am about to start respoking a rear bicyle wheel.

[carmley]

am about to start respoking a rear bicyle wheel. I
am going to replace the spokes with stainless
steel type. I am retaining the hub and rim. Should I
replace spokes one a time starting at valve hole and
one at a time and renew each consecutive spoke or
should I replace them in the normal wheel build pattern
or should I just strip the whole lot down and build from scratch.

 

[531Aussie]

I'm a 'backyard' wheel builder (I've built about 20), and I say pull it all to bits and start over.

Are you doing it yourself to save money, or for fun?

Have figured out what length you need?

I reckon my layman tips are easier to understand than some of the 'novels' that are on some websites.

It requires a fair bit of patience, and if you don't have the time, chances are you'll end up taking it to a shop, which wouldn't be a total loss if the wheel is laced (but still loose), because most places will charge less if the spokes are already in there.

I take it you'll also be using new nipples? They come with the spokes.
I recommend using good old straight gauge DT Champions, and the cheapest place in town (Melbourne) is Bicycle Recycle, who will probably sell them to you for 75c or 80c each! Some places will try to charge you $1.50 a spoke, which is a fkn joke. Most places charge a dollar a spoke for straight DTs.

I've tried lighter, double-butted spokes, I and i reckon they're just not worth it. To get a significant weight difference, the spokes are so thin that the wheel can be a bit too whippy, especially if you're over 80kg. And subtle butts provide such little weight difference (about 40g) that it still ain't worth it.

The quickest and cleanest way (by a MILE!!) to undo the old spokes is to cut them all with some side cutters, but watch out for the first few, coz they shoot out like a bullet if the rim tape is already off.

The 3 cross pattern is pretty easy: start on the drive side with the head of the spoke facing out, and put it behind the valve hole.

Anyway, if you want more detail, let me know.

 

[Travis]

531Aussie wrote:

> I take it you'll also be using new nipples? They come with the spokes.
> I recommend using good old straight gauge DT Champions, and the
> cheapest place in town (Melbourne) is Bicycle Recycle, who will
> probably sell them to you for 75c or 80c each! Some places will try to
> charge you $1.50 a spoke, which is a fkn joke. Most places charge a
> dollar a spoke for straight DTs.

So I take it your recommendation is that I tell the LBS who quoted me
$2.50 per DT Suisse spoke to shove it?

(I wound up buying a nice set of wheels of eBay at a very good price,
but was considering rebuilding at the time.)

Travis

 

[531Aussie]

So I take it your recommendation is that I tell the LBS who quoted me $2.50 per DT Suisse spoke to shove it?

you are kidding me???!!!

just plain old DT Champions?

what shop?

That actually pisses me off

 

[suzyj]

531Aussie wrote:

> I've tried lighter, double-butted spokes, I and i reckon they're
> just not worth it. To get a significant weight difference, the
> spokes are so thin that the wheel can be a bit too whippy,
> especially if you're over 80kg. And subtle butts provide such
> little weight difference (about 40g) that it still ain't worth it.

The reason I use double butted spokes almost exclusively has little to do with weight, and everything to do with durability. A 14/15/14 double butted spoke will actually last longer than a 14 gauge one.

That sounds counterintuitive, I know, so I'll try to explain.

Spokes are weakest at the ends where they've been swaged into the head or rolled into a thread. When spokes break, it's always at one of the ends.

With straight gauge spokes, the center section of the spoke is good and strong, so doesn't yield very much under stress. However, with double butted spokes, the center section is much more springy, so absorbs shocks, reducing the load on the fragile ends, and thus making the whole assembly more fatigue resistant.

It's the same sort of optimisation that you see in nature all the time. Trees aren't rigid structures, instead they bend in the wind, and thus are more durable than many more solid structures.

Cheers,

Suzy

 

[Bleve]

Travis wrote:
> 531Aussie wrote:
>
> > I take it you'll also be using new nipples? They come with the spokes.
> > I recommend using good old straight gauge DT Champions, and the
> > cheapest place in town (Melbourne) is Bicycle Recycle, who will
> > probably sell them to you for 75c or 80c each! Some places will try to
> > charge you $1.50 a spoke, which is a fkn joke. Most places charge a
> > dollar a spoke for straight DTs.
>
> So I take it your recommendation is that I tell the LBS who quoted me
> $2.50 per DT Suisse spoke to shove it?

Depends on the spokes, and if they came with nipples, and what sort of
nipples.

Around $1 for a DT Swiss "champion" and brass spoke is around the right
price.
For alloy nipples you pay more, for butted spokes more, for aerolites
.... ouch!

 

[geoffs]

531Aussie wrote:

The reason I use double butted spokes almost exclusively has little to do with weight, and everything to do with durability. A 14/15/14 double butted spoke will actually last longer than a 14 gauge one.

That sounds counterintuitive, I know, so I'll try to explain.

Spokes are weakest at the ends where they've been swaged into the head or rolled into a thread. When spokes break, it's always at one of the ends.

With straight gauge spokes, the center section of the spoke is good and strong, so doesn't yield very much under stress. However, with double butted spokes, the center section is much more springy, so absorbs shocks, reducing the load on the fragile ends, and thus making the whole assembly more fatigue resistant.

It's the same sort of optimisation that you see in nature all the time. Trees aren't rigid structures, instead they bend in the wind, and thus are more durable than many more solid structures.

Cheers,

Suzy

There is lots of information on the web to support Suzy's statement.
One such is http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#spokes

The main goal should be to build the most reliable wheel.

Don't try to reinvent the wheel!

Cheers

Geoff

 

[Bleve]

geoffs wrote:
> suzyj Wrote:
> > 531Aussie wrote:
> >
> > The reason I use double butted spokes almost exclusively has little to
> > do with weight, and everything to do with durability. A 14/15/14
> > double butted spoke will actually last longer than a 14 gauge one.
> >
> > That sounds counterintuitive, I know, so I'll try to explain.
> >
> > Spokes are weakest at the ends where they've been swaged into the head
> > or rolled into a thread. When spokes break, it's always at one of the
> > ends.
> >
> > With straight gauge spokes, the center section of the spoke is good and
> > strong, so doesn't yield very much under stress. However, with double
> > butted spokes, the center section is much more springy, so absorbs
> > shocks, reducing the load on the fragile ends, and thus making the
> > whole assembly more fatigue resistant.
> >
> > It's the same sort of optimisation that you see in nature all the time.
> > Trees aren't rigid structures, instead they bend in the wind, and thus
> > are more durable than many more solid structures.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Suzy
>
> There is lots of information on the web to support Suzy's statement.
> One such is http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#spokes
>
> The main goal should be to build the most reliable wheel.

That would depend on what you wanted it for. A straight guage wheel
will be stiffer, which may be desirable, even if it might not last as
long. FWIW, I use DT Champions in my training & commuting wheels, and
my rims wear out before I break spokes. 92kg ... lots of wheel stress.
I hammer wheels hard. In the last 4 years I've not broken a single
spoke, but have chewed through 3 Open Pro rims, one DT Swiss RR1.1 rim,
2 other rims that I can't remember the name of that I got with my first
roady and almost used up a Bontrager race-lite aero rim. The only
spokes I've broken were on my original wheels that I got with my first
Trek 1400, some generic Taiwanese spokes that lasted all of 4 months.

The most important thing with spoke longevity is sufficient and even
tension, and good quality spokes.

 

[suzyj]

Bleve wrote:

> FWIW, I use DT Champions in my training & commuting wheels,
> and my rims wear out before I break spokes. 92kg ... lots of
> wheel stress. I hammer wheels hard. In the last 4 years I've
> not broken a single spoke, but have chewed through 3 Open
> Pro rims, one DT Swiss RR1.1 rim...

I suspect you would go through fewer rims if you used double butted spokes, too. The reason for this is that the double butted spokes absorb more shock, thus reducing the load on the rim. When you apply a sudden force to your wheel (such as when you hit a pothole), that has to either be absorbed by components (flexing or bending), or else transferred to some other component, which must then either absorb it or pass it on. Having spokes that are able to absorb lots of shock without breaking is a good thing, as it spares the things that they're connected to.

Cheers,

Suzy

 

[Bleve]

suzyj wrote:
> Bleve wrote:
>
> I suspect you would go through fewer rims if you used double butted
> spokes, too. The reason for this is that the double butted spokes
> absorb more shock, thus reducing the load on the rim. When you apply a
> sudden force to your wheel (such as when you hit a pothole), that has to
> either be absorbed by components (flexing or bending), or else
> transferred to some other component, which must then either absorb it
> or pass it on. Having spokes that are able to absorb lots of shock
> without breaking is a good thing, as it spares the things that they're
> connected to.

Except that the rim failure is worn out braking surfaces in most cases.
Heavy rider, descending hills in the wet. Rims ... death.

I've only pulled one spoke through a rim (last Saturday!) but that rim
was almost worn out anyway.

 

[Wilfred Kazoks]

> Except that the rim failure is worn out braking surfaces in most cases.
> Heavy rider, descending hills in the wet. Rims ... death.
>

Just exactly how do you tell a rim is worn out? I mean as far as braking
surface wear goes.

Wilfred

 

[Bleve]

Wilfred Kazoks wrote:
> > Except that the rim failure is worn out braking surfaces in most cases.
> > Heavy rider, descending hills in the wet. Rims ... death.
> >
>
> Just exactly how do you tell a rim is worn out? I mean as far as braking
> surface wear goes.

The hardmans way is to wait 'til it bursts. Then you know it's rooted.
'corse, that's likely to happen while braking on a descent with
significant speed ... perhaps not so wise

Some rims have wear indicators, little holes drilled into the braking
surface, if the rim is down to the level of the base of the hole, it's
new-rim-o-clock.

Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?

You can also check for hairline cracks with your fingernail, if there's
a crack, rim to bin she goes. Post haste. It's not a bad thing to
check every week or so once you have a few 10,000km or so on a rim, or
after a big ride in the wet with some hills. It's wet weather braking
that does the most damage to the rim braking surfaces.

 

[TimC]

On 2006-07-06, Bleve (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Wilfred Kazoks wrote:
>> Just exactly how do you tell a rim is worn out? I mean as far as braking
>> surface wear goes.
>
> The hardmans way is to wait 'til it bursts. Then you know it's rooted.
> 'corse, that's likely to happen while braking on a descent with
> significant speed ... perhaps not so wise

The wheel! She explode!

> Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
> it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
> something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
> worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?

How significant is a significant concavity?

One of mine is a little bit concave on one side. Commuter bike --
gets used in the wet.

> You can also check for hairline cracks with your fingernail, if there's
> a crack, rim to bin she goes. Post haste. It's not a bad thing to
> check every week or so once you have a few 10,000km or so on a rim, or
> after a big ride in the wet with some hills. It's wet weather braking
> that does the most damage to the rim braking surfaces.

ObTimCStereotype: So the obvious solution is to not brake in the wet.

--
TimC
The first time, it's a KLUDGE!
The second, a trick.
Later, it's a well-established technique! -- Mike Broido, Intermetrics

 

[531Aussie]

That would depend on what you wanted it for. A straight guage wheel
will be stiffer, which may be desirable, even if it might not last as
long. FWIW, I use DT Champions in my training & commuting wheels, and
my rims wear out before I break spokes. 92kg ... lots of wheel stress.
.

yeah, I agree.

I know about the shock absorption, but I just don't reckon the DB spokes are worth the wheel flex or the extra money, especially if very light spokes are used, such as the DT Revolutions i have (ok, I'm 90kg). As Bleve said, the braking surface will often go before the rim will break, unless, of course, the wheel encounters a huge impact. Ironically, the only rims I've cracked were CXP33s, which had double-butted Wheelsmiths on them at the time!!

Anyway, straight-gauge spokes: STIFF STIFF STIFF!!

 

[Bleve]

TimC wrote:
> On 2006-07-06, Bleve (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> > Wilfred Kazoks wrote:
> >> Just exactly how do you tell a rim is worn out? I mean as far as braking
> >> surface wear goes.
> >
> > The hardmans way is to wait 'til it bursts. Then you know it's rooted.
> > 'corse, that's likely to happen while braking on a descent with
> > significant speed ... perhaps not so wise
>
> The wheel! She explode!

Can do, yes. Mine let go at 5km/h, fortunatly, and was controlable, so
I didn't drop the bike.

> > Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
> > it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
> > something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
> > worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?
>
> How significant is a significant concavity?

I haven't measuerd any, but maybe .5mm or so? That's a guess, there's
probably a better guideline out there somewhere.

> One of mine is a little bit concave on one side. Commuter bike --
> gets used in the wet.

And **** brakes? The wear should be pretty even.

> > You can also check for hairline cracks with your fingernail, if there's
> > a crack, rim to bin she goes. Post haste. It's not a bad thing to
> > check every week or so once you have a few 10,000km or so on a rim, or
> > after a big ride in the wet with some hills. It's wet weather braking
> > that does the most damage to the rim braking surfaces.
>
> ObTimCStereotype: So the obvious solution is to not brake in the wet.

That will significantly reduce rim wear, yes

 

[531Aussie]

........in fact, I have 34 DT Revolutions that someone here can have for nothing!! 292mm They're about 90g lighter than Champions for 32!!



I had a rim 'explode' on me a long time ago, when I didn't even know such a thing was possible. I was very lucky that it was the rear wheel, and I was only doing about 20kmh. I was also lucky that the walk home was "only" ~8km.

 

[suzyj]

Wilfred wrote:

> Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
> it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
> something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
> worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?

I imagine the best measure would be pulsing brakes. I've never had a set wear out completely. Once they start looking pretty terrible (after 30-40,000km), they get consigned to "spare" bikes, and then don't get ridden so much.

Cheers,

Suzy

 

[dave]

Bleve wrote:
> TimC wrote:
>
>>On 2006-07-06, Bleve (aka Bruce)
>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>>>Wilfred Kazoks wrote:
>>>
>>>>Just exactly how do you tell a rim is worn out? I mean as far as braking
>>>>surface wear goes.
>>>
>>>The hardmans way is to wait 'til it bursts. Then you know it's rooted.
>>> 'corse, that's likely to happen while braking on a descent with
>>>significant speed ... perhaps not so wise
>>
>>The wheel! She explode!
>
>
> Can do, yes. Mine let go at 5km/h, fortunatly, and was controlable, so
> I didn't drop the bike.
>
>
>>>Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
>>>it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
>>>something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
>>>worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?
>>
>>How significant is a significant concavity?
>
>
> I haven't measuerd any, but maybe .5mm or so? That's a guess, there's
> probably a better guideline out there somewhere.

Fawwwwkk. Mine are heaps more than that. Where the hell is the dial
guage?
>
>
>>One of mine is a little bit concave on one side. Commuter bike --
>>gets used in the wet.
>
>
> And **** brakes? The wear should be pretty even.

Grooved as buggery. It depends on how many large bits of grit go
through the brake.

>
>
>>>You can also check for hairline cracks with your fingernail, if there's
>>>a crack, rim to bin she goes. Post haste. It's not a bad thing to
>>>check every week or so once you have a few 10,000km or so on a rim, or
>>>after a big ride in the wet with some hills. It's wet weather braking
>>>that does the most damage to the rim braking surfaces.
>>
>>ObTimCStereotype: So the obvious solution is to not brake in the wet.
>
>
> That will significantly reduce rim wear, yes


Not the wear on vital Dave components alas

Dave
>

 

[geoffs]

Wilfred wrote:

> Others don't .. as a general rule if the rim is significantly concave
> it's probably ready to go. I'd need to get out a dial guage or
> something to give you measurements, but at a guess maybe a half a mm
> worn away? Suzy? You got a more accurate estimate?

I imagine the best measure would be pulsing brakes. I've never had a set wear out completely. Once they start looking pretty terrible (after 30-40,000km), they get consigned to "spare" bikes, and then don't get ridden so much.

Cheers,

Suzy

The crack along the rim has allways been a bit of a give away to me

Fortunately I've always managed to find them and bin them before having a problem.

Cheers

Geoff

 

[Random Data]

On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 03:12:25 +0000, TimC wrote:

> ObTimCStereotype: So the obvious solution is to not brake in the wet.

ObFad: Disc brakes were a requirement for my current (sorely underused)
commuter for wet weather braking. Though that had more to do with
reliability than maintenance.

And the commuter is underused because my 6km commute ends at a uni, so
I'm taking the hack singlespeed.

--
Dave Hughes | [email protected]
"They're coming to take me away, Ha Ha They're coming to take me away,
Ho Ho"