Prolite branccianos or williams 30x?

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by hajitosan, Jul 8, 2012.

  1. hajitosan

    hajitosan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    So im a pretty big rider (just got down to 190lbs), and im looking to upgrade the wheelset on my 2008 trek 2.3 (aka the goat)... Both of these sets seem like a great deal, and I think ill be able too stay around this weight for a while.. I was just wondering if anyone had anything to say about which set would roll smoother and be the stiffest? The prolites are about $100 cheaper and weight about 50 grams less but im a little concerned about flexing?... (max rider weight on the prolites is 200lbs vs 225lbs for the williams) I currently run bontrager race wheels (i think around 1900 grms), so either one will be an upgrade... As I said im a bit heavy, and I ride up steep windy mountains quite often.. Most rides ill be doing on the bike are around 70 to 100 mi and include a bit of rocky or rough road. Ive learned quite a bit from this forum, and was hoping to get a few opinions on durabillity relia illity and smooth rollin. Thanks!!
     
    Tags:


  2. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Assuming the hub dimensions are about the same, determining factor for lateral rigidity is basically available spoke cross section.
    If they're both running comparable materials and spoke dimensions, the Williams, with its higher spoke count, is likely to be stiffer.
    OTOH it's boasting ceramic bearings, which is a fairly pointless feature.
    Sure, a ceramic bearing can spin real light, but bearing drag is such a tiny part of overall drag that you're looking at an improvement of a fraction of a percent or something like that. Concentrating on your tuck for a descent or two is likely to yield more benefit.

    I'm guessing it's the alloy Pro-Lite Braccianos you're thinking of? My main gripe with those is that they're running radial spokes heads-out. It looks slicker, but it loses them something like 13% lateral rigidity compared to heads-in due to the poorer bracing angle. Not what I'd like to suggest to a self-proclaimed "pretty big rider". Can't tell if the Williams is the same.

    And for both of them you should be aware that they're likely to run alloy bodies(particularly the Williams, judging by the color). Alloy bodies, particularly for stronger riders, are prone to notching, which can make future cassette swaps difficult.

    When it comes to maintenance questions, what you should look for is Shimano and traditional, bent spokes. Poor in bling value, but they win hands down in terms of spares availability.
     
  3. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    ...but it loses them something like 13% lateral rigidity compared to heads-in due to the poorer bracing angle.

    Aye.
     
  4. hajitosan

    hajitosan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok guys, thanks for the input.. Leaning towards the Williams now, although I do plan to keep my weight down below 200lbs. I'll assume that "aye" is an affirmation?

    any other suggestions would be great.
     
  5. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Well, I'm not claiming it kept me from a podium finish or anything, but getting that swosh, swosh from brake pads brushing the rim while riding out of the saddle just bugs me something immensely.
     
  6. hajitosan

    hajitosan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you have experience with these wheels? how much do you weigh if i may ask?
     
  7. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Well, I'm not claiming it kept me from a podium finish or anything, but getting that swosh, swosh from brake pads brushing the rim while riding out of the saddle just bugs me something immensely.

    Same here. I had to open the pads up so the cheap Aksiums didn't rub under sprinting and climbing.
     
  8. stevfenton

    stevfenton New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you also considered the fact that the Bracciano's now come with spoke braces which provides amazing extra power transfer properties and have to be ridden to to be believed. The tensions used in all Pro-Lite wheels would appeal to the resident expert dabac who obviously has never ridden Pro-Lite wheels as he would never have to adjust his brake pads had he made the right choice. Anyone who has bought Gavia or Bracciano wheels that came without the spoke braces can get in touch with Hotlines in UK for a free set to be sent to them. I have heard so many times from riders when they use the spoke braces for the first time that they can actually feel the power going through the rear wheel projecting them forward. Seeing is believing.
     
  9. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    Yeah. Right. It must be true because Pro-Lite says it is.
     
  10. stevfenton

    stevfenton New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obviously the kind of reply one would expect from a keyboard expert really.
     
  11. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    You're coming across as somewhat insulting here. If that's intentional, I find it intriguing coming from someone who's officially associated with a supplier/manufacturer in the business. It's certainly a novel way of grooming your company's internet profile.

    If you're not familiar with it, look up the wheel testing performed by Damon Rinard. Look up the theory, as put forward by Jobst Brandt and others. Until the point of spokes beginning to go slack, more spoke tension does not make a wheel stiffer. End of story.

    Here's how it works: a reasonably normal spoke, say one made out of stainless steel, will, regardless of cross section area and shape, act as a linear spring. This means that for x amount of tension, it'll stretch y mm. For 2x amount of tension, it'll stretch 2y mm. For 3x amount of tensions it'll stretch 3y of mm.
    And so on, untill it will start to become permanently elongated, and eventually fail.

    So, unless another spoke is going slack, the wheel will remain just as stiff, or flexy, due to ride input regardless of what tension spec it's built to.

    No matter what spoke tension you build to, as long as the spoke material is basically stainless steel, heads-out lost you some 13% of lateral stiffness.

    That itself is not a problem, maybe you didn't need/want it it in the first place. Maybe you prefer the aestethics of heads-out.

    I OTOH would prefer to get the maximal stiffness available from the given parts rather than the looks of heads-out.
     
  12. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    In addition to what Dabac said, spoke bracing (in the form of tying and soldering) has been shown to do very little in terms of increasing a wheel's performance, specifically stiffness. If these spoke braces are truly so revolutionary, please show the test data that proves as much.
     
  13. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Indeed, T&S was invented by witch doctors and alchemists during the Dark Ages and actually reduces wheel stiffness laterally by 26.2% (for a 12 spoke, cross 6, group 3 lacing pattern with spoke material being 18 gauge flatted angel hair al dente pasta) and radially by 6.34% under the most used torque reference standard, the American Dweeb Institute for Standards & Technology with a sub-Fred calibration standard applied.

    I can only furnish this as anecdotal evidence as I read it in a book and never actually rode any of those things. That would be too scary.

    Disclaimer:
    The poster is in no way affiliated with the Amalgamated Association of American Witch Doctors nor the The Most Honorable Brotherhood of North American Alchemists. No guarranty of wheel stiffness beyond minimum CPSC specifications can be assumed from the reading of this post. Poster assumes no responsibility for wheel collapse or failure otherwise resulting from rides/routes involving Stravacide attempts or from wheels ridden by any rider referred to as any breed of draught horse.
     
  14. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Well, I dunno.

    I agree with the theory of anything as long and slender as a spoke can pretty much only be loaded in tension, so I find it real hard to see how T&S could do much good in terms of rigidity and power transfer.
    And since I've never built two wheels exactly the same apart from one being T&S, the other not, I don't even have anecdotal evidence from any sensible comparison.
    But I have built and used T&S wheels, and pretty much the only thing I can say is that it'll do a smashing job of keeping a broken spoke quiet, and in position.
    The "nice" wheelset for my MTB is T&S, simply b/c due to the recommeded spoke tensions for that rim, spoke failure from fatigue seems more probable than on average.
     
  15. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    But I have built and used T&S wheels, and pretty much the only thing I can say is that it'll do a smashing job of keeping a broken spoke quiet, and in position.

    They do an even better job of driving a Unicanitor or Cinelli up an ass-crack on rough roads. 32H/3X with sewups about 105-110 PSI. I do own identical setups other than the T&S (OK...the tires may not be matched, but are similar in construction and weights).

    Other than the general ride feel, I've noticed more than anything else an increase in lateral stiffness. Yeah, it's just a 'feel' thing.

    This is the third thread where T&S has come up. It's been a long while and I've threatened it before...this weekend I'm going to re-glue the tires and slap that 5-speed wheelset in one of the old steel steeds and head out for a few miles on our crappy roads. Now, if I can only find my slot-cleated Detto Pietro track shoes and remember how to tighten toe straps...AND re-learn friction shifting.
     
  16. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    That is the benefit of tied and soldered spokes. They don't roam freely if they break.
     
  17. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Indeed. T&S spokes were specifically invented to keep deadly, flailing spokes from severing legs and sawing thru 1/8" wall thickness gaspipe frames in 1890's. And to prevent endos, of course...according to life-coach expert Jobst Brandt.

    James Starley's patant text:

    "The crossing parts of the spokes k l may be connected with wire bound
    round the crossing parts and soldered. By arranging and connecting the
    spokes in the manner described a direct tensile strain is put on each
    spoke without any oblique strain."


    http://www.google.com/patents?id=r9Z...=PA1&dq=359809

    Of course, he just spaced out putting the part about endos and flailing spokes severing legs and frames. Damned stupid alchemists.

    Or Warwick's sleeve to join spokes:

    Here's a patent by Warwick for a "double-sleeve" (44 in the diagrams)
    that joins the spokes (43 in the diagram) where they cross on a
    highwheeler:

    "For the purpose of increasing the strength of a wheel, either front
    or rear, by holding the spokes 43 in line, the double sleeve 44 is
    provided . . ."

    http://www.google.com/patents?id=Znd...PA20&dq=384946

    Of course, spoke clips are not all that new:

    Here's another early patent, in which Latta uses special clips
    _without_ soldering for connecting spokes:
    http://www.google.com/patents?id=oCh...PA62&dq=377900

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Science pop quiz time:

    Spokes have been T&S since the invention of the spoked wheel for:

    A. To prevent spoke rattle...on bikes with woven spokes with up to eight crossings.

    B. To save severed limbs and frames made of gas pipe.

    C. To prevent flat tires...on bikes with solid/non-pneumatic tires.

    D. To add strength and stiffness and piss off an old man.

    [​IMG]

    Even the tiny rear wheels were T&S in order to:

    A. Prevent headers.

    B. Prevent tailers.

    C. Drive scientists even more insane.

    D. Increase strength and stiffness.
     
  18. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Er, are you aware what a patent is?

    Since it looks like you're not, let me tell you:

    A patent application is nothing more than an official statement where someone puts forward the claim "I thought of this first".

    Being granted a patent only means, that to the knowledge of the patent office, the applicant is indeed the first to formulate that specific idea.

    Having a patent is in no way a guarantee, or even an implication, that the thing would actually work.

    Novelty, not functionality, is what's required for a patent. There are plenty of patents granted for stuff that doesn't work. Free energy schemes have been rather popular for some time as an example.

    T & S doesn't change a thing, apart from rattling. A spoke is still too long and slender, and too loosely attached by the hub, to carry a significant force by any other means than tension.

    Show me the load path.
     
  19. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    let me tell you:

    And...here we go!

    "I thought of this first".

    Yeah...funny thing that.

    The patents mention strength and stiffness. Not a word about rattles. Or Flailing spokes. Odd, don't you think? They thought about strength. Too weird. You really would think since the cycling world was in the midst of a raging war to end rattling spokes for all time...even those up to eight cross woven ones I mentioned earlier...the patent application just might have made mention of the most salient attribute it was being applied to. Or am I way off course here?

    I mean...even the 'free energy' devices are patented with the words 'Free Energy' emblazoned on the patents that describe exactly how the novelty device generates its 'free energy'. AMIRITE?

    T & S doesn't change a thing,

    Well, if you say so. It must be true.

    A spoke is still too long and slender, and too loosely attached by the hub, to carry a significant force by any other means than tension.

    Well then, here's a fella that disagrees with you. And he can show plenty of calculations to back up his point.

    http://www.astounding.org.uk/ian/wheel/

    From these figures, I conclude that it is perfectly reasonable to say that the hub stands on the lower spokes, and that it does not hang from the upper spokes.
    It is also wrong to say that the force distributes all around the rim and all the spokes contribute to holding up the hub - over a third of the spokes have an effect that pulls the hub down!

    The compressive spoke that contributes most (spoke 19: 345.216) contributes more than 15 times as much lift as the tensile spoke which contributes most (spoke 3: 21.955).

    Queue the asploding heads animated gif please.
     
  20. dabac

    dabac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    139
    Again, patents are about novelty value, not about truth. They're more than half sales pitches. If you want to take them literally, go ahead. Make sure you read your horoscope too, And listen real good to what they're saying on the Shopping Channel while you're at it.

    If you bother to post a link, at least make (reasonably) sure you've read and understood the material yourself. Here's a quote from the page:
    "Therefore, when the analysis shows a force in a spoke, the real force in the spoke is whatever the preload (the initial tension) was, plus the force calculated. If the force was tension, we end up with a more highly stressed spoke. If the calculated load was compression we end up with a less tensile spoke. That is, a reference to a 'compressive' spoke could be read as a 'less tensile' spoke. To get the true state in the wheel you need to superimpose (ie, add) the results of this analysis on the initial state."


    There you go. A spoke that's "compressed" is a spoke that's less tensioned. Meaning it's still under tension. Cut it, and the ends spring apart.That guy Ian isn't disagreeing with me.

    Show me the load path.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - Prolite branccianos williams
  1. mtbspecialized
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    5,209
Loading...