Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Any advantage to having a narrower front rim?

Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Any advantage to having a narrower front rim?

Old 10-21-22, 12:03 PM
  #1  
bark_eater 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Posts: 2,151

Bikes: Road ready: 1993 Koga Miyata City Liner Touring Hybrid, 1989 Centurion Sport DLX, "I Blame GP" Bridgestone CB-1. Projects: Yea, I got a problem....

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 752 Post(s)
Liked 732 Times in 419 Posts
Any advantage to having a narrower front rim?

I picked up a wheelset that has narrower front rim. They seem like their the same vintage and patina, so one might assume that the pairing might be intentional, though parts pile inventory would of course be more likely... Thoughts?
bark_eater is online now  
Old 10-21-22, 05:53 PM
  #2  
Charles Wahl
Disraeli Gears
 
Charles Wahl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,162
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked 364 Times in 213 Posts
I think I remember reading somewhere that it was more important, for ride comfort, to have a wide tire in front than in the rear. Just sayin' -- it might be misinformation.
Charles Wahl is offline  
Old 10-21-22, 06:35 PM
  #3  
randyjawa 
Senior Member
 
randyjawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada - burrrrr!
Posts: 11,672

Bikes: 1958 Rabeneick 120D, 1968 Legnano Gran Premio, 196? Torpado Professional, 2000 Marinoni Piuma

Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1370 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,743 Times in 934 Posts
The ride quality will improve in one area, feel but diminish in another area, comfort. Why?

The heavier the wheel rim tire and inner tube, the more clumsy the feel. Prove this to your self. Pick up a wheel and, holding the axle ends, tip the wheel from side to side. There will be little or even no resistance. Now, spin the wheel and, still holding the axle ends, repeat the tipping exercise. You will immediately feel the resistance thanks to the gyro effect imparted by the spin factor. With this in mind, when the bicycle with the narrower rim will seem to be and will also, marginally, be more responsive and feel lighter.

As for the comfort factor, a narrower rim will, probably be fitted with a smaller tire, reducing the cushion effect, thus negatively impact the comfort factor.

Was this original issue from the bike maker? I really do not know but I do know that in all the bikes that have come my way, I have never seen a bike issued with different width rims (at least none that come to mind).

Hope that is a help.
__________________
"98% of the bikes I buy are projects".
randyjawa is offline  
Old 10-21-22, 06:50 PM
  #4  
Straightblock
Fast Old Guy
 
Straightblock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Central California
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked 669 Times in 177 Posts
My guess would be that the rims matched when the wheelset was new, one of the wheels was wrecked or cracked, and the owner replaced the rim with whatever was available.
Straightblock is offline  
Likes For Straightblock:
Old 10-21-22, 08:06 PM
  #5  
iab
Senior Member
 
iab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NW Burbs, Chicago
Posts: 12,153
Mentioned: 200 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2992 Post(s)
Liked 3,704 Times in 1,392 Posts
The most entertaining advantage it could have is to bring people out of the woodwork to pontificate a performance advantage when in reality the only advantage is you have 2 wheels for your bike because something happened to the matching wheel.
iab is offline  
Old 10-21-22, 08:58 PM
  #6  
Soody
Senior Member
 
Soody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,047

Bikes: Gunnar, Shogun, Concorde, F Moser, Pete Tansley, Rocky Mtn, Diamant, Krapf, Marin, Avanti, Winora, Emmelle, Ken Evans

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked 412 Times in 214 Posts
Not relevent for a road bike but if you run wide gravel or mtb tires on narrow/narrowish rims the rear one is the first to become a problem because it will squirm in corners.
Soody is offline  
Old 10-21-22, 09:41 PM
  #7  
scarlson 
Senior Member
 
scarlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Medford MA
Posts: 2,090

Bikes: Ron Cooper touring, 1959 Jack Taylor 650b ladyback touring tandem, Vitus 979, Joe Bell painted Claud Butler Dalesman, Colin Laing curved tube tandem, heavily-Dilberted 1982 Trek 6xx, René Herse tandem

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 963 Post(s)
Liked 1,447 Times in 721 Posts
The back wheel is less strong than the front wheel because of dish, so it needs a beefier rim?

I think more likely one of the wheels was messed up or stolen, so another one was gotten.
__________________
Owner & co-founder, Cycles René Hubris. Unfortunately attaching questionable braze-ons to perfectly good frames since about 2015. With style.
scarlson is online now  
Old 10-22-22, 07:00 AM
  #8  
Schreck83 
Senior Member
 
Schreck83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: WNY
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Liked 304 Times in 159 Posts
Wheels end up being consumables. Tires/tubes for sure and if the rim gets whacked, there’s a good chance the hub goes with it.
Do your hubs match?
__________________
72+76 Super Course, 74 P-10+ 79 Tandem Paramounts, 84 Raleigh Alyeska, 84 Voyageur SP, 85 Miyata Sport 10 mixte and a queue




Schreck83 is offline  
Likes For Schreck83:
Old 10-22-22, 07:35 AM
  #9  
Mr. 66
Senior Member
 
Mr. 66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 3,440
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1124 Post(s)
Liked 1,704 Times in 941 Posts
There would be a smaller patch of contact, if that means anything
Mr. 66 is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 07:54 AM
  #10  
wrk101
Thrifty Bill
 
wrk101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mountains of Western NC
Posts: 23,570

Bikes: 86 Katakura Silk, 87 Prologue X2, 88 Cimarron LE, 1975 Sekai 4000 Professional, 73 Paramount, plus more

Mentioned: 96 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 957 Times in 624 Posts
No one paired Mavic rim wheel with an Ambrosia rim wheel. Something happened, like a crash. I often find bikes or even wheel sets where the wheels do not match.
wrk101 is offline  
Likes For wrk101:
Old 10-22-22, 08:30 AM
  #11  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,092 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by bark_eater
I picked up a wheelset that has narrower front rim. They seem like their the same vintage and patina, so one might assume that the pairing might be intentional, though parts pile inventory would of course be more likely... Thoughts?
I wouldn’t assume that the pairing was intentional. Those are very old rims but not necessarily of the same age. The process that creates patina reaches an equilibrium at some point so that two items of slightly different ages can appear to have aged the same amount. Most likely the front wheel was replaced for a myriad of reasons from a wheel being stolen to damage to loss to wear. There’s no advantage of a narrower rim other than weight.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 08:36 AM
  #12  
Saudadeii
USAF Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Location: SoCal
Posts: 79

Bikes: 1984 Univega GT, 2000 Fuji Newest

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked 55 Times in 27 Posts
Sometimes a mismatched wheel set is just a mismatched wheelset.
Saudadeii is offline  
Likes For Saudadeii:
Old 10-22-22, 10:35 AM
  #13  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,535

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10901 Post(s)
Liked 7,390 Times in 4,148 Posts
This wheelset is the same concept Merckx used late in his career to regain a bit of the edge he had lost. The front wheel is narrower for aerodynamics and the rear wheel is wider for comfort.

...or its just an old mismatched wheelset because someone I. The last few decades broke or lost a wheel.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 11:15 AM
  #14  
The Golden Boy 
Extraordinary Magnitude
 
The Golden Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Waukesha WI
Posts: 13,640

Bikes: 1978 Trek TX700; 1978/79 Trek 736; 1984 Specialized Stumpjumper Sport; 1984 Schwinn Voyageur SP; 1985 Trek 620; 1985 Trek 720; 1986 Trek 400 Elance; 1987 Schwinn High Sierra; 1990 Miyata 1000LT

Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked 1,678 Times in 926 Posts
I'm going to get a narrower front tire for one of my bikes so it clears the fenders more safefully. The rear fits 35s swell... the front... It "fits." Sorta.

I also know there were tourers that came with a 40 spoke rear wheel and a 36 front- I guess, assuming more weight in the rear.
__________________
*Recipient of the 2006 Time Magazine "Person Of The Year" Award*

Commence to jigglin’ huh?!?!

"But hey, always love to hear from opinionated amateurs." -says some guy to Mr. Marshall.
The Golden Boy is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 12:12 PM
  #15  
stardognine
Partially Sane.
 
stardognine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Sunny Sacramento.
Posts: 3,562

Bikes: Soma Saga, pre-disc

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 972 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 643 Times in 468 Posts
Originally Posted by Saudadeii
Sometimes a mismatched wheel set is just a mismatched wheelset.
I'm gonna just come right out & say it, mismatched wheels are not a wheel set. A "set" of wheels means they have the same parts, rims, hubs, & spokes. And presumably, were built at roughly the same time. 🤔😉

There's certainly nothing wrong with using mismatched wheels, pretty much all of us probably have done so. But calling mismatched wheels a set is a minor crime, punishable by flogging, or at least public ridiculing. 😁😉

That's my opinion, so it must be right. 😁😉
stardognine is offline  
Likes For stardognine:
Old 10-22-22, 01:03 PM
  #16  
Lombard
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1031 Post(s)
Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by scarlson
The back wheel is less strong than the front wheel because of dish, so it needs a beefier rim?

I think more likely one of the wheels was messed up or stolen, so another one was gotten.
A wider rim does not necessarily make a stronger wheel. It has more to do with build and a higher spoke count.

I'm guessing the mismatch was due to a rear wheel failure and replacement.
Lombard is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 02:05 PM
  #17  
scarlson 
Senior Member
 
scarlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Medford MA
Posts: 2,090

Bikes: Ron Cooper touring, 1959 Jack Taylor 650b ladyback touring tandem, Vitus 979, Joe Bell painted Claud Butler Dalesman, Colin Laing curved tube tandem, heavily-Dilberted 1982 Trek 6xx, René Herse tandem

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 963 Post(s)
Liked 1,447 Times in 721 Posts
Originally Posted by Lombard
A wider rim does not necessarily make a stronger wheel. It has more to do with build and a higher spoke count.
I don't agree. All things equal, a wheel with a heavier rim, with more metal in it, will be less likely to break spokes than one with a thinner rim. Dish also matters a lot. Dishless tandem wheels can be very strong in spite of a low spoke count.

First, I used to tour on a 36 spoke rear wheel made with a Mavic MA3 rim (470g weight), and broke three rims and ten spokes before lacing the same spokes and hub to a Rigida Sputnik (745g weight), and it has not had any trouble under the same conditions. Same builder (me), same spokes, same hub.

Second, Look at Santana's tandem-specific Shimano wheels, which only have 16 spokes, but are dishless and have special, heavier rims. According to Santana, they were subjected to the same mechanical test trials as Santana's 40-spoke wheels and the 40-spoke wheels broke first.

I would also love to have more spokes, yes. But above 36 you get into specialist tandem components. Heck, even getting 36 is hard sometimes. I put an ad up looking for a 135-spaced silver 36h rear cassette hub and have had no responses in two weeks. And even tandems are going to heavier rims with fewer spokes now.
__________________
Owner & co-founder, Cycles René Hubris. Unfortunately attaching questionable braze-ons to perfectly good frames since about 2015. With style.
scarlson is online now  
Old 10-22-22, 02:27 PM
  #18  
SurferRosa
señor miembro
 
SurferRosa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 8,442

Bikes: '70s - '80s Campagnolo

Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3846 Post(s)
Liked 6,437 Times in 3,183 Posts
Originally Posted by Schreck83
Wheels end up being consumables.
Then everything is a consumable.
SurferRosa is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 03:10 PM
  #19  
scarlson 
Senior Member
 
scarlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Medford MA
Posts: 2,090

Bikes: Ron Cooper touring, 1959 Jack Taylor 650b ladyback touring tandem, Vitus 979, Joe Bell painted Claud Butler Dalesman, Colin Laing curved tube tandem, heavily-Dilberted 1982 Trek 6xx, René Herse tandem

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 963 Post(s)
Liked 1,447 Times in 721 Posts
The front brake often gets used more than the rear. If they are the same hub, maybe a new rim got swapped in after the rider braked through the front rim.

I'm having fun speculating as all these things have happened to me.
__________________
Owner & co-founder, Cycles René Hubris. Unfortunately attaching questionable braze-ons to perfectly good frames since about 2015. With style.
scarlson is online now  
Old 10-22-22, 03:31 PM
  #20  
79pmooney
Senior Member
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,826

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4743 Post(s)
Liked 3,860 Times in 2,509 Posts
Originally Posted by scarlson
I don't agree. All things equal, a wheel with a heavier rim, with more metal in it, will be less likely to break spokes than one with a thinner rim. Dish also matters a lot. Dishless tandem wheels can be very strong in spite of a low spoke count.

First, I used to tour on a 36 spoke rear wheel made with a Mavic MA3 rim (470g weight), and broke three rims and ten spokes before lacing the same spokes and hub to a Rigida Sputnik (745g weight), and it has not had any trouble under the same conditions. Same builder (me), same spokes, same hub.

Second, Look at Santana's tandem-specific Shimano wheels, which only have 16 spokes, but are dishless and have special, heavier rims. According to Santana, they were subjected to the same mechanical test trials as Santana's 40-spoke wheels and the 40-spoke wheels broke first.

I would also love to have more spokes, yes. But above 36 you get into specialist tandem components. Heck, even getting 36 is hard sometimes. I put an ad up looking for a 135-spaced silver 36h rear cassette hub and have had no responses in two weeks. And even tandems are going to heavier rims with fewer spokes now.
That Second +1. I build my rear wheels with DT Revs or equiv. (2.0-1.5-2.0) on the NSA and Competitions (2.0-1.8-2.0) DS. But my fix gears get just the Revs on both sides and are better wheels. Much stronger, fewer issues and feel much more solid on right hand corners.
79pmooney is online now  
Old 10-22-22, 05:33 PM
  #21  
canklecat
Me duelen las nalgas
 
canklecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,522

Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel

Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,798 Times in 1,798 Posts
Nope. Back in the day there were all kinds of theories about wheel diameters, rim widths, crank lengths, etc. But wind tunnel and quantitative testing methods debunked most theories, or explained why some did indeed work, although not always for the reasons original speculated.

For example, wind tunnel testing indicates that -- if we want to wring out every nth of a degree of performance -- tire and rim width should be carefully matched. So while my 700x25 tires are comfy on my skinny rims intended for 700x18 or so tires in an era when 700x23 tires were considered "fat" for road racing... I'll never be strong or fast enough for it to matter. It might be a factor for an elite level rider on a closed track chasing an hour record.

Subjectively, I've found that if tires are too wide for the rims, the ride can feel splashy on fast curves on rippled or rough pavement, as the tire bulges out beyond the rim and loses some road feel. That bothered me a bit a few years ago when I was strong enough to push my limits. My legs are so old and sluggish now I can't remember the last time I was pushing any ride hard enough to notice minor differences in handling. Maybe 2019 was the last time my legs were strong enough for that, and only on occasion. 2017 -- pre-cancer and being hit by a car -- was the last time I was consistently fairly strong and noticed a slightly splashy feel from my 700x25 tires on skinny, lightweight rims.

Speaking of which, some of those techie late 1980s rims, like the Araya CTL-370 hard anodized, could come pretty close to pro level performance in a clincher format, but at a cost. Those lightweight, low profile rims needed more frequent truing, and tending to be a bit fragile. My CTL-370 and comparable Wolber Super Champion Alpine clincher rims finally cracked and spokes began pulling through on rear wheels after many years of use. The front wheels are still okay. I'm saving both in case I ever get a notion to rebuild to factory specs. But I've mostly moved on to sturdier, higher profile and heavier Mavic rims.

Anyway, that quirk could explain some mismatched wheelsets on bikes of that era.
canklecat is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 06:13 PM
  #22  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,092 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by scarlson
I don't agree. All things equal, a wheel with a heavier rim, with more metal in it, will be less likely to break spokes than one with a thinner rim. Dish also matters a lot. Dishless tandem wheels can be very strong in spite of a low spoke count.

First, I used to tour on a 36 spoke rear wheel made with a Mavic MA3 rim (470g weight), and broke three rims and ten spokes before lacing the same spokes and hub to a Rigida Sputnik (745g weight), and it has not had any trouble under the same conditions. Same builder (me), same spokes, same hub.
Explain how that would work. What is the heavier rim doing that the lighter rim won’t?

Rim strength has very little to do with wheel strength. You can take the strongest, stiffest rim around…a steel one…and build with weak spokes. The wheel won’t be “strong” because the spoke are weak. Alternatively, you can take the strongest spokes…2.3/1.8/2.0mm triple butted spokes…and lace them to a “weak” rim and still have a very strong wheel. The spokes are what breaks, not the rim. The rim isn’t really attached to the spokes. It is free to move on the spoke during riding and does so as each point on the rim approaches, is directly over, and passes by the contact patch. The rim deflects upward, decreasing tension on the spoke Go into a corner and the spokes are still the part that takes the brunt of the lateral forces on the wheel.

I always build with the lightest rims I can find and seldom have wheel breakage issues…even on loaded touring bikes.

Second, Look at Santana's tandem-specific Shimano wheels, which only have 16 spokes, but are dishless and have special, heavier rims. According to Santana, they were subjected to the same mechanical test trials as Santana's 40-spoke wheels and the 40-spoke wheels broke first.
While the Santana wheels look interesting, I think you are misrepresenting what they do. First, the rims aren’t heavier. Santana says

​​​​​​​…Surprisingly, these uniquely proportioned rims weigh no more than the weaker rims found on other tandems.
Second, the spokes put different stresses on the rim than conventional spokes do. I would question the longevity of the rim sidewalls with the spoke pulling on a weaker part of the rim than conventional spokes do. They say they are reinforced but that is still a bad place to put the spokes.

​​​​​​​I would also love to have more spokes, yes. But above 36 you get into specialist tandem components. Heck, even getting 36 is hard sometimes. I put an ad up looking for a 135-spaced silver 36h rear cassette hub and have had no responses in two weeks. And even tandems are going to heavier rims with fewer spokes now.
The key isn’t necessarily more spokes but better ones. The triple butted spokes, suggested above, are about the equivalent of added 4 to 8 (perhaps) spokes to the hub. They are significantly stronger than straight gauge spokes and don’t require proprietary rims to build them. Most every hub is drilled to pass a 2.3mm spoke through the hole in the hub because that’s the increase that rolling on the threads puts on the spokes. The heavier bend increase fatigue strength about 50% which makes for a more durable wheel.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 10-22-22, 11:10 PM
  #23  
scarlson 
Senior Member
 
scarlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Medford MA
Posts: 2,090

Bikes: Ron Cooper touring, 1959 Jack Taylor 650b ladyback touring tandem, Vitus 979, Joe Bell painted Claud Butler Dalesman, Colin Laing curved tube tandem, heavily-Dilberted 1982 Trek 6xx, René Herse tandem

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 963 Post(s)
Liked 1,447 Times in 721 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
Explain how that would work. What is the heavier rim doing that the lighter rim won’t?
I am merely relating my experience. I may be an exceptionally heavy tourist. We did carry a pétanque set with us at one point. And a couple of lawn ornaments we had found. Small BBQ also. Tried to make ourselves at home in our campsites over the year or so we spent on the road. I will explain below why I think it happened this way.

Rim strength has very little to do with wheel strength. You can take the strongest, stiffest rim around…a steel one…and build with weak spokes. The wheel won’t be “strong” because the spoke are weak. Alternatively, you can take the strongest spokes…2.3/1.8/2.0mm triple butted spokes…and lace them to a “weak” rim and still have a very strong wheel. The spokes are what breaks, not the rim. The rim isn’t really attached to the spokes. It is free to move on the spoke during riding and does so as each point on the rim approaches, is directly over, and passes by the contact patch. The rim deflects upward, decreasing tension on the spoke Go into a corner and the spokes are still the part that takes the brunt of the lateral forces on the wheel.

I always build with the lightest rims I can find and seldom have wheel breakage issues…even on loaded touring bikes.
My hypothesis for my experience is that heavier rims are less flexible so they spread the load out. You mention the spoke tension decreasing above the contact patch. Yes. I think this effect is more spread out on a heavier, less-flexible rim. Thus, more spokes share in it so the overall effect on each individual spoke is lower. Also, often I find I can build with a higher tension if I use a heavy rim. This may help to insure nothing ever comes completely loose under any extreme circumstances (e.g. hitting a poorly graded cattle grid with a touring bike carrying a pétanque set and a bottle of Grand Marnier and a Campingaz grill in addition to the usual sundries). We pulled spokes through the MA3 rims, completely destroying them. We saw cracks developing in the A319 rims a couple times. But we never broke a Rigida Sputnik. We also broke many spokes with the MA3, but not with the A319 or the Sputnik. Not sure what else could be responsible except the extra metal in the rim.

While the Santana wheels look interesting, I think you are misrepresenting what they do. First, the rims aren’t heavier. Santana says

Second, the spokes put different stresses on the rim than conventional spokes do. I would question the longevity of the rim sidewalls with the spoke pulling on a weaker part of the rim than conventional spokes do. They say they are reinforced but that is still a bad place to put the spokes.
Seems to be working for them in spite of it all. I would like to know the weight of their 16-spoke rims, as well, but I can't find a weight figure to compare them to the usual ~500g Mavic fare available in 40-hole. I held one in my hands at a trade show a while back. It felt like a touring rim, certainly. That has been my experience with a lot of these modern low-spoke-count deep-section rims. They are heavy.

The key isn’t necessarily more spokes but better ones. The triple butted spokes, suggested above, are about the equivalent of added 4 to 8 (perhaps) spokes to the hub. They are significantly stronger than straight gauge spokes and don’t require proprietary rims to build them. Most every hub is drilled to pass a 2.3mm spoke through the hole in the hub because that’s the increase that rolling on the threads puts on the spokes. The heavier bend increase fatigue strength about 50% which makes for a more durable wheel.
I agree with you, I like triple butted spokes for all these reasons. 13/15/14ga, the equivalent of 2.3/1.8/2.0, sure. But I don't like them enough to rebuild an existing wheel with them. They are nice but they are pricey! Any new wheels I build are usually with the Sapim Force unless it's a budget build.
__________________
Owner & co-founder, Cycles René Hubris. Unfortunately attaching questionable braze-ons to perfectly good frames since about 2015. With style.
scarlson is online now  
Old 10-23-22, 12:27 AM
  #24  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,092 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by scarlson
My hypothesis for my experience is that heavier rims are less flexible so they spread the load out. You mention the spoke tension decreasing above the contact patch. Yes. I think this effect is more spread out on a heavier, less-flexible rim. Thus, more spokes share in it so the overall effect on each individual spoke is lower. Also, often I find I can build with a higher tension if I use a heavy rim. This may help to insure nothing ever comes completely loose under any extreme circumstances (e.g. hitting a poorly graded cattle grid with a touring bike carrying a pétanque set and a bottle of Grand Marnier and a Campingaz grill in addition to the usual sundries). We pulled spokes through the MA3 rims, completely destroying them. We saw cracks developing in the A319 rims a couple times. But we never broke a Rigida Sputnik. We also broke many spokes with the MA3, but not with the A319 or the Sputnik. Not sure what else could be responsible except the extra metal in the rim.
For the most part, the extra metal in the rim is taken up by the increased volume of a wider rim. The walls of the rim aren’t any thicker and the force from the spoke tension is concentrated in the same area. The area around the spokes is what is going to take any force that the wheel experiences in impact and having very similar thicknesses around the spokes doesn’t increase their resistance to cracking just because the rim is wider.

Mavic MA3 are an old model that has a history of cracking…I’ve broken some. I would suspect a metallurgical problem that seems to have been fixed in later years with different models.

Seems to be working for them in spite of it all. I would like to know the weight of their 16-spoke rims, as well, but I can't find a weight figure to compare them to the usual ~500g Mavic fare available in 40-hole. I held one in my hands at a trade show a while back. It felt like a touring rim, certainly. That has been my experience with a lot of these modern low-spoke-count deep-section rims. They are heavy.
Just going by what Santana says in comparison to other rims. That said, the rim, the hub, and the spokes are proprietary and, I think, come from Shimano. Shimano has a very poor history of supporting technology which could make replacement difficult in the future. It’s an interesting design but likely to be a technology dead end in a few years.


​​​​​​​I agree with you, I like triple butted spokes for all these reasons. 13/15/14ga, the equivalent of 2.3/1.8/2.0, sure. But I don't like them enough to rebuild an existing wheel with them. They are nice but they are pricey! Any new wheels I build are usually with the Sapim Force unless it's a budget build.
I prefer to use the diameter measurement over gauge measurement. It’s less confusing. There are a number of spoke manufacturers that make triple butted spokes that aren’t all that expensive. It also depends on where you get them from. Pillar (sold through Bdop Cycling) are relatively cheap at $0.89 each. The deal of the Intertubz, however, has to be DT AlpineIII from Rose Bikes out of Germany. 0.41€ or about $0.41 each, US. That cheaper than wholesale. Yes, you have to pay shipping but, even with shipping, the cost is below wholesale in the US.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 10-23-22, 06:49 PM
  #25  
bark_eater 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Posts: 2,151

Bikes: Road ready: 1993 Koga Miyata City Liner Touring Hybrid, 1989 Centurion Sport DLX, "I Blame GP" Bridgestone CB-1. Projects: Yea, I got a problem....

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 752 Post(s)
Liked 732 Times in 419 Posts
Originally Posted by scarlson
The front brake often gets used more than the rear. If they are the same hub, maybe a new rim got swapped in after the rider braked through the front rim.

I'm having fun speculating as all these things have happened to me.
Who ever was riding this bike put most of the wear on the 52t big ring. The front brake pads may have been replaced also, I'll have to check the parts pile.
bark_eater is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.