Ronno6

For anyone still reading this thread,
Here's a new twist. I have "discovered" the availability of Shimano 7 speed hyperglide cassette bodies. These can be swapped onto my Ultegra 10 speed hub shell, thereby reducing the dish. Along with the use of a Bontrager Fairlane asymmetrical rear rim, I calculate that the dish should be of the order of 3mm. Drive/non drive spokes would only be .5mm different in length, using 14ga spokes in a cross 4 pattern.
Then, I can use an 8 of 9 cassette sprocket setup, eliminating a cog that I never used anyway, and have a pretty darn strong 126mm freehub style rear wheel.

seeker333

Changing cassettes on a given hub + freewheel doesn't change wheel dish.

ClemY

I had the dropouts on my steel frames opened to 135, both road and mountain bikes. With the 135mm hubs I can minimize dish about as much as I am going to be able to do. In the last couple of years I have gotten one new bike frame and rebuilt a couple of my older bikes. What I did for my 26” wheeled expedition touring bike was 40 hole White Industries hubs, front and rear, with Velocity Aeroheat rims (they are the same extrusion as the Dyad rim). They were bullet proof. I toured for the first time with no wheel problems.

The new frame I got was a Salsa Vaya. I wanted to try disk brakes. They work great and White Industries makes similar hubs for disks. I have two sets of wheels for it: Ride2 hubs with Velocity Dyad rims and White Industries hubs with Velocity Deep V rims. Both are working just fine with 9 spd cluster setups.

My older Holland’s touring bike has 48 spoke Phil Wood hubs with Sun Rhyno Lite rims. This is probably overkill. It is heavier than is really necessary, but it is certainly bulletproof. With fast 700x37c tires it doesn’t seem to mind the slight excess weight of the rims.

I just finished rebuilding my criterium racing bike. It is 35 yrs old and after I stopped racing hasn’t been ridden much in that time. I put a pair of 40 hole White Industries hubs with Velocity Deep V rim wheels on it. It is certainly fast enough; faster than any of my other bikes. I am riding it on a Metric Century on Sat. I don’t expect any problems with my wheels.

I neglected to mention that I weigh 265.

Ronno6

That is true. But the 7 speed Uniglide body is 4 or 5mm shorter than the 8sp and up body. That will reduce dish after adding a spacer to the non drive side.

Ronno6

Mine is a Cannondale , which, of course, is heat treated aluminum. I know that many people have sprung the frame apart to use 130mm wheels, but I choose not to stress the frame in a direction for which it was not designed. Especially as I weigh 240# and loaded touring will add to that substantially.

I just finished a tour on my custom built 68cm steel frame touring bike. It performed well, but I was able to detect an amount of upper end flex that I found unsettling. I was unable to hold a straight line when out of the saddle, even if just to stretch my legs. Probably due to my weight and my touring load. That bike has 140mm PW hubs and 40 spoke wheels. I had no wheel issues whatsoever. But, I want to try another similar tour n the 'Dale to see if the wiggly tendencies are eliminated. I look to a freehub to build a wheel less likely to suffer axle breakage.
I will still build a wheel using a PW freewheel hub, but the most cogs I can get with that is 7. That will be for a different Cannondale bike, and I'll use7 or 8 speed barcons or brifters.

seeker333

Apparently you meant to say in #51 that you discovered that 7 spd hubs produce less dished wheels than current 9/10 spd hubs, which is fairly common knowledge to bicyclists who have ventured into wheelbuilding.

Ronno6

Right you are! But, I'll bet you won't see many honest to goodness Ultegra 6600 true 7 speed freehubs!

fietsbob

If you spread the frame out, that also reduces dish.. 145 is what tandems use.

they have used the extra left side to add the Drag brake, on the hub.

Ronno6

Correct. But I an talking about 2 different bikes here. The 140mm is a custom built steel frame, and the hub will accomodate a drag brake.
The 126mm wheel is for an older model Cannondale. Spreading those frames is not recommended.

staehpj1

You don't mention your weight or how much you will be carrying. Number of spokes required and choice of other wheel components is a function of how heavily you plan to load the wheels. The recommendations given are probably on target for fairly heavily loaded touring. The 48 spoke recommend is probably overkill unless you are going really heavily loaded.

I too would recommend 14/15/14 rather than straight gauge ones.

fietsbob

My rig I used a 6 speed freewheel, phil hub, then only carried a spoke wrench
and the tool to pull the freewheel, off, and spare spokes..

with 47 spokes left, The use of someone else's big wrench to unscrew the freewheel
could wait a long time.. as I touched up the spoke balance to make the rim run true,
on the spot, when finding the 1 spoke broken.

Another approach, common off the peg wheels, that you will abandon to the bikeshop
that you buy the replacement wheel from.. after damaging ..

, if there were premium priced parts , the drop everything and shop hand build a wheel ,
in the middle of high season, is pretty un-likely, as then, there is likely a long repair backlog..

seeker333

OP is >6 years old...

juggleaddict

20 inch 48 spoke wheels with disks >: D

. . . ok. . . so that's what's on my 20" unicycle minus the disks. Maybe I should post a picture : ) you can barely stick your finger in between spokes : P but it's a dang tough wheel. Has to be even stronger than some trials unis because it has a thinner tire. I thought it'd be hilarious to make a mini velo with those. I guess I'd have to use tandem hubs.


I say for someone less than 200 lbs:

36 spoke rear
32 spoke front
Double butted is really all you actually need, triple butted if you really want overkill. DT swiss please.

double walled rim made for <2" wide tires (alex adventurer, mavics, velocity if you don't mind the looks)

lx hubs are mostly the same as xt and some think they're better. They're half the price.

Do yourself a favor and get a competent mechanic to put it all together for you.

MassiveD

I agree, as far as the LX hubs I have used. They seem very good. Every time this subject comes up though, someone chimes in and says they have been changed somehow. I like the ones I have used, and most of my bikes it turns out had them on them. I wish one could count on these products as one can on the Phil ones, you like 'em, they are are the same as they ever were.

Butted spokes are a solution looking for a problem most times. If you are building, use them. If you are buying don't worry about it if the wheels you get are straight spoked. I've toured at an all up weight of 350+, and never broken a straight spoke on any of my bikes. Do worry if your wheels aren't to proper tension, and they weren't stress relieved. I like wheelsmith spokes either way. I'd use DT if I had DT hubs.

I'd never go to 32 on any 700 c, though people have gone a lot lower than that. Just don't see the point, or the point to having different counts. I get the idea, why people think it is a good idea, but I don't want to shave a few spokes that much. My current 700c wheels have 40 spokes on them, but as I say, I never broke a straight spoke on any bike, so going up to a 40 count was mostly for fun.

stevepusser

What's everyone's opinion on hubs with user-serviceable sealed cartridge bearings? It seems that it would be handy to carry a few of the cartridges along in your repair kit, as they are cheap and light (#6001 bearings are what my hubs take) and are much easier to replace than standard bearings (at least on my hubs).

MassiveD

I think bearings are hugely easier to replace, and in general probably better. From a machine point of view, one can usually stick more balls of large size in a raceway, than in a cartridge. I have gone all custom cartridge hubs, because they are so nice. One argument has it that the machinery to make races in alumiunum hubs is way more expensive. And another argument has it that machined hubs are weaker than cold forged.

While some of the cartridge hubs need only one key to be taken appart, there are quite a few other tools required in a bearing change, so it is not a side of the road thing. Look at the PDF on the Phil site. But ball bearings are an easy side of the road thing.

The lab. seals on regular hubs can let the water in, so most people trust sealed bearing more. Even though for the most part they are not designed to be sealed against the elements. Most commonly they are sealed against low pressure environments where the grease might be drawn out. But as I say, the sealed bearings seem to have earned confidence. DT is one maker of upper end hubs that still makes them with loose bearings.

juggleaddict

Fair enough point on straight spokes, but the price difference isn't that significant, so I kinda view it the same as you do on spoke count.

I should have noted that I have 26" wheels as well. I think 32 up front is plenty, and if you're getting a set built there's no reason to have the same spoke count on front and back. Yes it's only a few grams, but why when you know the front wheel takes less abuse? I went in to building a wheelset with the mindset of a balance. I could have gone with overkill (40 spoke count triple butted with phil wood hubs) but it just isn't necessary. . . . I may have splurged on some velocity CB hubs and I'm glad I did : ) more for my own vanity than anything else.

cycle_maven

@Ronno6- Did I see that you're drilling a 20-hole hub for 40 spokes? And the new holes are going to be directly across from the holes in the opposite flange? You'll need two different lengths of spoke, then, because that half-hole offset will need to be made up for in spoke length. Calculating those lengths will be a bear, too. I once built up a 40-hole hub onto a 36 hole rim, and it required 9 different lengths. Calculating those lengths took me an hour, and I majored in math in college.

MassiveD

Beckmann, who used to be well regarded in the universe of heavy loaded touring is pretty much the only person I know of who made a serious play for straight spokes as a choice on 4K cutom built bikes, with the most expensive wheel parts. I think his view was that there was no real advantage in running butted, while straight spokes were less likely to break when assaulted by baggage handlers or stray sticks in the spokes. That lines up perfectly with my results, but I can't say I ran the whole "test" with butted spokes and could say they were worse. I put butted spokes on my lattest wheels because they were more in keeping with the quality of the build, and to see what I could see.

I forget who I recently read who rejected that approach. With me, if I take notice it is normally because Jobst said it, but I don't know. Anyway, I was actually planning the opposite. I have never broken a 32 MTB while touring, but at the same time I felt overkill is the watchword with wheels, so I would like to have 36 front and back or even 40 on a 26. So when I went Rohloff, which is only 32 in the rear, I thought I would go 36 in the front, since after all Rohloff is a zero dish wide base and the rear 32 we are told hits harder than a regular 32. In the end I looked into what others were doing and I think Thorn does 32 front, on their Rohloff bikes, so I fell in line.

In general though, I prefer to have compatible components, and my ideal would be to have front and rear spokes that are the same length, rims that could be used on either wheel so that when carrying a rim build pack only one would be required to back up either wheel. For a credit card bike maybe, but not for the heavy end of a loaded touring bike, which is where I am even if I don't go on an expedition. But that is just me. I have kinda a thing for English touring bikes and they often had a split on spoke count. So I would adopt that on style points if I thought it made sense, but it does not seem that common any longer. Maybe you can get something started.

I find the front hub, at least, is often in my line of sight on long tours. Sure makes for better scenery if it is a half decent looking hub. One of my LX hubs was downright ugly, even though it never let me down. Life is too short...

MassiveD

There was a recent thread on the subject of spreading drops on one of the framebuilding boards. Richard Sachs mentioned not doing it because if he built the frame for 130, he sure wasn't going to slap it around until it fit a 135. Wasn't really because the frame would break, it was more principled than that, I guess you could say. I kinda liked it.


I have too many wheelsets already, but I would build a bike using the Phil 135 freewheel hub, maybe the Riv version, I have done most of my cycling over the last 35 years on 7 speed freewheel hubs. Just worked out that way. I can't really tell the difference, on a blind basis. With the clusters we have available the 8 speed was often something profound with an 11 cog. Wow! That makes all the difference! There are some better options I intend to try out, but I have to go out of country to get the parts. Thanks goodness for 29ers.

Ronno6

I posed the same query in post #32. I have not actually moved forward with that effort, but may at some point in time. Thanks for your input.
It is not by choice that the holes are directly opposite on the flanges, but, since the original drilling in each flange staggers the hole patterns, drilling a new hole centered in between holes on one flange automatically places it directly opposite the original hole in the opposite flange.
that's just how it is..........

Ronno6

To MassiveD:
The reason for not altering the dropout spacing of my frame lies in the mechanical properties of heat treated 6061 aluminum. Once heat treated, the crystalline structure of the alloy is not very ductile, and will fracture once too much deflection in induced, rather than simply bend.
Impact can cause a bend to occur without fracture, but that is way beyond my capabilities. Ever notice how an aluminum derailleur hanger will bend in an accident, but efforts to straighten it usually end in breakage??
Anyway, I'm enjoying the novelty of working with 8,9,or 10 speeds in a 126mm spacing.

runair

Ron:

Tried to reply to your pm but I don't have enough posts to permit this? Anyway below is my response.

Scott

Ron:

Actually I still have it. Haven't tried to sell as it was my main ride this past season. It's just barely too large for me but is a great cruiser for those long rides. Very comfortable and stable. Have since acquired two others, these in 25" size. One is a complete bone stock '83 ST500. This was Cannondale's first year in frames. I completely restored to as new condition. It's my "collector bike". The other is an unknown year frame that I will be building up this winter. If all goes well, I may be selling the 27" at that time. Tough to give up a bike that is such a great ride.

Scott

fietsbob

7 speed 13-34t freewheel in a 126 frame was fine , Phil W and now Bullseye hub..

50,38, 24 t triple

RubberLegs

I am working on rebuilding an old Torpado (not sure what year or model) into a tourer. Good lugged steel frame, Barcons, 170mm: 39/52 crankset, a 6-speed ( 14/17/20/24/28) freewheel. THe wheel set I am looking at using is a Weinmann Alloy concave A-125 w/eyelets, 27x1-1/4, 36 spoke. These wheels are HEAVY, but from what I am reading, they should hold up well for light touring? Only BIG concern is that being hookless rims, have to keep the pressure down...but am reading mixed reports on that. I weigh in at about 180#. Any suggestions on tires that will play nice with these rims? They ARE heavy, the rear wheel, with tube/tire/freewheel/QR Skewer weighs 4 oz MORE than the frame alone!!!!! Good thing I'm not a weight weenie!!