BNB

We're slowly dialing in our new, custom tandem. I would really appreciate any information about tandem wheel options. The axle spacing will probably be 145 though 135 is an option we would consider. Disc wheels are an absolute - but don't know pros/cons of 203 vs 180mm. Our current (cannondale) has one 203 and one 180 disc. We hope to travel a lot with this tandem so ease of repair, including in Europe, would be a plus. That said, we are considering hydraulic brakes - or maybe switch depending on circumstances if that can be done easily (?). One builder is recommending a drag brake that we probably don't want.

Background - we regularly climb 15% and over grades. Last week we climbed a continuous 7-9% grade for 14 miles then descended those 14 miles therefore disc brakes mandatory (and I understand the case for a drag brake but can do without it fine and don't have the added weight).

Monoborracho

When we travel overseas or a long way from home I run a set of hand built 48 spoke Phil Woods with Velocity Dyad rims. A few years ago in Ireland I overshifted in the back and jammed the chain between the cassette and spokes. I had to split the chain and yank like XXXXXX to get it out. We were out by ourselves and it was getting dark. I bent three spokes, but didn't even know it till we got back home and I cleaned the cassette. I'm not sure a set of low spoke count wheels would have worked as well.

Tires --- 32mm Gatorskins are my favorite, but we also have used 40mm Schwalbe Duremes in Ireland. I had our tandem built for 38mm with fenders, and the 40's fit though the front fender can be a bit tight on the Wound-up fork..

Around home I generally run a set of Spinergy rims with either 28 or 32 mm tires.

I have a rear disk, and cantilievers front and back.

fxsvelo

I'm unclear why anyone would intentionally downgrade their wheels from 145 spacing to 135. So you could throw a mountain bike wheel in there if you had to? I'd think you'd have to be a pretty light team and unladen to pull that off.

The option I'd want most for a new tandem would be the ability to take 32-35 mm wide tires at a minimum. I think I'd still go with rim brakes and a drum drag brake for the security as the best combination.

And yes, where we ride we do a lot of hills.

fietsbob

In 1 word... why? Rohloff .. they made a 36 spoke Hub-shell because so many people were putting them in Tandems ..

with the 32hole. [XL is 170 wide but made for fat bike singles so is only in 32 hole. ]

SPEEDHUB: www.rohloff.de & quote : https://www.rohloff.de/en/products/fa...mtb/index.html

Carbonfiberboy 

Our 2003 Speedster has 145 Chris King hubs. They've been ridden hard, toured, and seen a lot of rain and grit. They've needed less maintenance than any hub I've used and are still perfect. 287 lb. team running 36H Kinlin XC279 rims and CX-Ray spokes. That's been an excellent combo for us. Keeping those spokes and going down in spoke count doesn't net you much either in reduced weight or watts. Pretty hard to match in terms of fixability and durability though deep carbon is a little faster.

If we had discs, I'd be temped to have a set of these for touring and away rides and use carbon for local sport riding. I think every tandem really needs two wheelsets for convenience if nothing else. We only have the one tandem front because a single wheel will work but we have two tandem rears.

twocicle

Hi BNB,

Since you seem to have a lot of experience climbing/descending significant hills, whichever type you are currently using for disc brakes on your Cannondale should also work fine in Euro trips. Mech/wire brakes are simpler to setup and maintain than hydraulic. Also, the former can be easily disconnected in the middle if you have a S&S frame. Hydraulic usually has better power, modulation and heat capacity. A very good combo caliper is the TRP HyRd.

With a front disc, you should absolutely use a thru-axle fork & hub, not QR. 145mm rear spacing is not so common among the bike industry, 135mm is. If you are concerned about parts availability while abroad, that factor may weigh in your decision.

You didn't mention your team weight, or the makeup of your current wheelset. That info would lend more data to consider direction of the new set.

BNB

Thanks for all info so far. Our current setup with the Cannondale is DT Swiss Tandem, 36-hole rim, DT swiss tandem hub and spokes. We are a 260 (115 captain, 145 stoker) pound team. Our bike is a heavy 40 pounds before all our "stuff" - and we enjoy have our "suitcase" on the back for jackets, wallets, phone etc - love not having stuff in jersey pockets; but that luxury adds weight because we carry tools and extra tube/co2 that we wouldn't normally carry.

One of our buddies also uses CX Ray spokes so will check that out further.

Tires: we run 32s but I'm confident 28s will be fine for us (32 was good for starting out and being ultra conservative). We have only used Conti Hardshells but have gotten enough flats even with these that we just bought a pair of Armadillo Elite All Condition 28s. We're in goat-head country with a major goat-head season this year so many, many flats all around (mtb, road/tandem rides). So many flats we are using the goop in the tubes - less than ideal when pumping up tires and having that stuff spurt in your face.

I like the idea of “away” wheels vs “home” wheels. In fact, if we want one tandem for all our rides we need 2 rear wheels which I hope is easier than switching out cassettes. Our flat rides are fast and I really want a straight block 11-17, so 11-23 for 10 speed. Not having a 16 cog makes me nuts when trying to keep cadence in a fast group ride. Then we need a hill climb cassette or wheel with very low gears, less than 1:1 ratio, for our 15% + climbs.

I would like to know more about thru-axle fork/hub @twocicle - why is it better? I know nothing about these other than my mtb buddies have them on their mtbs now (my mtb is an old, heavy calorie burner )

BNB

Also, I'd like to know 203 vs 180mm disc differences and the best disc out there, if there is one that stands out. It would be great to have less disc brake noise and vibration. Even after bedding in our brakes we have noise, especially with moisture.

jnbrown

I would recommend against CX-Rays at least on the rear wheel. I originally built our wheels with those and broke quite a few on the rear wheel.
Current wheels use White Industries MI6 hubs, DT Swiss Competition DB spokes, BikeHubStore / Kinlin C31W, C31OS 32 hole rims.
The rear rim has an offset that reduces dish resulting in a stronger wheel.

twocicle

BNB

A thru-axle fork & hub stiffens the front end due to the axle screwing solidly into one fork blade and anchored firmly at the lever side. Since both axle ends are held within holes and not slotted dropouts, there is no way to lose a front wheel, something that can occur with a disc front and QR.

My preference is for DT spokes. Although I have some single bike race wheels with Sapim CX-Ray, I've heard of too many breaking when used for tandem wheels. We have been using DT Aero Comp (flattened Comp spokes) and DT Aerolight with no problems. As far as spoke count goes, using more lightweight spokes will typically net you a stronger wheel than using fewer thicker spokes.

If you shy away from Shimano's ICE Tech rotors which can melt (Aluminum core), then IMO, one of the better rotors is the Hope V2 which has good surface area, a floating brake surface (prevents some heat transfer, truer, and less prone for harmonic noise) and light weight. Bigger rotors handle heat better. 203mm rear and 180mm front is a great setup for tandems.

Shop: Hope V2 Floating Disc Brake Rotor | Chain Reaction Cycles

DubT

I would suggest looking at Spinergy tandem specific wheels. House of Tandems is the distributor, they carry a good warranty and HOT honors that warranty.

merlinextraligh

Because, with modern deep sectioned carbon rims, you can build a wheel with 135mm spacing that is more than strong and stiff enough.

Because it opens up your hub options dramatically.

Because, with deep sectioned rims, it reduces stresses induced by more extreme spoke angles.

Because it ends up being a lighter build.

Amongst others

twocicle

Initially I found Spinergy wheels comfortable to ride and the thought of PBO spokes being very durable was appealing.

However, based on our experience the shine went off Spinergy once our TX2 spokes started popping. Luckily not until after a tandem trip to Germany. Metal orrosion/fatigue/whatever was the cause, breaking in the threaded part where they screw into the nipple. I asked acquaintances throughout the country and heard of a few with similar issues. A couple other specs I didn't like was the very narrow rim, soft lateral rigidity and my impression of riding very non-aero and slow wheels. Yes, our wheels were warrantied with replacements, after which I sold the set.

Kudos to Ric at HOT and Spinergy for standing behind the product.

mtseymour

Thru axles have been used on mtn bikes for over 10 years on suspension forks. The thru axle keeps the fork legs moving in unison, so it's easier to stay on line while riding through rock gardens or over big bumps (from 1' to 10'+). Thru axles are becoming more common for rear wheels too, with auto-centering being a nice feature. The thru axle makes it impossible for a wheel to come loose but the lawyer tab comes pretty close. On a road tandem, the thru axle is only a slight upgrade because we're talking about a rigid fork on fairly smooth roads. I like the concept but I'm not ready to buy it yet.

The TRP Hy/Rd will be a major improvement over the BB7. The BB7 is noisy because it's using one brake pad to push the rotor against a fixed pad. It's hard to adjust the pad position to get the pad close enough without rubbing the rotor. With the Hy/Rd (and all hydraulic disk brakes), the two brake pads move inward at the same time. The pads self-adjust and don't have to bend the rotor.

Compatibility will narrow your choices. Hydraulic brakes (eg. Shimano R785) are powerful, but you'll have to buy new shifters and check that your chain stay can handle the a 200mm rotor. We're planning to use a R785 caliper with 180mm on our Tetra. Calfee will have to reinforce the chain stay if we want to use a 200mm rotor (for heat dissipation more than braking power). If you use the Hy/Rd, you can use your existing shifter and 200mm rotors for long, fast descents.

A thru axle front wheel will require a suitable carbon disk fork. The thru-axle road fork is so new that your option is pretty much limited to the Whisky 9. You have to make sure that the axle-to-crown measurement is correct, and the steerer tube fits your head tube (ie. tapered steerer won't fit a straight 1-1/8 head tube).

We like our Shimano RT-86 Ice Tech rotor (200mm), but the Hope V2 should also work well. Since you're a light, aggressive team, you shouldn't have problems with over-heated rotors.

twocicle

A number of points with the above that I'd like to address:

Although road forks are fixed, non-suspension, a thru-axle will effectively tie both blades together which makes for a very solid triangle. Additionally, disc braking tends to stress just one side of the fork, so having a thru-axle helps to transfer that torque through both blades resulting in much less one-sided stress. With a QR fork, the majority of the braking stress is on one side and one tiny tange on that dropout.

IMO, most BB7 noise is simply because of the one piece steel rotor they supply. Swapping out the rotor for a two piece usually solves a screeching noise, plus they run cooler.

The Whisky Road No.9 fork (49mm rake) has a shorter 367mm A-C length which I think only Calfee uses in their default geometry. 367mm usually limits tire size to 28mm max. Majority of builders designing frames for CX fork compatibility shoot for 397mm, for which either the Whisky Cross No.9 (49mm rake) or TRP CX (47mm rake) fork are the best current choices. FWIW, Calfee will also build to the 397mm fork spec if you wish. Other than fork availability, trade-offs in A-C length typically involve the cross having extra tire clearance, but usually heavier and 30mm longer blades can incur more flex. Both these use the 15mm axle spec

Forks | Whisky Parts Co.
TRP

Enve has a cross fork too. 395mm A-C, 47mm rake, but downsized the axle to 12mm (a roadie tweak intended to reduce weight). 15mm front axle is overkill for road bikes (tandems incl).

waynesulak

Thru-axle questions

Even on a rim brake bike, the thru-axle would appear to add security which on a tandem fork is a good thing. Looking vendor web sites it appears that there are a lot of separate axles listed. My question is why? My understanding is that the axles are not a wear part. If this is correct then buying extra axles seems odd. Possible the aluminum axle threads can get damaged when replacing a wheel? Are the axles even aluminum?

bwebel

A lot of hubs are convertible between thru axle and QR, that would drive demand for axles. And axles do occasionally get damaged, not often, but if it happened and you had to buy a new wheel rather than replacing a part, it would be annoying.

twocicle

^^^ also, not sure if all forks come with axles. To add to the confusion, thread pitches are not all the same and so hub mfr don't provide the axles. Whisky does provide a nice Ritchie axle with their fork. Not sure about others.

Alcanbrad

Were you riding the lower spoke count TX2 or the higher spoke count 29'er?

We upgraded to the Disc 29'ers from the stock Rolf wheels on our Co-Mo and love the ride, however, our experience has not been too good. At around 1200 miles we noticed the rear wheel was out of true and discovered that the hub had failed in several places where the spokes connect to the hub.

Here is a picture of one of the failure spots which is essentially identical in every failure spot (4 occurances on the first wheel, 3 on the second)



As you can see there are two failing locations for each failing spot. In each case, the hub damage is associated with, and pulled towards, the spokes that would be under greater tension when braking.

I called Mel and he arranged a replacement lickity split. With the new wheel the same thing happened at around 800 miles. This time, Mel had me in contact with Ric at HOT within minutes of my call. Ric was very surprised and immediately said he would replace the wheel which he promptly did.

I had indicated, that based on the evidence, it appeared to me that the failure was a result of braking forces induced by the rotor on the hub working against the inertia of the system. We live and ride in NW NJ where it is very hilly and the hills are steep. We are a just under 400 lb. team (at least before the holidays :-)) and we brake hard on the descents. I believe we heard the first hub breaking while braking on a descent (we heard a loud SNAP).

Ric did not think that this was the cause and indicated that hubs are very robust and there are 500 lb teams riding these wheels.

We received the third rear wheel promptly, however, I have not put it on the bike until I hear from HOT on what it going on as there is nothing to suggest to me that we will have a different experience with this wheel.

Was this the failure you experienced?

Anyone have similar experience or have a different theory on what may be happening here?

We really love the ride from these wheels and I am sure Spinnergy does not want to ship me a new wheel every 1000 miles give or take.

And again, Kudo's to both Mel and Ric for standing behind their products.

Thanks

twocicle

From my post above...
So, no, our issue was different.

marciero

In my view, for a given frame, it is makes much more sense to address ride and comfort with tires rather than with spokes (eg, Spinergy wheels w/ PBO spokes). Our steel Comotion with Compass or Grand Bois 32 tires is like riding on a cloud. GB/Compass are also among the fastest tires. I could never tolerate, say, Gatorskins. A winter project will be building a set of 650b disc wheels for the Cannondale, on which I plan to use the 42 Compass tires, which will clear that frame. Will risk those wheels seeming out of place on that bike.

waynesulak

The stress on brakes varies greatly from team to team. I know most of our local routes put very little stress on brakes. Very little braking at the bottom of hills and most stops our at the top of hills. I think I have about 15,000 miles on our rim brake pads and they don't show much wear. We are less than 300 lbs but with as little braking as we have to do I don't think a 500 lb team would stress brakes on our normal routes.

I believe all that matters is the suitability of the product to your actual conditions and I think it is safe to say that the wheels are not working for your team. Product support is a great not needing product support is much better.

I also agree with the post above that ride quality can best be addressed by tire selection.

twocicle

Agree. A big selling factor of the Spinergy is to tout the virtually unbreakable spokes... Which apparently did have a weakness at the nipples.


After building up a set of more conventional, wider rim (23mm) wheels, we thought the ride quality was about par and durability so far has been excellent.

CrippledKonaBoy

About the disc brakes:

203 front/180 rear will be your friends. Others may disagree, but I'd run BB7's; I weigh 255, on a 37-lb MTB, run 185 f/r BB7's, and can one-finger stop all day long. Semi-metallic pads (or, just as good, ceramic) have more stopping power.

Team Fab

One big difference is the speeds involved.

A road tandem will regularly stop from much higher speeds. Probably double a typical MT Bike.