Yan 

Yes. Any time you become involved it's like a full time job to come here and correct bad information.

You need to read my post again and understand it properly. I never said there was NO difference. I said there is a NEGLIBLE difference. I never said the builder would have a different skill level when changing components. What I said word-for-word is "builder skill makes a much bigger difference than hub dimensions". Why is your imagination causing you to read wrong? Hello??? Your skin is so thin that you're imagining things.

As you can see, when we went from 130mm to 142mm on these Shimano 7000 series sibling hub models, the tension distribution only improved from 47% to 55%. Now if we are talking about 135mm, then the improvement would be even less. You said quote, "with a heavy load this could result in more broken spokes". WRONG! We are talking about low single digit levels of % difference here. You make it sound like 130mm is less than suitable compared to wider spacings for heavy loads. WRONG! My point was that contrary to what you claimed, all this finger wringing about hub width and wheel strength is a total waste of time. If one simply uses an offset rim, one would automatically get WAY MORE benefit. It improves to 61% instantly! And that's without having to worry about drop out spacing. Or, make sure to hire a skilled wheel builder, which will again make a WAY MORE massive difference than worrying about 130 vs 135mm.

Clear now? Are you sure you should be teaching wheel building?

cyccommute 

Well I feel your pain although I don’t agree on the source.


That depends on what you call “negligible” (correct spelling). I didn’t say there was a huge difference but there is a notable difference in spoke tension and amount of dish when using a 135mm vs a 130mm hub.

As to builder skill, a builder’s skill WILL NOT make a difference in the tension differential. That is a function of the hub width and no amount of “skill” will change that.

The tension differential is enough that manufacturers tandems use a 142mm OLD vs a 135mm OLD to make tandem wheels stronger. It’s enough of a difference that mountain bike manufacturers have moved from 135mm OLD to a 142mm OLD to make a stronger wheel. It’s enough of difference that touring bikes moved from 130mm OLD hubs to 135mm OLD hubs. It seems the world doesn’t agree with you.

So why do mountain bikes, tandems, touring bikes, and even some road bikes use wider OLD than they used 30 to 40 years ago? If the difference is so small, why bother with the change?

With you? Never. You can muddy the waters more than 15 alligators and one chicken.

Yan 

Because 30 to 40 years ago cassettes had 6 speeds. Shimano 7400 only moved to 7 speed in 1987. Nowadays they have 12-13 speeds so a wider dropout spacing is needed. That's why they bothered with the change.

You are clearly a person with many opinions, all of which are wrong apparently.

cyccommute 

You can physically spread the drop out of an aluminum frame to fit a 135mm OLD wheel into a 130mm OLD frame. Cannondales around 2000 were actually built with a 132OLD frame so that you could use either hub.

You can’t cold set an aluminum frame but there’s enough flex in the frame to spread the frame.

cyccommute 

And Shimano introduced 135mm OLD hubs in 1990…30 years ago and only 3 years after that a introduction of 7 speed.

And “nowadays” you can put 12 speed cassettes on 8/9/10/11 speed hubs using the 135mm spacing. A 12 speed cassette is the same width as a those 8/9/10/11 cassettes. It fits in the same space, it just uses thinner cogs.

By the way this is what Nobl says about going to wider hubs

Keep trying.

Oh, and by the way, that increase to 61% gained by going to off-center rims is only 4% larger than what you pointed out in your above post. It’s just as insignificant as going from 130mm OLD hub to a 135mm OLD hub…perhaps less.

I agree that it is a good thing to use off-center rims.

djb

I've not done tours more than about 3000kms , but do all the hub maintenance on my bike, and especially with the better hubs, ie xt stuff that has better seals, the grease stays good and clean after a lot of kms. I think how much rain and dirt riding is the big factor. Also better quality hubs seem always to have better metal and tolerances, so they stay in better shape over a longer period.
I tend to go by finger feel with hubs, so even if with years of use they still feel smooth and not dry, I don't degrease them, but defining what feels good enough is impossible in words.

I'd be inclined on a super long trip to pay a shop to let me use their stuff, as I know I'll do a better job probably than a Joe blow mechanic.. Plus that way I'm sure of the job.

Tourist in MSN

It was my understanding that the cassette would be in about the same place compared to the mid point on the hub on both a 135mm conventional hub and 142mm through axle hub. Thus, it was my understanding that the amount of dish in the spokes on both of those hubs would be the same.

Is that not correct?

My Lynskey Backroad was designed for interchangeable rear dropouts, each dropout is held in with two 4mm screws. That frame can be fitted with one set of dropouts as a 135mm conventional hub frame, with the other set of dropouts is a 142mm through axle frame. I have the 135mm conventional dropouts, photo below.



In the photo above, those 4mm screws that hold the dropout in are at about the 10 oclock and 2 oclock positions relative to the skewer.

From another angle, below:

Tourist in MSN

I built up my rando bike in 2016 with a rear wheel that I built in 2004. Hub is a steel axle XT hub with quarter inch ball bearings, model M752. A couple years ago I noticed a bit of play in the rear bearings. I probably put another 200 miles on it before I got around to adding some grease and tightening up the cones.

The hub in the previous post where I have two photos is an XT hub, M756A, also steel axle cup and cone with quarter inch ball bearings. Those steel axle hubs with big ball bearings are very forgiving.

staehpj1

"Standard service interval preventative maintenance" wouldn't need to be done squatted by the side of the road regardless of where the tour is. If it was "standard service interval preventative maintenance" you could certainly put it off until a comfortable place was available. Surely you run across an available table or bench now and then and service doesn't need to be done at exactly a specific interval.

I am curious how long your tour and service interval are that you even need to repack hubs. I figure that there are two numbers to consider one is miles and the other is time. Personally I have never felt the need to repack bearing in less than a year regardless of the mileage for good hubs. I've done 10k mile years on my 1990 105 hubs and everything looked fine when I repacked them. My 1990 Deore XT hubs have had similarly long/hard usage off road in mud and generally wet hostile conditions and they too were okay with annual repacking. Both are still going strong since 1990. I chose those hubs as an example since they were cup and cone and I have a long history with them.

I know some folks do planned maintenance at 1500 miles or something, but I always assumed that they'd forgo that on tour at least up to a point. I guess it is true that if the tour is long enough at some point you will need to do planned maintenance on the hubs, but by then I might be calling it "living on the road" rather than a tour because it will likely be coming up on a couple years

I'll never find out what distance I'd plan on hub maintenance because I will never do a longer tour than the Trans America (4244 miles last time). I didn't even consider any hub maintenance and won't the next time I do it. I don't think most people do. When I next to the TA in 2026 it will likely be my last hurrah for tours of that length.

I think I'd most likely not plan ahead at all, but think about repacking after a year and not really consider it a necessity, but more like due dilligence. So if it was near the end of the tour I might press on without. But that is me.

djb

Yan, along with the mentioned higher quality hubs having better materials and building tolerances/seals, the human factor of how well one adjusts the cones and properly tightens the lock nuts is a bigger factor.
Not to mention some bearing greases appear to me to be longer lasting ,, in combination with better seals keeping moisture and physical stuff out better, which again greatly affects the grease life.

I've certainly improved over the years and have learned through errors, too tight, too loose, whatever. That's life, learning from errors. Some people have no interest in hands on mechanical work, and or have crap mechanical skills, but that's ok too, that's why there are bike shops.
Re your comment about "fixing loose bearings at the side of the road" , that's the one advantage for a tourer to have worked on all parts of their own bike, is that with regular check overs, you can pick up on stuff before there's a problem. One can "hope" you don't have a mechanical, but having hands on experience is a big factor to reduce chances of mechanical issues.

cyccommute 

The cassette sits further out from the hub center which will decrease dish on a wider hub just like it does when going from 130 to 135. Chainlines are adjusted accordingly. Shoehorning in a braking system on the other side has moved the left flange inward so now both sides are essentially “dished” which will make the tension on each side closer to the same. The angle of those spokes coming out of the flange will be steeper as well. A steeper angle makes the wheel less resistant to side forces which makes for a weaker wheel. Manufacturers went to 142 and 148mm hubs to get a wheel that is stronger with regard to lateral forces, especially when using 622mm rims on mountain bikes. 559mm wheels are inherently stiffer with regard to lateral force because the spokes are significantly shorter.

cyccommute 

What is this “maintenance” thing of which you speak? And what are these odd words…”cup” and “cone”?* All of my bearings…from front to back and top to bottom…are cartridge bearings that require no maintenance. I have hubs with more than 30,000 miles on them that have never had anything done to them.

*Before someone chimes in, I know what this stuff is. I’m yanking chains. All 13 of my bikes require so little maintenance that I volunteer at a co-op just so I can work on bikes.

Yan 

100,000 miles on hubs before servicing is too much in my opinion.

I'm planning on taking 2014-15 off to do a one year tour. I expect I'll have to service the hub on the road again.

No, it's not always possible to ride until a bike shop for hub service. People here are too used to the west. In much of the world hub service is an unknown concept. They ride ultra cheap bikes that they buy for $50. They ride those things for years, never servicing the hubs. Eventually the bike melts from rust and is thrown in the trash.

Even if you get to a national capital with a large bike shop, you still face the language barrier of communicating what service you need. It's a total pain. I just carry a cone wrench.

Yan 

4%?? Check your math.

47 to 61 is 14.
55 to 61 is 6.

???

And no frame compatibility concerns to worry about.

phughes

They definitely are forgiving, and long lived. I have a bike from 1984 with the original XT hubs.

cyccommute 

My mistake, I read it as 57%. That said, you stated that the difference between the 130mm hub and the 142mm hub was…let me see if I can find it…”NEGLIBLE” [sic]. That difference is 8 percentage points while going to an off-center rim is only 6 percentage points. Which one is negligible again?

Additionally, going to an off-center rim with a 130mm hub isn’t quite as large a difference…but close enough. Notice that it provides a larger increase in tension equality. There’s more gain to be made because of the greater dish of the narrower hub.

And, yet again, you find the tiniest mistake to concentrate on while completely ignoring the main argument. Do you not agree with a wheel manufacturer on why wider hubs are used?

staehpj1

Sorry, that was a typo. I corrected it since then. That should have read 10k miles and I may have done two consecutive 10k years without servicing, but I didn't keep records and can't say that for sure. 100k miles between service may be possible, but no I doubt I have ever done that.
I don't doubt that, but I still doubt the need to be "squatting by the side of the road" to service your hubs. I am guessing you have access to a bench or table now and then.

Yan 

It's hilarious that you're repeatedly trying to make fun of me for a single typo, while you yourself are unable to read. Typos happen, poor reading comprehension as a middle aged adult is terminal.

If you go back and re-read what I wrote, and this time try to comprehend it properly, you will realize that the 61% is with the offset rim on the 130mm hub. Not on the 142mm hub as you mistakenly understood. Couldn't do math before and now can't read. What else can't you do?

Going from 130 to 142mm hub gives you 8% improvement .
Going from 130 hub standard rim to 130 hub offset rim gives you 14% improvement.

But let's not forget that your argument is about 135mm hubs. I gave you 142mm because I was being generous. Since Shimano doesn't have a 135mm sibling model in their current road hub lineup, we don't have direct data here. But if we extrapolate, we can expect that going from a 130 to 135mm hub would merely give a 4% improvement.

4% vs 14%. It's not even close. Your 4% loses badly. Whichever way you look at it, your arguments are dead wrong. End of story, sorry. Hard to confront reality, I know. Feel free to keep thrashing about desperately to try to save face.

------------------------

If you were really that concerned about hub dimensions and their influence on spoke angle, you can simply go for a hub with different sized flanges on either side. That would have a massively bigger influence on spoke angle compared to pushing the width 2.5mm out on each side.

Yan 

I one and only time I ever serviced a hub during a tour, I was indeed squatted on the side of the road. It was at a moped shop. The shop owner himself was squatted on the side of the road next to me repairing a moped. He didn't have a table in his shop. The entire indoor floor space of his small shop was dedicated to keeping his precious new mopeds out of the rain. He did repair work outside on the ground next to the road.

Again, people here are too used to the west. Rich countries are not the same as poor countries.

I will also add that in many developing countries, traditional bicycles are almost obsolete. Conditions have improved and most of these poor people are no longer riding bikes. When you are poor, you are not riding for exercise, you are riding for utility. Previously it was gas scooters. Nowadays e-bikes are picking up. Traditional bikes are only ridden by kids. In large cities you will find a few bike enthusiasts, but it's rare. It's getting hard to find any bike shops at all let alone enthusiast bike shops able to provide the level of service people on this forum are imagining. Any bike shops that do exist are mostly just low end outlets. Take your bike out the door, goodbye. Tube changes and minor gear adjustments, that's it.

Tourist in MSN

So, are you saying that if I had a 142mm hub in this frame that the cassette would have been shifted further to the right?



How would I do that when the cassette is so close to the frame that there is not much extra space there when the chain is on the farthest cog to the right?

Or are you saying that the cassette is in the same place, but the hub flanges are shifted in position?

Yan 

The cassette is always in the same place relative to the frame dropout. That small cog needs a minimum clearance to fit the chain. The cassette does move outward relative to the imaginary centerline of the bike; however when you go from 130 to 135mm overall hub width, the cassette is only 2.5mm further from the centerline. So yes, you would have a 2.5mm spoke angle improvement. However don't forget the radius of the wheel is around 300mm, so that 2.5mm lateral improvement doesn't help a lot. Drop of water in the ocean.

cyccommute 

Constantly called an idiot pales in comparison to calling out a typo.

As for reading comprehension…well, people in glass houses. Do you agree with the wheel manufacturer or not?

What percentage change is “significant” and what is “negligible” for you? Using a non disc hub, going from a 130mm hub to a 135mm hub (Deore FH-510 135mm no disc hub) gives the same tension differential as the 142mm disc hub does. Back when 130mm hubs were the standard, off-center drilling didn’t exist. The reason for going to 135mm hubs was to make for a stronger wheel. Some people…including wheel manufacturers…thought that the “negligible” improvement was worth the changes needed.

And… It all depends on what is considered “negligible”. An 8% improvement results in fewer broken spokes because the wheel is stronger laterally.

Again, I have nothing wrong with using off-set rims. They are a good idea. But if you use them in the 130mm hub wheel build, why not use them in the 135mm and 142mm wheel build. You get an even greater improvement there…to 71% in both cases.

Shimano does have a 135mm model in their mountain lineup which is equivalent to the 105 model with a 1mm difference in one of the flanges which won’t make that much of a difference. The 142mm hub isn’t really a valid comparison since it has to make room for the disc rotor on the left. If you run the numbers on, the 135mm Deore hub has the tension differential is 57% compared to the 142mm hub due to the narrowing of the flanges to make room for that rotor. If you use an off-center rim, the tension differential is smaller still

You are, yet again, dragging the conversation off into the weeds. I did not say anything about using an off-set rim. If you make a fair comparison with the same rim, the 130mm hub makes for a weaker wheel because of the narrower hub. If you want to compare off-set rims, compare them on all the hubs. Make an apples-to-apples comparison, not a cheese-to-chalk one.

And that is not the discussion here. Can’t wait to see how you make me out to be an idiot on that one.

​​​​​​​Do you agree on what the wheel manufacturer says or not?

Tourist in MSN

I am quite happy with the M756A rear XT hub that would use your cone wrenches.


That said, if your freehub had problems you would need another, which might not be readily available. And the 10mm wrench to remove and replace your old one.

I have three rear wheels with very similar hubs with the steel axle and quarter inch ball bearings. Have performed great.


Sarcasm is not winning too many points here today.

Yan 

Yes.. yes... etc.. etc... that's all very good but end of the day it all circles back to frame compatibility. If you remember, the origin of this debate was Doug saying he and his wife have 130mm frames, and you telling him he is at a disadvantage in wheel strength (post #65).

Next thing you know the guy is jury rig stuffing wider hubs into his frames, reading about cold setting, or god forbid buying whole new bikes on your bad advice. NO! He should not be messing with his bikes for a 4% tension balance improvement. What a joke.

That's what it comes down to.

Tourist in MSN

That frame fits 142mm through axle or 135mm conventional hub with interchangeable dropouts. The question was specific to those hubs, not the 130mm.

Cyccommute said: "The cassette sits further out from the hub center which will ..." and I was seeking clarification, as the word center, if it was read to mean the mid point would mean that the cassette was shifted, which as you noted won't work.