PDKL45

DT Swiss H 1950 Classic (https://www.dtswiss.com/en/wheels/wh...h-1950-classic).

They're designed for ebikes, but are marketed as being suitable for fully loaded touring bikes as well. They come with a QR conversion kit, so you can run 142 thru-axle or 135 QR in the rear and 100 Thru-axle or 100 QR up front. Only 32 spokes, but they have Alpine III spokes for strength and are rated to 150 kgs (330.69 lbs) overall system weight.

djb

Wgscott, I just wanted to mention that you'll probably love these tires. I was driving today along a section of road I rode on touring last month and it reminded me of how my 50mm slicks similar to your tires, are so darn nice when riding over rough stuff.
It also reminded me again of how great it is if i have to bail onto the soft shoulder or go through a rough patch of soft gravel etc, and tires of 45+ mm's simply take so much drama out of these situations due to the cushion and the grip with more rubber, compared to narrower tires--and loaded too!

muse kidd

I've been running Mavic A 719's for nearly 20 years and well over 100,000 miles from 8-9 sets (I generally get 20k to 25k on a pair). They have proven to be bomb-proof in my estimation. I've taken them through the jungles of the Yucatan, across most every state in the US, and all over Europe. From rough, rocky roads, cobblestones, and off-road adventures they have been fantastic. It is why I keep returning to them time and time again. The only catch is that they won't support a 55mm width tyre. They'll take a 47mm with ease and you'll love them.

36 spokes and heavier than what most folks want... but I've not found anything better.

ctak

The author's suggestion mirrors your own: check the ETRTO chart for combinations that have been tested and found safe

cyccommute 

While I would never use a 55mm tire on a road tour, I regularly use 55 to 58 mm mountain bike tires on 17mm internal width rims. I had 25mm rims back in the 80s but that’s the last time I used rims that wide. I’ve never had a handling issue nor any kind of problem with the tire staying on the rim in 10s of thousands of miles of off-road use. The tires on this bike are 55mm tires on 19mm rims carrying a load on the most off-road of “off-road” trails I’ve been on lately




The tires in that picture are 55mm and I usually use 58 to 60mm on that bike. These tires are sacrificial since there are so many goatheads in the area I was riding.

Frankly, weight of the rim is more paramount to me than width. I’ll take saving 100 to 250 g of wheel weight over any (supposed) benefit of rim width.

cyccommute 

You should read the Heine article. I don’t understand why you have to run higher pressures to retain the shape of the tires on a narrower rim. A round profile on a tire naturally retains the shape when compressed. A U-shaped one depends on the sidewall to hold the shape and the sidewall isn’t that strong.

I run very narrow rims all the time and never felt the need to run higher pressures as the tires get wider. I don’t subscribe to the idea of running super low pressures but my pressures have been set at about 45psi since the 80s on my mountain bikes. Those tires in the picture above were at 45psi on extremely rocky trails. I value my rims too much to run much less. I could run less pressure but rims aren’t cheap and I don’t have problems with pinch flats nor with bent rims. I also dislike riding on flat tires.

cyccommute 

A couple of things. Lots of spokes are good but better spokes are, well, better. Straight gauge spokes (which most people use) need more spokes to do the same job as double butted spokes. And triple butted spokes like the DT Alpine III spokes will be stronger than double butted spokes. There’s almost a 50% increase in strength from straight gauge to triple butted spokes. This article (which I quote often) nicely explains why. I wouldn’t go as far as Hjertberg does when it comes to equivalent spokes...I’d say that the triple butted spokes are equivalent to 4 extra spokes...but there is a distinct increase in strength.

I would also look at different rim options. Since you are looking at Velocity, look at the A23, particularly the A23OC. The off-center drilling of the A23OC makes for more even tension on the spokes which results in a much stronger wheel. Instead of a 60% difference between drive and nondrive side spokes, there is closer to a 30% difference. Add that to the triple butted spokes and you have a very durable wheel.

The A23 is fairly light. It may be a little narrow for most people’s comfort zone on wide tires but I regularly run narrower rims on wide tires without issue. The benefit from the offset is worth a marginal issue with the tire width.

Finally, hubs. The White Industries that you currently are using aren’t the easiest to work on but I’ve had many of them and seldom had to do anything to them. In fact, the ones I’ve bought new I’ve never had to do anything to. The only ones I’ve ever had to work on were older ones I got used. And by “older” I usually mean at least 20 years old. Phil Woods are easier to work on but the Whites are cheaper. Buy a hub that doesn’t require service and you won’t need to do it out in the field.

tyrion

Yes, off road I think you can get away with a greater tire/rim width ratio because you can't put as much lateral force on the tire.

Tourist in MSN

With the tires in the photo, I run about 50 psi rear, about 40 front when I expect to be on pavement, but when i am on a really crappy road, sometimes I would like to go well below 40 psi in the front. But with a narrow rim that does not work very well for me.

When you don't bother trying to steer around something that is smaller than a tennis ball, that tells you how crappy the road is when you only try to miss the big stuff. Tires are Marathon Extremes (now discontinued) in 57mm width.



Different trip - I did a week long ACA van supported tour a couple years ago in Big Bend Texas. The West Texas chip seal pavement can be pretty rough. On my folding bike with 40mm wide Marathon tires, I ran the front between 40 and 45 to keep the handlebar vibration to a manageable level. Had the rear up around 75 to 80 psi, the sprung Brooks saddle kept the vibration to a minimum even at that high a pressure in the rear. I have not calipered the rim on that bike, internal width according to internet is 20.7mm.

***

When I built up my Thorn Sherpa (a 26 inch wheel touring bike), I wanted to be able to use 40 to 50mm tires on it. Based on the chart at the bottom of Sheldon Browns page at:
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html
I wanted a rim with an internal width of 23mm. I bought Salsa Gordo rims (no longer produced) that calipers at 21mm, according to the chart that is close enough so I bought them. Great touring rim. Most of the touring I have done on that bike was with 40mm wide Marathons. But have also used 50mm Duremes and Extremes.

***

I have Dyads on my Lynskey, the widest tire I can fit inside the fenders is 37mm. When I built it up I wanted to be able to use tires in the 28 to 37mm range. Based on the graph at the bottom of this, the Dyad is the perfect width for my desired tire widths.
https://www.velocityusa.com/tech/rims/

If you are suggesting that a rim like the Dyad at 18.6mm internal width would work fine with 50mm, why does the rim manufacturer not recommend that?

The Chart at Sheldon Browns website also suggests that the Dyad is for the right width for my desired tire range, that concurs with the Velocity chart.

***

Heine is a smart guy and I usually agree with him. But, not always.

cyccommute 

Huh? Off-road puts as much or more lateral force on the tire. Cornering on pavement is predictable while it’s not always predictable off-road. A tire off-road is more likely to hit rocks and other objects that throw the tire as well as the wheel and bike attached to that tire off-line putting more lateral force on the tire. Riders also tend to steer more quickly and at faster speeds because they are avoiding objects than they would on pavement. Off-reading will tear up equipment and materials faster than pavement ever will.

Road bikes do tend to run higher pressure which forces the sides of the rim out more than mountain bikes typically do. But, in practice, there’s no real downside to used a narrower rim than “standard”. The chart that ctak provided indicates that a 19mm rim could be used with a 55mm tire. A 17mm rim is only 2mm narrower. That’s less than the thickness of a nickel. The wheel isn’t going to fail if the rim is that much narrower.

A Velocity Deep V...only 13mm internal width...might not be a good choice but a 17mm rim would do fine.

cyccommute 

I have a very long mountain bike history. I’ve ridden rigid, front suspension, and full suspension on just the kinds of terrain you describe. Tire pressure has always been 40 to 45 psi. The one thing I do on roads like the one you show is to not depend on the tires to do the job of a suspension system. I would add at least suspension fork for that kind of riding. In fact I have




The fork doesn’t add much weight, it can be locked solid, and it does the work that the tires aren’t up to. I don’t have to “dodge” the rocks but ride over them.

The fork (and the small travel on the rear of the YBB) also help on uphills like this. As will downhills, there less dodging back and forth.





I actually disagree with Heine more than I agree with him. He just happens to have found the “blind squirrel nut” in this case.

tyrion

Not in my experience. I can't get the lateral g-forces on dirt that I can on clean pavement.

Russ Roth

This is a frequent misunderstanding, the king hubs only need a special tool for removing the bearings to replace them, regular cleanings, adjustments, and repacking of the bearings can be done with standard tools. Based on my experience and years working in a couple shops that dealt heavily with CK they don't have a really measurable failure rate. Though my current touring bike has XT, when my wife recently asked for shinier wheels in purple for hers CK was the first I jumped on. Apparently I was a week too late and they're not making any more purple nor do they still have purple r45 in stock, my order was canceled for this reason, and now we're truing out White Industries XMR which also comes recommended for a strong touring wheel.

I had looked up that chart earlier today and found that to be an interesting one. Velocity has said that the Dyad is the same extrusion as the old aeroheat which I used to run on my old raleigh M400 around 99-00, I remember Nashbar had blown out the rims for nothing to get rid of the old colors. I ran 2.1 and 2.2 tires on that bike with no troubles and those were typical tire sizes. Seems that if it worked fine then it should still work fine now. I do like the newer tire profiles with the wider rims and I like less pinch flats but it still doesn't seem unsafe to me.

Cyclist0108

I've had mine since 2014 and have only ever done the standard-tool service, and flushed out the ring drive with WD-40 and re-lubed with light motor oil (their revised instructions).

I just got an email from them today. QR is a thing of the past, but I did see they still have those purple hubs on the website.

Tourist in MSN

I do not have a mountain bike, and if I had one it would not get much use. The bike I showed in my previous post that you commented on has a frame designed for either that stock front fork or a 100mm suspension fork.

Several years ago, a friend of mine was organizing a trip for a group of us to ride the White Rim. Those in the group that did not have mountain bikes rented, but I wanted to try out my heavy duty Rohloff touring bike on that trail, so instead of renting a mountain bike I bought a low budget RockShox coil spring 100mm fork. On mountain bike trails that fork is great compared to a solid fork. But that was an unladen bike.

I don't see hanging a pair of Front Roller panniers from the bottom of a suspension fork as the best solution, that would be a lot of unsprung weight. And, on that trip where I had the photo of my loaded bike, I was on paved roads about three quarters of the time, was only on 4X4 roads a quarter of the time.

The suspension fork would not have fit in my S&S case, but it might fit in my other checked bag, so it might be possible for an international trip like that. But in the big picture for the trip as a whole, I think the solid fork was the best option.

Thanks for the suggestion though.

Photo below is the same bike as the bike in the previous photo, this photo with suspension fork and a cheap telescoping suspension seatpost while day tripping while car camping on the Maah Daah Hey Trail in North Dakota.



I get a lot of grief for having a kickstand when riding mountain bike trails, but it sure is convenient.