IK_biker

Focusing on 700c for this setup sounds odd.
Switching to disc brakes allows an opportunity to also switch to smaller, lighter, and stronger wheels affording higher comfort: 26" or 650b with a fatter tire.
Why ignore it?

tspoon

I've only had one rim failure, A719 on a rear wheel, the spoke pulled through the rim. I would say overly tightened at a guess. The spokes were straight gauge, possibly a case where a butted spoke may have resulted in a wheel lasting forever, but the wheel had done over 80,000k on straight gauge, so I wasn't to bothered by it eventually giving up. Lately I've been using rims with single eyelets, or even no eyelets and a deep V profile, but have nowhere near enough mileage on them to know if there is a significant difference.

Until very recently I had never owned a wheel with less than 36 spokes, I now own a bike with 32 front and rear. And, while not disputing that butted spokes are superior, I have actually had decent results with straight gauge spokes, not to mention spokes not from the more fancied manufacturers. The last time I had a broken spoke was 13 years ago, on a machine built wheel, actually that wheel continually broke spokes. In response I bought the A719 mentioned, built for me by a local shop, and proceeded to say goodbye to broken spokes. Since then I have rebuilt the wheel myself, re-using the spokes, and then proceeded to build all subsequent wheels too.

manapua_man

I get by fine with 32 rear 28 front when I'm not loading the bikes down with much more than a giant bike packing style saddle bag and a handlebar bag, and I weigh about 220lbs. My newest rear wheel is a DT Swiss RR 511 rim, double butted spokes and Hope Pro 4 hub.

IMHO how well your wheels will hold up is probably going to have more to do with how you ride than anything else.

DeadGrandpa

I might be overly susceptible to new design and marketing, but I really like the concept and execution of the new Industry 9 proprietary hubs/spokes/rims. The spokes are straight; no "J" bend is needed to fit the hub, the nipples are intrinsic to the formation of the spokes, so no weak point like with standard spokes where they are threaded into the nipple. At least that's what the guy at my LBS said. The rims, either aluminum or carbon, are unknown strength, but I like the i9 approach.

alan s 

Nothing new. Mavic has been doing this for years.

manapua_man

I don't think straight pull spokes/hubs etc. have been a new thing for at least a few decades now.

DeadGrandpa

I did not know that. My LBS guy said i9 had just announced these new straight pull spoke/hubs things.

DeadGrandpa

I guess I've been living in the past. I should have said that the design is new to me. I guess the next thing you'll tell me is that we don't need tubes anymore.

fietsbob

a rim type.. with a brake track is OK, even if you don't need it for the brakes... don't overthink this.

J.Higgins 

New sig material.

chrisx

Is the xr 331 tubeless? I do not like the 20mm internal width. I little wider would be nice.

My stans flow rims out lasted my Hope hubs and dt brass nipples. Well, I tossed the front Hope hub because it had developed to much side to side play. I replaced the bearings in the rear hope hub, and will someday reuse it on my 1995 bike. When the dt swiss brass nipples started to crack, I replaced the hope hubs with xt 756 hubs and dt straight spokes. 4x

Do you plan to build your wheels 2x, 3x, or 4x? I like 4x better. 2, 3, or 4 x means the spokes cross other spokes 2, 3, or 4 times. The 4x is a stiffer wheel, and a nicer ride. You can tell the difference.

32 is enough. It takes a long time to wear out a hope hub. I ride in harsh environments too. 32 spoke stans rims will last, I am sure. In the old days they used 36,in the new days the equuiptment is better.

Tubelessis the future
rims are getting wider
dt swiss hubs last a long time
Do you own cone wrenches and know how to adjust shimano bearings, or do you want to pay more for dt cartridge bearings?

You get more enjoyment from riding on a wheel you built yourself.

3speed

Fat tires equal more weight. I'd rather not. Actually I did my last tour with 700x35c tires and came to the conclusion that it's overkill for a paved tour and plan to go with 700x32 on my next tour if it's paved. I was wondering about the wheel-size, though. Is there any reason not to throw my 26" MTB wheels on this bike with some higher volume tires for a gravel/dirt tour? My outer tire diameter will be slightly smaller, but I can't think of any other changes. I can't think of how it would change the handling or geometry. Would it? A 650B wheel-set might be the sweet spot for non-paved tours down the road. I just can't afford to build another wheel-set for this bike right now. I'm probably already gonna end up dropping $500+ on it and the holidays are coming up and then I'm moving the first week of the new year...

Nice

tspoon

If the 26" tire is slightly smaller, you would run an increased possibility of pedal strike as they would be slightly closer to the ground. The fork trail will also be altered (reduced), altering your steering response. It would be worth trying out a set before starting a trip.

fietsbob

Wrong for touring.. you strayed from the road bike carbon addict section..

alan s 

Looking to be banned again?

manapua_man

I've toured on carbon MTB rims without any problems. It's definitely overkill, but I doubt anything that would realistically kill them wouldn't trash an alloy rim too.

3speed

Well, he is wrong...

saddlesores

since you've already got the wheels and other components, why not get yourself
a 26" touring frame designed for fatter tires, avoid the headache of deciphering
bb drop and rake and trail. put it together and go.

i'd be willing to drop $360 (includes shipping) of your cash to try out one of
these tsunami framesets w/fork!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/TSUNAMI-Chr...sFyW-5h54h9VHQ

cyccommute 

With the proviso of all other things being equal, yes, I would say that spoke strength is the most important factor to strong wheels. Think about what "kills" a wheel. Wear out a rim and you can replace it with a rim of equivalent ERD. But if you break only a few spokes...especially 2.0mm and thinner...and the wheel is toast. (Breaking a hub is a different story but thankfully rare.)

I have said this numerous times in the past but it is possible to build a wheel out of the strongest rim that you can find...a steel one...and the lightest spokes you can find and you'll have a positively awful wheel.

Yes, the number of spokes matter. Even with a stronger spoke, a 28 spoke wheel is going to be more prone to spoke breakage than a 48 spoke wheel, especially if the bike is carrying more load. That's the reason people have gone to such high spoke counts. But the triple butted spokes do increase the resistance to breakage significantly which means you can build with fewer spokes. In the day and age where high spoke count rims are rapidly disappearing, that a plus. 48 spoke rims (and hubs) have always been rare. 40 spoke wheels are equally rare. With disc hubs it's even hard to find 36 spoke hubs and there are fewer 36 spoke rims to go along with them.

I wouldn't ride them personally but building a 20 spoke wheel with triple buttes spokes would be at least the equivalent of a 24 spoke wheel, in my opinion. I don't completely agree with Hjertberg that it's the equivalent of 10 extra spokes but, I suspect, it's higher than the 4 extra spokes I give it.

As to the type of spoke, I'm not a fan of straight pull...not may people are if you go by the availability of straight pull wheels. I find them difficult to build with because of the twist when tensioning. I realize they are probably stronger but getting the tension high enough to take advantage of that extra strength is difficult. There is also the proprietary nature of most straight pull spokes and wheels. There are lots and lots of straight pull wheels out there that are basically useless because you can't replace a broken spoke.

Carbon rims just aren't something that I've personally worked with. They are too expensive. Frankly, I haven't even seen one yet. At the current price of carbon fiber, I don't expect to see the price come down much in the near future, either. Even if you could reduce the price of the raw fiber, the material still involves a lot of hand work which is expensive as well. They could be great rims but at this point they are out of reach of most wheel builders.

Yes, wheel builder skill is a factor and it's important. But a triple butted spoke is more forgiving than other spokes. A new builder would benefit from using a spoke that takes more to break. If you undertension a double butted spoke, it is far easier to break than an undertensioned stronger spoke. The nature of the tighter fit in the hub also makes for a slightly stiffer wheel so an undertensioned spoke won't flex quite as much which means it doesn't break as easily. Bend a thin wire vs a thick wire sometime and see which one breaks first.

Basically, a new builder building with triple butted spokes will build a better wheel and have a better experience for their first few wheels. The failure of your first few wheels is probably the worst hurtle to get over as a new wheel builder. I'm a stubborn as a Missouri mule...I get it from my Grandmother...so I just stuck with building until I figured it out but many people give up much earlier than I would.

3speed

Just for fun, here's a link.

elcruxio

Going by this and the first post you made on this thread, you don't really think a rim does not matter? Right? I mean try building a wheel out of a pool noodle. It won't work because the rim is not stiff enough. Rim stiffness, especially vertical stiffness has a concrete and crucial effect on wheel durability. A rim that flexes vertically will allow for the spokes nearest to the ground to slacken more than a rim that does not flex. A stiffer rim will distribute the load to the bottom spokes more equally so that no single spoke gets too slack. Spokes going slack is the main reason wheels die as the cycle of going slack and getting tight repeated for thousands of times will fatigue the steel.
There is a reason touring rims are usually heavier than sporty rims. It's not purely about the 'more material', it's about more material in the right places to make the rim stiffer vertically foremost but also laterally.
And another point for touring (at least some of them) is the beefing of the nipple seats. For example the Ryde (Rigida) andra 40 has a specially thickened nipple seating area making it possible to tighten spokes up to 140kgf, which is really nice for a touring build since you can get the non drive side spokes to almost 100kgf making the wheel essentially bomb proof.

Also I find it weird you use a steel rim as an example of a strong rim as it has been known for years, decades even that steel is not a good rim material. It cannot be extruded into complex shapes the same way aluminum can. Steel rims are flexy and weak and wear resistance is the only thing they have going for them, but braking on a steel surface sucks. On the other hand extruded aluminum rims can be made stiffer and lighter and pretty much better in any way.
Is it because you don't know, or is it because using a false example makes your argument more compelling?

If you were really looking for a strong rim to compare you'd take a carbon rim with a deep V-section. Those things have almost nonexistent vertical flex and are stronger by far than any other rim material, especially if the weight is the same (although carbon rims are usually lighter)

So I would say what makes a strong touring wheel is

1) A good V or V-type box section touring rim

2) good quality spokes (like you I prefer the DT Alpine III's)

3) Hub flange spacing and dimensions. The hub can have a pretty large effect as it dictates the tension ratio of the spokes. A badly spaced hub (flange wise) will make a weaker wheel than a well spaced one since the non drive side spokes will be slacker.



I agree with this though. I will say however that 48 and even 40 spoke wheels have been getting rarer and rarer due to the fact that they are no longer needed in majority of uses, not even touring. 48 spokes used to be a crutch for heavily loaded bikes since rims were of the old steel kind, hence flexy and spoke breaking, and spokes weren't as good as they are today. I would say there is very little need to go over 36 spokes in a touring build these days, even with a 700c wheel. That said I wouldn't do any loaded touring with under 36 spokes either. Maybe 32 if I was going really light but 36 is a nice number.

cyccommute 

With in reason the rim doesn't matter that much. No, I wouldn't use a pool noodle but that mostly because a pool noodle wouldn't hold the tension on the spoke. A spoke without tension won't carry any weight as it's just a thin piece of wire at that point.

But for most rims, there is more than enough stiffness to build a very good wheel if you choose the right spokes. The 380g DT Swiss XR 331 really isn't going to be any more flexible than a 525g Velocity Dyad or a 450g Velocity A23. On the other hand, it's likelier to be stiffer than the flat Rigida you suggest below because the rim is a bit taller.

Most rims made today are triangular in shape so they have that vertical stiffness. There are a few flat profile rims still hanging around but most of those are much thicker walled to provide at least a little stiffness. But even a very deep v rim is only marginally stiffer than a flatter rim. It's the nature of the aluminum which isn't a stiff material.

Even if you get a rim that has a lot of vertical stiffness, the spokes are still going to go through a tension/detension cycle. It's just the nature of the wheel.

A lot of vertical height does offer the advantage of using shorter spokes.

Most of the "touring" rims I've seen aren't that taller nor do they use that much more material in the rim. They all have similar profiles from the die extruder. Touring wheels are slightly thicker in terms of wall material but, again, aluminum is a soft material. A few tenths of a millimeter of wall thickness isn't going to make a significant difference in the flexibility of the material.

Most every profile of a rim that I've seen includes the same thicker nipple bed as the Rigida's profile. Most rim manufacturers are aware of the benefits of a thicker nipple bed. The Velocity A23's profile shows a similar thickness as that seen in the Rigida rim with the additional benefit of a V shaped rim.

I choose a steel rim as an example of the strongest rim material available. It is far from "flexy" and weak. Yes, it is hard to extrude in to complex shapes but not impossible. The only reason it isn't is because there is no market for that kind of rim. All things being equal...i.e. same shape, width and wall thickness...a steel rim is going to be about 3 times stronger and stiffer than an aluminum rim. Steel rims are a bear to true because you have to put much more tension on the spoke to bend the rim. You can beat a steel rim six ways from Sunday and still not do the damage to one that you can do to an aluminum rim with far less force.

But you are missing the point of my argument. A steel rim is stronger than any aluminum rim available. It resists bending and even detensioning of the spokes better than aluminum. You can put more tension on the spokes by a large factor than you can on an aluminm rim. However, build a steel rim with light spokes and the wheel isn't going to be more durable nor stronger than an aluminum wheel build with strong spokes. On the contrary it will be weaker because of the spokes.

I haven't run across any 48 hole steel rims in several decades of being a bicycle nut. A few aluminum rims...and very few of them...but not any steel ones. I'll agree that spokes are better than they used to be so that you can get by with fewer spokes. That said, using triple butted spokes means that you can get by with even fewer spokes doing a better job or, on the flip side, you can ride with confidence on wheels for which rims are still somewhat available.

elcruxio

You sure about that? Less weight means less material which then means less resistance to bending. Also the XR 331 has a system limit of only 110kg, which is not a lot by touring rim standards.
And the problem I have with all of those as touring rims is that they are pretty shallow in shape. I prefer something like the TK 540 since it has the V-shaped top but also a lot of vertical surface.
So either a pretty deep V or a v+box like the TK540

All the more reason why shaping the material correctly makes a big difference in rim performance. And while it is true that spokes go through those detension cycles even with the stiffest of rims, the additional stiffness eliminates the kinds of point slackenings old steel rims and current light shallow box section aluminum rims suffer from.



Just having the word touring in the marketing material rarely means anything. It's better to find a rim that's actually a good rim even with the marketing material. I would also disagree that adding material does not make a significant difference as that material can either be added to support a stiffer shape or to make the walls thicker or both. A good touring rim is likely to be heavier when compared to a racing rim since it has both the shape and wall thickenesses in tandem to create a more resistant rim. It is also those things in tandem that make the rim stiffer, not just slapping on extra material somewhere.

You haven't seen many rims have you? Or you just haven't checked out the Ryde Andra profiles in a while. Go check them out. You cannot find those kind of nipple beds in many other rims. I mean sure other manufacturers make the nipple bed a thicker area but there are not many rims that are given the 140kgf rating (well, you can push carbon up to 180kgf easy, but that's carbon for you)

Yes, the rim is going to be 3 times stiffer and more durable and all that, but it'll also weigh 1500 grams or more, which is insane. Aluminum is used because you can get better properties with far less weight due to the complex extrusion shapes. And there is an added bonus. Steel may be 3 times stiffer, but metals gain added stiffness through thickness, so if you have a steel bar and an aluminum bar three times as thick, the aluminum one is going to be stiffer. In terms of bicycle frames that can be either good or bad depending what is sought, but in terms of rims it's a definite bonus. In terms of rims, if you have the same profile for the two materials but the aluminum with 3 times the wall thickness to balance the weight, the aluminum is going to be slightly stiffer.

I have honestly never seen a v+box double walled steel rim. I bet it would be a bear to true but the steel rims I've have have been essentially folded sheet steel which made them heavy but horrible in every other aspect. And they weren't even that durable since a kid could bend them to oblivion with pretty conservative riding.

IF it is the same shape as the comparison aluminum rim, but that's not reality. Light spokes is not going to be an issue either. It'd rather take light spokes over straight gauge but like you, I prefer the Alpine III's as they combine best of both worlds.

I would like to see rims specifically made for touring though, where a combination of aluminum and steel could be used. The main parts of the rim would be aluminum but the nipple bed would be steel. How that would work with galvanic corrosion and all would be difficult to solve, but if it was possible it would be neat. Or I'll just go carbon once proper carbon touring rims come out at some point since those are going to be practically indestructible.

linus

Yet another thread ruined by two fools.

cyccommute 

Need to get your post count up?

I only see one fool...and it's not who you think. No one said you have to read everything that is posted and, frankly, this kind of sniping adds nothing.