Touring Wheels for a Super Galaxy



Im thinking about treating myself to a new set of wheels for my Super
Galaxy (its a 96 model with original Mavic 221 rims at moment - rear
has been trued once, and has again gone out, so think its about time).

The rims Im looking at are either Alesa Endevour or Rigida Sputnik from
Spa Cycles or DRC ST19's from Hewitt Cycles. Ive already got a pair of
Deore Lx hubs, and both shops are similar pricing for having the wheels
built.

Any advice on which to go for ? Ive been told the ST19's are slightly
lighter, however Im a heavy rider and am carrying 2 full panniers
commuting 12 miles each day.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Im thinking about treating myself to a new set of wheels for my Super
> Galaxy (its a 96 model with original Mavic 221 rims at moment - rear
> has been trued once, and has again gone out, so think its about time).
>
> The rims Im looking at are either Alesa Endevour or Rigida Sputnik
> from Spa Cycles or DRC ST19's from Hewitt Cycles. Ive already got a
> pair of Deore Lx hubs, and both shops are similar pricing for having
> the wheels built.
>
> Any advice on which to go for ? Ive been told the ST19's are slightly
> lighter, however Im a heavy rider and am carrying 2 full panniers
> commuting 12 miles each day.


ST19 has got plenty of width and depth, judging by the profile on
http://withingtoncycles.co.uk/product.php?id=1352&node_id=1937 . This
could /possibly/ make up for the lower weight. Sorry I can't find the
dimensions of the other two rims at the moment.

Mavic A719 and A319 deserve places on the short list as well, I think.
I'm very happy with my A719 rear which sometimes takes very heavy loads,
albeit for short distances. Longer distances it's lightly loaded but it's
reassuring to have the strength when it comes to potholes, etc.

~PB
 
Ive been told that Mavic are not that great (mind you shop I was
talking to only stocked Alesa and Rigida)..... always had them on
previous bikes and were fine though. I'm swayed somewhat by reputation
of Hewitt Cycles, especially fact that they use the ST19's on their
Cheviot SE tourer, something which is worth drooooling over. If only I
had a spare £1200 to spend !!!! Plus Hewitt have been regularly
recommended in loads of Cycling Plus articles, so should be good.
 
On Sun, 7 May 2006 09:34:41 +0100, "Pete Biggs"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>

[snippage]
>
>Mavic A719 and A319 deserve places on the short list as well, I think.
>I'm very happy with my A719 rear which sometimes takes very heavy loads,
>albeit for short distances. Longer distances it's lightly loaded but it's
>reassuring to have the strength when it comes to potholes, etc.
>
>~PB
>


I'll second that plug for the A719.

I run 'em front & rear and they've supported my fat carcass +
occasional stupid loads over potholes that (literally) take yer breath
away. You know - that instantaneous breathless sinking feeling right
after the jolt where all good sense is telling you that something must
be bent or broken. Still as straight and true as the day they were
fitted, several 000's of miles ago...
 
[email protected] wrote:

> Ive been told that Mavic are not that great


It'd be interesting to find out /exactly/ what they don't like about the
latest models.

> (mind you shop I was
> talking to only stocked Alesa and Rigida).....


I bet they get them cheap :) Not that that means they're no good. The
Sputnik is probably bomb proof!

> always had them on
> previous bikes and were fine though. I'm swayed somewhat by reputation
> of Hewitt Cycles, especially fact that they use the ST19's on their
> Cheviot SE tourer, something which is worth drooooling over. If only I
> had a spare £1200 to spend !!!! Plus Hewitt have been regularly
> recommended in loads of Cycling Plus articles, so should be good.


The size, shape and features of ST19 are very similar to Mavic A319's
except it's lighter. So I wonder if the ST19 has thinner walls, meaning
it's less strong or durable?

A719 is similar again except has fewer walls. Since it's about the same
weight as ST19 I think its walls might be thicker, making it more durable
*if* the sidewalls are thicker. I don't have any experience of ST19 but
the design looks OK but nothing special to me.

~PB
 
"Tim Binns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 7 May 2006 09:34:41 +0100, "Pete Biggs"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>

> [snippage]
>>
>>Mavic A719 and A319 deserve places on the short list as well, I think.
>>I'm very happy with my A719 rear which sometimes takes very heavy loads,
>>albeit for short distances. Longer distances it's lightly loaded but it's
>>reassuring to have the strength when it comes to potholes, etc.
>>
>>~PB
>>

>
> I'll second that plug for the A719.
>
> I run 'em front & rear and they've supported my fat carcass +
> occasional stupid loads over potholes that (literally) take yer breath
> away. You know - that instantaneous breathless sinking feeling right
> after the jolt where all good sense is telling you that something must
> be bent or broken. Still as straight and true as the day they were
> fitted, several 000's of miles ago...


I'll third that plug for the A719. I have destroyed the Alesa and the
Rigida specced rear wheels with minimal effort. The Mavic 719 has coped
well with my considerable bulk and full camping load on the second half of
LEJOG and more with no attention needed from a spoke key
 
I wrote:
> The size, shape and features of ST19 are very similar to Mavic A319's
> except it's lighter. So I wonder if the ST19 has thinner walls,
> meaning it's less strong or durable?
>
> A719 is similar again except has fewer walls. Since it's about the
> same weight as ST19 I think its walls might be thicker, making it
> more durable
> *if* the sidewalls are thicker. I don't have any experience of ST19
> but the design looks OK but nothing special to me.


Correction: A719 is lighter: 565 v 580g

(But I think I'm still right about A319)

~PB
 
Similar threads have been in this group for ages. Not specifically
about these particular rims, hubs, spokes and their various
combinations. My attitude is buy a standard mass produced shop wheel
and throw it away after a year, or keep it as a spare. Just how many
shop wheels can you get for such expense? Dare I say it - is there an
element of one-up-manship in wheels that cost so much.

Again this just a personal preference.
 
in message <[email protected]>,
[email protected] ('[email protected]') wrote:

> Ive been told that Mavic are not that great (mind you shop I was
> talking to only stocked Alesa and Rigida)..... always had them on
> previous bikes and were fine though.


After things I've done to Mavic rims recently, I have to say I think the
person you were talking to was being a little economical with the
actualite. They're /very/ strong.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Friends don't send friends HTML formatted emails.
 
"archierob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> My attitude is buy a standard mass produced shop wheel
> and throw it away after a year, or keep it as a spare.


I've never found a 'standard mass produced shop wheel' to be any good. ****
hubs, **** rims, **** spokes, **** building - each has suffered at least one
of these.

> Just how many shop wheels can you get for such expense?


Fewer than you might think.

> Dare I say it - is there an
> element of one-up-manship in wheels that cost so much.


No - it's about getting something which not only works, but works well, and
does so for several years. This is a better long term proposition than yours
as you not only get a wheel which runs better, it's also actually cheaper
than buying several **** ones.

We're not talking about hugely expensive stuff here - no gratuitous eye
candy or other 'bling'. Just decent quality engineering.

cheers,
clive
 
On Sun, 07 May 2006 13:20:16 +0100, Simon Brooke
<[email protected]> wrote:

>in message <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> Ive been told that Mavic are not that great (mind you shop I was
>> talking to only stocked Alesa and Rigida)..... always had them on
>> previous bikes and were fine though.

>
>After things I've done to Mavic rims recently, I have to say I think the
>person you were talking to was being a little economical with the
>actualite. They're /very/ strong.



Depends on the Mavic rim, I would have thought. MA2 was a lovely,
simple, inexpensive rim. Double eyeleted I think, went on for ever.
So it was replaced by the MA3. The MA3s I had seemed to be made of
cheese, wearing the side walls at an alarming rate.

The A719, however, as others have already posted, is v. good. Box
section, eyleted and all that good stuff.


Tim
 
archierob wrote:
> Similar threads have been in this group for ages. Not specifically
> about these particular rims, hubs, spokes and their various
> combinations. My attitude is buy a standard mass produced shop wheel
> and throw it away after a year, or keep it as a spare. Just how many
> shop wheels can you get for such expense? Dare I say it - is there an
> element of one-up-manship in wheels that cost so much.
>
> Again this just a personal preference.
>
>



I bought some handmade wheels, built to my spec. in 1990. Deore XT hubs,
Mavic Module 3CD rims IIRC. £125. Not cheap by the standards of the day,
but after many thousands of miles, loaded and not loaded, I still
haven't had them trued. A top builder made me some top wheels that are
still going strong 16 years later. I used one of them yesterday for 195
miles. I think I'd have spent a lot more than £125 on mass produced
wheels over the last 16 years, not to mention the anguish of them
breaking in the middle of nowhere whilst on tour. One upmanship ? no one
drools over touring bike wheels.

Used only one ? To the OP, I also have a front built around a SON that
has a DRC ST19. Used it for about a year with no problems at all.
Nothing bad to report, cheaper than A179, the only other thing I'd
consider. I keep saying this though a **** wheel builder will make the
best components into a **** wheel .
 
archierob wrote:
> Similar threads have been in this group for ages. Not specifically
> about these particular rims, hubs, spokes and their various
> combinations. My attitude is buy a standard mass produced shop wheel
> and throw it away after a year, or keep it as a spare. Just how many
> shop wheels can you get for such expense?


It's actually cheaper in the long run to just replace the rims if/when
they wear out. Decent hubs and spokes will last many years and most
decent rims cost just £15 to £35 each. Most importantly, with good
components and a good build they'll be less risk of a broken spoke or
buckled wheel in the middle of a ride, and less unnecessary weight in some
cases as well.

> Dare I say it - is there an
> element of one-up-manship in wheels that cost so much.


I don't think so! Is £90 to £200 "so much" for a pair of such important
components? Bear in mind quite normal bikes nowdays cost £350 to £1000+.
I think most cyclists could eventually afford the one-off payment of £90
then the occasional £15 rim transplant.

Buid yourself and you might save a few more quid too.

~PB
 
Mavic Vs DRC
A recent article in Cycle magazine, suggests that 28mm don't fit as
well on Mavic touring rims as they do on DRC19's. Paul Hewitt gives
this as his reason for changing to DRC a few years ago. Apparently
both rims are good for the 30-35mm range, Mavic better if you want to
go a little wider and DRC if narrower.
The wheels that came on my Hewitt tourer were trouble free for the life
of the rims. I had a LBS replace the rims with the same model DRC,
they've needed truing twice in 5,000 miles. Shows it's more about
build than components, I'll be back to Hewitts for the next pair.
 
PH wrote:
> Mavic Vs DRC
> A recent article in Cycle magazine, suggests that 28mm don't fit as
> well on Mavic touring rims as they do on DRC19's.


Besides being a bit tight to get on, new-type 28mm Panaracer Paselas* fit
Mavic A719 fine, and other users use various other 28mm and even 25mm
tyres on A719 with no problems according to reports on rec.bicycles.tech.

Even a Vittoria 23mm fits (not that I'd normally use it on this rim).
Actually it wouldn't seat properly when I first tried it, but it did after
a full pump-up.

* now about the same width as most other 28mm tyres, unlike older versions
that were narrower.

~PB
 
Apologies, I've just re read the article (Cycle, Feb/Mar 2006, Q&A
Section) It doesn't say that 28mm tyres don't fit, it says that
"they won't roll as smoothly or give as much comfort as they ought
to"
 
PH wrote:
> Apologies, I've just re read the article (Cycle, Feb/Mar 2006, Q&A
> Section) It doesn't say that 28mm tyres don't fit, it says that
> "they won't roll as smoothly or give as much comfort as they ought
> to"


Thanks for the clarification.

If the rim widths are different, there may be some difference in steering
or traction from the different tyre profile created, but I don't see how
comfort would be different when the volume of air is the same. I've
noticed the same tyre becomes shallower but wider on a wider rim.

You could always have a wide rim at the back for high strength and a
narrower rim front to save weight or to allow a narrower tyre. Aesthetics
wise, any oddness in shape and width is hardly noticeable when the colours
are exactly the same (as they are with the various Mavic silver models,
for example).

~PB
 
Simon Brooke wrote:
>
> After things I've done to Mavic rims recently, I have to say I think the
> person you were talking to was being a little economical with the
> actualite. They're /very/ strong.


Seconded - I've always ridden Mavics - mostly Open Pro, with a short
spell on MA3s - for cyclo-cross, using one wheelset for both training
and racing ('cause I'm a cheapskate). They've coped more than
admirably, whether it's rocky terrain and tree roots in the Chevin
Forest Park [1] or me practising my bunny-hopping skills ;-)

David Belcher

[1] Brilliant for off-road training if you live in that bit of Leeds.
 
"Pete Biggs" <[email protected]> wrote:

> If the rim widths are different, there may be some difference in steering
> or traction from the different tyre profile created, but I don't see how
> comfort would be different when the volume of air is the same. I've
> noticed the same tyre becomes shallower but wider on a wider rim.


Air volume doesn't have a direct bearing on comfort.

The theory is that a tyre will adopt an arc of roughly constant curvature
between the beads. The wider the rim, therefore, the larger the radius of
curvature across a tyre of a given nominal width. The vertical compliance
(and therefore the comfort) of the tyre is related to the rate of change of
contact patch area with vertical displacement, which increases roughly in
proportion to the radius of curvature of tyre cross section at a given
pressure.

To the OP, I'd go for the Sputniks.

James Thomson
 
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote:

> After things I've done to Mavic rims recently, I have to say I think
> the person you were talking to was being a little economical with
> the actualite. They're /very/ strong.


It's not impact strength that's the problem. Some of Mavic's models have
been known for fatigue cracking - either in the rim face around the
eyelets, or inside the rim in the internal wall. The newer models have
gained weight (e.g. 420g for an XC717 versus 395g for an X517), and some
are shot peened to reduce the propensity to crack. I've had to throw away
two low-mileage X517s that Mavic refused to warranty.

James Thomson