Road bike wheelsets

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Goose5, Jul 30, 2016.

  1. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    One had been a good climber before a heart problem so perhaps you could put power in in bursts. The other was pretty heavy but not fat and had enough power to take his weight to the top of any hill including the 12%ers that we encounter here with regularity. Since these are in short bursts even relatively poor climbers can put the pedal to the metal on them. But at the same time they do not put any sustained power through the wheels.

    BTW - I just bought a Campus from a Polish seller. He said it was a fairly popular German builder for awhile. It appears to be a little better than a Cinelli by looking at the pictures. Do you know anything about them?
     


  2. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    By the way - I too rate Mavic wheels very high. I just am no fan of super-light low spoke count wheels.
     
  3. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Why? I've had great durability from them...if you call 16 to 20 spokes 'low' and while not exactly 'super light' at 1650 to 1770 grams I would still consider them to be very light. As light as many good 50 MM carbon wheelsets.

    I started building my own wheels in the early 1970's out of necessity (broke) and consider myself to be a very good wheel builder, if I say so myself. I've never got a factory build, a custom build (and I consider the wheelsets I've bought from Colorado Cyclist to be among the best I've ever ridden...mine included), my own builds or the latest machine-built el cheapo's to last more than two or three season under my skinny ass.

    I was at 155-160 pounds in my prime and I'm still at 158. Gimme any wheel you got up to 32 holes and I'll kill it in two seasons or at least make you cringe when you look at it. That includes the supposedly 'bomb proof' stuff. My caveat is that will run 23 MM tires at 105-110 PSI and I will ride them like I stole them. I always have. Always will...I hope!

    This is not to say I'm deliberately abusive, but going fast...as fast as I can most often...is my priority. I live in some hills and I place a premium on climbing attributes so it has to be stiff, it has to be light weight (enough, not necessarily weight weenie crap) and it has to make the bike feel responsive to what few Watts I can develop.

    I can see where the Clydes might look at a 1500 gram set and think, "Madness!", but most of the out-of-shape gut busters in the local clubs seem to have no issues with wheels like Ksyriums and the like...and those guys ain't exactly the picture of fitness in a too-tight jersey and shorts. Stuffed sausage is more the picture I see...
     
  4. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    While I would probably refrain from using my race wheels on a fully loaded touring bike headed over Belgian cobbles, it should be noted that one of the most highly recommended and user acclaimed wheels for tandems is the shimaNO 'Sweet Sixteen' set.

    16 spokes front and rear and they hold up well to 300-400 pounds of riders mounted on 30-40 pounds worth of bike plus the added touring gear. Tandem manufacturer Santana recommends them as optional upgrade equipment.

    From the home page of Santana:
    Well, pictures are not loading to the site...so, web URL:


    http://www.santanatandem.com/
     
  5. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    FWIW ...

    In addition to the pictured wheelset on the SANTANA Tandem having a longer rear axle than a "stock" Shimano WH-7700 rear wheel ...

    And, apparently/presumably a Centerlock rotor mount, now ...
    YOU may-or-may-not be misinterpreting inclusion of that wheelset in the picture on the linked page.

    I could definitely be mistaken (I never asked Bill McCready, directly, since I wasn't planning on buying a set ... obviously, YOU could if you wanted to), but I'm pretty sure that those are laced with DIFFERENT spokes (e.g., possibly 13g ... THAT might have actually been mentioned when the wheels were first introduced OR it is something which I merely presumed) spokes rather than the bladed spokes which the Shimano WH-7700 wheels are/(were) laced with.

    BTW. Just as the WH-7700 wheels were apparently prone to stress cracks, the same is probably true for the Santana variant UNLESS a different internal "washer" [the spoke's J-bend is buried inside the rim and anchored by a form-fitting pyramidal "washer"] was spec'd for the rims which Santana had Shimano build for them OR the rims, themselves, are fabricated from a more robust extrusion.
    SANTANA is a great company which builds great bikes ....

    But, I reckon that inclusion of the SANTANA variant of Shimano's 16-spoke wheels may be MORE of a veiled PRODUCT PLACEMENT to entice people to buy one of the remaining wheelsets which is otherwise gathering dust in their warehouse than a you-should-buy-and-use-these recommendation.
     
  6. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Santana uses the widest rear dropout spacing of any of the tandem manufacturers an was the first to use the now standard 160 MM.

    The Sweet Sixteen wheelset is available as a rim brake style and disc brake style. Yes, 16 spokes will not only handle the weight of a loaded tandem, but the wheels will also handle the added stresses incurred by the use of a powerful 203 MM disc to slow up 450+ pounds hurtling off the side of an Alpine mountain pass.

    Washer equipped spoke are standard on the Sweet Sixteen's. According to Santana the hub is threaded for either a disc or a drum, no flange mount.

    shimaNO also went to a LIGHTER rim recently, which reduced the weight of a pair of wheels by 1/3 of a pound.

    So much for 'product placement'. Gathering dust??? WTF? I think you are poorly informed.
    http://santanatandem.com/Techno/Sweet16.html

    Santana also uses custom built wheels, Spinergy wheels, Hadley/Velocity and the 40-spoke and 48-spoke EDCO/Sun and EDCO Weinmann combinations that failed before the shimaNO Sweet Sixteen's. And yes, you can carry around 48 spokes like my Santana has and eat all the cheeseburgers you desire.

    Note: Mine came with 48-spoke wheels as purchased used. If I were buying or building a new tandem the Sweet 16's or a low spoke count Spinergy or Hadley set would be ordered.

    Santana also recently made the Sweet Sixteen's standard equipment on some of their line. It's a perfect choice for a high stress application.

    1970 called. They want their wheels back.
     
  7. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    GREAT ...

    I'm sure that YOU are now more-motivated-than-ever to buy a low spoke Tandem wheelset ...

    AND, you will report back how well they hold up after various mileage intervals ...

    I'm sure you can adjust the axle spacers for your Tandem's rear dropout width.
    BECAUSE, the need to prove a point is a valid motivator.

    Of course, if the engineers-and-subsequent-marketing were 100% right, then we should all be using BioPace chainrings.
    Both Bill McCready (aka SANTANA) and you may be correct -- and, I may be living in the past (BTW. Yes, I'll have a Whopper w/ Fries, please) -- but, as elegant as Shimano's paired-spoke wheel design is, Shimano not only abandoned it, but they went to 20 spokes for their subsequent factory-built Dura Ace rear wheels (which the SANTANA wheels are based on) ...

    WHY would Shimano abandon their paired-spoke wheels if it was such a great design?

    Think about it.

    The only way I would use those 'Sweet 16' wheels on a Tandem is if I were a "sponsored rider" who did not have to pay for them.
    BTW. I can think of ONE reason not to use low spoke count wheels on (m)any bike(s); but, THAT reason is not an immediate issue.



     
    #27 alfeng, Aug 9, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2016
  8. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    I have to tell you I have no idea of where you're coming from. I used to be 210 and am now 185 and I have NEVER broken a 32 spoke wheel. They have only been rebuilt with new rims when the brake surfaces are worn off.

    Even though California roads are trashed I am particularly easy on wheels and it's unusual for me to break anything on a wheel including spokes. But I have seen others break light wheels a lot and claiming that for some reason you are breaking 32 spoke wheels at 168 lbs gives me the idea that you're jumping curbs.
     
  9. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Yeah, we probably ride with completely different styles. I don't jump curbs, but bunny hopping RR tracks at speed and the like? I certainly do. Like I said, I'm not deliberately abusive, but when racing or on a fast training ride with the guys it's a 'whatever it takes' environment. And no one I know races or even trains on old or heavy equipment. No steel frames. No 32-spoke wheels. No Brooks saddles. No frame pumps. All that stuff went the way of the dodo over a decade ago...unless you are riding those vintage events like L'Eroica.

    My last set of 32-hole Open Pro's were purchased in 2006. By 2007 they were cracked. The weird thing was that even back then they were obsolete technology and guys asked me why I was using them.

    FTA: I also cracked a steel frame in the 1970's and recently cracked another (carbon) in 2013.
     
    #29 CAMPYBOB, Aug 9, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2016
  10. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Both Bill McCready (aka SANTANA) and you may be correct -- and, I may be living in the past (BTW. Yes, I'll have a Whopper w/ Fries, please) -- but, as elegant as Shimano's paired-spoke wheel design is, Shimano not only abandoned it, but they went to 20 spokes for their subsequent factory-built Dura Ace rear wheels (which the SANTANA wheels are based on) ...

    WHY would Shimano abandon their paired-spoke wheels if it was such a great design?

    I would trust Bill McCready's judgement. Lightweight, low spoke count wheels can be incredibly strong.

    Who the Hell knows why shimaNO stopped building single bike wheels with paired spokes? Economic reasons? I don't know and neither do you.

    Paired spoke tandem wheels are still built and sold by shimaNO. Where do you think Santana gets theirs? Rolf also still build paired spoke wheels as do several other outfits.

    Why not ask Bontrager why they stopped building them? As a guess, I would say it might have been due to the difficulty of trueing them and spoke replacement on some of the designs.

    While you're at it, why don't you ask Campagnolo why they build the G3 design. Inquiring minds want to know.

    And unless I find a deal while not looking, I doubt that I buy any new wheels for the tandem. I just don't see my wife and I drilling it up the rails to trails bike path and jumping curbs. The 48-spoke 3-ton wheels on the rig now will probably be there for the next owner unless I can talk The Boy Wonder into stoking for me and seeing what we can do in the tandem catagory of the local TT.
     
  11. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    I have no clue how or why Alf decided to morph a discussion on lightweight, low spoke count wheels into a debate on the merits of paired spoke designs, but go here: http://www.rolfprima.com/technology/ and watch the video.

    The disclaimer: No one is categorically stating a 32-spoke wheel would not do what the Rolf wheel in the video does. The question is: Why haul all that weight around and the extra aero drag of the spokes if you don't need to? I prefer to go fast using the least Watts possible. I just might need them for the next climb or attack. And when I want to climb or attack I want my wheels to spin up quickly and cut through the air with as little resistance as possible.

    If the OP is really concerned about his buddy pulling ahead and has $1000 to spend, go for the speed equipment and win back that $5 beer at the bar and all the bragging rights associated with it (i.e. not much!).
     
  12. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    They just had the women's Olympic race and the Scandinavian woman was FAR out in the lead and pulling away. She was on a descent and for no apparent reason at all lost total control and flipped 180 degrees over and her head hit the curb. The manner in which she lost control was extremely suspicious since the group following her were going just as fast down that hill and did not have ANY control problems.

    Any guesses as to we ever learn what really occurred? My suspicion is that she had a super-light frame failure.
     
  13. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    What is pretty funny is that I'm seeing all this discussion of low spoke count wheels to reduce the weight. But the fact is that the difference between "heavy" wheels and "light" wheels is 7 ounces at best. People are willing to risk their necks to save 2 lbs on a carbon fiber frame and fork vs. steel and they are equally complacent about being stuck in the middle of nowhere with a broken wheel in order to save 7 ounces.

    What's more the CF frames are so stiff that they do not handle well on fast bumpy descents and low spoke count wheels need only break one spoke to have wildly dangerous handling characteristics in these conditions. Steel has a little give that has always been a large factor in allowing great riders to deal with bad roads.

    Strange that over the last three years several people in our group have seen the results of super-light components and are now on steel and 32 spoke count wheels.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=201...=6fGpV7P5OoO4jAOCv6vADA#imgrc=bzR80o1fPHGjyM:

    In some cases the damage is major but hard to spot.
     
  14. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    She was Dutch.

    There was no frame failure. It was raining and she simply left her braking way too late. First, she skidded the rear and secondly she flipped with the front wheel locked. Your suspicion is incorrect.

    G. Thomas fell, Nibali fell and Haneo all crashed on the descent for the same reason...going too fast.

    Frame material had zero to do with it and carbon frames can and are built to be MORE COMPLIANT than steel. Pay your money and take your choice.

    I recently popped a spoke on a 20-spoke front wheel on my Emonda. Not only did I not die, I simply opened up the brake and rode it home at normal speed. Just like I would have done with a 32-spoke wheel.

    I know of no one, IRL, that went back to steel frames or 32-spoke wheels. And what's up with the pic of Froome's bike? Are you suggesting Team Sky go back to using steel Pinarello Montello's (I have a few of those and some Treviso's) and 32-spoke wheels for the next Tour?
     
  15. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    The announcer on he news said she was Swedish I believe. And that her teammate won the sprint.

    I wish you would not tell us things like she locked up her brakes or that there wasn't a frame failure without proof of either one. I said I suspected. That's a hell of a lot different than you telling us the chain of events that strangely did not happen to the group of three behind her who went through the same turn at the same speed in the same conditions.

    And I can honestly say that I NEVER went head over heels on a slippery road but ALWAYS slid out.
     
  16. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    As far as frame materials go...just like wheels, they can all be killed easily over a short time span if the work load put into them is high enough.

    According to Sheldon Brown's website and a German testing outfit, both carbon frames and aluminum frames did better than steel frames in durability testing:

    http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/frame_fatigue_test.htm

    "What is so important about the testing this article describes? Even the testers were surprised to find that the high-quality lightweight aluminum and carbon-fiber frames they tested were more resistant to fatigue failure than heavier, high-quality steel frames."

    I keep wondering where all the old guys on steel bike and heavy, high spoke count wheels are? I guess they are far behind me...and I'm 'old'.

    "Steel was in crisis: The De Rosa SLX broke after only 57,000 cycles, only half as many as Brügelmann’s Barellia frame with the same tubeset. Interestingly, they both broke in the same characteristic way, just above the lower head-tube lug – a type of failure, by the way, which TOUR’s testers had already seen in on bicycles in use. The Fondriest frame, very light for a steel frame, did not last through the first testing cycle, and, like the much heavier Nishiki frame, broke after only 80,000 cycles."

    Ouch...not so good, after all.

    Steel is real! Or not.


    So...pretty much every material exceeded steel in failure mode:

    "The Time carbon frame failed the test by only a little, with a broken chainstay after 182,000 cycles. The second-lightest frame in the test, the low-priced Schmolke titanium frame, made in Russia, exceeded all expectations at 160,000 cycles. Klein’s Quantum Race failed more quickly: the down tube broke after 132,000 cycles. Next was the Merlin Team Road titanium showpiece, struck down at a relatively low 106,000 cycles – the greatest disappointment, considering its price. The last among the light frames was the Stevens RPR4, which, however, was also the least expensive."

    Sure, if you drill your old steel frame into a wall you can certainly sleeve in a new top tube and down tube and repaint it. By why the Hell bother? I never repaired any of the multiple steel frames I folded up over the years.



    Back to wheels, weight and speed...

    Speed matters to many people. The OP and myself included. If you want to go fast...go aero and go light weight. Those two attributes will assist anyone in the quest for speed.
     
  17. dhk2

    dhk2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    39
    CB, hope you keep up the good fight here. Makes for a most entertaining thread.
     
  18. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Dutch. Her name is van Vleuten. Her team mate, the gold medal winner, is van der Breggen. U.S.A rider Mara Abbot went over the top of the climb with vV, but descended more slowly and made it to the bottom. On a carbon bike with light carbon wheels. Imagine that.

    About the brakes and wet road as the cause of the crash: EVERY analyst has stated this. EVERY ONE. Go read the reports. Come back and post just one link that ANYONE else suspects a broken carbon frame as the cause.

    Just.
    One.

    Good Lord.

    I have low-sided and I have high-sided.

    Shit.
    Fucking.
    Happens.

    vV went in hot. On a piss poor line. She lost it. She tried to save it. There was no saving it. Her frame material had zero shits to do with her crash. Zero. Nada. None.

    Neither did it have anything to do with G's crash. Or Nibali's crash. Or Haneo's crash.

    Zero.

    Weather, a rather dangerous descent and the typical athlete's desire to throw away common sense in exchange for a gold medal was the causation. Nibali is one of the best, if not THE best, descender in the professional peloton and HE wiped out. As I said, shit happens. His frame did not asplode under him. He simply overcooked a corner.
     
    #38 CAMPYBOB, Aug 9, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2016
  19. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    For God's sake, dhk2...help me! I'm drowning in the most illogical shit I've read since Alf spent 10 pages of drivel trying to convince Colnago C50 and I that you could actually ride an UltraTorque crankset with the spindle halves separated with a "1 MM air gap"!!!
     
  20. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Here's a couple angle's on vV's crash.




    Note that in the second video you can clearly see her locked up rear wheel slide out and her correction. Too late. The flip occurs with her front brake helping to stand the bike back up and after she hits the tall curb.

    Please point out the pre-contact broken carbon that would cause a crash that looks like carrying too much speed on a poor line? She apex'd the turn way early going too fast on a somewhat dangerous course (again, not according to me, but to coaches, talking heads, announcers, etc.) on a day even a guy living in the arctic could have predicted rain in Rio.
     
Loading...
Loading...