Sluggo

Looks like Super Champion Arc En Ceil
VeloBase.com - Component: Super Champion Arc en Ciel

Andy_K 

I've got GP 4000s on most of my bikes. I do have one pair of the GP 5000s. They're great tires. The De Rosa has Vittoria Corsa G tubulars. I've got Corsa G clinchers on a couple of other bikes, and honestly the difference in the way they ride is miniscule.

squirtdad

LOL I run vittoria corsa control tubulars 30mm (and gp5000) on my 85 team miyata I used to run corsa g clinchers, but had way too many flats with those...so shifted to gp5000

Andy_K 

Yeah, those look like the ones.

Trakhak

"Obviously" is putting it a bit strongly. In the 1970s, I built a couple of radial non-drive-side/radial-plus-cross-drive-side rear wheels and rode them extensively. I didn't bother tying and soldering the spoke crosses on either, since I knew even then that the benefit of tying and soldering, if any, would be negligible. Both wheels held up fine. (For the record, I used a cross spoke-radial spoke-cross spoke pattern on one of the wheels and a cross spoke-radial spoke-radial spoke-cross spoke pattern on the other.)

cbrstar

I personally never had the leg power but back in the 80's there were guys soldering/tying spokes on their BMX wheels. The idea wasn't to increase lateral stiffness but torque stiffness. But back then I don't think too many people I knew had a spoke tension gauge, so maybe it was more of a problem with unproperly tensioned spokes? Interestingly I was watching a documentary on Japanese Kerin racing and was surprised to see that most of the wheels had the spokes tied even to this day. I just keep hearing how radial spokes can wreck the flange on the hub which seems to be the OP concern.

non-fixie 

I used a similar pair on my weight weenie build last year. They didn't seem to mind my 200 lbs.

Exactly 10.00 kgs as pictured:

Reynolds 

I thought conventional wisdom forbade 36hole low flange hubs for radial lacing, but not other configurations.

JohnDThompson 

The front looks like a Super Champion "Arc en Ciel" ("Rainbow") rim. Not sure about the rear, beyond it being Fiamme.

P!N20

I believe Gerd Schraner in The Art of Wheelbuilding said the only reason he could find for tied and soldered spokes was to stop a broken spoke spearing a competitor on the track!

cbrstar

He actually wrote:

"Tying and Soldering Reason and Purpose: long forgotten art, but in view of the high demands placed on today's wheels, more necessary than ever.".
"is increased enormously without influencing the tension of the spokes.It adds stability to the spokes' crossed structure,because the hub and the spokes should form an immovable unit and - even more importantly -they should remain so. The spokes no longer move against each other and the result is a solid unity of hub and spokes.In addition, should the wheel encounter any momentary radial stresses (bumps., the high stresses encountered by any one spoke is decreased thanks to the damping effects of its "co-soldered"neighbors. Tied and soldered spokes therefore tend to look after each other! Yet another positive aspect is the large flange effect. A small flange hub can almost be trans-formed into a large flange hub. The actual flange diameter is increased to that of a large flange hub.The wheel becomes a little harder, responds more directly when riding upright and is faster when accelerating - qualities highly appreciated by amateur and professional athletes alike. Tying and soldering also offers advantages for the front wheel, increasing durability and allowing it to be steered more directly when riding upright"

If you read the Ivan Gott story you will see that he tied and soldered his wheels for the 1997 Giro d'ltalia.

oneclick 

Just to be clear, tests of tied-and-soldered wheels show no difference in lateral or torsional stiffness (I expect many here would already know this).

P!N20

Right. Must’ve been Jobst.

SJX426 

The op asked for a risk assessment. My take is that the likelihood of failure is about a 2 (20-40%) on a scale of 1-5. Impact is could be severe so I would give it a 5. PI score of 19 or medium high risk.

cbrstar

Makes sense. But I wonder if there are diminishing gains? If I take a modern wheel that has a wider hub, thicker axel, and thicker spokes will those improvements out weigh any possible gain from tying the spokes?

I haven't read that book yet, but I think I saw it mentioned on Sheldon Browns site so I am going to download it. I've only built a few sets of road bike wheels and there's many things I need to learn about still.

Mr. Spadoni 

Fiamme Red Label. Heavier than the Yellow labels, and without the wood fill.

63rickert

Campagnolo 1036 hubs were fine with radial spokes. Later hubs would not take radial and Campy warned of that loudly. My old Gloria (owned before anyone knew they were collectible) had a rear wheel laced like yours. Except it was a Pista operated with fixed cog as Tullio intended. Basically fixed is harder on a wheel. That wheel went a lot of miles. The radial spokes broke with some regularity. The wheels remained in true after the radial one broke. Redoing the tie and solder got old, so was discontinued. Worked about same.

Nothing lasts forever. Many wheels have been built disregarding previous lace pattern. Yeah, better to follow the old marks on hub. Not a big one.

Fiamme Yellows did not have a wood fill.

jimmuller 

Not necessarily. It was "thing" back then, so I understand. Jobst Brandt's book talks about various spoke patterns and IIRC he says that tying/soldering the crossovers doesn't make much difference. Nor is there any real difference in 3-cross vs. 4-cross, or high vs. low flange hubs.

Another thing he describes is that hubs twist a measurable amount under heavy pedaling. The drive side spokes already take quite a bit of the weight load and because of the hub flex also take most of the stress of pedaling. Radial spokes on the non-drive side mean they take none of the pedaling load at all, so the drive side spokes take even more. The end result will be earlier spoke failure.

It always struck me that if you really wanted one side to be radial it made sense for it to be the non-drive side spokes. But I've never seen a wheel like that.

Mr. Spadoni 

Yeah, , you’re right. No wood in Yellow Labels. Must of been thinking of Weltmiesters. Both were rims that I only ever dreamed of riding.

Trakhak

I think you must have meant "if you really wanted one side to be radial it made sense for it to be the drive side spokes." I built one rear wheel that way about 30 years ago. Worked fine.

jimmuller 

duh...you are correct.

63rickert

Some clarification. Always the details matter. I looked at OP’s photos, saw the crows foot drive side lacing and didn’t even notice the radial spokes on non drive side. My old Gloria was crows foot all the way around, both sides, front and rear. The drive side radials, rear wheel, were the ones that repetitiously broke. All the others lasted as long as I had the bike. Maybe 5000 miles while I had that bike.

Purely out of curiosity I have built rears with radial on drive only and left only. The wheels with radial spokes on left side rear worked fine, perhaps slightly reduced spokes life. If it breaks past a few thousand miles on an experiment I really don’t care. Rear wheel built with radial on drive side, tangent on left side, did not work at all. Felt squirrelly, spokes started to break on second ride. If others say they had different results I believe them. This was weird stuff, we were younger, too many variables and too few samples to evaluate.

One of most successful wheels ever built was a Campy 28 hole K2 rim built to a 28 hole Tipo hub with only 14 spokes. They were radial and paired, somewhat like a Rolf. K2 was not a well known rim, they were a lot like an Atlanta, but for 559. It was used for maybe ten years on a city bike. Gave it away to a stunt rider. He was in the habit of using very heavy steel rims with very high spoke count. And he broke those five pound wheels with regularity. He tried to break my wheel and could not. My wheel survived many broken forks and a few broken frames.

Duragrouch

1) It's lovely with the tied and soldered drive side spokes, but in my opinion, as much of a "wallhanger" as a shotgun with Damascus barrels; Unsafe. Because...

2) Radial lacing is only appropriate for hubs designed for it. The wide flange helps in that it increases spacing between holes, but the flange needs to be strong enough to resist radial tearout and circumferential cracks from one hole to another, meaning extra metal radially outboard, and high strength aluminum, and still, aluminum has poor fatigue life, most especially in tension. Also, the only radial spokes above that are sound are the ones between the lightening oval holes on the flange; Those pulling directly across that oval hole are putting a ton of radial bending load on the flange there, and it's just not designed for it, it will fail. Do you ever see a hub designed for radial lacing with those lightening holes (that big)? No, you don't.


Even with modern hubs, I hate radial lacing, even on a front wheel, except perhaps on a race bike that is actually raced. It save so little weight and drag. Tangential lacing came about for a reason, it's so much stronger with respect to the hub flange, and the longer spokes ride better, and stay in true longer because of the bending tension on paired spokes due to lacing. I hate fewer spokes. I hate it when a bike maker mismatches hole numbers front and rear, like a 28 rear and 20 front. I want 32 or 36 hole, 3 or 4 cross lacing, except where impossible such as so much cross that one spoke obscures the head of an adjacent spoke, making service way more difficult. I have a 20" wheel folder which has 28 hole on 2X because angles would not accommodate a 3X pattern.


What's my name?

Darth Lefty 

this needs a price axis

oneclick 

"Common Sense"