mavic rims don't *all* suck

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Dvt, Feb 26, 2004.

  1. Tim McNamara

    Tim McNamara Guest

    [email protected] (Carl Fogel) writes:

    > Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >> The "right" failure mode is one that is predictable and non-catastrophic. Non-anodized and
    >> socketed aluminum rims have the right failure mode in that failure is predictable from braking
    >> area wear. Anodized rims, introducing new catastrophic failure modes, do not have the "right"
    >> failure mode.
    >
    > Dear Tim,
    >
    > Do you have any pictures of brake-wear failure, catastrophic or otherwise?

    No.

    > Carl: I've been reading some of the RBT threads for lunchtime diversion recently. I was surprised
    > that folks with much more cycling experience than mine had never seen worn out rims before.

    This of course is dependent on what type of conditions people ride in, as well as how much they
    ride, how many bikes and wheels they have, etc.

    > Attached are photos of a completely depreciated Mavic 221 rim. Its life was just over 2 seasons of
    > mountain biking in southern Maine. For me a season is 6-7 months, 2 to 3 rides/week, 2-3
    > hours/ride. It's about typical rim life for me, only the failure mode is unusual. Usually I
    > replace rims when they've gotten a major ding, which becomes easier and easier to do as the rim
    > wears. This one somehow never got that abuse. It failed while I was trying to seat a studded tire,
    > at about 60 psi. As an outcome, I have gotten a bit quicker to replace rims when they start to
    > flare out, and keep ear protectors handy by the floor pump!

    Rims don't "flare out" with age. The "flare" of the braking surface is due to abrasion wear causing
    a concavity. Mountain bikers, riding often in muddy and/or gritty conditions with frequent braking,
    are probably more prone to this than roadies. Heck, on some of my rides in rural areas I can go for
    long periods of time and not have to brake. And I don't like riding in the rain, so I rarely do so.
    Hence I have never worn our a sidewall from braking in the 30+ years I've been a bike nut.

    > http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/rim.jpg
    > http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/rimdetail.jpg

    Unfortunately I can't see how much braking wear was present from these photos. That's the longest
    failed section like that I've ever seen, though. I'll bet it was a surprise for Dave! With a line
    that consistent, I'd guess there's an acute wear groove from a bit of gravel embedded in the pad or
    from a worn-down pad that exposed the metal holder.

    > Whatever happened to this rim, it looks catastrophic. It would be nice if someone had close-up
    > pictures of a non-anodized rim failing from brake-wear.

    Yup, it would. I don't have any. I'd expect them to look basically the same as this, however.
     


  2. Peter

    Peter Guest

    Tim McNamara wrote:
    > Peter <[email protected]> writes:
    >>Tim McNamara wrote:

    >>>Hmm. A nice shiny clear anodized layer, would you say? That flakes off with the slightest
    >>>scraping with a razor blade? That's what's on my MA2s. And it's unlike any anodizing I've
    >>>ever seen.
    >>
    >> From the bikepro.com description:
    >>
    >>"The MA2 is a Box shaped extrusion, with the three exterior surfaces, both side walls and the hub
    >>facing side of the spoke bed wall high polished to a bright Silver aluminum then Clear anodized to
    >>harden and preserve the finish." Doesn't sound like a coating that would flake off.
    >
    > Anodizing is not applied to the metal as a coating, and hence it doesn't flake off like this.

    Precisely my point.

    > Anodizing is a chemical conversion of the surface of the metal. Nothing I've seen in the reading
    > I've been able to do indicates that anything like "clear" anodizing exists (but perhaps I've just
    > missed it).

    Google took 0.32 seconds to come up with about 16000 references to the term "clear anodized" - it
    doesn't seem to be particularly esoteric.

    > The Alodine process seems to be able to produce a clear finish, but that is an applied coating.

    Which has nothing to do with anodizing, the subject under discussion.
     
  3. Tim McNamara

    Tim McNamara Guest

    "Mike S." <[email protected]> writes:

    > Funny how we haven't been bashing on Campy anodized rims, just Mavics... Interesting that.

    Well, that's because this thread got started by a comment by me that Mavic rims- other than the MA2-
    suck. That was made priarily on the experience of many Mavic rims failing in my personal use, and
    because they led the industry in the move to anodizing. However, I'm really bashing on *all*
    anodized rims, not just Mavic. I've had Campy, Fir and Sun anodized rims crack (the Sun actually
    failed catstrophically, ripping out a half-inch chunk of rim at a spoke hole; the others have just
    cracked and were spotted before it got that bad).

    Now, there may be (as is often the case) multiple contributors to a failure. A 100 lb rider with
    a zero-dish, 48 spoke wheel may never see a rim fail by cracking. A 200 lb rider, on a 9 speed
    wheel with
    32/28/16/etc spokes may see lots of cracked rims. As I think I've mentioned, I have a 36 spoke zero
    dish wheel built with an MA3 rim that has thus far lasted 1000 miles- the point at which
    most other anodized rims I've tried have cracked. And I have a silver anodized Open Pro, 7
    speed, that hasn't failed yet but has an unknown quantity of miles on it (this has at
    various times been the winter hack wheel and also my cyclo-cross wheel- it has a Bullseye
    hub so it's easy to swap back and forth from 126 mm to 130 mm).

    My recipe for a short service life and premature failure by cracking, then, is an anodized rim
    (especially one with only a single ferrule rather than an actual socket for the spoke nipple), 32 or
    less spokes, and 8/9/10 speed with a 130 mm OLN ridden by a rider who weighs more than 180 lbs.
    Changing any of those factors can change service life. IMHO, however, the greatest factor in these
    is anodizing. Eliminate that and the majority of premature failures by cracking go away.
     
  4. Tim McNamara

    Tim McNamara Guest

    dvt <[email protected]> writes:

    > The sections of rim that *didn't* fail are noticeably concave to the thumb. I hope to get a photo
    > just like Andy's to show the curvature. I would still like to know how to tell if a rim's wall is
    > too thin, preferably without removing the tire. The calibrated thumb trick is beyond my feeble end-
    > user capacity.

    No, actualy, your thumb is pretty calibrated. However, you can use a straightedge on the rim, shine
    a light from behind, and get a pretty good idea how much metal is worn away. Many rims, and
    eventually all, will come with some kind of wear indicator to make this simple, probably by the end
    of this year.
     
  5. Tim McNamara wrote:

    > As I commented to the other person to cite the BikePro Web site, I have not found anything in the
    > available literature on the Internet to indicate that clear anodizing is even possible. Clear
    > coatings seem to be just that- applied coatings. Anodizing is not an applied coating but a
    > conversion of the metal itself into a ceramic. Applied coatings seem not to provoke the same
    > problems as anodizing- for example, we have not seen numerous reports of cracked powder coated
    > rims in this newsgroup or other media sources.

    http://www.ventprod.com/anodize.htm

    Apparently "clear anodizing" is just anodizing without added colour pigments.

    --
    Benjamin Lewis

    Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.
    - Mark Twain
     
  6. Jobst Brandt

    Jobst Brandt Guest

    A points to consider about rim failures:

    If a rim flares from too thinly worn sidewalls, then it must be operating at yield stress, a
    condition that WILL cause failure in a few thousand loaded wheel rotations. That is about three to
    six kilometers. The tendency to spread rim sidewalls is also largely affected by tire size and
    pressure, larger cross section tire casings pulling on the rim at a lower (more lateral) angle.

    Having ridden minimal thickness rims for more than 500 km without failure, I am convinced that
    inflation pressure and rolling forces are not the culprit and that they are insignificant for a 25mm
    cross section tire. Changing wire bead, closely fitting tires also has not caused rim deformation.

    Jobst Brandt [email protected]
     
  7. Jay Beattie

    Jay Beattie Guest

    "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Mike S." <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    > > Funny how we haven't been bashing on Campy anodized rims,
    just
    > > Mavics... Interesting that.
    >
    > Well, that's because this thread got started by a comment by me
    that
    > Mavic rims- other than the MA2- suck. That was made priarily
    on the
    > experience of many Mavic rims failing in my personal use, and
    because
    > they led the industry in the move to anodizing. However, I'm
    really
    > bashing on *all* anodized rims, not just Mavic. I've had
    Campy, Fir
    > and Sun anodized rims crack (the Sun actually failed
    catstrophically,
    > ripping out a half-inch chunk of rim at a spoke hole; the
    others have
    > just cracked and were spotted before it got that bad).
    >
    > Now, there may be (as is often the case) multiple contributors
    to a
    > failure. A 100 lb rider with a zero-dish, 48 spoke wheel may
    never
    > see a rim fail by cracking. A 200 lb rider, on a 9 speed wheel
    with
    > 32/28/16/etc spokes may see lots of cracked rims. As I think
    I've
    > mentioned, I have a 36 spoke zero dish wheel built with an MA3
    rim
    > that has thus far lasted 1000 miles- the point at which most
    other
    > anodized rims I've tried have cracked. And I have a silver
    anodized
    > Open Pro, 7 speed, that hasn't failed yet but has an unknown
    quantity
    > of miles on it (this has at various times been the winter hack
    wheel
    > and also my cyclo-cross wheel- it has a Bullseye hub so it's
    easy to
    > swap back and forth from 126 mm to 130 mm).

    Dang, Tim, you must have some really bad luck. I raced at over 200lbs for probably the last 5 or 6
    years of my unillustrious career and got more than 1K out of my Open 4CDs/SUP/GP4s etc. The last
    pair I had did give up the ghost in the usual giant anodizing conspiracy way by cracking at the
    sidewalls and spoke holes -- but it had a lot more than 1K on it.

    So when are we going to talk about all the NON-anodized hub flanges I ripped up? That is more of a
    pain financially than a stinking rim that is near the end of its life anyway. -- Jay Beattie.
     
  8. Dianne_1234

    Dianne_1234 Guest

    On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:43:13 GMT, [email protected]
    wrote:

    >It's the failure mode that is under discussion here, not the number of miles.

    I've asked how many miles is enough. I'd take two or three seasons for a racing bike rim.

    >Failure mode. That's what it's about.

    I pick spoke hole cracks. Separating side walls sounds more scary to me!
     
  9. Dianne_1234

    Dianne_1234 Guest

    On 1 Mar 2004 11:03:34 -0800, [email protected] (Carl Fogel)
    wrote:

    >When the same model of rim is offered both anodized and unanodized, the anodized rim ends up a bit
    >heavier after its bath in electrified acid:
    >
    >"Hard anodizing is said to increase a rim's rigidity between 10 and 20 per cent. Somehow that seems
    >a little high, but is certainly adds something to a rim's weight, as the Rim table demonstrates."
    >
    > http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimover.html
    >
    >The rim table itself is at:
    >
    > http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimtables.html
    >
    >The first rim in the table, for example, goes from 409 grams with clear anodizing to 413 grams with
    >hard anodizing. Presumably, the unanodized original would have been a svelte 400-405 grams.
    >
    >Carl Fogel

    Careful -- individual rims vary in weight even with the same finish.

    For examples, see http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/weights.htm#clincherrims

    Same model rims weighting Matrix ISO-C II 392,398,405,406,411,412,440 Mavic Open 4 CD
    412,456,456,437,434 Mavic Reflex 422,427,427,439 Mavic Open Pro 405,424,424,437,440,441,445

    I'm not sure how many rims bike pro measured, but it would be simple to find one rim heavier than
    another and (erroneously) conclude it was due to different finish.
     
  10. Jim Beam

    Jim Beam Guest

    Matt O'Toole wrote:
    > Carl Fogel wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Well, not exactly. When the same model of rim is offered both anodized and unanodized, the
    >>anodized rim ends up a bit heavier after its bath in electrified acid:
    >>
    >>"Hard anodizing is said to increase a rim's rigidity between 10 and 20 per cent. Somehow that
    >>seems a little high, but is certainly adds something to a rim's weight, as the Rim table
    >>demonstrates."
    >>
    >> http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimover.html
    >>
    >>The rim table itself is at:
    >>
    >> http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimtables.html
    >>
    >>The first rim in the table, for example, goes from 409 grams with clear anodizing to 413 grams
    >>with hard anodizing. Presumably, the unanodized original would have been a svelte 400-405 grams.
    >
    >
    > First, I wouldn't take Bike Pro as the ultimate authority on anything. It may be useful as a
    > general reference for ID'ing old parts, etc. But the stuff you just quoted is just plain
    > ridiculous. Gee, which type of anodizing adds more rigidity, Japanese or French? Maybe Italian,
    > where they age the rims in the wine cellar, alongside the salamis, and tubular tires...

    anodizing does makes the surface harder, but you're right, it's a stretch to claim it makes the
    whole rim stiffer.

    >
    > I don't know how much anodizing affects weight. But those weight differences could easily be due
    > to normal production tolerances. When making extruded parts like rims, the dies wear. Early
    > production is thinner in cross section and lighter, becoming fatter and heavier over a production
    > run. Eventually the dies are replaced, and the process starts all over.
    >
    > Now, why the anodized rims would weigh more than the unanodized ones -- maybe the unanodized ones
    > (from which the weights were taken) were from an earlier, lighter batch. Maybe this is on purpose
    > -- to leave you the impression that anodizing "adds something." Or maybe it's all just typical
    > brochure bullshit.

    anodizing /does/ add weight, regardless of the rim's "position" in the production run, because of
    the weight of the oxygen that's chemically combined with the aluminum. clearly, whether there is a
    significant weight gain depends on the extent of anodizing.

    >
    > Matt O.
     
  11. Jim Beam

    Jim Beam Guest

    dvt wrote: <snip>

    > I would still like to know how to tell if a rim's wall is too thin, preferably without removing
    > the tire.

    with older style rims, you're stuck with physical measurement. no need to remove the tire if you
    know the initial rim width.

    all modern rims have wear indicators - european law.
     
  12. Jim Beam

    Jim Beam Guest

    i think the quoted weights are averages for larger samples.

    if you did a before & after anodizing for just one rim, it would be heavier after - but you very
    sensibly point out the /significant/ variance in individual items.

    dianne_1234 wrote:
    > On 1 Mar 2004 11:03:34 -0800, [email protected] (Carl Fogel) wrote:
    >
    >
    >>When the same model of rim is offered both anodized and unanodized, the anodized rim ends up a bit
    >>heavier after its bath in electrified acid:
    >>
    >>"Hard anodizing is said to increase a rim's rigidity between 10 and 20 per cent. Somehow that
    >>seems a little high, but is certainly adds something to a rim's weight, as the Rim table
    >>demonstrates."
    >>
    >>http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimover.html
    >>
    >>The rim table itself is at:
    >>
    >>http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/rimtables.html
    >>
    >>The first rim in the table, for example, goes from 409 grams with clear anodizing to 413 grams
    >>with hard anodizing. Presumably, the unanodized original would have been a svelte 400-405 grams.
    >>
    >>Carl Fogel
    >
    >
    > Careful -- individual rims vary in weight even with the same finish.
    >
    > For examples, see http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/weights.htm#clincherrims
    >
    > Same model rims weighting Matrix ISO-C II 392,398,405,406,411,412,440 Mavic Open 4 CD
    > 412,456,456,437,434 Mavic Reflex 422,427,427,439 Mavic Open Pro 405,424,424,437,440,441,445
    >
    > I'm not sure how many rims bike pro measured, but it would be simple to find one rim heavier than
    > another and (erroneously) conclude it was due to different finish.
     
  13. Carl Fogel

    Carl Fogel Guest

    Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > carlfogel <[email protected]> writes:
    >
    > > http://www.bikepro.com/products/rims/mavicroad.html
    > >
    > > "The Mavic MA2 is a double wall 700c road racing rim. As stated the series of alloy used for
    > > this rim kept secret. The MA2 is a Box shaped extrusion, with the three exterior surfaces, both
    > > side walls and the hub facing side of the spoke bed wall high polished to a bright Silver
    > > aluminum then Clear anodized to harden and preserve the finish."
    >
    > Spend some time reading through the BikePro Web site and you'll find that they are not a reliable
    > source of technical information. Their catalog was ground-breakingly informative, oh, about 10
    > years ago, but contained much myth, lore and legend.
    >
    > > The difference between what BikePro calls clear and hard anodizing appears to be a matter of
    > > depth. The clear anodizing was used on numerous other rims by other manufacturers, too.
    >
    > As I commented to the other person to cite the BikePro Web site, I have not found anything in the
    > available literature on the Internet to indicate that clear anodizing is even possible. Clear
    > coatings seem to be just that- applied coatings. Anodizing is not an applied coating but a
    > conversion of the metal itself into a ceramic. Applied coatings seem not to provoke the same
    > problems as anodizing- for example, we have not seen numerous reports of cracked powder coated
    > rims in this newsgroup or other media sources.

    Dear Tim,

    Anodizing (what we're calling clear anodizing) and hard anodizing seem to be well-established terms.
    You can see them used, for example, in the study cited by John Everett in the current thread "Re:
    Tubular rim glue ???":

    http://www.engr.ukans.edu/~ktl/bicycle/Cusa1.pdf

    The seven different glues are shown in the charts, with different bars showing how well each works
    with anodized (clear) and hard anodized rims.

    Wolber, Pana, and 3M stick better to anodized (clear) rims. Two kinds of Vittoria, Clement, and
    Continental stick better to hard anodized rims. The differences might be due to how the glue
    attaches to the dye, since both surfaces are anodized. Or the differences might be due to different
    kinds of acid used--the sort of thing explained in the BikePro rim link.

    The BikePro site description of the two degrees of anodizing seems to be quite plain, clear, and
    factual. Track glue seems to notice a difference between the two approaches.

    There's lots of information about this on the internet. Here's a link to a directory with four
    companies that offer clear anodizing:

    http://www.aluminumanodizing.com

    By all accounts, it's just a thin anodized layer without any dye added. Leave the aluminum piece in
    the electrified acid bath longer, add some optional dye, and you have hard anodizing. Different dyes
    and different acids might lead to interesting differences in fatigue and track glue adhesion.

    Let us know if you find a different explanation of what clear anodizing is.

    Carl Fogel
     
  14. carlfogel

    carlfogel New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Dianne,

    Yes, you and Tim and Damon (and BikePro) are correct
    that the weight of individual rims of the same model
    will often vary.

    Damon Rinard, it should be noted, introduces his rim
    weight table by explaining that he measured things
    over a period of years with two different scales.
    Within individual models, there's no separation by
    finish, metal, design, or number of spoke holes.

    For the Mavic MA2, for example, Damon's table just
    lists these weights: 444,451,466,454,481,481. This
    implies that the rim weights vary about 10% in what
    should be identical rims.

    But this implication is misleading.

    As the BikePro rim table shows, the MA2 was available
    in 32, 36, and 40 hole drillings and in three sub-models
    with different weights: a 464 gram two-piece design, a
    double wall 473.5 gram model, and a chubby 484 gram
    stainless steel version.

    To use an analogy, Damon's table would list wildly
    different weights for Smith & Wesson .38 snubnose
    revolvers. The BikePro table would break them down
    into lightweight aluminum hammerless 5-shot models,
    heavier standard steel 6-shot models, and nickel-plated
    behemoths.

    I appreciate Damon's effort, but his rim weight table
    doesn't make the distinctions that the BikePro table
    does. He seems to have weighed whatever parts he could
    get his hands on and trusted the labels. (I'd have done
    the same thing--until your post prompted me to look,
    I assumed that an MA2 was an MA2.)

    BikePro, however, knew that the same rim models came
    in distinctly different sub-models with different
    anodizing, drilling, design, and even metals.

    The BikePro table looks more authoritative.

    That said, my point, supported by BikePro's tables
    and comments, was just that anodizing any rim will
    increase its weight.

    To use an analogy, the standard Fogel varies from 190
    to 195 pounds, but always weighs more after making
    a pig of himself. Just as adding spaghetti to a Fogel
    increases his weight, so does adding oxygen to aluminum.

    Like Benedict Arnold, I'm always willing to switch sides
    for the fun of it, so now I'll point out that the actual
    anodizing process might conceivably work out the
    other way.

    There is, after all, extensive cleaning and perhaps
    etching of the aluminum piece. All this preparation
    might remove a thin layer of aluminum before the piece
    is dangled in the electrified acid bath. If so, the
    amount of raw original metal removed might equal or
    exceed the increase involved in anodization.

    But I doubt it. The BikePro tables show a fairly
    consistent pattern of weight gain when the same rim
    models move from clear to hard anodizing.

    I also doubt that the increase is significant (it looks
    like about 1%). Drilling fewer spoke holes, for example,
    will also lead to slightly heavier rims, but the faint
    obesity of the undrilled areas is more than offset by
    the absence of the corresponding spokes.

    Of course, I may misunderstand the oxidizing process,
    but so far I haven't seen any posts explaining how to
    oxidize an aluminum surface without adding to its weight.

    Carl Fogel
     
  15. Dvt

    Dvt Guest

    Carl Fogel wrote:
    > Wolber, Pana, and 3M stick better to anodized (clear) rims. Two kinds of Vittoria, Clement, and
    > Continental stick better to hard anodized rims. The differences might be due to how the glue
    > attaches to the dye, since both surfaces are anodized. Or the differences might be due to
    > different kinds of acid used--the sort of thing explained in the BikePro rim link.

    Different types of acid are used in different types of anodizing -- Types I, II, and III. Type III
    anodizing is called hard anodizing. Hard anodizing always imparts a color other than "clear"
    regardless of dye. The other types of anodizing can be made more transparent. I think it's wrong to
    categorize anodizing in two bins: clear and hard. See http://www.anodizing.org/reference_guide.html
    for more detail. Sorry about the poorly formatted tables.

    The simplified process goes something like this:
    1. surface prep
    2. anodize
    3. dye
    4. seal

    The anodizing process leaves pores into which the dye penetrates. The sealing process closes those
    pores, locking the dye in. The sealing process improves corrosion resistance, so I'd be surprised if
    any rims were not sealed. So the adhesion properties probably don't relate to the dye.

    The different types of anodizing do leave a slightly different type of surface composition. [1] That
    may make a difference in the adhesion properties.

    > By all accounts, it's just a thin anodized layer without any dye added. Leave the aluminum piece
    > in the electrified acid bath longer, add some optional dye, and you have hard anodizing. Different
    > dyes and different acids might lead to interesting differences in fatigue and track glue adhesion.
    >
    > Let us know if you find a different explanation of what clear anodizing is.

    You can probably use Type I, IB, IC, or II to achieve clear anodizing. See the link I gave above.
    Process variants among those types include different acid baths (chromic, sulfuric, and others);
    different voltages; different temperatures; and probably some variations in the temporal application
    of these parameters (i.e. sudden application of low voltage in Type IB vs. a gradual increase to
    higher voltage in type I).

    Summary: "clear anodizing" doesn't tell me how a part was anodized. Even hard anodizing varies
    depending on the alloy anodized. So these two terms (clear and hard) are not sufficient to pinpoint
    the properties of anodized aluminum.

    Hard (type III) anodizing is usually the thickest coating of the available options, so that may be a
    useful bit of information in this context.

    [5] International Journal of Adhesion & Adhesives 22 (2002) 143–150 Pre-treatment of AA6060
    aluminium alloyfor adhesive bonding
    O. Lundera,b,*, B. Olsenb, K. Nisancioglub (I have a pdf, so it's probably available on the web if
    you google)

    --
    Dave dvt at psu dot edu
     
  16. Dvt

    Dvt Guest

    Tim McNamara wrote:
    > No, actualy, your thumb is pretty calibrated. However, you can use a straightedge on the rim,
    > shine a light from behind, and get a pretty good idea how much metal is worn away.

    [email protected] wrote:
    > A points to consider about rim failures:
    >
    > If a rim flares from too thinly worn sidewalls, then it must be operating at yield stress, a
    > condition that WILL cause failure in a few thousand loaded wheel rotations. That is about three to
    > six kilometers.

    If a rim wall is concave, it's time to replace it. Concavity (I had to look that one up) is well
    sensed with the average fingertip. I believe that one.

    So if I can feel that a brake wall is concave, pitch it. Did I get it right?

    --
    Dave dvt at psu dot edu
     
  17. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 18:10:05 -0600, Tim McNamara
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >mentioned, I have a 36 spoke zero dish wheel built with an MA3 rim that has thus far lasted
    >1000 miles- the point at which most other anodized rims I've tried have cracked. And I have a
    >silver anodized

    How much do you weigh?

    I weigh 210, ride on sometimes rough roads, do not "ride lightly", and currently have 500 miles on
    my Mavic CXP-21 rims. I think they're anodized. They're colored black, except, of course, at the
    machined braking surfaces, and possibly inside -- I don't feel like dismounting a tire to find out
    at the moment.

    I'll forgot to comment when I hit 1000 miles. I promise.
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
  18. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    >dvt wrote:
    >> would still like to know how to tell if a rim's wall is too thin, preferably without removing
    >> the tire.

    I would like to know too.

    On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:13:21 GMT, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
    >with older style rims, you're stuck with physical measurement. no need to remove the tire if you
    >know the initial rim width.
    >
    >all modern rims have wear indicators - european law.

    What does a bicycle rim wear indicator look like? My Mavic CXP-21 rims are only a few years old, and
    may have indicators, but I don't see anything I can identify as such.
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
  19. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    On 29 Feb 2004 17:55:31 -0800, [email protected] (Carl Fogel)
    wrote:
    >There's an interesting section on how Japanese and U.S. hard anodizing differs at the very end of:
    >
    > http://www.bikepro.com/products/metals/alum.html

    Just a few minutes ago, catching up on this thread, I read this message:
    http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=veO0c.25457%246K.16459%40nwrddc02.gnilink.net

    I guess this sarcasm isn't so preposterous after all: Matt O'Toole wrote :Gee, which type of
    anodizing adds more :rigidity, Japanese or French? Maybe Italian, where they age the rims in the
    :wine cellar, alongside the salamis, and tubular tires...
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
  20. Jim Beam

    Jim Beam Guest

    afaik, there are 3 types:

    1. the circumferential groove type like mavix cxp22 - runs all the way around the braking surface.
    once you get to the bottom of the groove... etc.

    2. the sidewall drilling type like shimano r540 - small perpendicular drilling in the side wall.
    once the drilling has worn away... etc.

    3. the embedded type like mavic x717 - invisible until worn. kind of radial notch. not sure how it's
    made, but i'd guess it's a radial drilling from the rim edge.

    Rick Onanian wrote:
    >>dvt wrote:
    >>
    >>>would still like to know how to tell if a rim's wall is too thin, preferably without removing
    >>>the tire.
    >
    >
    > I would like to know too.
    >
    > On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:13:21 GMT, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>with older style rims, you're stuck with physical measurement. no need to remove the tire if you
    >>know the initial rim width.
    >>
    >>all modern rims have wear indicators - european law.
    >
    >
    > What does a bicycle rim wear indicator look like? My Mavic CXP-21 rims are only a few years old,
    > and may have indicators, but I don't see anything I can identify as such.
    > --
    > Rick Onanian
     
Loading...
Loading...