Hub Question

"Eric St. Mary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going to be a Chris King or Phil
> Wood. I don't currently need the disc type for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are
> supposed to last "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible hub,
> excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
>
> Eric
>
1. weight
2. dish in the front wheel
3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)

There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for something you don't need?

Mike

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:ZxR_a.258$cj1.93@fed1read06...
>
> "Eric St. Mary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going to be a Chris King or
> > Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are
> > supposed to last "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible hub,
> > excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> >
> > Eric
> >
> 1. weight

Chris King specs: Classic: 112g front, 268g rear. Disc: ISO 166g front, 306g rear. Total gain: 110g,
or a bit under a quarter of a pound. Unless you're a major weight weenie, thats really not all that
much extra weight. Yeah, if you're building a superlightweight racing machine, then go for the
classics. Actually, go for the American Classic or WTB ones, they're lighter. But if he's
considering Phil Woods, which are heavy anyway, then why not sacrifice a tiny bit of weight for a
much more versatile wheelset?

> 2. dish in the front wheel

The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm different. And how about this: You
get less dish in the rear wheel.

> 3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)

But if he's planning on upgrading later ("In the future... I may"), he's saving himself a lot of
money now. The disc hubs are about $30 more for the pair, on a $400 set of hubs. Thats not even 10%.
But if you buy non disc wheels now, and decide to go disc sometime in the future, you have to buy a
whole new set of $400 hubs, PLUS new spokes, PLUS have the whole wheel relaced. You might as well
get new rims too, since you're changing everything else. And guess what? Thats another $600 wheelset
you're buying. Ok, so you can change the rear hub internals over, and save maybe $100, but still -
Why not pay a tiny bit more now to save a crapload of money down the line? Not to mention resale
value - fewer and fewer high end mountain bikes are coming with rim brakes, and for good reason.

> There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for something you don't need?

Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury items, plain and simple. So is a
high end mountain bike. And finding a well built Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the
cheapest I could find (at jensonusa.com) were $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is
still not cheap by any stretch of the imagination.

About a year ago I bought new wheels, rim brake. I just built up a new bike and put discs on it.
Now my nice, handbuilt wheelset from the old bike (the frame cracked) is sitting in my basement,
not getting any use. I might put them back on whatever frame the company sends back, because its
fork doesn't have disc tabs, and use it as my singlespeed, but I should have just bought a disc
wheelset and either had a spare set of disc wheels now just in case, or not had to drop another
$400 on a new wheelset.

> Mike

Jon Bond (btw, chris kings are lighter, phil woods are a bit heavier, but pretty bombproof. Not that
the King's aren't. I'd personaly go king, as long as you can stand the beehive sound!)

[email protected] schreef ...

> Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury items, plain and simple.

Unless you ride off-road tandems. Then a CK (and probably a Phil Wood) puts an end to the misery of
continuous rear hub desintegration.

--
Regards, Marten

I have Phil Woods (disc) front and rear. They're way over twenty thousand miles old - near thirty
thousand. Have you ever worn out a freehub clutch? I doubt it since few wheels, being disposable
boutique items, are kept long enough to do so. I cannot speak highly enough of PWs.

"Jon Bond" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > "Eric St. Mary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going to be a Chris King or
> > > Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type for any reason, in the future, as these hubs
> > > are supposed to last "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc
compatible
> > > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
>
> Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury
items,
> plain and simple. So is a high end mountain bike. And finding a well
built
> Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the cheapest I could find (at jensonusa.com) were
> $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is still not cheap by any stretch of the
> imagination.

"> > > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going
> > > to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type for any reason, in the
> > > future, as these hubs are supposed to last "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to
> > > purchase a disc
compatible
> > > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > 1. weight
>
> Chris King specs: Classic: 112g front, 268g rear. Disc: ISO 166g front, 306g rear. Total gain:
> 110g, or a bit under a quarter of a pound. Unless you're a major weight weenie, thats really not
> all that much extra weight. Yeah, if you're building a superlightweight racing machine, then go
> for the classics. Actually, go for the American Classic or WTB ones, they're lighter. But if he's
> considering Phil Woods, which are heavy anyway, then why not sacrifice a tiny bit of weight for a
> much more versatile wheelset?

Versatile for whom? The guy that buys them when he wants to change the color of his hubs? If he's
not using the discs, then why pay the weight penalty at all? If the disc upgrade was say, next year,
I'd say go for it, but if the OP isn't planning on going disc any time real soon, why bother?

>
> > 2. dish in the front wheel
>
> The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm
different.
> And how about this: You get less dish in the rear wheel.
>
> > 3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)
>
> But if he's planning on upgrading later ("In the future... I may"), he's saving himself a lot of
> money now. The disc hubs are about $30 more for
the
> pair, on a $400 set of hubs. Thats not even 10%. But if you buy non disc wheels now, and decide to
> go disc sometime in the future, you have to buy
a
> whole new set of $400 hubs, PLUS new spokes, PLUS have the whole wheel relaced.

Yeah, and he can probably sell off the wheelset to someone on
r.b.marketplace to offset the costs, or heaven forbid, buy a set of used wheels for "cheap." (as if
a PW disc wheelset ever is...) There's always someone selling something fancy for a lot less
that you can buy new. Ask me about my $90 Nuke Proof/517 wheelset...

You might as well get new rims too, since you're changing
> everything else. And guess what? Thats another $600 wheelset you're buying. Ok, so you can change
> the rear hub internals over, and save maybe $100, but still - Why not pay a tiny bit more now to
> save a crapload of money down the line? Not to mention resale value - fewer and fewer high
end
> mountain bikes are coming with rim brakes, and for good reason.
>

Hey, gotta point out that "standards" change. Who is to say that when the OP is ready to go disc,
that there isn't some new proprietary mounting system (XTR!) that makes the purchase of disc hubs
now obsolete? I know that there's going to be something that he can do, just like there are people
still running 6/7sp stuff here...

> > There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for something you don't need?
>
> Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury
items,
> plain and simple. So is a high end mountain bike. And finding a well
built
> Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the cheapest I could find (at jensonusa.com) were
> $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is still not cheap by any stretch of the
> imagination.
>
> About a year ago I bought new wheels, rim brake. I just built up a new
bike
> and put discs on it. Now my nice, handbuilt wheelset from the old bike
(the
> frame cracked) is sitting in my basement, not getting any use. I might
put
> them back on whatever frame the company sends back, because its fork
doesn't
> have disc tabs, and use it as my singlespeed, but I should have just
bought
> a disc wheelset and either had a spare set of disc wheels now just in
case,
> or not had to drop another $400 on a new wheelset.
>

I wish I had hindsight glasses like they're using those TV ads... Woulda, coulda, shoulda and we'd
all be millionaires!

Mike

> > Mike
>
> Jon Bond (btw, chris kings are lighter, phil woods are a bit heavier, but pretty bombproof. Not
> that the King's aren't. I'd personaly go king, as long as you can stand the beehive sound!)

"Jon Bond" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:
> >
> > "Eric St. Mary" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when
> > > building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > 2. dish in the front wheel
>
> The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm different. And how about this:
> You get less dish in the rear wheel.

The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as the reduction in tension in
the looser side's spokes. That means you can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your
front wheel to have it "disc ready". This degree of weakening can't be worth it if you are hard on
your wheels.

At least your rim won't be hitting the brake pads when the wheel collapses.

The wider front axle spacing of 20mm front disc hubs (110mm IIRC) was intended to address the
grievous structural shortcoming of front disc wheels.

Chalo Colina

Chalo wrote:

> "Jon Bond" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:
>>
>>>"Eric St. Mary" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when
>>>>building up a new wheel?
>>>>
>>>
>>>2. dish in the front wheel
>>
>>The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm different. And how about this:
>>You get less dish in the rear wheel.
>
>
> The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as the reduction in tension in
> the looser side's spokes. That means you can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your
> front wheel to have it "disc ready". This degree of weakening can't be worth it if you are hard on
> your wheels.
>
> At least your rim won't be hitting the brake pads when the wheel collapses.
>
> The wider front axle spacing of 20mm front disc hubs (110mm IIRC) was intended to address the
> grievous structural shortcoming of front disc wheels.

Who's hard on their front rims? I've never had a problem with one -- they last forever. It's the
back ones that I keep breaking. I really wish that I'd gone 36 hole when I bought the Chris King...

David

David Kunz <[email protected]> wrote:

> Chalo wrote:
>
> > The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as the reduction in tension in
> > the looser side's spokes. That means you can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your
> > front wheel to have it "disc ready".
>
> Who's hard on their front rims? I've never had a problem with one -- they last forever. It's the
> back ones that I keep breaking.

Front wheels may not bear as much static weight as rears, but they must withstand more side loads
and braking loads than rear wheels. The reason fronts hold up better that rears is because most of
them are dishless and most rear wheels are dished. On up-to-date bikes with about 2:1 left:right
flange spacing in the rear, a symmetrical front is about twice as capable of withstanding loads.

Disc wheelsets tend to reverse this inequality, with more equal tension in the rear and a heavily
dished front wheel.

> I really wish that I'd gone 36 hole when I bought the Chris King...

48 spokes make for a stronger wheel yet, and a prettier one too. 48
15/17ga. spokes weigh a bit less than 36 14/15ga. spokes to boot. If you want strong wheels, and
you're going to part with the insane amount of money required to buy Chris King or Phil Wood
hubs, it seems like a no-brainer to make them 48 hole models.

Chalo Colina

Chalo wrote:
> David Kunz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Chalo wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as the reduction in tension in
>>>the looser side's spokes. That means you can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your
>>>front wheel to have it "disc ready".
>>
>>Who's hard on their front rims? I've never had a problem with one -- they last forever. It's the
>>back ones that I keep breaking.
>
>
> Front wheels may not bear as much static weight as rears, but they must withstand more side loads
> and braking loads than rear wheels. The reason fronts hold up better that rears is because most of
> them are dishless and most rear wheels are dished. On up-to-date bikes with about 2:1 left:right
> flange spacing in the rear, a symmetrical front is about twice as capable of withstanding loads.

I was talking about disc wheels -- I should have been clearer. I've totalled 4 rear rims since I
put this front rim on and it shows no signs of problems. I tension my rims to 120 kg on the drive
side in the rear and disc side in the front. I usually end up at about 80 kg on the other side in
the rear -- it's been a while since I needed to build a front and don't remember what they turn
out to be .

> Disc wheelsets tend to reverse this inequality, with more equal tension in the rear and a heavily
> dished front wheel.

I understand the theory -- I'm just talking experience (and I'm a clydesdale -- 220-235 depending on
how much riding I'm getting in ). All I was saying is that strong enough is strong enough .

>>I really wish that I'd gone 36 hole when I bought the Chris King...
>
>
> 48 spokes make for a stronger wheel yet, and a prettier one too. 48
> 15/17ga. spokes weigh a bit less than 36 14/15ga. spokes to boot. If you want strong wheels, and
> you're going to part with the insane amount of money required to buy Chris King or Phil Wood
> hubs, it seems like a no-brainer to make them 48 hole models.

Never considered 48 -- didn't know that they existed! If my Chris King ever wears out, or when this
bike becomes my beater and I buy a new one, I'll check it out .

David

[email protected] schreef ...
> Chalo wrote:

> > 48 spokes make for a stronger wheel yet, and a prettier one too. 48
> > 15/17ga. spokes weigh a bit less than 36 14/15ga. spokes to boot. If you want strong wheels, and
> > you're going to part with the insane amount of money required to buy Chris King or Phil Wood
> > hubs, it seems like a no-brainer to make them 48 hole models.
>
> Never considered 48 -- didn't know that they existed! If my Chris King ever wears out, or when
> this bike becomes my beater and I buy a new one, I'll check it out .

FWIW: 48 spoke wheels are quite common in tandems, mostly in 700c-wheels to make them strong enough
for loaded touring. Some people even ride 48- spoke 26"-wheels which, unless you're *very* heavy,
makes no real sense.

We've ridden 36-spoke rear wheels in our tandems since 1990 and have had only a few broken spokes.
And most of these breakages occured when we had a rim where the spoke holes (as it turned out) were
perpendicular to the rim instead of slighty offset. So the spokes started breaking at the nipple
(small wonder).

There is another point to bear in mind when going for an 48-spoke wheel: the hub flanges must have
enough "flesh" left after drilling 48 holes to keep the spokes where they belong. It wouldn't be the
first time the flange breaks due to a lack of material!

--
Regards, Marten