Originally Posted by
cyccommute
My position has been the same since my initial response to Doug64. It has not changed. The mistake I made was, in fact, minor and has very little impact on the spoke tension. Different hubs can be compared in terms of spoke tension differentials. They really are apple to apple comparisons. You keep making a mountain out of a very small molehill.
Nope. You tried to compare a hub with a shorter freehub standard with another hub with a wider freehub standard. Then in your ignorance you attributed the improvement in spoke tension to the dropout spacing, when in fact much of it should be attributed to the shorter freehub standard. This is not "minor". This is a fundamental and critical misunderstanding that totally blows you up. If you made a mistake just be a man and move on. Why do you do this to yourself? It's ridiculous.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
I read your post 116. It was only borderline understandable and wasn’t relevant. I’ll remind you that you said in post 110
To those who refuse or are incapable of reading, everything is not understandable.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
I gave you a comparison that used the same freewheel length but different OLD. The result, I’ll remind you, is that the tension differential between the 130mm and 135mm hub was the same 10 percentage points as comparing the (slightly) longer 105 freehub bodied hub to a shorter XT freehub bodied hub. And only 3 percentage points higher than your comparison. Your comparison of FH-R7000 to the FH-R7070 has it’s own problems since you are comparing a disc hub to a rim brake hub. The disc fittings change the flange spacing.
I gave you a comparison and you Gish galloped away as fast as you could.
This is utterly wrong. You're comparing across different hub brands now? How ignorant do you have to be to not understand that a hub designer can make ANY hub of ANY standard have ANY spoke balance distribution? That non drive side flange is completely free to float anywhere on the left half of the hub shell. If the designer moves it toward the centerline, he can get a more even tension distribution. If the designer moves it away from the centerline, he gets worse tension distribution. Furthermore, the hub designer can choose to make the flange diameter larger of smaller. The larger the flange diameter, the more angled the spokes. The smaller the flange diameter, the more vertical the spokes. Again, this will change the spoke tension distribution. The designer has TOTAL freedom to set the spoke tension distribution to ANYTHING WHATSOEVER, with ZERO relationship to the dropout width.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
“Muddy the waters” says the guy with the chicken and the 12 aligators. Do you not understand wheel dynamics? It doesn’t matter how tight you make the spokes. There will always be a difference between the spoke tension on the drive vs non-drive side. That difference is always important and is independent of the wheel build quality. I don’t know why I have to even explain this to you.
If you think this, it is clear evidence that you have no idea how to build a wheel. Perhaps you read a manual a long time ago and memorized the procedure via rote memorization, but you have no idea of the theory behind building a strong wheel.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
Oh, you are soooo close to understanding. Yes, if we made the nondrive side mirror the drive side we would have stronger wheels. That’s the whole point of wider hubs. I’ll remind you want Nobi said…again…
Wrong again. If you took any one of these hubs we've been using as examples and mirrored the drive side spokes to the non drive side to give yourself a perfectly symmetrical wheel, your spokes will quickly fail via yield. There is a reason wheels are not build this way. They all intentionally have tension imbalance in order to create sufficient triangulation. Spoke balance is NOT the end all be all. In fact it is not even that important. If it WAS important, then 100% of bicycles manufactured in the world would have offset drilled rims. Afterall, it costs exactly the same amount of money to drill the rim holes on the offset rim. So why don't ALL bicycles manufactured in the world have offset rims, if spoke tension balance is so life changing as you claim? Take your time and work that out for yourself
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
The wider hubs allow for more closely matched tension. Off-center rims do the same. It makes for closer symmetry of the wheel and, thus, a stronger wheel.
Wrong. Any hub of any width can be made to have good or bad tension distribution simply by changing the non drive side flange placement and flange diameters. See my quote #3 above.
Originally Posted by
cyccommute
Unwinding of the spokes isn’t the issue. The issue is unequal tension.
If you think this, it is clear evidence that you have no idea how to build a wheel. Perhaps you read a manual a long time ago and memorized the procedure via rote memorization, but you have no idea of the theory behind building a strong wheel. Spokes break via fatigue. Fatigue happens only when metal exceeds the yield point. Spokes exceed the yield point because a poorly built wheel gradually falls into a poorly tensioned state during riding, eventually causing the load to be concentrated onto a small number of spokes until those spokes exceed the yield point. You can have unequal left-right tension all day, as long as your 18 spokes on the non drive side all maintain the same correct tension as one another, and your 18 spokes on the drive side all maintain the same correct tension as one another, you will never get a broken spoke.
And how do you ensure your spoke all maintain the correct tension even after years of riding? You make sure to build your wheel with high enough tension that the spokes don't unwind during years of riding. And of course you can't make the tension TOO high, or you'll run into another set of problems. That's why diligent builders check their work with tensionmeters. Do you use a tensionmeter during your wheel builds?