Rolf wheels safety



D

Dave Gittins

Guest
The other day, a friend of mine had a nasty fall. She was using Rolf
wheels. I don't know the precise model. They have thin round spokes
arranged in pairs. There may be 20 or 24 spokes in all.

From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at no great
speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded over, causing the
wheel to jam in the forks.

Has anybody experienced anything like this?

--
Dave Gittins

Author of Titanic: Monument & Warning
http://users.senet.com.au/~gittins/Book.html
 
Dave Gittins wrote:
> The other day, a friend of mine had a nasty fall. She was using Rolf
> wheels. I don't know the precise model. They have thin round spokes
> arranged in pairs. There may be 20 or 24 spokes in all.
>
> From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at no great
> speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded over, causing the
> wheel to jam in the forks.
>
> Has anybody experienced anything like this?
>
> --
> Dave Gittins
>
> Author of Titanic: Monument & Warning
> http://users.senet.com.au/~gittins/Book.html


How old were the wheels or how many miles had they been ridden? I've
worn rims down until they're so thin they split and fold like you
mentioned. If they're new and it really was a JRA you need to contact
the bike shop and Rolf.

Laters,

Marz
 
Dave Gittins wrote:

> From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at no great
> speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded over, causing the
> wheel to jam in the forks.


Do you mean the braking surface of the rim folded over, or the wheel
went out of true (tacoed)?

How many miles on the wheel?

A picture would be helpful.

Art Harris
 
Dave Gittins writes:

> The other day, a friend of mine had a nasty fall. She was using
> Rolf wheels. I don't know the precise model. They have thin round
> spokes arranged in pairs. There may be 20 or 24 spokes in all.


> From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at no
> great speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded over,
> causing the wheel to jam in the forks.


From what you say it is not clear what sort of deformation the wheel
had. Just riding along will not bend a wheel sideways, there being no
side loads on bicycle wheels without some gymnastics on the bicycle.
Are any spokes broken? I suspect this is a Rolf Vector Pro wheel with
14 spokes.

http://www.craigslist.org/sby/bik/146415277.html

With one broken spoke this wheel goes out of true enough that it will
not pass through a dual pivot (the most common) type brake, these
brakes not being able to follow a wobbly rim as former brakes did.
Don't ride this sort of wheel unless you value fashion more than
function.

> Has anybody experienced anything like this?


We need more details.

Jobst Brandt
 
The wheel didn't taco, as Americans picturesquely say. About a foot of it
just folded over and the rest stayed substantially true. I believe the
wheel had been used for quite some time, but the braking surfaces were not
much worn. It had at least 20 spokes and none were bent or broken.

--
Dave Gittins

Author of Titanic: Monument & Warning
http://users.senet.com.au/~gittins/Book.html
 
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 06:08:00 +0930, "Dave Gittins"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The wheel didn't taco, as Americans picturesquely say. About a foot of it
>just folded over and the rest stayed substantially true. I believe the
>wheel had been used for quite some time, but the braking surfaces were not
>much worn. It had at least 20 spokes and none were bent or broken.


"Not much worn" may be more worn than you think. It sounds like the
rim flange folded on one side, is that correct? This occurs only due
to serious overinflation and/or a defective rim, or brake surface
wear. If there was enough brake wear to produce a significant ridge,
the rim was probably just worn to the point that it was going to fail.
The Rolf wheels have a good reputation; I doubt that a defect is
involved, though their propensity for going wavy when a spoke breaks
is enough to make me not want any.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
 
In article
<[email protected]>,
"Dave Gittins" <[email protected]> wrote:

> The wheel didn't taco, as Americans picturesquely say. About a foot
> of it just folded over and the rest stayed substantially true. I
> believe the wheel had been used for quite some time, but the braking
> surfaces were not much worn. It had at least 20 spokes and none were
> bent or broken.


Would a photo be possible? It'd be worth a thousand words, as the
saying goes. Otherwise it's very hard to imagine what you're
describing, and it sounds like a failure I've never seen.
 
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:57:18 +0000, Werehatrack wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 06:08:00 +0930, "Dave Gittins"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>The wheel didn't taco, as Americans picturesquely say. About a foot of it
>>just folded over and the rest stayed substantially true. I believe the
>>wheel had been used for quite some time, but the braking surfaces were not
>>much worn. It had at least 20 spokes and none were bent or broken.

>
> "Not much worn" may be more worn than you think. It sounds like the
> rim flange folded on one side, is that correct? This occurs only due
> to serious overinflation and/or a defective rim, or brake surface
> wear. If there was enough brake wear to produce a significant ridge,
> the rim was probably just worn to the point that it was going to fail.
> The Rolf wheels have a good reputation; I doubt that a defect is
> involved, though their propensity for going wavy when a spoke breaks
> is enough to make me not want any.


I'd like to see a picture too. I'd also like to know the specs for
acceptable rim wear, as I ride these wheels (Rolf Sestriere) myself.

FWIW, I probably have ~7k miles on mine with few problems. I did break
two spokes in my rear wheel once, due to a freak water bottle incident,
but believe it or not I was able to ride home. The wheel trued up nicely
again with even tension, and has been trouble free ever since. I did go
through and stress relieve both wheels carefully at that point. Before
that they needed attention every few hundred miles.

Frankly I don't think the paired spoke pattern makes much difference.
It's the number of spokes and the strength of the rim. Other wheels with
the same number of spokes and a similar rim (like Ritchey) will be pretty
much the same.

These wheels wouldn't have been my first choice, but they came with a
bike. I considered selling them when they were still new and
replacing them with something more conventional, but I never got around to
it. So far, so good.

I just want to be careful about rim wear. Mine seem to have plenty of
life left, but I ride in the mountains, and get rained on a lot too.

Matt O.
 
[email protected] wrote:

>
> http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
>
> Jobst Brandt


So do you believe this, or do you consider this a joke?

Personally I've always felt 9-11 was likely an 'inside job'. It
was my gut feeling on the day of the event, and all the evidence
I've seen since hasn't changed my mind. All you need to do
is take one look at how WTC7 collapsed. People don't like to
hear to last 5 years of their life have been a lie.

http://www.st911.org/

(Really not wanting to open this can of worms in a bike group)

Eric
 
Matt O'Toole writes:

>>> The wheel didn't taco, as Americans picturesquely say. About a
>>> foot of it just folded over and the rest stayed substantially
>>> true. I believe the wheel had been used for quite some time, but
>>> the braking surfaces were not much worn. It had at least 20
>>> spokes and none were bent or broken.


>> "Not much worn" may be more worn than you think. It sounds like
>> the rim flange folded on one side, is that correct? This occurs
>> only due to serious over inflation and/or a defective rim, or brake
>> surface wear. If there was enough brake wear to produce a
>> significant ridge, the rim was probably just worn to the point that
>> it was going to fail. The Rolf wheels have a good reputation; I
>> doubt that a defect is involved, though their propensity for going
>> wavy when a spoke breaks is enough to make me not want any.


> I'd like to see a picture too. I'd also like to know the specs for
> acceptable rim wear, as I ride these wheels (Rolf Sestriere) myself.


Rim wear has almost nothing to do with wheel strength although it can
affect circumferential cracking and separation of the rim sidewall.
As I have mentioned here in the past, I rode an MA-2 rim in the Alps
in the rain until its sidewalls were a mere 0.5mm thick with no wheel
strength problem, although I dared not use the front brake descending
the Stelvio in pouring rain. As soon as things dried up I was back to
full brake performance descending in the Dolomites. I have a cross
section of that rim in my collection.

> FWIW, I probably have ~7k miles on mine with few problems. I did
> break two spokes in my rear wheel once, due to a freak water bottle
> incident, but believe it or not I was able to ride home. The wheel
> trued up nicely again with even tension, and has been trouble free
> ever since. I did go through and stress relieve both wheels
> carefully at that point. Before that they needed attention every
> few hundred miles.


That has no bearing on wheel collapse.

> Frankly I don't think the paired spoke pattern makes much
> difference. It's the number of spokes and the strength of the rim.
> Other wheels with the same number of spokes and a similar rim (like
> Ritchey) will be pretty much the same.


It makes a lot of negative difference, it being essentially a rim with
half as many but twice as thick spokes. Would you choose to ride a
seven spoke wheel which is what the rim sees in a 14 spoke Rolf wheel.

> These wheels wouldn't have been my first choice, but they came with
> a bike. I considered selling them when they were still new and
> replacing them with something more conventional, but I never got
> around to it. So far, so good.


Shoulda done that!

> I just want to be careful about rim wear. Mine seem to have plenty
> of life left, but I ride in the mountains, and get rained on a lot
> too.


Forget about the wear, it's the whole concept of the 1890 Lovelace
patent that remained dormant for good reason for 100 years. Because
Rolf Dietrich's patent is worthless in the light of Lovelace, TREK no
longer pays the man royalties not uses his wheels OEM.

It has nothing going for it other than fashion conversation piece.

Jobst Brandt
 
Dave Gittins writes:

> The wheel was a Rolf Prima Elan. She says she always checked the
> braking surfaces and they were OK. Tyre pressure was 110psi. No
> photo at present.


Explain once more the circumstances under which the wheel got warped.

Jobst Brandt
 
Eric Boo writes:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

> So do you believe this, or do you consider this a joke?


As you can see by reading it and seeing who authored it and on who's
web site it resides, it is not a joke and has merit as a searching
question with reasons why the question needs to be asked and
researched. Everythin about this reminds me of the great governmental
cover-ups of the past, except that this one is extra tragic and right
here at home. My reading of the GWB speech right afterward impressed
me as a declaration of WWIII, which it turned out to be. The whole
mess stinks from day one!

> Personally I've always felt 9-11 was likely an 'inside job'. It was
> my gut feeling on the day of the event, and all the evidence I've
> seen since hasn't changed my mind. All you need to do is take one
> look at how WTC7 collapsed. People don't like to hear to last 5
> years of their life have been a lie.


http://www.st911.org/

> (Really not wanting to open this can of worms in a bike group)


It deserves air for those who do not search the web for such
information. Turning a blind eye to what our nation is doing in the
world makes RBR idle talk. I miss Richard Feynman in things like this
because he could, in plain English, distill the essence of it.

Jobst Brandt
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Eric Boo writes:
>
> http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
>
> > So do you believe this, or do you consider this a joke?

>
> As you can see by reading it and seeing who authored it and on who's
> web site it resides, it is not a joke and has merit as a searching
> question with reasons why the question needs to be asked and
> researched. Everythin about this reminds me of the great governmental
> cover-ups of the past, except that this one is extra tragic and right
> here at home. My reading of the GWB speech right afterward impressed
> me as a declaration of WWIII, which it turned out to be. The whole
> mess stinks from day one!
>

(...)


Yeah it stinks. It f*cking reeks.

Here's how I see it. We've entered an era of resource
wars. We've got an exploding global population with a
widening gap between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'.
Combine this with declining resources (peak oil) and
an economy based on growth and you've got a recipe for
disaster.

Bush and Cheney are both former oil-men and are well
aware of the magnitude of the problem. America consumes
a quarter of the global oil pie (20 million barrels A
DAY). Any serious disruptions or declines in the supply
would crush the american economy like an empty beer can.
Already the higher cost of oil is severly pinching parts
of the economy - just look at the airlines

'War of Terror' is utterly bogus. You might as well declare
a 'War on Murder' as you can't stop terrorism any more
than you can stop people from killing each other.
Unfortunately we've now sown the seeds of hatred in
Iraq and we will likely be facing blow-back from this
for decades to come.

It's really a war to hopefully secure some of the last
large reserves of oil on the planet and prop up the
petro-dollar. 9-11 was used to gut the constitution
as well as loot large parts of the budget - look at
all the no-bid contracts in Iraq. Our leaders probably
are aware there's a high probablility of an economic
meltdown and they want to clamp down while they still
can.

What's sad is the utter cluelessness of most of the American
public on this issue. Our leaders have decided to use
war to attempt to solve the problem, IMO. Unfortuntely
there are no easy or simple solutions to the problem
of peak oil (read - the end of cheap energy). It's a
dire problem that's not being addressed.

Eric
 
> With one broken spoke this wheel goes out of true enough that it will
> not pass through a dual pivot (the most common) type brake, these
> brakes not being able to follow a wobbly rim as former brakes did.
> Don't ride this sort of wheel unless you value fashion more than
> function.


You keep saying this, and yet when I broke a spoke in mine, I was still able
to ride home without it rubbing on the brake. Yes, I had to open up the
brake (with the lever on the brake), but I didn't have to remove the cable,
or the pads. I did have to offset it slightly to the side. And it's not as
if I'm a lightweight guy (at the time, about 185; fortunately a bit lighter
now).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave Gittins writes:
>
>> The other day, a friend of mine had a nasty fall. She was using
>> Rolf wheels. I don't know the precise model. They have thin round
>> spokes arranged in pairs. There may be 20 or 24 spokes in all.

>
>> From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at no
>> great speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded over,
>> causing the wheel to jam in the forks.

>
> From what you say it is not clear what sort of deformation the wheel
> had. Just riding along will not bend a wheel sideways, there being no
> side loads on bicycle wheels without some gymnastics on the bicycle.
> Are any spokes broken? I suspect this is a Rolf Vector Pro wheel with
> 14 spokes.
>
> http://www.craigslist.org/sby/bik/146415277.html
>
> With one broken spoke this wheel goes out of true enough that it will
> not pass through a dual pivot (the most common) type brake, these
> brakes not being able to follow a wobbly rim as former brakes did.
> Don't ride this sort of wheel unless you value fashion more than
> function.
>
>> Has anybody experienced anything like this?

>
> We need more details.
>
> Jobst Brandt
 
Mike Jacoubowsky writes:

>>> The other day, a friend of mine had a nasty fall. She was using
>>> Rolf wheels. I don't know the precise model. They have thin
>>> round spokes arranged in pairs. There may be 20 or 24 spokes in
>>> all.


>>> From what we can work out, it appears that as she was turning at
>>> no great speed, about a foot of the rim of her front wheel folded
>>> over, causing the wheel to jam in the forks.


>> From what you say it is not clear what sort of deformation the
>> wheel had. Just riding along will not bend a wheel sideways, there
>> being no side loads on bicycle wheels without some gymnastics on
>> the bicycle. Are any spokes broken? I suspect this is a Rolf
>> Vector Pro wheel with 14 spokes.


http://www.craigslist.org/sby/bik/146415277.html

>> With one broken spoke this wheel goes out of true enough that it
>> will not pass through a dual pivot (the most common) type brake,
>> these brakes not being able to follow a wobbly rim as former brakes
>> did. Don't ride this sort of wheel unless you value fashion more
>> than function.


>>> Has anybody experienced anything like this?


>> We need more details.


>> With one broken spoke this wheel goes out of true enough that it
>> will not pass through a dual pivot (the most common) type brake,
>> these brakes not being able to follow a wobbly rim as former brakes
>> did. Don't ride this sort of wheel unless you value fashion more
>> than function.


> You keep saying this, and yet when I broke a spoke in mine, I was
> still able to ride home without it rubbing on the brake. Yes, I had
> to open up the brake (with the lever on the brake), but I didn't
> have to remove the cable, or the pads. I did have to offset it
> slightly to the side. And it's not as if I'm a lightweight guy (at
> the time, about 185; fortunately a bit lighter now).


So how well did your brake work when the QR was open. My old
Campagnolo Record Brake just wobbles from side to side as it clamps on
the rim as though nothing had changed. It is capable of swiveling
from side to side with no change in cable length, something a dual
pivot brake cannot do. It remains absolutely centered.

Jobst Brandt
 
[email protected] wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Eric Boo writes:
>>
>> http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
>>
>>> So do you believe this, or do you consider this a joke?

>>
>> As you can see by reading it and seeing who authored it and on who's
>> web site it resides, it is not a joke and has merit as a searching
>> question with reasons why the question needs to be asked and
>> researched. Everythin about this reminds me of the great
>> governmental cover-ups of the past, except that this one is extra
>> tragic and right here at home. My reading of the GWB speech right
>> afterward impressed me as a declaration of WWIII, which it turned
>> out to be. The whole mess stinks from day one!
>>

> (...)
>
>
> Yeah it stinks. It f*cking reeks.
>
> Here's how I see it. We've entered an era of resource
> wars. We've got an exploding global population with a
> widening gap between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'.
> Combine this with declining resources (peak oil) and
> an economy based on growth and you've got a recipe for
> disaster.
>
> Bush and Cheney are both former oil-men and are well
> aware of the magnitude of the problem. America consumes
> a quarter of the global oil pie (20 million barrels A
> DAY). Any serious disruptions or declines in the supply
> would crush the american economy like an empty beer can.
> Already the higher cost of oil is severly pinching parts
> of the economy - just look at the airlines
>
> 'War of Terror' is utterly bogus. You might as well declare
> a 'War on Murder' as you can't stop terrorism any more
> than you can stop people from killing each other.
> Unfortunately we've now sown the seeds of hatred in
> Iraq and we will likely be facing blow-back from this
> for decades to come.
>
> It's really a war to hopefully secure some of the last
> large reserves of oil on the planet and prop up the
> petro-dollar. 9-11 was used to gut the constitution
> as well as loot large parts of the budget - look at
> all the no-bid contracts in Iraq. Our leaders probably
> are aware there's a high probablility of an economic
> meltdown and they want to clamp down while they still
> can.
>
> What's sad is the utter cluelessness of most of the American
> public on this issue. Our leaders have decided to use
> war to attempt to solve the problem, IMO. Unfortuntely
> there are no easy or simple solutions to the problem
> of peak oil (read - the end of cheap energy). It's a
> dire problem that's not being addressed.
>
> Eric


What a pair of maroons.

PARANOID maroons.

Take it private, foilheads.

NF
 
Dave Gittins wrote:

> It had at least 20 spokes and none were bent or broken.


Did any of the spoke nipples in the affected area pull through
(separate from) the rim?

>From your description, it's hard to see how the wheel could have warped

like that without something breaking. Is it possible the wheel damaged
was the result of the crash and not the cause?

Art Harris