Need a new Tubular rim- Advice please

[PeterF]

I broke a tubular rim this past weekend (Campy Barcelona 32sp) and need a replacement and someone to build it. My hubs are 2006 Campy Record 10 and my intended use of the rim will be training with larger volume tires (24/25mm). I prefer low profile and I value durablitly and strength over all. These wheels need to take a big rider over bumpy roads.

My thoughts are Mavic Reflex CD or Ambrosio (Montreal or Nemesis), but am open to other suggestions. I want to work with my 32 hole hubs (which may not be ideal for me (200+lbs), but its what I have and will be using bigger tires too.

My Barcelona cracked while I was using a 22mm tires. I don't recall hitting anything with them, but an eyelet tore out and there are 12 cracks around a number of the remaining spokes. Oddly I used the Barcelona/22mm tire combo all of last year with no issue, so I'm not sure why they broke.

Suggestions please?

 

[alfeng]

How was the wheel originally laced?

 

[PeterF]

How was the wheel originally laced?

3x. I bought it with no history of the build. The spokes appear to be double butted but not sure what gauge.

 

[alfeng]

3x. I bought it with no history of the build. The spokes appear to be double butted but not sure what gauge.

THAT is what I thought ...

AND, despite the conventional wisdom to lace wheels as your wheelset was laced, I suspect the reason the wheel failed was because it was laced with double-butted spokes ... probably, without the assistance of a tensiometer (which is not necessary, but it is a beneficial tool for the wheelbuilder to use) either when the wheel was originally built or when the wheel was trued at some subsequent point in time.

While 99% of the people who think they know how to build wheels OR who build wheels will tell you to use double-butted spokes, I believe that is misinformation promulgated by Jobst Brandt, et al, because they have read him say (in so many words) to use double butted spokes.

Now, if 'I' were being paid to build a wheel for someone else then I would probably recommend double-butted 14-15-14 spokes, too, because I could charge a premium AND not worry about the actual build as much as if I were to lace the wheel with straight 14 gauge spokes ...

There are other reasons why I believe that using double-butted 14-15-14 are wrong thinking ... but, people thought the Earth was the center of the Cosmos for Millennia, too.

Basically, using double-butted spokes is a religion!
​

While we await the horde of people who will tell you to have the wheel laced x3 on both sides with 14-15-14 spokes let me say that if 'I' wanted what I perceive to be the best wheel for someone over 200 lbs (or, lighter), then I would probably spec straight 14g spokes laced x4 on the drive side & x3 on the non-driveside OR x3 on the driveside & x2 on the non-driveside.

BTW. As you probably know, a 36h rear wheel would be better, but you have committed yourself to a 32h rear wheel ... that's okay, but not the best option.

FYI. To the best of my knowledge, Campagnolo rims used to be made by AMBROSIO ... I presume that the alloy rims which are on Campagnolo's wheels are still made by Ambrosio ... whether you want to treat it as an endorsement or a reason not to use them, I think Ambrosio rims are better than MAVIC rims ... but, MAVIC rims are okay ...

It could be difficult to find a set of 32h Ambrosio Montreal rims, BTW; but, I presume you have a source since you mention it as one of your options.

 

[PeterF]

The wheelset with brand new Record hubs was $325 so I could sort of live with the mystery build since the hubs alone were worth it BUT part of me wanted to send the set to a builder to have them done right. Also my choice of 22mm tires was poor but i wanted to wear them out before installing some 24mm tires that I have.

I believe a good builder is worthe his/her weight in gold. A few years ago Dave Ornee built a set of wheels for me (Record with Velocity Aeroheads/OC) that survived all the cobbled roads of the Tour of Flanders (2-3 times in some cases) as well as two trips through the Forest of Arenberg with 25mm clinchers. After 3 years and a good Northern Classic beating I finally had to take the spoke wrench to the rear to true it up a tiny bit.

I have seen the Montreal in a couple shops including one in the UK. I was looking for the Nemesis but the Montreal seems to be similar only about half the price. I think the Nemesis may provide a little more heft, but I'm not sure.

 

[Peter@vecchios]

3x. I bought it with no history of the build. The spokes appear to be double butted but not sure what gauge.

Ambrosio rims are really the best in the field.
http://www.ital-tecno.com
Campagnolo rims, Montreal and Barcelonas were built by Campagnolo are were prone to cracking.
From this wheelbuilder(about 7000 wheels and counting), use double butted spokes, laced 3 cross for 32 and 36 hole, brass nipps. Use a tensionmeter to ensure the tension is 100 KGF on the right/frive side. Use a good lube between the nipp and rim and I use boiled lindseed oil between the nipple and spoke.

No need to mix lacing, 4 cross on 36 overlaps the flange too much, does nothing. Double butted spokes make for a more durable wheel when compared to straight gauge spokes. Again from my 25 years of experience in building wheels.

Don't use a "CD' or hard anodized rim when mixed with eyelets. The rim is hard anodized then the eyelet is installed causing micro cracks around the eyelet which can lead to cracking. The Barcelona and Montreal were single eyelet plus really light so cracking was common.

 

[Peter@vecchios]

THAT is what I thought ...

AND, despite the conventional wisdom to lace wheels as your wheelset was laced, I suspect the reason the wheel failed was because it was laced with double-butted spokes ... probably, without the assistance of a tensiometer (which is not necessary, but it is a beneficial tool for the wheelbuilder to use) either when the wheel was originally built or when the wheel was trued at some subsequent point in time.

While 99% of the people who think they know how to build wheels OR who build wheels will tell you to use double-butted spokes, I believe that is misinformation promulgated by Jobst Brandt, et al, because they have read him say (in so many words) to use double butted spokes.

Now, if 'I' were being paid to build a wheel for someone else then I would probably recommend double-butted 14-15-14 spokes, too, because I could charge a premium AND not worry about the actual build as much as if I were to lace the wheel with straight 14 gauge spokes ...

There are other reasons why I believe that using double-butted 14-15-14 are wrong thinking ... but, people thought the Earth was the center of the Cosmos for Millennia, too.

Basically, using double-butted spokes is a religion!
​

While we await the horde of people who will tell you to have the wheel laced x3 on both sides with 14-15-14 spokes let me say that if 'I' wanted what I perceive to be the best wheel for someone over 200 lbs (or, lighter), then I would probably spec straight 14g spokes laced x4 on the drive side & x3 on the non-driveside OR x3 on the driveside & x2 on the non-driveside.

BTW. As you probably know, a 36h rear wheel would be better, but you have committed yourself to a 32h rear wheel ... that's okay, but not the best option.

FYI. To the best of my knowledge, Campagnolo rims used to be made by AMBROSIO ... I presume that the alloy rims which are on Campagnolo's wheels are still made by Ambrosio ... whether you want to treat it as an endorsement or a reason not to use them, I think Ambrosio rims are better than MAVIC rims ... but, MAVIC rims are okay ...

It could be difficult to find a set of 32h Ambrosio Montreal rims, BTW; but, I presume you have a source since you mention it as one of your options.

ITAL-TECNO Catalog

 

[alfeng]

ITAL-TECNO Catalog

Good to know ... Thanks.

BTW. The Ambrosio Montreal rim has double-eyelets ... the Ambrosio rims were the first set of double-eyeleted rims that I encountered (c1980 ... I presume the first Ambrosio Montreal rims were produced c1975/76) ... the Ambrosio rims were a real pleasure to work with compared with NISI Toro rims (not NISI's best) + all of the OTHER rims (tubular & clincher).

I've never had an Ambrosio rim crack ... except for a pair of 32h Ambrosio Formula rims, all of the rest which I have are 36h.

 

[alfeng]

From this wheelbuilder(about 7000 wheels and counting), use double butted spokes, laced 3 cross for 32 and 36 hole, brass nipps. Use a tensionmeter to ensure the tension is 100 KGF on the right/frive side. Use a good lube between the nipp and rim and I use boiled lindseed oil between the nipple and spoke.

No need to mix lacing, 4 cross on 36 overlaps the flange too much, does nothing. Double butted spokes make for a more durable wheel when compared to straight gauge spokes. Again from my 25 years of experience in building wheels.

As I said, building wheels with 14-15-14 spokes laced x3 on both sides is a religion ... nothing wrong with that, I'm just not a disciple of THAT religion!

 

[PeterF]

ITAL-TECNO Catalog

How are Reflex (non CD) for the build you describe, from a durabilty standpoint?

 

[alfeng]

How are Reflex (non CD) for the build you describe, from a durabilty standpoint?

FWIW. I have several wheelsets with MAVIC Reflex clincher rims (622-13). They are the immediate predecessor to the ubiquitous MAVIC Open Pro (622-15).

The clincher version is a very good rim ... not necessarily great ... it was probably the first of MAVIC's "modern" rims -- welded seam (which is not necessarily better) + machined brake surface on the "second" generation (c1998? ... prior to the advent of the Open Pro rims) ... earlier tubular & clincher versions of the Reflex rim did NOT have a welded seam or a machined brake surface.

If a machined brake surface is meaningful to you, then the MAVIC Reflex tubular rim may be your only option.

 

[PeterF]

FWIW. I have several wheelsets with MAVIC Reflex clincher rims (622-13). They are the immediate predecessor to the ubiquitous MAVIC Open Pro (622-15).

The clincher version is a very good rim ... not necessarily great ... it was probably the first of MAVIC's "modern" rims -- welded seam (which is not necessarily better) + machined brake surface on the "second" generation (c1998? ... prior to the advent of the Open Pro rims) ... earlier tubular & clincher versions of the Reflex rim did NOT have a welded seam or a machined brake surface.

If a machined brake surface is meaningful to you, then the MAVIC Reflex tubular rim may be your only option.

I have Velocity Aeroheads for my clincher set that aren't machined. I honestly don't mind the braking at all.

 

[alienator]

I have Velocity Aeroheads for my clincher set that aren't machined. I honestly don't mind the braking at all.

Frankly, I think you can't do any better than the Ambrosio rims. Ambrosio has earned its stellar reputation; meanwhile, depending on who you talk to, Mavic's quality is either wavering or good.

If you believe that a good builder is worth his weight in gold, I think you'd heed Peter's advice over anything else you'll read here, and you'd definitely follow his advice re: double butted spokes. Spokes generally fail as a result of fatigue, and the fatigue is a result of repeatedly cycling tension, as in when a wheel strikes a bump/curb/etc and the spokes at that point suddenly detension and then retension once that point is passed. The thinner middle section on butted spokes has a lower spring constant compared to straight gauge spokes and is more responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation. Of course, proper tensioning of a wheel, reduces the number and/or the magnitude of those cycles, so that the difference in fatigue life between non-butted and butted spokes isn't huge. Still, the science and sound engineering principles favor butted spokes over straight gauge spokes. There's no religion to it.

 

[PeterF]

Another rim that interests me is the Velocity Escape. I love the aeroheads that I have for clinchers. I have heard different weights. I think I've seen some sites that say 365g which is too light, but other sites have it closer to 390 (one even said 404g). At 390-400 it's no lighter than the reflex.

It's funny after a several years of internet bike chat that I'm actually trying to make the bike heavier. That's heresy on some sites.

 

[Peter@vecchios]

As I said, building wheels with 14-15-14 spokes laced x3 on both sides is a religion ... nothing wrong with that, I'm just not a disciple of THAT religion!

A religion requires faith, something that can't be proven or observed. Building wheels with components I know work for many miles is an observable truth. No science fiction involved. Does doing a 4cross/3cross with straight gauge spokes make for a serviable wheel? Probably, but it doesn't answer any question nor solve any problem when compared to a 3 cross with double butted spokes.

 

[PeterF]

One other option. Matrix ISO. They look pretty solid. Good reputation?

 

[alfeng]

One other option. Matrix ISO. They look pretty solid. Good reputation?

Matrix rims are good rims ... probably, slightly better than MAVIC ... unlike MAVIC's welded seams, the Matrix rims which had welded seams were 'finished' (i.e., the non-braking surface was indistinguishable from the rest of the inner circumference of the rim).

Matrix rims were pretty well regarded at one time ... TREK thought enough of the company to buy them (sometime in the early 90s, I think) ...

If the Matrix rims which you are looking at do not have welded seams, then they are REALLY OLD STOCK, otherwise, figure they are from sometime before (about) 1998 (I'm not sure if/when the label passed into history).

 

[alfeng]

A religion requires faith, something that can't be proven or observed. Building wheels with components I know work for many miles is an observable truth. No science fiction involved. Does doing a 4cross/3cross with straight gauge spokes make for a serviable wheel? Probably, but it doesn't answer any question nor solve any problem when compared to a 3 cross with double butted spokes.

Amazingly, you (Peter) seem to be wrong almost as often as you are right ...

Thank goodness, after months of protesting to the contrary, you finally realized-and-acknowledged that the Shimano front derailleurs are different if they are designated as being for 9-and-10-speed drivetrains. You can add 8-speed Shimano front derailleurs as being different from the 9-and-10-speed front derailleurs.

Who knows? Maybe, at some time in the future you will also realize that there is a difference between between the 8-/9-speed Shimano rear derailleur and the 10-speed Shimano rear derailleur beyond the cosmetics.

It's a good thing that the customers whom you service didn't know any better if/when you casually installed the wrong chain & they had presumed that they were getting premium service because of the ability for you to speak Gorgonzola at your shop.
​

But, I guess I would expect little else from someone who has previously indicated that he prefers not to wear a helmet because he (meaning, you) are presumably associating the value of a helmet when crashing a jet plane at over 200 MPH (obviously, the speed could be much faster when the jet's speed is abruptly halted) with a crash on a bike at between 0-to-50 MPH. Or, is it for the look-I'm-cool appearance OR something else?!?

FYI. Actually, 'religion' (regardless of how it is generally defined vs. your definition) does not require 'faith'.

While a x3 lacing on both sides may "make for a serviceable wheel" (I've corrected what I presume is merely a typo), it isn't necessarily the best lacing despite your belief that it is OR because you declare it to be so.

And, just because you may have read a book which states that the writer prefers double-butted spokes (presumably, Jobst Brandt's THE BICYCLE WHEEL), doesn't mean it is the best option.

As far as NOT lacing a wheel on the non-driveside the same as on the driveside, perhaps you (generic) have noticed that on a wheel which is not symmetrically dished that the non-driveside spokes are tensioned less than the driveside spokes. As a consequence, the non-driveside spokes do comparatively less work as far as conveying any forces to the rim ...

The object of lacing the non-driveside with an alternate lacing is to allow the non-driveside spokes to be have a tension closer to that of the driveside spoke and thereby, hopefully, they will share some more of the load in moving the rim ... and, by sharing some of the load with the driveside spokes there will be less "fatigue" on the driveside spokes ... so, barring a failure of the rim, presumably the wheel will last longer.

The disadvantage for the "professional" wheelbuilder for whom time-is-money is that it takes incrementally longer to lace the wheels AND for the casual wheelbuilder it is an unnecessary complication because a x3 lacing on both sides "make(s) for a serviceable wheel."

The clearest advantages for the "professional" wheelbuilder to suggest to the cyclist that s/he choose double-butted spokes is best summed up in two syllables -- "ka-ching" ... i.e., more money in the wheelbuilder's pocket!

Regardless, just because YOU did not ask the question doesn't mean someone else didn't ask-and-answer the question in the past ... with YOUR expressed level of curiosity, Man would probably never have left the Stone Age.

This is just one more instance where you are wrong.

 

[alfeng]

Frankly, I think you can't do any better than the Ambrosio rims. Ambrosio has earned its stellar reputation; meanwhile, depending on who you talk to, Mavic's quality is either wavering or good.

You seem to be great at parroting things you've read; AND SO, it's good to know that both you & Peter are on the Ambrosio rim bandwagon which I have extolled on the Forum for several years!

If you believe that a good builder is worth his weight in gold, I think you'd heed Peter's advice over anything else you'll read here, and you'd definitely follow his advice re: double butted spokes. Spokes generally fail as a result of fatigue, and the fatigue is a result of repeatedly cycling tension, as in when a wheel strikes a bump/curb/etc and the spokes at that point suddenly detension and then retension once that point is passed. The thinner middle section on butted spokes has a lower spring constant compared to straight gauge spokes and is more responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation. Of course, proper tensioning of a wheel, reduces the number and/or the magnitude of those cycles, so that the difference in fatigue life between non-butted and butted spokes isn't huge. Still, the science and sound engineering principles favor butted spokes over straight gauge spokes. There's no religion to it.

I love your answer!

Specifically, I love your answer because your statements prove that using double butted spokes is a religion ...

Now, "science and sound engineering principles" are not mutually inclusive concepts ... science admits it doesn't know the answer -- the word is a euphemism which masks the lack of knowlege which the promulgators have.

Simply declaring that "sound engineering principles favor butted spokes over straight gauge spokes" doesn't make it so.

Are you declaring that because you read it in Jobst Brandt's THE BICYCLE WHEEL? OR, are you citing another source?

Regardless, you have provided neither quantitative data nor a valid answer which suggests anything other than your ability to parrot something you may have read and/or which you believe to be true. THAT's an act of faith which, according to Peter, qualifies your comments as a religion!

---​

Let 'me' state that it is my observation that a rolling bicycle wheel is part of a dynamic system ... I would declare that as a 'Given', but I am sure that some people who like to make static measurements might have a difficult time wrapping their minds around that aspect of a bicycle wheel.

Let 'me' also state that the "ideal" double butted spoke does NOT exist in isolation from the other components of a bicycle wheel ... take it, or leave it.

Now, let's just look at some other statements:

Spokes generally fail as a result of fatigue, and the fatigue is a result of repeatedly cycling tension -- For the moment, I'll accept that as a 'Given' ...

The thinner middle section on butted spokes has a lower spring constant compared to straight gauge spokes and is more responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation -- I'll accept that as a 'Given', too.
​

But, doesn't the "lower spring constant" suggest that the double butted spoke might flex more (in the middle, of course)?

Being "more responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation" suggests that (you believe that) the 14-15-14 double butted spoke is changing in shape ... presumably, tensioning-and-detensioning more than a constant, 14 gauge spoke does. Is that what you meant to write OR are you now going to say that what you wrote means something else?

Think about it.

Think about where a spoke generally fails.

Think about an extreme build where the hub is held in place by coiled springs if you need to visualize how the termini are subject to more motion if the spokes are momentarily stretching-and/or-flexing, as the case may be ...

AND, think about the inevitable result of the "responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation" is that the hub is becoming eccentric from the rim.

AND, think about how the greater the episodic eccentricity the more the J-bend flexes.

Maybe THAT (i.e., greater episodic eccentricity) is what you want, but it's not what I want.

OR, are you now going to say that the J-bend flexing is somehow a good thing?!?

If you think about it, your conclusion [that "sound engineering principles favor butted spokes over straight gauge spokes"] does not follow from your statements.

Only a Gaubacho (like Al Gore who is the champion of so-called "Global Warming") would continue to promulgate a false religion as the truth. OR, are you a Gaubacho, too?

 

[alienator]

You seem to be great at parroting things you've read; AND SO, it's good to know that both you & Peter are on the Ambrosio rim bandwagon which I have extolled on the Forum for several years!

Ah, that must be it, as there are so few people in the world that rate Ambrosio highly. Wow.

Specifically, I love your answer because your statements prove that using double butted spokes is a religion ...

Uhm, no.

Now, "science and sound engineering principles" are not mutually inclusive concepts ... science admits it doesn't know the answer -- the word is a euphemism which masks the lack of knowlege which the promulgators have.

Wow. If you say so, but, uhm, no. First, "science and sound engineering principles" are words...not word. Science admits it doesn't know the answer? Did someone interview science? You are aware, aren't you, that science is a field of study, not a person, right?

Simply declaring that "sound engineering principles favor butted spokes over straight gauge spokes" doesn't make it so.

Didn't say it did.

Are you declaring that because you read it in Jobst Brandt's THE BICYCLE WHEEL? OR, are you citing another source?

Typical alfeng argument construction. I'm citing what I've learned, been taught, and comes from standard textbooks and whole host of places, just as other scientists and engineers do.

Regardless, you have provided neither quantitative data nor a valid answer which suggests anything other than your ability to parrot something you may have read and/or which you believe to be true. THAT's an act of faith which, according to Peter, qualifies your comments as a religion!

I don't have to provide quantitative evidence in this case. The theory and principles suffice.

Let 'me' state that it is my observation that a rolling bicycle wheel is part of a dynamic system ... I would declare that as a 'Given', but I am sure that some people who like to make static measurements might have a difficult time wrapping their minds around that aspect of a bicycle wheel.

Let 'me' also state that the "ideal" double butted spoke does NOT exist in isolation from the other components of a bicycle wheel ... take it, or leave it.

Pointless. Stating the obvious. Uhm, I wasn't talking about "ideal" double butted spokes, anyway. I was talking about real spokes. I don't have to talk about your "ideal spokes."

But, doesn't the "lower spring constant" suggest that the double butted spoke might flex more (in the middle, of course)?

Yes.

Being "more responsive to changes in tension caused by transient wheel deformation" suggests that (you believe that) the 14-15-14 double butted spoke is changing in shape ... presumably, tensioning-and-detensioning more than a constant, 14 gauge spoke does. Is that what you meant to write OR are you now going to say that what you wrote means something else?

Think about it.

Think about where a spoke generally fails.

I did think about it. Spokes typically fail at the elbows or at the nipples, as that's where the significant stress risers are. Double butted spokes reduce the cycling and/or load on those areas by moving it to the middle of the spoke, i.e. where the spoke is thinner/spring constant is lower/spokes don't typically break. Simple.

Think about an extreme build where the hub is held in place by coiled springs if you need to visualize how the termini are subject to more motion if the spokes are momentarily stretching-and/or-flexing, as the case may be ...

No thank you. I'm fine with dynamics.

AND, think about how the greater the episodic eccentricity the more the J-bend flexes.

Cyclic, not episodic. The rest of your statement is just nonsense.

Maybe THAT (i.e., greater episodic eccentricity) is what you want, but it's not what I want.

I see. You don't understand dynamics.

OR, are you now going to say that the J-bend flexing is somehow a good thing?!?

Read. Besides, the j-bends flex whether you want them to or not.

I haven't even mentioned the reduced impulse on the spoke and those stress riser locations.