nitropowered

After reading many posts, everyone seems to like Phils and its probably worth the money, especially if my fixie is going to last me forever.

Whats the real difference between high and low flange? I know highs make a stronger wheel but how much stronger? I won't be doing track racing, just riding my fixie for training, speeding through campus, store runs. My town does however have some bad roads and lots of brick roads.

I don't need mega stiff wheels. I have Mavic K Elites and I find them plenty stiff.

Rim selection I can deal with and I'm debating over Fixed/Fixed or Single Fixed. I have lots of hills so it may be nice to be able to flip around my wheel if I have to.

jinx_removing

People will strongly disagree with me on this one but I would say that the difference in "stiffness" between high flange and low flange hubs is nominal. I've ridden both low flange and high flange wheelsets (not Phil mind you) and I did not notice any more "flex" in the low flange wheel. However, if we are talking straight up sexiness, high flange obviously wins.

deadly downtube

realistically to the rider? i dont think there is any difference.... besides, high flange looks prettier to most people.

small scientific differences?? more mass, more inertia... but don't base a decision off that, that'd be like taking the loose change out of your pocket before riding an alleycat to drop your weight

53-11_alltheway

Theoretically the high flange gives you a better bracing angle (increases lateral stiffness). It also reduces the length of the spoke making it stiffer.

I haven't ridden such a combination yet so I can't comment on real world benefits.

11.4

High flanges do have a couple interesting advantages:

1. The spoke holes aren't as close together, so there's a bit less likelihood of breaking a flange.

2. Because of the line the spokes take as they leave the hub, you can do a 3-cross spoking on a low-flange hub, but if you try 4-cross, a spoke actually crosses over the head of an adjacent spoke, which causes premature spoke wear and also makes it a royal pain if you ever have to replace a spoke. With high-flanges, you can do 4-cross just fine. Four-cross is overkill for many riders, but it gives the purely strongest wheel because the pull is most in line with the force applied to the hub and, because the spokes are a bit longer and at more of a tangent, it gives a bit more comfort.

These aren't killer arguments for high flange, but if you break wheels or want something bombproof they are worth thinking about. I race track and am able to feel a meaningful difference between high- and low-flange hubs, but it's dependent on how you spoke the wheel, spoke tension, and choice of rim. The difference between straight gauge radial and 3-cross double butted spokes is at least as significant. For rolling on the road, it's harder to ascertain. As for comfort, the pro peloton gave up on high flanges back in the late 60's as low-flange hubs improved, all in pursuit of a more comfortable riding wheel. Now the spokings and rims have made many low-flange wheels a harsher ride than any high flange ever was, illustrating that your tires, rims, spokes, and hubs all affect riding comfort, and probably more or less in that descending order.

If you can ride a very bling set of high flange Phil's, I'd go that way in a hot second. What is it about hubs that personal bling rises in direct proportion to hub bling but not any other component bling?

zelah

i hate how high flange front wheels look

weed eater

i am starting to see your point tehz

TNCLR

Gerd Schraner, author of The Art of Wheelbuilding, claims hi-flange hubs are a relic of the past and create weaker wheel than one with low flange hubs. The only reason they're still around are for aesthetics.

I'm not sure I agree with him but if you read his book, the guy knows his stuff. His theory makes sense after seeing pictures of that blown apart Campy hub. You can also look to both Shimano and Campy's current track gruppo to see that neither of these companies make hi-flange hubs anymore. The only people making hi-flange hubs are marketed towards messengers, street riding, retro-minded folks.

nitropowered

I hate making expensive decisions. I did see that Shimano only makes low flange track hubs now. The DA track hubs are alot cheaper than Phils too. It's so hard building up your own bike since you have to pick and choose everything.

I also found that Phil Single fixed hubs have dish.

emayex

is there a reason why f/f phills ar bad?

crust & crumb

as far as i can tell, there are no mechanical disadvantages. they may not be as aesthetically pleasing as single sided fixed, but it's not a question of aesthetics, right?

11.4

Gerd is a lot more moderate and thoughtful than Jobst Brandt, but like everyone else, has his own prejudices. I saw him building at Interbike a few years ago and he was bemoaning the lack of good high flange hubs. Go figure.

Campy C-record hubs (the sheriff's badge version) gave high flange hubs a bad name. They exploded far too frequently. It didn't have to be a radial build. I had a rear that was built four-cross that exploded during a start -- and I do mean explode. The announcer picked up the bang when it separated on his microphone from 100 feet away. They were very pretty but just plain fragile. I don't think they were forged, which was part of the problem. Dura Ace 7600, Suzue Pro Max, and the like all have forged shells and frankly very seldom break. But forging a high-flange hub shell is expensive and price counts when deciding what hubs to offer (though you wouldn't think so when you look at all the super-bling fixed hubs that are flying around this forum).

If you want to see a high-flange hub built specifically for track racing, check out the Zipp's. Very pricey and very bling. And you thought Phil's were expensive? (Have you checked the prices on Dura Ace 7600's lately?)

Emayex, you have the idea that Phil's are bad in any way? Well, they are an old design, they haven't changed significantly in 30 years, and they are pricey for what they are, but they also are bulletproof and quality product, and you can get them infinitely customized for your needs -- fixed with quick release, fixed with odd spacing, odd drillings, slotted drillings, and of course the local favorite on this forum (colors!). They also have absolutely incredible customer support.

53-11_alltheway

It's probably not dished much though, right? Does the flip-flop version have dish?

P.S. Sometimes removing dish [moving non-drive inboard] is a bad thing if the spacing between flanges gets too narrow. I don't think this is a problem though with a flip flop because there should still be plenty of space remaining.

nitropowered

DA 7600's? I can't find them anywhere. I'm sure NOS is crazy priced. I can find DA 7710's (low flange) for $165 a pair.

The flip-flop and fixed fixed don't have dish. This is what I pulled of Phil's site.

Hub Flange to center (mm)
High Flange
L-42.5 R-29.0
Low Flange
L-44.0 R-30.0

53-11_alltheway

I'm assuming then that the fixed-fixed or flip flop is 30.0mm both flange to center on both sides. That's 60mm total in between flanges. In contrast the heavily dished Shimano factory road hub has 55mm total distance in between flanges. (I forgot what the breakdown is per side though which would probably help you more than anything I writing here.)

Anyway 60mm of total distance with no dish should have plenty of lateral rigidity (front hubs are ~70mm between flanges with no dish as well). The dished version would have 74mm of distance, but tensions would be different on either side.

I might still be inclined to take the single side hub if I didn't plan on using another cog (helping the non-drive spokes is only a matter of making the drive spokes thicker)

crust & crumb

they've been going on ebay for right around 300 a pair, recently.

Kev

I have a wheelset built with Phil Hubs and Velocity Deep V rims.. they are definately stiff..24 bladed spokes front and rear, front is radial and rear is 2 cross. THey are still true after 2 years. I personaly like the look of high flange hubs, but it is a personal choice. Not many can say they have had a bad experience with phil hubs. Yes they are expensive but how many years will you have them? And I just try to stay away from Shimano hahaha Just would not go right with the campagnolo cranks.

zwxetlp

https://groups-beta.google.com/group/...1c509932b8c92f
particularly:
https://groups-beta.google.com/group/...1c509932b8c92f

53-11_alltheway

That's interesting. I actually have "the bicycle wheel" and I'll go check to see if what he is saying is true.

53-11_alltheway

From the "The Bicycle wheel" (pages 63-65)

"The main functional difference among hubs with different flange diameters is their torque stiffness. For a given spoke pattern, torque stiffness increases as the square of the flange diameter."

"Therefore, large-flange hubs can reduce torque loads in the spokes with small increaes in diameter. It is important to remember that in most hubs torque loads are already adequately supported by small diameter flanges."

[The following part is particularly interesting]

"It is evident from this comparison that small diameter flanges provide adeqaute torsional strength and stiffness. There is no need to use large diameter hubs for greater torsional stiffness, but their reduction of torque induced spoke loads might improve fatigue life slightly. However, with larger flanges the spoke angle at the rim becomes less perpendicular causing spokes to bend at the nipple. This bend increases failures at the threads and probably cancels out any gain from reduced spoke loads. To aviod this problem, large diameter flanges are often spoked less than fully tangentially"

So he isn't saying large diameter flanges don't work. He's just saying they are overkill (actually in another passage I didn't quote he mentions their extra torsional strength would be beneficial for tandems)

The last part about the large diameter flange increasing the spoke bend at the nipple was something I didn't realize.