F
On Aug 6, 8:55 am, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Dacey wrote:
> > Cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
>
> > On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:22:17 -0700, jim beam
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> they may indeed, but inspection doesn't reveal any evidence of such a
> >> process being used. compare d.t. spokes, sapim and wheelsmith with a
> >> sufficiently strong magnifier. spokes that are drawn or hammered show
> >> distinctive marks evidencing each production process - as you will see.
> >> wheelsmith don't. they are featureless - just like you'd expect from
> >> something with the marks polished out. and polishing something that has
> >> been drawn or hammered makes no financial sense since finish quality is
> >> already sufficient.
>
> > So let me understand your reasoning: since Wheelsmith's butted spokes
> > have a finish that's better than you think they need to be, that's
> > proof positive that they're lying about (or worse, that they don't
> > understand themselves) the fabrication process?
>
> at best, that's too simplistic. at worst, that's contrived and
> misleading. so here's what i suggest: provide samples of all 3 spokes
> to a metallurgy lab and have then do the metallography for you. the
> microstructure will reveal all.
>
> you can also try the magnet test, but that's not only more subjective to
> the tester, but it's non-definitive. should give you a rough idea
> though. use a strong magnet like one out an old hard drive. [cold
> worked "forged" austenite of certain grades becomes martensitic, thus
> more magnetic - the center sections should be more magnetic if formed by
> a hammering or drawing technique that their description implies.]
I'd say that "what you suggest" is up to the guy who claims he knows
more than Wheelsmith does, based on his own cursory look at their
spokes.
Wheelsmith's reputation is solid, jim beam. Your is not. If you want
to salvage something from this, it's up to you to provide conclusive
proof that Wheelsmith doesn't know how Wheelsmith makes spokes.
Your move.
- Frank Krygowski
> John Dacey wrote:
> > Cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
>
> > On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:22:17 -0700, jim beam
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> they may indeed, but inspection doesn't reveal any evidence of such a
> >> process being used. compare d.t. spokes, sapim and wheelsmith with a
> >> sufficiently strong magnifier. spokes that are drawn or hammered show
> >> distinctive marks evidencing each production process - as you will see.
> >> wheelsmith don't. they are featureless - just like you'd expect from
> >> something with the marks polished out. and polishing something that has
> >> been drawn or hammered makes no financial sense since finish quality is
> >> already sufficient.
>
> > So let me understand your reasoning: since Wheelsmith's butted spokes
> > have a finish that's better than you think they need to be, that's
> > proof positive that they're lying about (or worse, that they don't
> > understand themselves) the fabrication process?
>
> at best, that's too simplistic. at worst, that's contrived and
> misleading. so here's what i suggest: provide samples of all 3 spokes
> to a metallurgy lab and have then do the metallography for you. the
> microstructure will reveal all.
>
> you can also try the magnet test, but that's not only more subjective to
> the tester, but it's non-definitive. should give you a rough idea
> though. use a strong magnet like one out an old hard drive. [cold
> worked "forged" austenite of certain grades becomes martensitic, thus
> more magnetic - the center sections should be more magnetic if formed by
> a hammering or drawing technique that their description implies.]
I'd say that "what you suggest" is up to the guy who claims he knows
more than Wheelsmith does, based on his own cursory look at their
spokes.
Wheelsmith's reputation is solid, jim beam. Your is not. If you want
to salvage something from this, it's up to you to provide conclusive
proof that Wheelsmith doesn't know how Wheelsmith makes spokes.
Your move.
- Frank Krygowski
