Mavic MA-40 - Piece of Crap? - Page 4

BaCardi <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> writes:

> A Muzi without taking the time to thingk wrote:
>
> > Well, if it isn't wasteful why do they cost more, weigh more and last not as long? -- Andrew
> > Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> Obviously, you haven't been in the game with your eyes open long enough to know about the
> differences between the old seam rims of yesterday and the machined seamed rims of today. So, I'll
> lay it out for you so you can stop deceiving your customers that the old rims are better than new.

Since he's been "in the game" 32 years (and more), I'm betting he knows more than you, Rummie. Not
that it's all that hard to know more than you, from the drivel you post.

> 1) Buy a oldie rim with a seam that you can actually feel when you run your fingers across the
> seam.

In other words, bias your test to "prove" yourself right.

> 2) Buy a new rim with the seam welded and machined flat.

What benefit do you think the welding has?

>3) Now, when you brake with the old rim, you feel a thud, thud, thud
> every time the wheel goes around to hit the brake pad. Compare
> that to the smoothness of a rim with a flat and machined rim.
>
> You and Jobst are totally WRONG on this one. And it doesn't take a freaking "I got a Stanford
> degree" to see that.

Well, Rumhead, given the choice between the opinions of a mechanical engineer, a 30+ year veteran of
running a bike shop, and a troll hiding behind a goofy screen name- let's just say you come in last
in that race.

BaCardi <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> writes:

> Zog The Undenia wrote:
>
> > IME the brake pad soon smooths off the join - and I'd hardly describe it as a "thud". This
> > issue with machined rims is that the wall thickness varies, because it's impossible to keep
> > the rim running *perfectly* true during the machining process. With an unmachined rim the wall
> > thickness is constant as originally extruded.
>
> Total BS! The brake pad should not have to smooth out any join of an oldie rim. And some rims are
> worse than others. Welded and machined rims may be a little heavier, but they are machined smooth.
> Don't have to have a Stanford degree wedged up your crack to figure that one out. And don't need
> to a kissing ass LBS owner to see that either. But keep on justifying your stupid arguments, fool.

The troll is becoming irritable as he is called on his bull****.

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <philMuNgEd_lee@hahtmail.com> writes:

> > Been discussed many times. Do some trivial research on Google. If you're too dim to be able to
> > sort out a bump at the rim joint, then I feel sorry for you. It's trivially easy to fix.
>
> I'll be honest. I spent 30 minutes trying to find what you're referring to on Google Groups, and I
> can't find it. Do you have a reference? My Rhyno Lite has this problem.

There are several options. If it's a front wheel, try turning it around; that often all but
eliminates the bump. Second option is a gentle tap or two with a hammer. Third option is a few
seconds with a file taking down the high spot.

<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
news:%c9Gb.4774$XF6.103799@typhoon.sonic.net...
> anonymous writes:
>
> >>>> Oh? If all that welding, machining and heat treatment isn't a huge waste. Suckers!!!
>
> >>> Oh and the seam welding and machining is a waste too? Give me a break
>
> That's spelled Rollei. Rolleis take pictures.
>
> >> And what problem did these expensive adjuncts solve? You probably did not ride on rims that
> >> were not welded for any reasonable sampling. MA-2 rims and their equals for tubulars were used
> >> for about 50 years with no problem. Besides, the alloys used are not heat treatable. We went
> >> through that a few years back. Why would you want to heat treat aluminum rims? I think you'll
> >> believe anything manufacturers put out as a marketing gimmick. People actually believed Rolf's
> >> claim that his wheels, having laterally paired spokes, prevented shimmy.
>
> > HAHAH! Whatever dude! The seam is machined for better braking. Now, you'll NEVER get rims that
> > stick at the seam. But according to you its all marketing. Geez! Get a clue!
>
> Your reply may be convincing to those impressed with empty swagger, however, I see no content. On
> the other hand, you cannot find the rim joint on the many butt joined rims with filler sleeves
> that I have here by scraping your fingernail over the joint. This is an entirely imagined problem
> created by advertising based on the work of a bad wheel builder who caused a mismatch and did not
> correct it. For this we should pay someone to weld and machine rims?
>

Please tell how to correct this mismatch, if and when it should happen.

Thank you, Robin Hubert

In article <Db9Gb.2089$ps4.1546@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>, uce@ftc.gov says...

>sorry to interrupt the trivialities, but do you have personal experience of anodized sidewalls? i
>have "cd" rim coatings on both my road bikes, and my experience is that their wet weather braking
>remains strong, constant & reliable because they don't grit up the pads as badly as standard rims.
>and when pads are gritted up, braking sucks.

That is a function of your brake pads, not the rim.

>and before you ask, yes, i've tried plain, cd and ceramic. my experience is that ceramic are best
>in the wet.

At the expense of your brake pads. When you brake, your forward motion kinetic energy is converted
to heat. That heat has to be dissipated some how. Cermics are insulators, so much heat is not going
to go to the rim and it stays on your pads. So you eat through your pads very quickly. A plain
aluminum rim provides excellent braking without eating through your pads as quickly.

>> One of Mavic's owners is a metal finishing company specializing in anodizing (hello!) and the
>> company had to do something or start losing market share. They weren't going to stop anodizing,
>> so Plan B was to machine the sidewalls. This solved the bad braking, squealing and early pad death-
>> but at the cost of thin areas on the rims that wore through quicker.
>
>i find that claim hard to believe. can you substantiate it? and in what way is that worse than an
>unmachined braking surface habitually locking up at the rim join - like my cxp14 does?

I've never had a brake lock up at a bad rim joint. It will go thump, thump, thump as the pad goes
over the joint, but never lock up. After a few brake applications in wet weather, the uneven joint
will be even.

>> So, basically for fashion- because red and green and black and whatever rims look cooler than
>> polished silver ones, we all get to buy inferior products that will crack and fail on us, and
>> cost twice as much. Cool! So, Rum-pot-stiltskin, have yourself a merry little Christmas and if
>> you're really good, Santa will bring you a pair of MA-2s. If you've been bad, MA-40s.
>
>are you absolutely /certain/ your ma2's are not anodized?

Yes. Mavic would not anodize a rim and not charge extra for it.

Robin Hubert <robinhubert@earthlink.net> writes:

> Please tell how to correct this mismatch, if and when it should happen.

If you have such a rim, it is best to fix it before fully tightening the spokes. I have used large
Vise-Grip pliers for this, oriented them radially to the wheel using the smooth nibs to press across
the rim. Once aligned the rim will not become misaligned after spokes are tightened because the
joint is pressed together with about 1000lbs force. This force is N*T/2pi, N=number of spokes,
T=tension. In fact you could take a rim made of individual N unattached segments, each with a spoke
at its midpoint, butted together without an alignment spud and ride it with no perceptible
difference from a one piece rim.

Curiously the ancients also had dupes among them. Some Fiamme tubular rims had rivets at the joint
to "keep then from coming apart in use" and some did not. There was a fable about spokes adjacent to
the joint needing to be crossed to keep the rim together. That ignored that 32 spoke wheels had
parallel spokes at the stem and joint as do any regularly spoked wheels with spoke numbers evenly
divisible by four. N MOD 4 = 0.

Jobst Brandt jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

Richard Ney wrote:

> I have a wire-bead 25mm Road on the rear now. I'm interested to see if I get the same low mileage.
> I care less about the marketing and more about the functioanlity. They can call it Carbon 12 or
> whatever, but if the tires aren't lasting, I'll find something else.

I've been using the "Carbon 12" 25mm wire-bead Avocets for about a year now, and I'm getting just
about 2500 miles on the rear before threads start to show. The front lives on forever, until it
cracks or gets a deep cut.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/

you're assuming a high spot. as you say, that would be trivial to correct. in the case of the cxp14
however, it's a low spot. "removal" of the bump would require machining the whole rim.

comparative width measurements of some unbuilt rims i have:

ma3 cxp14
21.10 19.88
22.10 19.92
23.10 19.90
24.10* 19.66*

* at the rim joint.

Tim McNamara wrote:
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <philMuNgEd_lee@hahtmail.com> writes:
>
>
>>>Been discussed many times. Do some trivial research on Google. If you're too dim to be able to
>>>sort out a bump at the rim joint, then I feel sorry for you. It's trivially easy to fix.
>>
>>I'll be honest. I spent 30 minutes trying to find what you're referring to on Google Groups, and I
>>can't find it. Do you have a reference? My Rhyno Lite has this problem.
>
>
> There are several options. If it's a front wheel, try turning it around; that often all but
> eliminates the bump. Second option is a gentle tap or two with a hammer. Third option is a few
> seconds with a file taking down the high spot.

Zog The Undeniable <ggg@hhh.net> wrote in message news:<bsbru7$edi$3@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>...

[snip]

> IME the brake pad soon smooths off the join - and I'd hardly describe it as a "thud".

[snip]

Dear Zog,

I'm ignorant of the seamy side of things.

I'm guessing that the rim seam can't align itself by moving ever so slightly sideways because the
tremendous tension on the rim holds the ends firmly together.

If so, I can understand one side of the rim seam being smoothed off by braking as the abrasive pad
runs into the tiny curb.

But does the other side of the rim seam smooth out so easily? From the brake pad's point of view,
the rim seam is depressed, so the brake pad just flies off a curb on that side with little abrasion.

So does one side of a mismatched rim seam smooth out first, followed by the other side only when the
whole rim is worn down?

I understand that you're saying that it's not much of a thud anyway and that the seam is minute.
I'm just curious whether the raised bump side of the rim (from the brake pad's point of view) is
what smooths out in your experience, leaving a less noticeable dip on the other side that lasts
much longer.

Carl Fogel

Tim's had too much turkey. You're line of reasoning is nonexistent. And since, you prefer to blindly close your eyes and spout off about who you choose to follow based on so called "experience" and degrees, then go ahead and be a fool.

Seams in rims? Foolish! And the argument from the old farts are that they are even better than newer machined rims without a seam! HAHA! Whatever! The sky must not be blue in your world!

jim beam <uce@ftc.gov> writes:

> you're assuming a high spot. as you say, that would be trivial to correct. in the case of the
> cxp14 however, it's a low spot. "removal" of the bump would require machining the whole rim.
>
> comparative width measurements of some unbuilt rims i have:
>
> ma3 cxp14
> 21.10 19.88
> 21.10 19.92
> 21.10 19.90
> 21.10* 19.66*
>
> * at the rim joint.

Well, now, that's an interesting scenario. Is the rim equally pinched on both sides of the seam or
just one side?

> Zog The Undenia wrote:
> > IME the brake pad soon smooths off the join - and I'd hardly describe it as a "thud". This
> > issue with machined rims is that the wall thickness varies, because it's impossible to keep
> > the rim running *perfectly* true during the machining process. With an unmachined rim the wall
> > thickness is constant as originally extruded.

BaCardi wrote:
> Total BS! The brake pad should not have to smooth out any join of an oldie rim. And some rims are
> worse than others. Welded and machined rims may be a little heavier, but they are machined smooth.
> Don't have to have a Stanford degree wedged up your crack to figure that one out. And don't need
> to a kissing ass LBS owner to see that either. But keep on justifying your stupid arguments, fool.

Thanks for your wise and educated comments. And such grace!

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <philMuNgEd_lee@hahtmail.com> writes:
>>>Been discussed many times. Do some trivial research on Google. If you're too dim to be able to
>>>sort out a bump at the rim joint, then I feel sorry for you. It's trivially easy to fix.
>>
>>I'll be honest. I spent 30 minutes trying to find what you're referring to on Google Groups, and I
>>can't find it. Do you have a reference? My Rhyno Lite has this problem.

Tim McNamara wrote:
> There are several options. If it's a front wheel, try turning it around; that often all but
> eliminates the bump. Second option is a gentle tap or two with a hammer. Third option is a few
> seconds with a file taking down the high spot.

A file maybe, but I've found the issue is less a wide spot than that the two sides usually don't
meet exactly square.

Hold the rim (lightly!) in a smooth-jaw vise with the seam just at he edge of the jaw. Press the rim
to one side until the seam is smooth . Takes a moment and hand pressure only.

That can be done with a built wheel in the same way.
--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

BaCardi <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> writes:

> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > BaCardi <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> writes:
> > > Zog The Undenia wrote:
> > >
> > > > IME the brake pad soon smooths off the join - and I'd hardly describe it as a "thud".
> > > > This issue with machined rims is that the wall thickness varies, because it's impossible
> > > > to keep the rim running *perfectly* true during the machining process. With an
> > > > unmachined rim the wall thickness is constant as originally extruded.
> > >
> > > Total BS! The brake pad should not have to smooth out any join of an oldie rim. And some
> > > rims are worse than others. Welded and machined rims may be a little heavier, but they are
> > > machined smooth. Don't have to have a Stanford degree wedged up your crack to figure that
> > > one out. And don't need to a kissing ass LBS owner to see that either. But keep on
> > > justifying your stupid arguments, fool.
>
> > The troll is becoming irritable as he is called on his bull****.
>
> Tim's had too much turkey.

Not yet, dinner isn't until 8:00. Come to think of it, I'd better go check the sweet potatoes.

> You're line of reasoning is nonexistent.

Your grammar is atrocious. Be that as it may, I offered no line of reasoning, merely an observation
that the troll is becoming irritable as his BS is revealed for what it is.

> And since, you prefer to blindly close your eyes and spout off about who you choose to follow
> based on so called "experience" and degrees, then go ahead and be a fool.

A fool is one who persists in a course of action that repeatedly leads to failure. My preference for
rims that last 10,000 to 20,000 miles or more has led me away from failure- such as the failures I
repeatedly experienced with anodized rims.

> Seams in rims? Foolish! And the argument from the old farts are that they are even better than
> newer machined rims without a seam! HAHA! Whatever! The sky must not be blue in your world!

It seems to be you that needs to brush up on reasoning, logic and argumentation. We had a beautiful
blue sky here today, with dazzlingly beautiful hoarfrost on the trees and tall grasses along the
side of the road. Merry Christmas (or the holiday of your choice) to you, too.

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Curiously the ancients also had dupes among them. Some Fiamme tubular rims had rivets at the joint
> to "keep then from coming apart in use" and some did not. There was a fable about spokes adjacent
> to the joint needing to be crossed to keep the rim together. That ignored that 32 spoke wheels had
> parallel spokes at the stem and joint as do any regularly spoked wheels with spoke numbers evenly
> divisible by four. N MOD 4 = 0.

Did you mean divisible by 8, and N MOD 8 = 0?

Otherwise all traditional wheels would meet the criterion.

Mark (I've built 32s,36s,40s and 48s, but not 30s or 34s) Janeba