sd5782 

I recently purchased 2 different vintage touring miyatas, both with single wall rims. 1988 and 1989, so it seems that the double wall technology was well established by then. I have read that the single wall rims are frowned upon here. I am fairly new to the game except for a 72 Super Sport with the old single wall Weinmanns. I have 3 other C&V bikes with double wall rims that lean more sporty in application, but do seem more fragile.

The Araya and Ukai rims are a bit wider and seem quite sturdy, albeit a bit heavy. Was the single wall just the accepted sturdy standard of the day on touring bikes? I have read that the 40 hole Sansin is well regarded too so I thought about keeping those if I parted out one of the miyatas just in case another vintage tourer in 27” came up that might be a candidate for 700c. Was miyata cutting corners or just being conservative?

branko_76 

sd5782 , I wouldn't dismiss the rims based on one aspect of their design. There are other variables that make up a strong wheel. Spokes, tires and how well the wheel is constructed are just as important.

If you're considering using them for light touring, as long as they are built well, they will be okay. Long distance heavy touring would require a stronger rim.

ThermionicScott 

Single-wall rims are simpler and cheaper to make. When extruded with thicker walls, they are reasonably strong, too. (See also: Weinmann Concave rims.) Making the metal a bit thicker doesn't seem to add to the cost, so choosing single-wall rims helped keep the cost down for some bikes even after Mavic started to popularize double-wall rims in the 1970s.

Another way to look at it is that a double-wall rim will be heavy if the metal is thick on all sides. So the extruding dies need to be held to a closer tolerance to keep the metal thin but not weak, and more QC is needed to ensure that everything stays in tolerance. That's what pushes up the cost of double-wall rims, especially those that shoot for really light weights.

sd5782 

Actually, light touring could be in my dreams sometime in the future. Both of these rims are wide and seem fairly thick and strong, especially when compared to some double walled ones on an 83 Trek that I have. That one is quite easy to deform the edges when mounting tires.Perhaps the earliest double walls were narrower and for more sporting applications?

I wouldn’t have thought miyata cut too many pennies on the 1000 level bike. I do like them and will keep them, but was trying to get some perspective on the bad rap. As an aside, I packed up my 72 Super Sport 40 years ago not knowing any different and did a 600 mile solo circle Ohio tour with tent and gear on the old Weinmanns without problems.

canklecat

Some single wall rims are pretty good. I have a set of Araya PX-45 rims, concave braking surface (very trendy back then) from my early '90s Univega that withstood riding way too long with floppy untensioned spokes, got warped from a sideways sliding stop on gravel blacktop (didn't crash, fortunately), straightened by the LBS, ran trouble free for another year or so before I was clobbered by a car. And I'll bet those scrapes could be buffed out, the rims straightened and put back into service.

Unlike the single wall rims that came with my mid-2000s Globe Carmel comfort hybrid, those Araya PX-45 rims felt sturdy, good quality. Hefting them you wouldn't know they're single wall.

TiHabanero

Single wall rims can be as robust as needed for touring if designed correctly. An co-worker of mine did a cross country tour on the Ukai single wall rims that came on the Miyata 1000 and had zero issues. His tour took him into Canada from about Minnesota all the way to the west coast then down into California. I used a set of concave single wall rims for touring through 3 countries without any issues. Double wall is nice and can be light, but a good single wall is just as good with only a slight penalty in weight. Nothing to worry about.

Salamandrine 

What do you mean when you say single wall? Technically, extruded rims with hollow sections in the corners are not single wall. Box section rims, aside from tubulars, were not historically the typical touring rims. The Super Champion (later Wolber) mod 58 was the defacto standard high end touring rim from the 70s to the 90s. Similar rims were produced by Weinmann, Araya, and others. These are not inferior in any way to the box section rims of the day. True single walls were only seen in the cheapest aluminum rims.

sd5782 

I have seen the single wall defined as having no box section where the nipple comes through the rim so the nipple is in the center channel and not recessed below a hole in the innermost box section. Hence, the head of the nipple is exposed inside. And yes, PX-45s are on one bike, and the 1000 has the black anodized (except the machined brake tracks) Ukai rims.

As stated, I am fairly new to the game so was trying to figure out if this old tech was really bad, or a bit perfected before the new tech came on. Does anyone have any insight into early box section wider rims? Those Super Champions look like single walls too, except with eyelets. Thanks all for the replies.

Hobbiano 

If you decide you don't want to keep them, send me a pm. I could use them.

Salamandrine 

That definition is not correct. A single wall rim has no hollow sections. Originally single wall rims were made from a formed sheet of steel. Later on there were aluminum rims with single walls.

As I said, the gold standard in touring rims was the Mod 58. They were/are very sturdy. There really weren't any box section wider rims that I know of until mountain bikes became popular in the 80s.

scarlson 

I toured for 6 months on a Weinmann concave rim with no eyelets. It was in the front, but I had a heavy front load and broke two Blackburn lowriders. The wheel never gave me trouble. The rear, a box-section MA3, went through two rims, starting with cracks around the spoke holes before the spoke would pull free from the rim entirely, taking a chunk of rim with it. I find that it's difficult to generalize about these things.

Salamandrine 

I can see how a modern mechanic who has never seen true single wall rims might mistakingly call all non box section rims single wall. True single wall rims are pretty rare these days, but they were very common until the early 90s or so.

See the bottom 3 rims in this picture I pilfered from yellowjersey.com

sd5782 

Thanks for the education. All this makes sense, and I have no desire to part with those rims. Probably an interesting time with some newer tech coming in too. I would think some cross application of the early mtn bike stuff to touring was going on by the mid 90s too.

The Golden Boy 

I don't think so either- There's always a balance between weight, strength and price. You have an 89 M1000LT, correct? Where previous versions were often full XT or the closest equivalent, the difference between MT-62 and XT were so minimal- (Deore II was just so good) it just made sense to spec with it- My 90 M1000LT has the black Ukai rims- I've mounted tires a few times, never noticed they were a single layer.

scarlson 

Ha, I've totally used kevlar beads with Concave rims!

Salamandrine 

Everybody used to put Turbo tires on unhooked rims BITD and didn't worry about it.. Those things held tight.

Looks like that warning was added later.

79pmooney

Yes, Weinmann Concaves are far, far stronger than Blackburn Lowrider rack! Those Concaves may be the strongest rims ever made and laced up properly make a very strong wheel. I've broken a few Lowrider racks at the dropout (yeah, yeah, you dropout purists will say the forks have fork ends,not dropouts but the rest of the cycling world knows what I am talking about) and the Lowriders I have now will break there n time. (Never had a safety issue from the breakages. Rack just gets flimsier and when I pull the wheel of for other reasons it is "Oh, another rack died.") When not if.

A story on Weinmann Concaves and their both strength and stiffness - first summer of my 1979 Peter Mooney. I was living in Santa Cruz, rebuilding my life after my head injury. I'd raced one last season the year before so I had cycling fitness (and a sewup equipped bike). Saturday morning SCCC ride with its town line sprint. If you went long, you started going down small hill. I went. Got clear, briefly. Norm Alvis (if I recall correctly - he was the local hot sprinter) came flying past on my right. A strong rookie was on his wheel. Norm knew all the racing tactics and snapped over to my line as soon as he cleared me to shed the rookie. But the rookie stayed glued to his wheel. Suddenly I had a rear wheel where my front belonged. I steered away to avoid contact, but sooner or later., I've got to bring my bike back under my weight. ( Damned physics.)

So I leaned my front wheel into the rookies' rear and pushed off to get my balance back. There was a loud ripping of metal, then a strong almost un-rideable oscillation of the front of the bike but no crash. I rode the bike to as standstill.

I'd ripped out 8 consecutive spokes on the right and one on the left. Tire was hitting the fork solidly every revolution (and took the brand new Imron paint to bare, shiny steel). Got a ride home from the cyclist on my wheel (an ex-racer who was VERY thankful I kept it up and didn't take him down), replaced the spokes and the wheel was as good as new. I cannot think of another rim I would have rather had on there. (Well a much heavier rim would have not only survived, but kept me from that front of the sprint so I would not have been there.) Oh, and I opened the rookie's quick release. That was what was ripping out spokes as I was pushing off his wheel.

Given where I was in my life, 19 months after a major TBI, 4 months into a new job in a new city and that this happened at about 30 mph, that wheel not holding up might have been completely life changing.

Ben

sd5782 

You are correct on the 89 Miyata. Getting an education here on rim construction as I saw the spoke nipples in the base of the rim, and not through a hole in a center box section as on some Rigida, and sportier Arayas I have. All figured out now, and undoubtedly those Ukais on the 1000 would have box section at the edges. Learning, learning.

I have been going through this bike getting it ready to go, and the tires had to go first, so that led to the rim questions. Another surprise besides the 25c tires on a touring bike with wide rims, was a tire liner for flat protection inside the front tire. Tires were some high pressure folders that were pumped to at least the 100lbs on the sidewall with this flat guard that was sandwiched in. Ride was interesting to say the least.
found this between tube and tire. quite thick and around whole circumference

scarlson 

79pmooney Wow, that is a hell of a story!!

I crashed on a very slippery mud-coated fietspad in the Netherlands with a full touring load with my front Concave wheel. I got into a sort of oversteer-understeer situation at about 10mph, fishtailing increasing to the point where my last front tire-track was completely sideways, wiping the mud clean off the asphalt for five feet, before I flipped off the high-side of the bike and went down on the panniers, tearing one open. And covering myself with mud. The fork was a little bent. The wheel was, of course, fine.

79pmooney

I just re-read my post. I said "sewup equipped bike". I still had my racing sewup wheels but I was riding my newly built Concaves built on my old training hubs.

ThermionicScott 

So what is the correct term for these rims with hollow extrusions only at the shoulders, that are typically pinned? It's gotta be snappy, because right or wrong, millions of bike people and lots of component manufacturers and retailers are going to keep calling them "single-wall" if there isn't a convenient alternative...

If we want to be correct in our usage, we should also stop calling wired-on tires "clinchers" since true clinchers are also extinct AFAIK.

Salamandrine 

Twin tube? BITD I don't remember anybody calling them by anything but their names: Weinmann Concave, Mod 58, etc. Touring rim maybe. Double box maybe. For that matter box section rims would if anything called double wall. The term "single wall" was used to describe the kind with no hollow sections at all. You basically did not want those except on a very budget bike. The twin tube type rims are far superior and they should not be lumped together. .



Yep. Probably too late for that though.


I was going to say it's only a matter of time before true clinchers are revived in slightly different form. Then I remembered it already happened.


https://www.tufo.com/en/tubular-clincher/

seedsbelize 

So then, what is a true clincher? The Tufo?

zukahn1 

It would be help if you tell us the brand and model rims you have the width and size. Nicer single walled Araya rims were pretty much standard on most Japanese Touring and MTB's from the 80's and have been road thousands of rough miles no issues when when you keep them trued and the hubs well adjusted. Some of the nicer ones like the slightly wider dimpled Araya are actually some what sought after. Myself if there original and in good shape I would just rebuild them with new bearings and some spokes new nipples if need and ride. Also a great way to add some robustness strength to these type rims is to buy some nicer wire bead modern touring or cross tires you can get some Continentalls pr Paseelis from Walmart delivered in a couple of days for about $50.

Salamandrine 

No, the Tufo sort of revives the idea, but it isn't the same. A true clincher was an early form of 'single tube' tire that was clinched onto the rim without glue, but otherwise it was sort of like a modern tubular tire. Pulling off the tire did not give you access to the inner tube as in a modern wired on tire.

Clinchers is a lot easier to say than wired on tire.

https://www.bikeforums.net/20376062-post210.html