# Spoke and Rim Choices for Powertap...



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

I'm building a Powertap wheel that will be used for both racing and training. I have it narrowed down to Mavic CXP 33s, or Velocity AeroHead rims. Then DT aerolite or Sapim CX-Ray spokes. 

I weigh 190 lbs. and I asked a local wheel builder if I could use the super light Aerohead and he said only if i used CX-ray spokes as they make for a really strong wheel. This is the lightest combination so it is fine with me as long as it will be durable enough for plenty of hard miles.

I am lacing the rear 32 holes 3 cross and the front 28 holes 2 cross

Does anyone have any input that could help me make a decision.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

I'm a little lighter than you at 180 and I have a 28spoke Powertap with CXrays and a Kinlin XR-300 rim. Front is same rim/ spokes, but only 24 spokes on a WI H1 hub. This set works well for me. The Kinlin rim does weigh about 40 grams more than the Areohead, but it may build up into a more durable wheel, especially the rear. You may get away with only 24 spokes on the front, but let your builder give you some advice there. 

When I first had my Powertap built, I went with an Aerohead OC rim, but then had some wheels built using the Kinlin XR-300 that I liked so well I had the Powertap rebuilt with the Kinlin. I've had it that way for over a year on a bike I use for training and on my trainer and haven't had to touch it with a spoke wrench. 

For spokes, I would go with the CX-Rays, they are cheaper than Aerolites and I haven't had any problems with them at all.


----------



## ohdee (Nov 9, 2007)

boilerup17 said:


> I'm building a Powertap wheel that will be used for both racing and training. I have it narrowed down to Mavic CXP 33s, or Velocity AeroHead rims. Then DT aerolite or Sapim CX-Ray spokes.
> 
> I weigh 190 lbs. and* I asked a local wheel builder if I could use the super light Aerohead and he said only if i used CX-ray spokes as they make for a really strong wheel* . This is the lightest combination so it is fine with me as long as it will be durable enough for plenty of hard miles.
> 
> ...


Bad answer, find a new builder. 

I'm building a Powertap laced to the XR300's using DT Comps (32/3x). Plan to use it for training and racing. Sure, I could save a few grams going for the CX Rays, but I assure you they will not make the wheel any stronger.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

ohdee said:


> Bad answer, find a new builder.


That is a bad answer. CX-Rays are great spokes, but they are identical to Aerolites, and have the same stiffness as any 2.0/1.5mm spoke... which means they are the least stiff SS.

Why have you narrowed it down to CXP33 and Aerohead rims? There are lots of viable alternatives. Are you limited in the spoke counts you can use (ie hubs only come in higher counts)? Do you care about aerodynamics? Do you prefer a shallow rim? Some people think the shallow rims ride smoother.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

I picked those because the deeper rims should be stiffer and stronger than traditional box section rims. I was going w/ a high spoke count because I'm big and I flex frames and wheels when climbing and sprinting. I want them to be strong first then high performance second. The bladed spokes w/ the slightly of deep rim profile will make them slightly aero but I doubt its enough to matter. I would like them to be light too. Which is why i'm attracted to the aeroheads over the Mavics.

I don't have my hubs yet so I can use any spoke count I want I just was going w/ 32/28 for strength and theres not much of a weight penalty w/ the super light spokes. 

If I was rich I would just use carbon clinchers like the edge 45 mm but those would double the price of my build. 

so I guess I want my wheels to be this:
strong / durable for low maintenance
stiff enough for me to sprint on 
light 
aero


----------



## ohdee (Nov 9, 2007)

boilerup17 said:


> I picked those because the deeper rims should be stiffer and stronger than traditional box section rims. I was going w/ a high spoke count because I'm big and I flex frames and wheels when climbing and sprinting. I want them to be strong first then high performance second. The bladed spokes w/ the slightly of deep rim profile will make them slightly aero but I doubt its enough to matter. I would like them to be light too. Which is why i'm attracted to the aeroheads over the Mavics.
> 
> I don't have my hubs yet so I can use any spoke count I want I just was going w/ 32/28 for strength and theres not much of a weight penalty w/ the super light spokes.
> 
> ...


Many many options. With an emphasis on strength/stiffness, I'd suggest you look at the Kinlin XR300 and go with 32 spokes. This rim is lighter than most (if not all) rims at that depth and it makes a very strong wheel. Personally, I'm not a big fan of Mavic rims. I think they're a little overpriced and I've seen a whole lot of premature cracked rims. I do like the Aeroheads, in fact I have a set of them I use as commuters and I am very happy with them. 

For spokes, you could use CX-Rays for lower weight but you will sacrifice a small amount of stiffness as opposed to using 2.0/1.0 round spokes. With 32 holes, it's probably negligible. I weigh the same as you and chose the 2.0/1.8 spokes mainly for cost reasons.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

boilerup17 said:


> so I guess I want my wheels to be this:
> strong / durable for low maintenance
> stiff enough for me to sprint on
> light
> aero


Since I've been riding the Kinlin XR200 rims with 20f and 28r, and at 170 lbs I find them totally adequate, I'm inclined to suggest the same spoke count with XR270 rims for you. I previously rode the XR300s (very similar in strength and stiffness to the XR270s) in 18f and 24r 15k miles and never needed to touch them. Unless you are tough on equipment, you will be fine with the XR270s and 20f, 28r.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Ok guys I think I think I am going with the Kinlin xr300 and CX-rays. Thanks for the help. 
I think w/ that deep of a rim i will go with 28 3x, 24 2x. What spoke tension is suggested for the kinlin rims?


----------



## ohdee (Nov 9, 2007)

I'd go 2x on the rear for 28 holes. The Powertaps have a large diameter flange and 3x will be a pain to lace.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

When rruff rebuilt my 28 hole Powertap last year to convert it to the XR 300, he laced it 2X and its been fine for me.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

boilerup17 said:


> I think w/ that deep of a rim i will go with 28 3x, 24 2x. What spoke tension is suggested for the kinlin rims?


You can go up to 120kg on the DS rear no problem... maybe even a bit more if you wish since these rims are very good about not developing cracks. No reason to go above 100kg on the front. 

If you are running Shimano or SRAM and using CX-Rays or Aerolites, I prefer to lace the DS rear 1x heads in. It improves the stiffness and NDS tension a good bit. Lace the NDS 2x.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

Now, you have made me wonder just how you did lace mine last year? I just assumed it was 2X on both sides, since that's how you had done other rear wheels for me, but I'll have to look at it tonight.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

I have it down as 1x heads in on the DS. That works well with all S freehubs I've come across. On Campy the clearance to the derailleur might be too tight.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

rruff said:


> If you are running Shimano or SRAM and using CX-Rays or Aerolites, I prefer to lace the DS rear 1x heads in. It improves the stiffness and NDS tension a good bit. Lace the NDS 2x.



Isn't that backwards of how most wheels are built? Your saying that lacing the Drive Side of the power tap 1x will make for a stiffer wheel than 2x, on both sides?

The Mavics that are 1x drive and radial non-drive come to mind...


The user manual specifies that the non drive side of the powertap must be at least 2x. I always assumed that the drive side would be equal or more?


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Also do i need to use long nipples w/ the Kinlin rims or is the std. 12mm ok?


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

I'm sure you are correct. I never paid much attention to it. It works, that's all that I care about, its plenty stiff for me.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

boilerup17 said:


> Also do i need to use long nipples w/ the Kinlin rims or is the std. 12mm ok?


12mm are more than enough. The thickness of the rim where the spokes go through is the important parameter, and the Kinlin rims are pretty thin there.


----------



## samh (May 5, 2004)

*lacing powertap*



boilerup17 said:


> Isn't that backwards of how most wheels are built? Your saying that lacing the Drive Side of the power tap 1x will make for a stiffer wheel than 2x, on both sides?
> 
> The Mavics that are 1x drive and radial non-drive come to mind...
> 
> ...


I would lace both 2x. doing different lacing doesnt make much difference. fwiw I have 32h 3x/3x no problem.


----------



## ohdee (Nov 9, 2007)

boilerup17 said:


> Isn't that backwards of how most wheels are built? Your saying that lacing the Drive Side of the power tap 1x will make for a stiffer wheel than 2x, on both sides?


The powertap hubs are different in that the drive torque goes through the NDS. That's why the user manual says 2x on the NDS, minimum. 

1x heads-in will be a little more stiff (laterally) but I'd probably stick with 2x both sides if it were me.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Hmm there are some discrepancies. I'm sure any combo would work but I cant make a decision.

The woman on the other end of wheelbuilder.com's email address says to use 14 mm nipples w/ the Kinlin rims. 

She also Says that the nipple length does not affect the spoke length. I always thought that if you used longer nipples that you would shorten the spokes by the same amount. 

The DT calculator adjust spoke length when you change nipple size...

I also thought you should usually round the spoke length down so that you don't run out of threads when tensioning the wheel. 

The DT calc says precise 280.3 rounded 281

My spokes come in even lengths so I was thinking 280. She (wheelbuilder.com) said 282


Sorry I'm just being anal and I would love to only order spokes once...

Thanks for all the help guys.

BTW I am using a CycloOps Powertap SL + 28 hole 2x,2x rear
CycleOps Front hub 24 hole 2x,2x
Kinlin xr300 rims

(incase anyone is bored and wants to check my measurements)
Right now I'm looking at 268/ 270 rear
282 front
with 14mm nipples


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Use 577 for the rim erd and you should be good. 12mm nipples are fine. 1x heads in on the DS really is better. If you are using Sapim spokes, spoke head washers are nice too.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

Boiler: Trust the free advice rruff is giving you. He's built 4 pairs of wheels for me, including rebuilding my Powertap exactly as he is suggesting to you and I don't think you will go wrong following his suggestions. I know I haven't.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Thanks alot rruff. 

What do you mean heads in? (yes I'm an amateur wheelbuilder)

I thought it was trailing spokes run inside the flange and leading spokes out.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Heads-in means all the spokes have their heads inside the flange... so that the elbows are on the outside. Your PT hub has <16mm DS spacing, and if you are using a S freehub, you can have more than this without derailleur clearance problems. Lacing the DS heads in achieves this... you'll have a stiffer wheel and a higher NDS tension.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Sounds like a plan to me. Thanks for all the help. Does 24 holes laced 2x on the front sound ok? should I go 1x or radial?


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Radial is fine if the hub can take it. On most hubs I lace the front heads in.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

i would like to add, do as the ruff says.... i conventionally laced the PT hubs and its not so good... i think 1x heads in would be good idea for the DS...

the PT does not have a wide flange so trying to effectively increase the flange width that is the key... PT a fairly narrow hub (around 50mm IIRC) and thus builds a wheel not as laterally stiff.... my next build will be 1x DS, that's for sure...

- guys are right, cxray IS NOT, a stiff spoke... dt comp is stiffer, go with that... 30mm isn't hyper aero anyways but a good compromise... going with a cxray that is ~67% as stiff as a straight gauge spoke is not gunna help lateral stiffness) kinlin 30mm rim is a great choice tho..

i have a pic some where..


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Saris doesn't mention radial lacing so I will call and ask. 

Why do you prefer heads in? I only ask because I'm looking at a radial wheel now that is laced heads out.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

boilerup17 said:


> Saris doesn't mention radial lacing so I will call and ask.
> 
> Why do you prefer heads in? I only ask because I'm looking at a radial wheel now that is laced heads out.


heads in adds a bit of flange width... as it is on the other side of the flange which is itself around 2mm thick or whatever, plus u have the J bend of the spoke which adds a tad more...

i doubt they would endorse radial, but if you can swing it with cassette clearance, i would do 1x, which some spokes would be pushed out even more...

as u can see from the pic, the PT hub needs all the help it can get... i did not intend to compare flanges in that pic or i would have drawn a line on white paper and lined em up properly... in fact the PT is lower than the tune hub and still looks much narrower.


----------



## boilerup17 (Jan 19, 2010)

Saris said that radial was fine for the front hub. 

I am going 2x Non drive 1x drive in the rear.


----------



## framesti (Jan 26, 2009)

*powertap campy lacing*



rruff said:


> Heads-in means all the spokes have their heads inside the flange... so that the elbows are on the outside. Your PT hub has <16mm DS spacing, and if you are using a S freehub, you can have more than this without derailleur clearance problems. Lacing the DS heads in achieves this... you'll have a stiffer wheel and a higher NDS tension.


What if its Campy wheel? 2x heads in?


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

framesti said:


> What if its Campy wheel? 2x heads in?


You *might* have derailleur clearance issues with Campy if you lace heads-in vs 2x conventional. You wouldn't want to lace 2x heads in.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

*Powertap & Campy*

Interesting thread, as I'm looking to have a new 2010 Powertap hub built into a Campy 11 speed wheel.

*rru*ff stated "_You *might* have derailleur clearance issues with Campy if you lace heads-in vs 2x conventional. You wouldn't want to lace 2x heads in_."

The Powertap *Elite+ *hub I'm wanting to use, is listed (in its user guide) as having "wheel center to flange = 17.4 mm on Drive Side".

Whereas, the more expensive *SL+* hub has "wheel center to flange = 15.9 mm on DS".

1) I'm interpreting this to mean the cheaper Elite+ hub will have even less clearance than SL+ hub, by 1.5mm ... is this right ??

2) Anyone built an Elite+ with Campy 10 or 11 speed, and were there any clearance problems between DS spokes & rear derailleur?

3) And, what's a recommended lacing pattern? 

BTW, I am wanting to use either 24 or 28 spokes (undecided), Kinlin xr270 or xr300 rim, and I weigh 165 lbs.


----------



## rruff (Feb 28, 2006)

Yes, the PT hubs with the steel axles are tighter on the DS, and I would certainly not lace it heads in if it has a Campy freehub. You'd want to lace it 2x on both sides, for either 24 or 28h.


----------

