Touring wheelset...

[Rick]

Peter Cole wrote:

>
> Paselas are nice tires at a great price, but they run a little narrow.
> I'd think about 32mm for touring.

Not any longer. They changed the manufacturing process last year, the
tires now run fairly true to the markings.

- rick

 

[Pete Biggs]

Rick wrote:

> For heavy duty, the A719 is many, many, many times better than the
> CXP33. If you do not like the A719, go to the Velocity Dyad or Sun
> CR18, both much better than the CXP33 for this application.

Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty as they
help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride. However, I accept
that this is not always possible due to clearance problems. The answer then
is to get a different frame

~PB

 

[LewW]

Pat, here's my real-life experience:

My touring bike has Mavic T519 (same as current A719) rims, 36h, XT
hubs, cross-3 laced with DT Alpine Swiss III double butted spokes,
Continental TT2000 770C-32 tires. I built the wheels myself. I am a
real Clydesdale, and I have had my bike loaded so it weighs nearly 100
lbs. This setup has been absolutely bomb-proof. For a while I was using
a 37 tire on the back, but this proved to be unnecessary. No need to go
narrower than 32 on the tires.

A good wheel builder is essential. You can teach yourself how to do it.
Get Jobst Brandt's book, a spoke tensiometer, and a truing stand.
Probably out of your budget, but a very sound investment.

I have CXP33 rims on my go-fast road bike and they work fine there, but
would not be appropriate for touring.

Hope this helps,
Lew

 

[David]

Jim,

> hmmmm, you do not cite which page, and you didn't bother to context the
> link to the 90% statement. it may have been clear to you, but not to
> me. and having quickly scanned the site, i /still/ don't see a 90%
> statement.
>

Read the part where the rim will ovalize under a 200lbs load with
loosely tightened spokes. Any stiff rim, including the A719 or the
T520, T519 will ovalize or go out of true when built poor or tensioned
incorrectly. Therefore, the stiffness of the rim has nothing to do
with the final stiffness of the wheel, hence the 90% figure. The 90%
figure is just what I think, but seemed to concur with another master
builder in town who he seemed to agree with me. Spokes take all the
stress (compression and torque) and therefore, they all have a fatique
lifespan which (depending on the spokes you use) sometimes can be
shorter than the rims they hold, if ridden in very dry and sunny
weather all year round.

> besides, do you really think a low-pro lightweight racing rim is just as
> stiff as a heavy duty touring rim?
>

You are comparing apples and oranges here.. Light weight low spoke
count wheels carry less spokes, tensioned much higher than normal
wheels and the rims are designed stiffer to compensate for that, while
still maintaining light weight status. Therefore, it has less (or
lesser) meat area (braking) than say a T520 or a A719. If both are
ridden in foul winter weather with constant braking and pads are
contaminated with sand and grit, the pro lightweight rims will be
killed sooner than touring rims. When the braking area of the rims
have less than 1mm thickness on both sides, you are looking at
structural integrity being compromised really soon -- rims will break.
The A719 will break later, because it's got a lot of meat area. And
yes, I replaced my T520s twice a year and that is using Koolstop black
pads!

David.

 

[David]

> Sapim are fine spokes as are DT.
> 14/15 on both sides on a well built wheel will have the same
> reliability as one with mixed gauges., in my experience of building
> thousands of wherels w/o ever mixing gauges on any of them. Tension is
> tension, regardless of spoke gauge, measured in kgf.
>
>

The rider is < 200lbs. With a bike and a reasonable touring load of
say $50, you're looking at around 270 to 280lbs..
That was my recommendation based on experience of knowing people of the
same load bearing that had broken spokes before..

>
> It should also be noted that the importer of Sapim in the USA is too
> lazy to stock all lengths, why I do not use them, even tho they are 1/2
> the cost of DT.
>

Good to know that.. I don't reside in the states and I need to get
them there, so it's a bit pricier than DT.

David.

 

[[email protected]]

Peter Cole writes:

> I think a MA3 is a bit light for touring. I'd go with the A719
> (T519/520). I got a pair of LX/T520 wheels for <$100 mail-order.
> An uncommonly good deal, but you should be able to find a pre-built
> set for <$200. Adjust the tension and stress relieve and you've got
> a set of wheels as good as any custom-built.

> Paselas are nice tires at a great price, but they run a little
> narrow. I'd think about 32mm for touring.

> It's really hard to beat LX hubs, they're probably the best hub
> value on the market. They are very durable. I'd look no further.

As I see it, the whole rim business is a tragedy these days with all
the latest boutique wheels being bought at many times their
predecessors cost along with all the failures reported here.
Fortunately I still have plenty of MA-2 rims that weigh less than the
"elite" stuff on the market today and last until the sidewalls are
worn through, sidewalls that are thicker than the machined ones. No
pull-outs or cracks around spoke holes. On the other hand, they are
not welded, have no machined sidewalls, and no hard anodizing. On
that basis, they must be worthless from what I read here.

I don't understand the marketing intelligentsia. The Mavic MA-2 was
the standard of the industry, available here and in Europe in every
bicycle shop. What have they gained since then? The Ksyrium looks to
me to be a caricature of the syndrome both in name and execution.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

Pete Biggs writes:

>> For heavy duty, the A719 is many, many, many times better than the
>> CXP33. If you do not like the A719, go to the Velocity Dyad or Sun
>> CR18, both much better than the CXP33 for this application.

> Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty
> as they help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride.
> However, I accept that this is not always possible due to clearance
> problems. The answer then is to get a different frame.

What sort of roads are you guys riding on? Considering the many
years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio, Albula,
Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many cobblestone
roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are needed for. I
don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende today would go
any better on 32mm tires.

This seems to be a competition of raising spurious riding conditions
to support some oddball wheels. Just spoke up some durable 36 spoke
rims and be done with it. There still are some of those rims made
although they remain well hidden.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

[email protected] wrote:
> Pete Biggs writes:
>
> >> For heavy duty, the A719 is many, many, many times better than the
> >> CXP33. If you do not like the A719, go to the Velocity Dyad or Sun
> >> CR18, both much better than the CXP33 for this application.
>
> > Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty
> > as they help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride.
> > However, I accept that this is not always possible due to clearance
> > problems. The answer then is to get a different frame.
>
> What sort of roads are you guys riding on? Considering the many
> years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio, Albula,
> Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many cobblestone
> roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are needed for. I
> don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende today would go
> any better on 32mm tires.
>
> This seems to be a competition of raising spurious riding conditions
> to support some oddball wheels. Just spoke up some durable 36 spoke
> rims and be done with it. There still are some of those rims made
> although they remain well hidden.
>
> Jobst Brandt

Based on your pictures Mr. Brandt, you ride unloaded on your loaded
tours. Your baggage consists of a very large seatbag. 10-15 pounds?
My European tours were with front and rear panniers, handlebar bag, and
stuff on the rear rack. 50 pounds or so of baggage. Unsuspended
baggage. I liked having 32 or 35 mm tires on my Mavic ISO Tour rims(or
something like that name), 36 spoke, 14 straight gauge, Shimano Deore
DX hubs.

 

[Pete Biggs]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> What sort of roads are you guys riding on?

Partly: London urban streets, with such a large number of vicious bumps and
potholes that I can not avoid them all because of distractions from traffic,
etc.

> Considering the many
> years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio, Albula,
> Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many cobblestone
> roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are needed for. I
> don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende today would go
> any better on 32mm tires.

Cobbles + 25mm = punishment. What is the point when not in a great hurry?
28, 30 or 32mm does provide more suspension. If 25mm is better than 23mm,
why stop at 25mm? What does the little bit of extra weight and rolling
resistance matter on a practical bike?

> This seems to be a competition of raising spurious riding conditions
> to support some oddball wheels.

Real conditions, real practical tyres. I don't claim they're absolutely
essential -- I used to use 1 1/8" and also ride a bike with 23mm tyres --
but they are more reliable and comfortable.

~PB

 

[Rick]

[email protected] wrote:
> Peter Cole writes:
>
> > I think a MA3 is a bit light for touring. I'd go with the A719
> > (T519/520). I got a pair of LX/T520 wheels for <$100 mail-order.
> > An uncommonly good deal, but you should be able to find a pre-built
> > set for <$200. Adjust the tension and stress relieve and you've got
> > a set of wheels as good as any custom-built.
>
> > Paselas are nice tires at a great price, but they run a little
> > narrow. I'd think about 32mm for touring.
>
> > It's really hard to beat LX hubs, they're probably the best hub
> > value on the market. They are very durable. I'd look no further.
>
> As I see it, the whole rim business is a tragedy these days with all
> the latest boutique wheels being bought at many times their
> predecessors cost along with all the failures reported here.
> Fortunately I still have plenty of MA-2 rims that weigh less than the
> "elite" stuff on the market today and last until the sidewalls are
> worn through, sidewalls that are thicker than the machined ones. No
> pull-outs or cracks around spoke holes. On the other hand, they are
> not welded, have no machined sidewalls, and no hard anodizing. On
> that basis, they must be worthless from what I read here.
>
> I don't understand the marketing intelligentsia. The Mavic MA-2 was
> the standard of the industry, available here and in Europe in every
> bicycle shop. What have they gained since then? The Ksyrium looks to
> me to be a caricature of the syndrome both in name and execution.
>

Were we all so foresighted to have stocked up on MA-2's when Mavic
discontinued them. I agree that the boutique wheel situation is out of
hand, the trick these days is to find serviceable rims and build one's
own wheels. Which rim to use for which purpose is the issue here. If
enough of us continue to buy the few semi-decent rims left, perhaps the
manufacturers will continue to provide them and we will not be forced
to use those marketing wonders. Perhaps I should be stocking up on Sun
CR-18's and/or A719's for future use.

- rick

 

[Chalo]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> Pete Biggs writes:
> >
> > Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty
> > as they help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride.
> > However, I accept that this is not always possible due to clearance
> > problems. The answer then is to get a different frame.
>
> What sort of roads are you guys riding on? Considering the many
> years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio, Albula,
> Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many cobblestone
> roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are needed for. I
> don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende today would go
> any better on 32mm tires.

I don't have to ride on unpaved Alpine roads to need bigger tires than
you seem to think are warranted. I have pinch-flatted a 700x38 tire,
inflated to 100psi, on the potholed bike lane on my way home from work.
That was partly because of the 35 lb. battery pack on the rear rack,
which (like touring luggage) cannot stand up off the saddle to provide
a measure of suspension. If I'd been using a 25mm tire, the wheel
would have been wrecked; as it was, I got away with only a small dent
in the rear rim.

If you look at photographs of racing bikes from the early 1900s, you'll
see that even track bikes were equipped with ~38mm tires. Casing
materials capable of withstanding higher pressures may have allowed the
use of narrower tires, but wider tires still come with ride quality,
traction, and damage-preventing benefits that narrower tires can't
match.

1899 Eagle track bike:
http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Eagle_full.jpg

Chalo Colina

 

[Tom Nakashima]

"Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I don't have to ride on unpaved Alpine roads to need bigger tires than
> you seem to think are warranted. I have pinch-flatted a 700x38 tire,
> inflated to 100psi, on the potholed bike lane on my way home from work.
> That was partly because of the 35 lb. battery pack on the rear rack,
> which (like touring luggage) cannot stand up off the saddle to provide
> a measure of suspension. If I'd been using a 25mm tire, the wheel
> would have been wrecked; as it was, I got away with only a small dent
> in the rear rim.
>
> If you look at photographs of racing bikes from the early 1900s, you'll
> see that even track bikes were equipped with ~38mm tires. Casing
> materials capable of withstanding higher pressures may have allowed the
> use of narrower tires, but wider tires still come with ride quality,
> traction, and damage-preventing benefits that narrower tires can't
> match.
>
> 1899 Eagle track bike:
> http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Eagle_full.jpg
>
> Chalo Colina
>

Nice classic, beautiful bike!
35 lb. battery pack? What was that used for?
-tom

 

[Peter Cole]

David wrote:
> The A719 will break later, because it's got a lot of meat area. And
> yes, I replaced my T520s twice a year and that is using Koolstop black
> pads!

You might do better with the salmon colored pads.

 

[Rico X. Partay]

Chalo wrote:

> 1899 Eagle track bike:
> http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Eagle_full.jpg


I guess the chain gets a little slack after 106 years of
racing.

 

[[email protected]]

mavic is tops, yes? the CR-18 doesn,t get any praise?
i ride- 165 rider, 10 pounds front bag, 40 rear bag every day at this
time over a ten mile round trip but last winter a 30 every day and two
days a week a fifty miler each ...
and a shopping day at 70 pounds rear 20 pounds plus front.
i take it slow over bumps to reduce maintenance time but have ridden
the 70 pounder over a ten mile course at 25 mph-downwind or downblast.
this is a Conti TT 27"/cr-18/14 ga dt/deore hub/25 bearings/philwood or
finish line teflon grease.
it works ok but frankly traveling across the country with the full
touring load at around 70 pounds total minus beans wood not be a sure
thing. one would expect failures
but this setup for light touring of a few days with mainteneance
intervals is fool proof.
for cross country with the stove and beans, i'd go with the phil wood
and an extra TT wound against the rack. and a pump that will reliabley
get the TT up to 75; a FRESH bearing and greased phil wood plus FRESH
spokes and ditto specialized self sealing tubes

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

Actually, you don't have to spend that much on a set of wheels. Now I
only weigh 170, but I usually tour with panniers and camping gear, which
should make up the extra 30 lbs or so. The wheels I have on my Tourer,
which I have had for five years now and are still working great, still
true, I bought for $125 for the set at Nashbar.

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[[email protected]]

Russell Seaton1 writes:

>>>> For heavy duty, the A719 is many, many, many times better than
>>>> the CXP33. If you do not like the A719, go to the Velocity Dyad
>>>> or Sun CR18, both much better than the CXP33 for this
>>>> application.

>>> Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty
>>> as they help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride.
>>> However, I accept that this is not always possible due to
>>> clearance problems. The answer then is to get a different frame.

>> What sort of roads are you guys riding on? Considering the many
>> years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio,
>> Albula, Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many
>> cobblestone roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are
>> needed for. I don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende
>> today would go any better on 32mm tires.

>> This seems to be a competition of raising spurious riding
>> conditions to support some oddball wheels. Just spoke up some
>> durable 36 spoke rims and be done with it. There still are some of
>> those rims made although they remain well hidden.

> Based on your pictures Mr. Brandt, you ride unloaded on your loaded
> tours. Your baggage consists of a very large seatbag. 10-15
> pounds? My European tours were with front and rear panniers,
> handlebar bag, and stuff on the rear rack. 50 pounds or so of
> baggage. Unsuspended baggage. I liked having 32 or 35 mm tires on
> my Mavic ISO Tour rims(or something like that name), 36 spoke, 14
> straight gauge, Shimano Deore DX hubs.

Well people who haul everything including the kitchen sink don't need
to ask about wheels, they have the experience about what works. I
decided long ago that eating and sleeping at the end of long daily
rides is best done in a dining room and sleeping under comfortable
covers under roof. I tried the camping routing and decided that I had
had enough of that in the US Army. I like to ride rather than to
emulate Mayflower Moving and Storage.

I encourage riders to consider saving up a small travel chest for the
expense of enjoying the ride. Putting up a shelter and getting into a
sleeping bag in the rain is not my choice, and I have observed many
thunderstorms in the night on tours in the Alps as well as the Sierra
Nevada locally. When I finish a day's ride in bad weather, a hot
shower and warm food before getting under warm covers is what makes
the day's ride an adventure rather than part of an ordeal.

From the durability of 36-spoke wheels with 1.8-1.6mm diameter spokes
I believe the ancients found a good match. I think the reasons for
that are well stated in "the Bicycle Wheel".

Jobst Brandt

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:48:02 -0700, "Rico X. Partay" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Chalo wrote:
>
>> 1899 Eagle track bike:
>> http://www.theracingbicycle.com/images/Eagle_full.jpg
>
> I guess the chain gets a little slack after 106 years of
>racing.

It's not as easy to replace 1" pitch block chain when it gets worn.

Jasper

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

> Pete Biggs writes:
>
> >> For heavy duty, the A719 is many, many, many times better than the
> >> CXP33. If you do not like the A719, go to the Velocity Dyad or Sun
> >> CR18, both much better than the CXP33 for this application.
>
> > Fair enough, except I would want to use wider tyres for heavy duty
> > as they help protect the rim as well as giving a better ride.
> > However, I accept that this is not always possible due to clearance
> > problems. The answer then is to get a different frame.
>
> What sort of roads are you guys riding on? Considering the many
> years of riding the Alps on unpaved mountain passes (Stelvio, Albula,
> Pordoi, St. Bernard, Simplon, Splugen) and the many cobblestone
> roads, I can't imagine what tires fatter than 25mm are needed for. I
> don't think descending the 19th century Col de Tende today would go
> any better on 32mm tires.
>
> This seems to be a competition of raising spurious riding conditions
> to support some oddball wheels. Just spoke up some durable 36 spoke
> rims and be done with it. There still are some of those rims made
> although they remain well hidden.

Name some? The Torelli Master is discontinued. Ambrosio
rims are not available in the USA. ???

--
Michael Press

 

[Chalo]

Tom Nakashima wrote:
>
> "Chalo" wrote:
> > I have pinch-flatted a 700x38 tire,
> > inflated to 100psi, on the potholed bike lane on my way home from work.
> > That was partly because of the 35 lb. battery pack on the rear rack,
> > which (like touring luggage) cannot stand up off the saddle to provide
> > a measure of suspension.
>
> 35 lb. battery pack? What was that used for?

The bike was equipped with electric assist using a pair of sealed lead
acid batteries. It's since been superseded by a faster, longer-ranged
electric-assist bike with a 53 lb., 36V battery pack.

Carrying such a heavy battery around makes the roughly $600 price of an
equivalent NiMH battery (about 25 lbs.) seem somehow more reasonable.
Certainly it's a better $/gram ratio for the weight savings than most
lightweight cycle parts. Lithium-polymer batteries (9 lbs. for an
equivalent battery) are entering the market so fast, they may prove to
be a better option by the time I am ready to upgrade.

Chalo Colina