member, starts with W and rhymes with San might be hooking me up with some pacenti sl23 from his stash and that is very nice of him and that will be probably the way I will go:banana:

[AngryScientist]

The archtypes build well for sure, I have a set already and why I want to try something else.

A veeeeerrrryyyy nice forum member, starts with W and rhymes with San might be hooking me up with some pacenti sl23 from his stash and that is very nice of him and that will be probably the way I will go:banana:

if they are V1's make sure to use nipple washers on the DS rear, at least.

[R3awak3n]

if they are V1's make sure to use nipple washers on the DS rear, at least.

they are V1s so I am going to pass on them :(

[weisan]

No worries R3 pal.
I got an extra pair of new Pacenti SL23 v1 28 holes rims if anyone is interested. $100 shipped.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2u4d31CW5loNURid2pPZ21UNGM/view

[oldpotatoe]

No worries R3 pal.
I got an extra pair of new Pacenti SL23 v1 28 holes rims if anyone is interested. $100 shipped.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2u4d31CW5loNURid2pPZ21UNGM/view

and I have nipple washers if anybody is going to build a V1 rim..

[oldpotatoe]

I might do the forza. Is the rear forza out of stock or something?

edit: yeah the OC is not on the site. hmmmm. I am not building these for a couple more weeks so maybe it will be come available.

DT440(OC rear), Velocity A23(OC rear)...PM if you'd like these..all 28h. Archetypes as well. These 3 are my favorite rims.

[dcgriz]

Archetype and A23 are two worlds apart in terms of QC. I find the Archetype quality consistent, can't say the same for the A23

Durability wise, if the OP is north of 200 lbs, the DT440 won't compare to the strength of the Archetype. If it must be DT look at the 460 as a minimum.

Weight is your friend ........ if it doesn't overextend it's welcome that is........

[oldpotatoe]

Archetype and A23 are two worlds apart in terms of QC. I find the Archetype quality consistent, can't say the same for the A23

Durability wise, if the OP is north of 200 lbs, the DT440 won't compare to the strength of the Archetype. If it must be DT look at the 460 as a minimum.

Weight is your friend ........ if it doesn't overextend it's welcome that is........

Well..after building a BUNCH of all 3 mentioned, and not trying to get into some sort of argument, I don't agree.

Archetypes are very consistent and build quality is excellent. A23 is too, now. Early on, right after the manufacturing was moved from Australia to Florida, QC was poor. Now, however, after building about a dozen or so of each, the A23, WITH OC rear, is a fine rim that makes for a fine wheelset.

I have also build a bunch of DT440(also OC rears) and at 450 grams, the very best, roundest, flattest rim I have ever built, period. 'North of 200 pounds' doesn't matter. 460s are good, low digit, asian made, rims. Almost The same weight as DT440, BTW(10 grams), make great wheels too BUT are not the consistency of the others mentioned. PLUS OC a great idea for any rider, particularly those 'north of 200 pounds'-..

IMHO, of course.

[weisan]

and I have nipple washers if anybody is going to build a V1 rim..

Sorry, couldn't wait for the washer, just finished building the front wheel, too damn cold to be sitting around doing nuthin'

but i got 4 or 5 more to go so if you wanna send me some washers, I am not going to say no...:D

Pacenti v1 32h 3x

http://alicehui.com/wheels/rsz_p1060096.jpg

[Fatty]

Archetype and A23 are two worlds apart in terms of QC. I find the Archetype quality consistent, can't say the same for the A23

Durability wise, if the OP is north of 200 lbs, the DT440 won't compare to the strength of the Archetype. If it must be DT look at the 460 as a minimum.

Weight is your friend ........ if it doesn't overextend it's welcome that is........

I like the A23 rim. Don't have any experience with so can't comment on quality of the Archetype rims but as far as where they are made worlds apart is spot on. Guessing that the worker at the shop in Florida makes better wages/benefits than his counterpart in the China.

[dcgriz]

Well..after building a BUNCH of all 3 mentioned, and not trying to get into some sort of argument, I don't agree.

Archetypes are very consistent and build quality is excellent. A23 is too, now. Early on, right after the manufacturing was moved from Australia to Florida, QC was poor. Now, however, after building about a dozen or so of each, the A23, WITH OC rear, is a fine rim that makes for a fine wheelset.

I have also build a bunch of DT440(also OC rears) and at 450 grams, the very best, roundest, flattest rim I have ever built, period. 'North of 200 pounds' doesn't matter. 460s are good, low digit, asian made, rims. Almost The same weight as DT440, BTW(10 grams), make great wheels too BUT are not the consistency of the others mentioned. PLUS OC a great idea for any rider, particularly those 'north of 200 pounds'-..

IMHO, of course.

My post is not intended to start an argument; just to share experiences.

Glad to hear the A23 have finally improved. I stopped using them a while after the move to Florida. Last experience with them was trying to remove the leftover alloy shavings, some still attached on the rim spoke hole some left inside the rim. Then I had to chamfer the holes. Too much work considering the other choices available that have remained true to their quality reputation.

The std DT 440 is 435 grams, the OC DT440 shows at 450 grams. The basis of my observation is that the wider and taller profile of the 460 helps its rigidity. An additional detraction for me is the use of single eyelets. I prefer either double eyelets or no eylets.

I dont understand your point about the heavier weight of riders weighing more than 200 lbs does not matter. I have always consider that choosing suitable rims and spokes, particularly when the rider insidted on low count spokes like the OP wants to do. In my experience and opinion, a heavy rider on a lightweight rim laced with fewer spokes than appropriatte for his weight is a difficult combination to justify for anything else but a specific event niche wheel.

The reason I am being vocal on this is that I'm tired of seeing these light weight rims sold for everyday use, fail in short order (i.e cracks on the rim, broken spokes, etc) and then read the posts asking why the wheel failed.
IMO and observations, these lightweight rims dont seem to be able to hold the spoke tension well after the tire is fitted on the rim. In prior years, it was expected to loose 5 to 10 kgf after the tire was inflated and still have 110-115kgf on the DS to work with while maintaining adequate tension on the NDS to keep spokes from loosening up. Now we have shorter flange offsets (11 speed) affecting the spoke bracing angle, lighter rims (typically thinner extrusion) and lesser number of spokes. That's the perfect storm in wheels and one of the results is a 20 to 35 kgf drop in spoke tension after the tire is inflated or in some cases after the tubeless tire is just fitted on the rim beads. Primary reason being the deformation of the rim when under load. Assuming one starts with the manufacturer's conventional max spoke tension of 120kgf, the resulting tension drop does not make for good wheels.

Anyway, sorry for the long post. Dont mean to lecture anybody, just sharing some observations. :beer:

[weisan]

Good discussions all around.

The wheel was mounted with Compass Stampede and went straight up on the Rivendell, now the front and back are matchy matchy :D

[chiasticon]

Sorry, couldn't wait for the washer, just finished building the front wheel, too damn cold to be sitting around doing nuthin'

but i got 4 or 5 more to go so if you wanna send me some washers, I am not going to say no...:Dwhat's the deal with the washers for V1 SL23's? pretty sure that's what I have. they've seen a good bit of miles for a couple years, plus CX practice/couple races, good bit of off road/gravel riding, singletrack trails, etc. haven't had to do anything to them yet.

however, I have no idea if I have nipple washers in them or not, as I didn't build them. they go over the nipple, before you place it through the rim hole right? so they're not visible once built?

[AngryScientist]

what's the deal with the washers for V1 SL23's? pretty sure that's what I have. they've seen a good bit of miles for a couple years, plus CX practice/couple races, good bit of off road/gravel riding, singletrack trails, etc. haven't had to do anything to them yet.

however, I have no idea if I have nipple washers in them or not, as I didn't build them. they go over the nipple, before you place it through the rim hole right? so they're not visible once built?

correct. the V1's had a less beefy rim bed than probably necessary, which was rectified with the V2's. there were several reports of cracking at the spoke holes, and it was recommended wheels be built with nipple washers to spread the load a bit more at the rim bed for the V1 rims, at least for the DS rear.

of course, it was not like a 100% failure thing, and you may very well be fine without the washers, depending on how heavy you are and how hard on wheels. most wheelbuilders knew of this and built accordingly though...

[Mark McM]

There is a lot less weight supported by the front, so fewer spokes are needed on the front wheel.
Also less weight (but not much),
and looks cooler :)

Edit:
Putting fewer spokes in the front wheel may seem reasonable because it carries less of the rider’s weight, but under braking the weight is shifted towards the front and under extreme braking where the rear wheel lifts off the ground the whole weight is taken by the front. So it’s best not to reduce the number of spokes in the front wheel and keep it the same as the rear.
—Professional Guide to Wheelbuilding - Musson

I'm afraid that I can't agree with Musson's advice. It is true that up to the entire weight of the rider/bike can be shifted to the front wheel under hard braking (just as all the weight can be shifted to the rear wheel under hard acceleration if the front wheel lifts off the ground). But wheels typically don't fail under a single heavy load, they most often fail under fatigue, which is the result of high cycle repetitive loading. The hard braking Musson is referring to doesn't happen often enough to have a significant influence on fatigue. So using a reduced number of spokes on the front is unlikely to result in greater wheel failure.

Another factor not mentioned by Musson is that the dishing required for modern 8/9/10/11spd wheels reduces wheel strength, so that rear wheels should have more spokes to compensate (in other words, even if front wheels experienced the same loads as rear wheels, rear wheels would still require more spokes).

Using fewer spokes in front wheels has become the norm, especially for pre-built wheels. And yet, rear wheels still have more problems than front wheels. Here are some comments from Sheldon brown, recounting how front wheels have used fewer spokes than rears for decades:

Up until the early 1980s, virtually all adult bikes had 72 spokes.
32 front/40 rear was the standard for British bikes, 36 front and rear for other countries. The exception was super-fancy special-purpose racing wheels, which might have 32 spokes front and rear.

The Great Spoke Scam: In the early '80s a clever marketeer hit upon the idea of using only 32 spokes in wheels for production bikes. Because of the association of 32-spoke wheels with exotic, high-performance bikes, the manufacturers were able to cut corners and save money while presenting it as an "upgrade!" The resulting wheels were noticeably weaker than comparable 36-spoke wheels, but held up well enough for most customers.

Since then, this practice has been carried to an extreme, with 28-, 24-, even 16-spoke wheels being offered, and presented as it they were somehow an "upgrade."

Actually, such wheels normally are not an upgrade in practice. When the spokes are farther apart on the rim, it is necessary to use a heavier rim to compensate, so there isn't usually even a weight benefit from these newer wheels!

This type of wheel requires unusually high spoke tension, since the load is carried by fewer spokes. If a spoke does break, the wheel generally becomes instantly unridable. The hub may break too; see John Allen's article.

If you want highest performance, it is generally best to have more spokes in the rear wheel than the front. For instance, 28/36 is better than 32/32. People very rarely have trouble with front wheels:
◦Front wheels are symmetrically dished (except with disc brakes).
◦Front wheels carry less weight.
◦Front wheels don't have to deal with torsional loads (unless there's a hub brake).
If you have the same number of spokes front and rear, either the front wheel is heavier than it needs to be, or the rear wheel is weaker than it should be.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html

[chiasticon]

correct. the V1's had a less beefy rim bed than probably necessary, which was rectified with the V2's. there were several reports of cracking at the spoke holes, and it was recommended wheels be built with nipple washers to spread the load a bit more at the rim bed for the V1 rims, at least for the DS rear.

of course, it was not like a 100% failure thing, and you may very well be fine without the washers, depending on how heavy you are and how hard on wheels. most wheelbuilders knew of this and built accordingly though...ah cool. thanks for the explanation :beer:

I'm about 155 and they're built 24/28 with kings/cx-rays so pretty sturdy for my weight. got 'em later summer 2014 so I believe they're V1's. I'm not super hard on wheels but like I said, they've seen some decently tough conditions.

can you see the nipple washers through the spoke holes in the rim bed? I could check just out of curiosity, next time I have to change rim tape (so... probably long enough from now that I'll forget all about this).

[oldpotatoe]

My post is not intended to start an argument; just to share experiences.

Glad to hear the A23 have finally improved. I stopped using them a while after the move to Florida. Last experience with them was trying to remove the leftover alloy shavings, some still attached on the rim spoke hole some left inside the rim. Then I had to chamfer the holes. Too much work considering the other choices available that have remained true to their quality reputation.

The std DT 440 is 435 grams, the OC DT440 shows at 450 grams. The basis of my observation is that the wider and taller profile of the 460 helps its rigidity. An additional detraction for me is the use of single eyelets. I prefer either double eyelets or no eylets.

I dont understand your point about the heavier weight of riders weighing more than 200 lbs does not matter. I have always consider that choosing suitable rims and spokes, particularly when the rider insidted on low count spokes like the OP wants to do. In my experience and opinion, a heavy rider on a lightweight rim laced with fewer spokes than appropriatte for his weight is a difficult combination to justify for anything else but a specific event niche wheel.

The reason I am being vocal on this is that I'm tired of seeing these light weight rims sold for everyday use, fail in short order (i.e cracks on the rim, broken spokes, etc) and then read the posts asking why the wheel failed.
IMO and observations, these lightweight rims dont seem to be able to hold the spoke tension well after the tire is fitted on the rim. In prior years, it was expected to loose 5 to 10 kgf after the tire was inflated and still have 110-115kgf on the DS to work with while maintaining adequate tension on the NDS to keep spokes from loosening up. Now we have shorter flange offsets (11 speed) affecting the spoke bracing angle, lighter rims (typically thinner extrusion) and lesser number of spokes. That's the perfect storm in wheels and one of the results is a 20 to 35 kgf drop in spoke tension after the tire is inflated or in some cases after the tubeless tire is just fitted on the rim beads. Primary reason being the deformation of the rim when under load. Assuming one starts with the manufacturer's conventional max spoke tension of 120kgf, the resulting tension drop does not make for good wheels.

Anyway, sorry for the long post. Dont mean to lecture anybody, just sharing some observations. :beer:

I never do the 'three strikes and you are out' gig. Light rim, thin spokes and not enough spokes. If somebody wants such a thing and I think it'll be unreliable, I don't build it. I do NO thin spokes(like CxRay, DT revs or Sapim Laser) on ANY drive side rear, for anybody. I don't like alloy nipples either BUT DT440, Archetype, A23 aren't light rims. 28 rear is too few spokes IMHO, but I don't think the OP said he was .1 of a ton(200 pounds). DT RR411 is a light rim, DT415 was a light rim. Some Kinlin are light rims.

OC, DT440 and A23, help the flange spacing on 11s a lot. And all are 450-460 grams. I agree with everything you have said..it's kinda like the french bridge builder who s___k_d one c__k..Was he known as the French bridge builder? No, known as the French c___ S___K__....I won't design and build a wheel that won't work for a cyclist.

[11.4]

There's a lot here that I'd endorse wholeheartedly, and a lot that I'd amend.

First of all, let's remember that all the big wheel authorities -- Musson, Brandt, Schraner, Sheldon, and so on -- are for the most part twenty or thirty years behind the times. If we leave out carbon rims entirely, we still have seen quite an evolution of alloy rims. The 1980s and 1990s were focused on ultralight rims like the Ambrosio Crono, Mavic GEL280, Nisi Sludi, and so on. Almost all were tubular rims. Spokes were nothing like we have available today. Hubs were limited in how well they could handle higher spoke tensions and different spoking patterns. Wheels were 9-speed or less with much less offset. And on and on. Those older rims don't compare to a HED Belgium or H+Son Archetype. Same for hubs, spokes, and so on (anyone who used Robergels or Stellas knows how readily they fatigued and broke, compared to the Sapims and DTs that dominate today).

Second, I suspect we tend to be heavier riders. That's just a demographic trend. We're riding at older ages, at heavier weights, and with lighter bikes.

Third, the metallurgy of rims has improved enormously. In the 70's we had fairly heavy rims from soft alloy that were extremely durable but got dinged up a lot. The first rims made with improved or heat treated alloys were the Mavic GP4's in their second generation. Heat treating got out of control in the 80's and 90's as it became a solution to extruding thinner and thinner rim cross sections, and we ended up with rims that cracked at spoke holes, that usually needed ferrules or at least washers, that had short lives, and that could fail in spectacular ways. In the last ten years or so, we've had better rim designs, plus clincher rim design has really come into its own after years of mediocre product.

We've also had better analysis of wheel design. This effect has been quite profound. Who in the 80's ever talked about bracing angles and actual tension measurements?

In short, we're in a new world of wheel design and we really need to pick through the comments applying to prior generations of wheel construction with a very cautious eye. We can do a lot of things that Brandt and others simply couldn't do, and can't do something that they were able to.

Plus, as astute as they were, they also had plenty of illusions about what they were doing and were limited in their understanding of wheel design. Today we're much better equipped to evaluate a wheel or rim design and can frankly do so much better than the older experts were able to. I'd never quote them as gospel. They were learning, and we have been learning a lot more since.

[weisan]

22.8/2 pal, how do you do that???!!

:eek:

[dcgriz]

Good points brought up all around!

Of particular interest are the modern day advancements in clincher rim design as metallurgy has improved. However, it also appears to me that in the quest for the lightest, deepest, more aero, etc. etc. rim, significant experimentation is conducted at the expense of the receiving public. Rim design, appearing to be driven more by marketing than solid engineering principles, enters the market; occasionally prematurely as proven by time and use.

A concern of mine is the use of asymmetric rim design for lightweight rims. Rather than trying to establish what is the weight numerical value that characterizes a lightweight rim lets say that a lightweight rim is one that upon tire installation (inflation or fitting) the spoke tension reduces by ~30%.
I think is well established that this reduction in spoke tension is due to the rim deforming as the inflation pressure pushes the clincher sidewalls outwards, in the process creating a significant amount of stresses on the rim leading edge. This for a standard, symmetrical, rim. An asymmetric rim by design is already prone to unbalanced surface tensions; how's this deformation is expected to affect it? More than it does its standard shape sibling? How much will it affect its expected longevity? Unanswered questions considering the rim structure has remained essentially unchanged if not further simplified from when rims were weighing more.

In reference to the DT 440's we were discussing earlier on, DT shows a weight difference of 15 grams between the std and OC rims. Is this a calculated subjective compromise between performance and durability or is simply a stop of not going over the mantra of 450 grams? I dont know the answers to these questions but recent history (on other lightweight rims) has proven that some skepticism may be warranted.

Granted, as I have indicated previously, this may be totally acceptable for a racing environment where performance is paramount to durability but when a general use wheel for a "chubby" rider is in question, I'll take two steps backwards and wait 'till the dust settles....

[tbike4]

Should I stop riding my rear wheels with 28h 2x DS and radial NDS?

[weisan]

Should I stop riding my rear wheels with 28h 2x DS and radial NDS?

yes, and sent them to me.

[R3awak3n]

I think its really hard to just say weight = x amount of spokes. People ride wheels in different ways, there are light guys that trash wheels, there are heavy guys that don't. Some guys race, some don't.

I am actually over 200lbs and I know OP would never build me 28 spoke wheels but I have had them an never had problems. I have broken more spokes on 32 spoke wheels than I have on 28 (could be because most of my sets are 32 :P).

The last wheels I had were enve 45s, 20 spoke front, 24 back and these wheels felt more solid than my 32 spoke Hplus son. Could be the carbon and carbon is strong but so is some alloy. I am not going for less stout alloy wheels (thats why I passed on V1 pacenti sl23s). The rim I am going for will be in the 450g weight and will be doing Sapim laser.

I also always use brass but I think I might go alum nipples this time aroud. According to Sapim, alum nipples are now stronger than brass... do I believe it? eh, not necessarily but there are tons of good alum nipple builds out there that have had no problems so I am going to try it.