high flange and 3X?

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by dabac, Sep 18, 2007.

  1. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Hi guys,

    It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a higher number of crosses?
    Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke holes?
    Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?
     
    Tags:


  2. Nate Knutson

    Nate Knutson Guest

    On Sep 18, 1:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    > Hi guys,
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > higher number of crosses?
    > Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > holes?
    > Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?
    >
    > --
    > dabac


    the threads in question were with regard to 4x on 36h wheels
    specifically.
    it's not a question of opinion; 4x on 36h wheels gives overlap with
    many common flange diameters and wheel sizes. it just does.
    download the shareware program wheelcalc to see how it all plays out.
     
  3. On Sep 18, 1:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    > Hi guys,
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > higher number of crosses?
    > Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > holes?
    > Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?


    Wider flange doesn't change spoke angle nearly
    as much as increasing the number of crosses.
    Roughly, because the difference between low and
    high flange hub radius is ~20 mm, while going to
    4x moves the spoke end by 2 rim holes (about 105mm
    on a 700c 36 hole rim).

    Try playing with dimensions in a spoke calculator like
    http://www.appliedthought.com/danny/Spoke/SpokeCalculator.html
    For a typical 700c rim size, changing from low to
    high flange 36 hole 3x changes spoke angle only from 64
    to 68 degrees, while low flange 36 hole 4x is 84 deg.

    Another angle on this problem is that about eight
    bajillion bike boom bikes were built with 36 hole 3x
    wheels on Normandy high flange hubs or the like,
    and they didn't have any spoke crossing problems.
    Some of these wheels are still in operation today
    (I have a couple of them).

    Ben
     
  4. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    I'm not questioning that, I just suspected that if I stated it as a fact I'd get a lot of replies about which combos that actually did work anyhow, which isn't of current interest to me.

    Firewall settings doesn't allow that, but I can see that the spoke pattern exlorer would have answered my question whether 3X would carry a risk of overlap on high flange hubs or not.
     
  5. Chalo

    Chalo Guest

    dabac wrote:
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?


    Cross-four lacing is inappropriate in all cases with less than 36
    spokes. On a 32 spoke wheel, cross-four is beyond tangential,
    actually cutting a chord across the hub flange.

    36 spokes laced cross-four on a low flange overlap each other's
    heads. On a high flange, 36 spokes laced cross-four are OK-- there's
    no head overlap.

    But cross-three works fine for all 32 and 36 spoked wheels, high
    flanges or low. It's a safe bet.

    Chalo
     
  6. Joel Mayes

    Joel Mayes Guest

    On 2007-09-18, dabac <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > Hi guys,
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > higher number of crosses?
    > Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > holes?
    > Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?


    I've had two hub rim combinations where 3X doesn't work in the past
    month, one a high flange track hub on a DT R1.1 rims and the other a
    Sturmey AW on a generic 550A rim.

    Cheers

    Joel


    --
    Human Powered Cycles | High quality servicing and repairs
    [email protected] | Affordable second hand bikes
    (03) 9029 6504 | Bicycle reuse centre
    www.humanpowered.com.au | Mechanical and on-road training and instruction
     
  7. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Thanks, I was sure of the direction of change, but I had no grasp of the order of magnitude.

    Which although undobtedly true is of little help to someone who who wouldn't recognize a Normandy hub in a wheel even if I fell over it...
     
  8. On Sep 18, 2:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    > Hi guys,
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > higher number of crosses?
    > Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > holes?
    > Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?
    >
    > --
    > dabac


    Not really. Spokes don't overlap adjacent heads, closer than LF for
    sure...just built a set of HF Campag onto Campag tubie rims..3 cross.
     
  9. Nate Knutson

    Nate Knutson Guest

    On Sep 18, 2:19 am, Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
    > dabac wrote:
    >
    > But cross-three works fine for all 32 and 36 spoked wheels, high
    > flanges or low. It's a safe bet.


    that's really not a safe generalization at all. don't you own a
    rohloff?
     
  10. dabac wrote:
    > Hi guys,
    >
    > It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > higher number of crosses?
    > Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > holes?
    > Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?


    3x 32-hole high flange works just fine.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig...
    You soon find out the pig likes it!
     
  11. John Everett

    John Everett Guest

    On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:31:08 -0700, "Qui si parla
    Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sep 18, 2:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    >mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    >> Hi guys,
    >>
    >> It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    >> trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    >> Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    >> higher number of crosses?
    >> Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    >> holes?
    >> Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?
    >>
    >> --
    >> dabac

    >
    >Not really. Spokes don't overlap adjacent heads, closer than LF for
    >sure...just built a set of HF Campag onto Campag tubie rims..3 cross.


    To back up what Peter says (not that he needs it), I have two sets of
    36 spoke HF wheels (a Normandy set, and a Nuovo Tipo set) I built
    3-cross.

    BTW, a couple of weeks ago while on our annual trip to the Colorado
    Rockies I was wasting time in Jerry Siegel's shop in Idaho Springs
    waiting for the barber shop next door to open. We were discussing
    replacement rims for my touring bike, which is currently 36 spoke,
    3-cross. Jerry recommended building 4-cross next time. While I
    probably won't follow his advice, at least one professional
    wheel-builder thinks 36 spoke, 4-cross is doable.

    --
    jeverett3<AT>sbcglobal<DOT>net (John V. Everett)
     
  12. On Sep 19, 8:47 am, John Everett
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:31:08 -0700, "Qui si parla
    >
    >
    >
    > Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >On Sep 18, 2:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    > >mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    > >> Hi guys,

    >
    > >> It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > >> trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > >> Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > >> higher number of crosses?
    > >> Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > >> holes?
    > >> Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?

    >
    > >> --
    > >> dabac

    >
    > >Not really. Spokes don't overlap adjacent heads, closer than LF for
    > >sure...just built a set of HF Campag onto Campag tubie rims..3 cross.

    >
    > To back up what Peter says (not that he needs it), I have two sets of
    > 36 spoke HF wheels (a Normandy set, and a Nuovo Tipo set) I built
    > 3-cross.
    >
    > BTW, a couple of weeks ago while on our annual trip to the Colorado
    > Rockies I was wasting time in Jerry Siegel's shop in Idaho Springs
    > waiting for the barber shop next door to open. We were discussing
    > replacement rims for my touring bike, which is currently 36 spoke,
    > 3-cross. Jerry recommended building 4-cross next time. While I
    > probably won't follow his advice, at least one professional
    > wheel-builder thinks 36 spoke, 4-cross is doable.
    >
    > --
    > jeverett3<AT>sbcglobal<DOT>net (John V. Everett)


    Of course it's do-able but like 32 2 cross, it doesn't do anything to
    make the wheel stronger plus there is that spoke over the adjacent
    head thing. I don't go to 4 cross until 40h.
     
  13. Jay Beattie

    Jay Beattie Guest

    On Sep 19, 7:47 am, John Everett
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    > On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:31:08 -0700, "Qui si parla
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >On Sep 18, 2:19 am, dabac <[email protected]
    > >mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:
    > >> Hi guys,

    >
    > >> It appears that a fairly accepted opinion is that 4X can give you
    > >> trouble with spoke overlap, so how about 3X on a high-flange hub?
    > >> Won't a wider flange influence spoke angles the same way as going to a
    > >> higher number of crosses?
    > >> Or is this effect countered by the bigger distances between spoke
    > >> holes?
    > >> Or am I missing something in the visualisation of the geometry?

    >
    > >> --
    > >> dabac

    >
    > >Not really. Spokes don't overlap adjacent heads, closer than LF for
    > >sure...just built a set of HF Campag onto Campag tubie rims..3 cross.

    >
    > To back up what Peter says (not that he needs it), I have two sets of
    > 36 spoke HF wheels (a Normandy set, and a Nuovo Tipo set) I built
    > 3-cross.
    >
    > BTW, a couple of weeks ago while on our annual trip to the Colorado
    > Rockies I was wasting time in Jerry Siegel's shop in Idaho Springs
    > waiting for the barber shop next door to open. We were discussing
    > replacement rims for my touring bike, which is currently 36 spoke,
    > 3-cross. Jerry recommended building 4-cross next time. While I
    > probably won't follow his advice, at least one professional
    > wheel-builder thinks 36 spoke, 4-cross is doable.


    Gawd, this was done all the time 20+ years ago (at least on low or
    standard (Phil) flange hubs). I still have a bunch of 308/310mm (?)
    spokes sitting around after building a pair of 4X/36 hole on Weinmann
    Concave rims aka boat anchors. They also lacked hooked sides and were
    soon retired. I built several sets of Mod 58 4X/36 hole on Phil hubs
    in the late 70s. The big claim was that 4X was more plush and
    comfortable than 3x, which was harsh and for racing bikes. As if
    anyone but the pea-princess could tell. I was ostracized for actually
    building touring wheels 3X. I regained some cred by tying and
    soldering -- now viewed as voo-doo by the Book. Whether it worked or
    not, I used silver bearing solder, which made for old school wheel
    bling-bling. Beats paying a mint for weird carbon spokes. -- Jay
    Beattie.
     
Loading...
Loading...