# How would you lace a 21H rear wheel?



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

I'm assuming these are 12H on the DS and 9H on the other but if I'm wrong, please correct me. What are the viable lacing patterns?


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

If I ever had a 21h hub and rim...probably 2:1 lacing, AKA 14-DS:7-NDS


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

and at 14:7 the only really viable pattern would be 2X DS and radial NDS. Rims need to be specifically drilled also.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikerjulio said:


> and at 14:7 the only really viable pattern would be 2X DS and radial NDS. Rims need to be specifically drilled also.


^This^


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

bikerjulio & cxwrench
Thanks for the timely replies, 21H makes for really odd hub spacing with 12:9 and that's probably why there's only one combo (2x), 14:7 (DS:NDS). Having just 7 spokes holding the NDS will definitely tense them up. That addresses the NDS slack and stretch which is often responsible for pinch flats and it opens the door for an excellent negative venturi effect (right hand rule of natural vectors). I think I really like the 14:7 21H idea. I'm 80 kilo +/- 5% so will 21 ties be enough for me?

Marc
If there were a 12:9 hub for 21H rims, what could be the lacing options?


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

I would assume a 14/7 semi-radial , with the radial NDS in between each p[air of DS crossed spokes.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> bikerjulio & cxwrench
> Thanks for the timely replies, 21H makes for really odd hub spacing with 12:9 and that's probably why there's only one combo (2x), 14:7 (DS:NDS). Having just 7 spokes holding the NDS will definitely tense them up. That addresses the NDS slack and stretch which is often responsible for pinch flats and it opens the door for an excellent negative venturi effect (right hand rule of natural vectors). I think I really like the 14:7 21H idea. I'm 80 kilo +/- 5% so will 21 ties be enough for me?
> 
> Marc
> If there were a 12:9 hub for 21H rims, what could be the lacing options?


If you went 12:9 you'd have to lace it the same way, how would it work any other way? I'd recommend 14:7 over 12:9. If you weigh 80 kilos it would really depend on the rim. A wheel built w/ a very strong rim would work, maybe. 

Why are you even thinking about this? What does any of this have to do w/ pinch flats? Explain that to me if you can.


----------



## rideit (Feb 8, 2005)

Just because you _can_ do something doesn't mean that you _should_...


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

bikerjulio said:


> and at 14:7 the only really viable pattern would be 2X DS and radial NDS. Rims need to be specifically drilled also.


Why? My 16:8 wheels use off the shelf 24 rims. Are you saying a specific pattern would have to be drilled, or just that no one makes a 21 hole rim?


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Kontact said:


> Why? My 16:8 wheels use off the shelf 24 rims. Are you saying a specific pattern would have to be drilled, or just that no one makes a 21 hole rim?


Given a stiff enough rim I guess it doesn't matter.

My experience is only in building lighter alloy rims, where spoke spacing would definitely matter.

Campy seem to agree with their G3 patterns. Which is what I was thinking of. 

Kind of a boring topic really. Since it must have been discussed about 1000 times already.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

bikerjulio said:


> Given a stiff enough rim I guess it doesn't matter.
> 
> My experience is only in building lighter alloy rims, where spoke spacing would definitely matter.
> 
> ...


I have a hard time seeing how the huge unsupported rim sections in the G3 wheels could possibly be stronger than more even spoke distribution.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
Agreed. I suppose having those gaps between the spokes would add some cush to the ride but I don't see how you could true them properly if they ever started to bend there. Did you use 32H hubs for your 16:8 build?

bikerjulio
The topic is new to me and my search didn't yield the answers I got in here from you and others so I'm glad I asked the question. 



cxwrench said:


> If you went 12:9 you'd have to lace it the same way, how would it work any other way?


How would you cross the 12 with 9 radials? The 12 side could go 3x4, 4x3 or 6x2 and the 9 side 3x3 or radial but only two of those combinations seem viable. Possible patterns? 8 without really thinking about it. The valve hole would have identical sides but there is room for creativity with 12:9. I don't see any room for creativity with 14:7. Pinch flats happen when the tube obdurates from the flexing of the NDS and you hit a bump. The spoke loosens and pushes up on that side, squeezing the tube further, kapow! When there is sufficient tension on the NDS spokes, this is less likely to happen. It made sense to me when I heard it


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> Kontact
> Agreed. I suppose having those gaps between the spokes would add some cush to the ride but I don't see how you could ever true them properly if they ever started to bend there. Did you use 32H hubs for your 16:8 build?
> 
> bikerjulio
> ...


I bought hubs drilled 16 and 8.

For 14:7 the drive side has 7 pairs of parallels with radial NDS spokes running in between them, or angled spokes running outside of them. For 12:9 you would have 6 pairs of DS parallels with NDS spokes separating each pair, plus three of the pairs would have an NDS spoke running between them. That may require two different DS spoke length to work. It would be odd.

The reason triplet lacing works is that the brace angle of (especially) a radial NDS spoke is twice that of the DS, so the tension is pretty much halved. With half the tension, half the spokes can do the work of all the NDS spokes.

If I had to guess, a 33 spoke 22:11 wheel would be stronger than even a 36 spoke wheel because it would 4 more drive side spokes. But all the triplets are generally low spoke counts, so that isn't a theory easily tested. When I built my triplet rear wheel I was taking the bet that 16 DS spokes would make the wheel as strong as a 28h with only 14 DS spokes. As I have both built on the same rims, I guess we'll see.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
If I understood you, we'd need to alternate the pattern on the 9 side 1x so that 2DS, 1NDS, 2DS, 2NDS, 2DS, 1NDS, 2DS, 2NDS, 2DS, 1NDS, 2DS, 2NDS results. I don't know that the 12:9 would result in a better balanced spoke tension with a 10/11s dishing offset but it would seem to on a 6s. That's food for thought if you want to try asymmetrical lacing on your vintage racer 
For those that have the 2:1 asymmetrical spoke configuration, what is the difference in tonal pitch of the two sides when you tap them with metal? Which side has a higher pitch and by how much is it higher (ex: 16DS+3 semitones)? For reference, a guitar fret change on any string is equal to one semitone, ditto for any adjacent keys on a keyboard. Don't forget to take the black keys into account when counting adjacent tones (black keys matter?).


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

nania said:


> The spoke loosens and pushes up on that side, squeezing the tube further, kapow! When there is sufficient tension on the NDS spokes, this is less likely to happen. It made sense to me when I heard it


Nope. If you have spokes so loose they are coming up through the rim bed you have far bigger issues than pinch flats.

Do you already have a hub that's drilled? If not I really suggest don't bother. Like already said, just because you can.

Why do people have such a hardon for even tension left and right? There are literally millions of rear bicycle wheels that are traditionally laced that don't have problems. The problems start to arise when you underbuild or simply build poorly.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

nania said:


> it opens the door for an excellent negative venturi effect (right hand rule of natural vectors).


Can you explain what right hand rule has to do with a bicycle wheel?


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

ergot
You're probably right if your nipple is seated in a deep section rim but are you sure this wouldn't be an issue in a shorter box section? I tend to recount things I hear from people I respect until something else I hear makes more sense. I'm not married to the pinch flat premise above but I threw it out there because I heard it and it made sense to me. As far as the current trend for symmetrical tension goes, I think it makes sense from a practical standpoint. When you optimize designs to match the forces you are required to tame, you can use less material which saves weight and in this particular case, you seem to gain additional synergies (ie: aerodynamic vacuum on lesser spoke NDS).

As stated above, you can lace a 21H rim to a conventional 28H hub 14:7 (either side). Ditto for a 32H hub to a 24H rim 16:8 and there are many other plausible asymmetrical combos so what's the harm in experimenting?


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

Your original question was about a different drilling I have never seen and it sounded like you had a hub in mind. If you are simply asking with the point of an open discussion it's been done in the archives. 

The conclusion is almost always the same. It can be done, but the volume of production and demand is so low that it's not economically viable for anyone to bother selling the individual components. Companies like Campagnolo sell wheels like that because it's in their interest to sell the whole wheel. There's really only one typical configuration for something as specific as 7:14 or 9:12. You are basically asking to have parts available that are mostly proprietary (hub and rim). Standard rims and hubs are cross compatible to other brands and much more customizeable.

Even in the shallowest rims, you will have serious issues beyond pinch flats if the nipples leave their seat due to lack of tension even the slightest bit. A fraction of a millimeter would be too much as that means the spoke is cycling from full tension to 0 tension. They will fail rather quickly in that case.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

I have been watching this thread and what comes to my mind repeatedly is a very good quote from RBR's very own DCGriz (an experienced wheel builder) paraphrased: "It is important to distinguish between what is merely true and what is important".

What I mean here is that while in theory, these special lacing patterns for rear wheels give you less spoke tension disparity between DS and NDS. But really, how important is that? I can build a 32 spoke rear wheel with DS tensions of around 130kgF and the NDS tensions will be around 55kgF which is adequate tension.

If you really have the hots for a low spoke count wheel, then special lacing patterns may be prudent, but there is no real weight advantage to lower spoke counts as that is offset by the heavier rim necessary for this build. And if your obsession is aero, that doesn't have any affect on a rear wheel anyway.

Just saying.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Lombard
No one is arguing that the tried and proven methods don't work well but using your example, wouldn't you prefer your wheel with 100kgF on the DS and 75-80kgF on the NDS, especially if it were equally reliable AND improved aerodynamically? You don't buy into the negative venturi effect of the low spoke count NDS rear? Point your right hand forward, palm down and simulate the wheel rotation. Your thumb is pointing to the direction the fluid (air) wants to go. A lower spoke count on the NDS creates a pressure differential (foil) which sucks the turbulent air through the wheel, organizing the flow and reducing _Cd_. That's the theory and it's pretty cheap to check it out with spare parts for most of us.

ergott
I didn't have a specific configuration in mind, I was playing with the idea of repurposing unused hubs and rims to experiment with asymmetrical lacings. I've been out of cycling for ~10 years now so I wasn't really up on the new tech, hence the curiosity about what was probably obvious to others here. This thread has renewed my interest in the game and I am thankful for the responses. I appreciate the elaboration provided on spoke tension, it sort of makes my point about the advantages of balanced spoke tension, no?


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I'd encourage you to search the older topics on triplet lacing. Near even tension often is at the expense of lateral rigidity. In order to recover this on the left side you have to move flange further out. This brings up issues with spoke angle and rim drilling. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

ergott
Thanks, I'll try searching again but my last attempt didn't yield the pearls I found in this thread 

BTW, there is another theory on the loss of lateral rigidity (backed up by the math) that addresses this deflection "takeup" loss when the torque is high. I suspect you would find it interesting. Thanks to all for your attention and contribution here.

Lombard
I guess all those rear disk guys should be set straight by you


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> Lombard
> No one is arguing that the tried and proven methods don't work well but using your example, wouldn't you prefer your wheel with 100kgF on the DS and 75-80kgF on the NDS, especially if it were equally reliable AND* improved aerodynamically*?


Any aerodynamic advantage there is, however little, will be realized in the front wheel. Once you get to the rear wheel, you have "dirty air" so to say, so I dispute any aerodynamic improvement due to rear wheel lacing technique.



nania said:


> You don't buy into the negative venturi effect of the low spoke count NDS rear?


Ummm, nope. Even if so, would it have any effect in the real world. Please re-read my paraphrase from DCGriz ""It is important to distinguish between what is merely true and what is important"



ergott said:


> I'd encourage you to search the older topics on triplet lacing. Near even tension often is at the expense of *lateral rigidity*.





nania said:


> BTW, there is another theory on the loss of* lateral rigidity*........


There is a much more effective and easier way to improve lateral rigidity. Are you ready for this one?? Drumroll please..........MORE SPOKES! :idea:


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

nania said:


> ergott
> Thanks, I'll try searching again but my last attempt didn't yield the pearls I found in this thread
> 
> BTW, there is another theory on the loss of lateral rigidity (backed up by the math) that addresses this deflection "takeup" loss when the torque is high. I suspect you would find it interesting. Thanks to all for your attention and contribution here.
> ...



Actually, it was another forum that I remember going into depth about this.

New Triplet Lacing hub option - Weight Weenies
Hub geometry - Weight Weenies
UltraRear SLX 139g Tension limits...drifting to 12 8 Lacing - Weight Weenies

Please elaborate on deflection "takeup".


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

ergott
Thanks for the links. The loss of apparent rigidity when you radial the DS shows up when you apply torque to the crank. The radial DS is perpendicular to the tangential force being applied and therefore causes a deflection (known as takeup) in the wheel. The spokes try to yield and the wheel tries to go off the Y axis but that force gets absorbed by the NDS tension. This hardly happens when the spokes on the DS are closer to a tangential angle to the hub because the force is more or less inline with the torque pulling spokes. The interesting thing about this and what I hinted at above is the diminishing loss with radial DS to the NDS as your revs increase or as your torque unwinds. Riders who mash their cranks will generally dislike the feel of a radial DS because of this deflection (mushiness) when pressed but high rev riders will notice improvements in efficiency because of the greater tension balance in the wheel. To them, the wheel starts to feel springier than a more firmly placed DS as they spin up. That's how I understand it from what I've read and what I've been told.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> Riders who mash their cranks will generally dislike the feel of a radial DS because of this deflection (mushiness) when pressed but high rev riders will notice improvements in efficiency because of the greater tension balance in the wheel. To them, the wheel starts to feel springier than a more firmly placed DS as they spin up.That's how I understand it from what I've read and what I've been told.


Sorry to be a wet blanket again, Nania, but I would really like to know what your source is of this information.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Lombard
If I tell you my sources, I'll be alienating everyone who ever put a disk on his rear wheel not to mention the entire aeroweenie community


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> Lombard
> If I tell you my sources, I'll be alienating everyone who ever put a disk on his rear wheel not to mention the entire aeroweenie community


Who cares? "Nania" is an anonymous account with 13 posts. I think you'll survive the ensuing tumult.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Kontact said:


> Who cares? "Nania" is an anonymous account with 13 posts. I think you'll survive the ensuing tumult.


Now, now, Kontact. Are you incinuating that Nania is a troll?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Now, now, Kontact. Are you incinuating that Nania is a troll?


Nope. Trolls don't have interesting discussions or technical knowledge.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Is nania a troll? Pfft, he's probably not even a real person so how could he have anything like technical knowledge. He, or it, just uses bot algorithms to string words together that sound technical. I wouldn't pay any attention to posts by nania and continue to use tried and proven methods 

Join me in my chant: _more spokes for bike blokes, more spokes for bike blokes..._


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> Is nania a troll? Pfft, he's probably not even a real person so how could he have anything like technical knowledge. He, or it, just uses bot algorithms to string words together that sound technical. I wouldn't pay any attention to posts by nania and continue to use tried and proven methods
> 
> *Join me in my chant: more spokes for bike blokes, more spokes for bike blokes...*


Ahhhhh, now you're making sense! :thumbsup:


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> Kontact
> Agreed. I suppose having those gaps between the spokes would add some cush to the ride but I don't see how you could ever true them properly if they ever started to bend there. Did you use 32H hubs for your 16:8 build?
> 
> bikerjulio
> ...


Uhmmm...no. Your understanding of wheel building in general, and spoke tension in particular as well as what causes a pinch flat is definitely lacking.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Uhmmm...no. Your understanding of wheel building in general, and spoke tension in particular as well as what causes a* pinch flat* is definitely lacking.


My question is what the eff does wheel building technique have ANYTHING to do with pinch flatting??? :crazy:


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> Having just 7 spokes holding the NDS will definitely tense them up. That addresses the* NDS slack and stretch which is often responsible for pinch flats* and it opens the door for an excellent negative venturi effect.......


Would you like to explain to us HOW this is possible other than to say you heard or read it somewhere and cannot reveal your sources?



nania said:


> *Pinch flats happen when the tube obdurates from the flexing of the NDS and you hit a bump*. The spoke loosens and pushes up on that side, squeezing the tube further, kapow! When there is sufficient tension on the NDS spokes, this is less likely to happen. It made sense to me when I heard it


Oh brother!  If the spokes were loose enough for this to happen, the bike would be unridable. 



nania said:


> I'm not married to the pinch flat premise above but I threw it out there because* I heard it and it made sense to me*.


You must have heard it from the same source she did:


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

LOL, I love you guys


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> LOL, I love you guys


So nothing except 'someone told me...'?


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

cxwrench said:


> Uhmmm...no. Your understanding of wheel building in general, and spoke tension in particular as well as what causes a pinch flat is definitely lacking.


I'm always open to being schooled, enlighten a troll bot like me and explain it so a simpleton can correct all the knowledge they are _"lacking"_ 

Lombard
LOL, try harder


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> Pinch flats happen when the tube obdurates from the flexing of the NDS and you hit a bump. The spoke loosens and pushes up on that side, squeezing the tube further, kapow! When there is sufficient tension on the NDS spokes, this is less likely to happen. It made sense to me when I heard it


What kind of a rim do you have in mind when you write things like that?
If it is one of these rims








be advised that we use a different kind of rim these days.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> I'm always open to being schooled, enlighten a troll bot like me and explain it so a simpleton can correct all the knowledge they are _"lacking"_
> 
> Lombard
> LOL, try harder


With guys (or girls) like you I really don't even know where to start. You're obviously not clear on what happens to spoke tension when riding. How low do you think spoke tension would have to be for the nipple (not the end of the spoke...it shouldn't be protruding from the end of the nipple) to move towards the tube?


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Asfos??


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

nania said:


> *I'm always open to being schooled,* enlighten a troll bot like me and explain it so a simpleton can correct all the knowledge they are _"lacking"_
> 
> Lombard
> LOL, try harder


yeah, I can see that. The problem is that opening of yours lets in all the wrong stuff. How you managed to get all this incorrect and simply crazy 'knowledge' to sink in while at the same time avoiding actually facts about wheels is nothing short of amazing.


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

Whenever someone on the ride pinch flats, I whip out my spoke wrench and give the spokes a few twists so it don't happen again on the same ride.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

cxwrench said:


> You're obviously not clear on what happens to spoke tension when riding.


I thought I gave a pretty clear explanation of what I believe happens to the wheel when the crank turns and I even added elaboration of the dynamics. Tell me what I got wrong and this time, try to be more specific when you address each of those statements in your critique. It doesn't help me much to hear I'm wrong when you don't specifically say what was wrong. A simpleton like me is likely to assume everything I said was wrong. By the way, you never answered my simple question to you on page 1 where I asked you what configurations you would use to lace up 12:9. Specifically, what did you mean when you said I should do it the "same way as 14:7" 

Jay Strongbow
I guess you're trying to help me too but I can't for the life of me make out what you wrote. Is English your second (third?) language?

Lombard
Were you as friendly to Asfos as you are to me?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> I thought I gave a pretty clear explanation of what I believe happens to the wheel when the crank turns and I even added elaboration of the dynamics. Tell me what I got wrong and this time try to be more specific when you address each of those statements in your critique this time around. It doesn't help me much to hear I'm wrong when you don't specifically what was wrong. A simpleton like me is likely to assume everything I said was wrong. By the way, you never answered my simple question to you on page 1 where I asked you what configurations you would use to lace up 12:9. Specifically, what did you mean when you said I should do it the "same way as 14:7"
> 
> Jay Strongbow
> I guess you're trying to help me too but I can't for the life of me make out what you wrote. Is English your second (third?) language?
> ...


Do you actually have a 12:9 hub and rim to lace? All the 21 spoke wheels I can find are 14:7, like Fulcrums.


No one gets your 'pinch flat' comment. Spokes never go to zero tension, and even if they did the nipple heads are recessed too far into the closed section of the rim to come anywhere near the tube.

That statement is the main reason you are now being treated as a loon.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> I thought I gave a pretty clear explanation of what I believe happens to the wheel when the crank turns and I even added elaboration of the dynamics. Tell me what I got wrong and this time try to be more specific when you address each of those statements in your critique this time around. It doesn't help me much to hear I'm wrong when you don't specifically what was wrong. A simpleton like me is likely to assume everything I said was wrong. By the way, you never answered my simple question to you on page 1 where I asked you what configurations you would use to lace up 12:9. Specifically, what did you mean when you said I should do it the "same way as 14:7"
> 
> Jay Strongbow
> I guess you're trying to help me too but I can't for the life of me make out what you wrote. Is English your second (third?) language?
> ...


I was wrong about the 12:9 lacing, after further though I don't think it can be built that way at all. What I'm talking about is your absurd belief that a spoke can somehow cause a pinch flat.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

I worked out a 12:9 lacing pattern that is radially symmetrical, but it might need two DS spoke lengths.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
You guys are keeping the spoke puncture thing alive in your effort to discredit the other sensible (and valuable) content of my posts. Have fun trying to unthread the sweater from that strand, I won't mind. What is amusing to me is the attempt at conflating the two topics. Don't show cxwrench your 12:9 pattern, he's already made his mind up it can't be done and he knows my knowledge is "lacking". It's a good thing we have him to show us the way. You don't need a 12:9 hub to experiment with 12:9 spacing. A 36H hub will get you there. You should probably check with cxwrench and Lombard about that statement though, I'm just a loon, Asfos, lacking or maybe just plain wrong


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> Kontact
> You guys are keeping the spoke puncture thing alive in your effort to discredit the other sensible (and valuable) content of my posts. Have fun trying to unthread the sweater from that strand, I won't mind. What is amusing to me is the attempt at conflating the two topics. Don't show cxwrench your 12:9 pattern, he's already made his mind up it can't be done and he knows my knowledge is "lacking". It's a good thing we have him to show us the way. You don't need a 12:9 hub to experiment with 12:9 spacing. A 36H hub will get you there. You should probably check with cxwrench and Lombard about that statement though, I'm just a loon, Asfos, lacking or maybe just plain wrong


What's "discrediting" you is the inability to say either admit that you are wrong about anything OR just explain what you are talking about when challenged on it. The pinch flat thing is just the most egregious, but there's a fair number of things you've said that the wheel builders in this thread don't get. At all.

I'm not surprised the CX doesn't think 12:9 could be done - what I came up with doesn't exactly make a lot of sense because the spokes would be 3 different lengths. Why would you want to lace a 21 hole wheel 12:9 when 14:7 is established as working?


So if you want to talk about odd ball stuff and not sound like a crackpot, you're going to have to offer explanations after you drop some idea that everyone else says is false.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
Please note your hypocrisy. You want me to admit I'm wrong while you openly state the only way to build a wheel 12:9 is with a 12:9 hub. Where is your admission there? Get off your platform, it's embarrassing. The explanation and rationale has already been presented to those that can read and understand English. It probably explains why current big name manufacturers are all starting to build asymmetrically and the reasons for a radial DS with its counterintuitive result. You can choose to accept its truth and value or not. I have no motivation to twist anyone's arm here. It's clear to me that I know things that you don't, I'd say it's a good probability that the forum knows things that I don't. That's why I'm here, to learn and to teach. I offered a gift to this forum and it was not accepted graciously. Without harping on the pinch flat comment which I addressed on page 1, what specific "odd ball stuff" caused the most pain to your cognitive map?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> Kontact
> Please note your hypocrisy. You want me to admit I'm wrong while *you openly state the only way to build a wheel 12:9 is with a 12:9 hub*.


Oh really? Quote me.

I think we're done here.


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> It probably explains why current big name manufacturers are all starting to build asymmetrically and the reasons for a radial DS with its counterintuitive result.


Asymmetrically in terms of 2:1 lacing and offset rims. 
No one does 12:9 (why should they, 2:1 is much more effective).
As far as I know, Mavic is the only big name manufacturer, that has kept radial DS lacing.
Shimano moved away from that some years ago.
With it's introduction of 11speed Shimano freehub bodies German brand Citec moved away from radial DS lacing to 2:1...


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Andreas_Illesch said:


> As far as I know, *Mavic *is the only big name manufacturer, *that has kept radial DS lacing*.


This figures. A picture is worth 1,000 words:


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact said:


> Do you actually have a 12:9 hub and rim to lace? All the 21 spoke wheels I can find are 14:7, like Fulcrums.


This and the other text you edited/modified seem to imply you couldn't stretch your mind enough to imagine a 12:9 built on a 36H hub but I guess I'm wrong about that too because _spoke pinch flat_


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> This and the other text you edited/modified seem to imply you couldn't stretch your mind enough to imagine a 12:9 built on a 36H hub


So how would you lace that on a 36H hub?


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Andreas_Illsech
X2/DS on every 3rd hub hole, radial/NDS on every 4th hole. By Monday I'll be able to report on the result. How would you do it?


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> How would you do it?


I wouldn't because I still don't see the point.

Here is a 36H hub and a 36H rim laced evenly with 12 spokes on the DS and 6 radial spokes on the NDS -> 2:1 pattern.














Now where would you put the three missing spokes on the NDS?

This is how it looks with 9 evenly spaced spokes on the NDS:


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> This and the other text you edited/modified seem to imply you couldn't stretch your mind enough to imagine* a 12:9 built on a 36H hub* but I guess I'm wrong about that too because _spoke pinch flat_


And why would you even think about doing this? Never mind my negative opinions on low spoke wheels. I don't care whether you are lacing 12:9 or 14:7, lacing either of these to a 36 hole hub is not a good idea. Get a hub with the correct number of spoke holes!

Keep in mind that a 36 hole hub will have less material in the flanges than a 21 hole hub. So the 36 hole hub will have weaker flanges which are offset by the fact that you have more spokes which are each doing less work. Skipping hub spoke holes is a great way to have an earlier hub failure. And when that flange breaks, you will be walking or thumbing a ride home.

Nania, have you ever built any wheels? Have you ever read any books on wheel building? If not, I strongly suggest you buy and read the following books. They are a valuable source of information for wheel builders:

Roger Musson's "Professional Guide to Wheel Building" (eBook with lifetime free updates):

https://www.wheelpro.co.uk/wheelbuilding/book.php 

Jobst Brandt's "The Bicycle Wheel":

https://www.amazon.com/bicycle-whee...8&qid=1512063335&sr=1-6&keywords=jobst+brandt 

Jobst Brandt's The Bicycle Wheel - Wheel Fanatyk 

And then there is RBR's very own Mike Tech's Wheel Building website and it's FREE. Lots and lots of good stuff here:

Wheels 

If you are in a quandary about which of the first two books to put your $$ down on, I highly recommend Roger Musson's eBook as a primary source while you are building your wheels.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I wouldn't recommend lacing any hub flange that has 18 holes in it. Worse yet, higher tensions and using only some of the holes. They just weren't designed for that.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> This and the other text you edited/modified seem to imply you couldn't stretch your mind enough to imagine a 12:9 built on a 36H hub but I guess I'm wrong about that too because _spoke pinch flat_


You are wrong - I never made such a statement - only asked the question to understand where you got 12:9 from. And I only edited spelling and grammar mistakes. 

Apologize for the hypocrit comment.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> This and the other text you edited/modified seem to imply you couldn't stretch your mind enough to imagine a 12:9 built on a 36H hub* but I guess I'm wrong about that too because spoke pinch flat *


Again...how? Explain this at some point will ya.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
That's not the way I interpreted it and I suspect I'm not the only person who would see it that way. Only a loon would expect an apology from a loon 

Andreas_Illesch
LOL, very funny. Now draw it (the 36H hub) as I intended it with a 21H rim. By the way, what software did you use to create the graphic?

Lombard
Gee, thanks. I don't know how I'd ever get along without you 

ergott
You make a valid point. There not much material on some of the hubs I'm looking at. This weekend's candidate might be an old Bontrager Racelite XXX rear laced up 14:7 instead of a vintage campy high flange 12:9.

cxwrench
I'll use your own quote to reply, "I wouldn't know where to begin"


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> Kontact
> That's not the way I interpreted it and I suspect I'm not the only person who would see it that way. Only a loon would expect an apology from a loon
> 
> Andreas_Illesch
> ...


21 evenly spaced spoke holes?!? Why are you persisting w/ this crazy idea? And will you ever attempt to answer the question of how the spokes will 'pinch' flat the tube?


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

cxwrench
My son, there are many mysteries. Some will insist upon fixing a misplaced hair when they are about to lose their head


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> cxwrench
> My son, there are many mysteries. Some will insist upon fixing a misplaced hair when they are about to lose their head


Figured you had no idea.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Let's take the personality out of the thread for the moment and just look at the OP's claims:

12:9 lacing. No one does it, because the 4:3 spoke ratio means that DS spokes have have different bracing angles and tensions to deal with the uneven spacing required to match 3 spokes to 4.

NDS spoke slack. This doesn't happen. Spoke tension varies as the wheel is rolled under weight, but all DS and NDS spokes are carrying much more tension than the amount of pressure put on the rim, so the spoke tension never drops low enough to create any slack.

7 spokes will "tense up" the NDS. They will, and that's good. The difference in bracing angle between DS and NDS means the NDS spokes are doing much less work than the drive side. 7 spokes are very few - so are 14 spokes on the DS.

Pinch flats have nothing to do with spokes. Spokes and nipples do not come anywhere near the tire or tube on post 1980 wheels, and changes in tension do not change the rims relationship with the sidewall. Pinch flats are caused by the tire being pinched between rim and road - that's all.

Venturi effect and rule of right hand natural vectors. There is no such thing as a "natural vector". The right hand rule is a method for understanding the way certain forces are diagrammed. There is also a left hand rule. Neither describe a natural "handedness" in the real world.

Putting gaps between spokes on the rim would make the ride "cush". It would not. If the rims where that flexible, they would fail. The rim gets its strength from the compression of the spokes pulling it in. If the rim could flex much at all in gaps the ride would be bumpy and then the rime would fail.

Radial drive side spokes with tangential NDS spoked wheels feel "springy" to pedal mashers. For this to be true, the hub would have to actually twist between the flanges in a measurable amount. An amount much greater than spokes flex. If this were true aluminum hubs in such a wheel would break from torque - they do not.


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> Now draw it (the 36H hub) as I intended it with a 21H rim.


I did!
The only kind of 21H rim that might pull this off, is a rim that has 21 holes drilled in a 36H pattern!
But that's one of the things you don't seem to be able to grasp.



nania said:


> X2/DS on every 3rd hub hole, radial/NDS on every 4th hole. By Monday I'll be able to report on the result. How would you do it?


We awaiting your result on Monday.
I hope you have found a 36H rear hub by then that is tough enough to endure the 9 radial spokes.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Kontact said:


> Let's take the personality out of the thread for the moment and just look at the OP's claims:
> 
> 12:9 lacing. No one does it, because the 4:3 spoke ratio means that DS spokes have have different bracing angles and tensions to deal with the uneven spacing required to match 3 spokes to 4.
> 
> ...


Great post, I'll go make some popcorn and wait for a response.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Great post, I'll go make some popcorn and wait for a response.


I ran out of popcorn yesterday.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Andrew_Illesch said:


> I did!


If you did you didn't post it here 
If you have an inline, evenly spaced 21H rim model, connected 12:9 as described above, to the evenly spaced 36H hub then post it, if not then make one and post it. You'll see the spokes are most tangential with 21 evenly spaced holes. If you're not inclined to do this, tell me what software you used and how you did it and I'll construct the model myself. That visual proof of concept will shut some of us up  

Kontact
We'll see how your words do against the images forthcoming. Fortunately, our posts are there for members to review and judge for themselves. You may have caused your fanboy cxwrench to come in his pants with your attack against me but I doubt the more informed reading will be as easily impressed


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Alright, which one of you meanies hit poor Nania with negative rep??


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Lombard said:


> Alright, which one of you meanies hit poor Nania with negative rep??


After his last post (which will hopefully be his last post) I had to. I don't care if you want to troll the **** outta the forum, I'll play. When the attacks become crudely personal the line has been crossed.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> If you did you didn't post it here
> If you have an inline, evenly spaced 21H rim model, connected 12:9 as described above, to the evenly spaced 36H hub then post it, if not then make one and post it. You'll see the spokes are most tangential with 21 evenly spaced holes. If you're not inclined to do this, tell me what software you used and how you did it and I'll construct the model myself. That visual proof of concept will shut some of us up
> 
> Kontact
> We'll see how your words do against the images forthcoming. Fortunately, our posts are there for members to review and judge for themselves. You may have caused your fanboy cxwrench to come in his pants with your attack against me but I doubt the more informed reading will be as easily impressed


You are new, which is why you don't understand the character and relationships and expertise of the people you're talking to. CX is a full time and pro race mechanic. I was a full time mechanic and own a saddle business. Ergott is a well respected professional wheel builder. You aren't talking to people with big egos, but people with immense experience and no small amount of intelligence.

Your posts are like the rantings of von Daniken cultists or people that believe you can make a car run on water with the right carburetor. And you're rude about it to boot.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Kontact
I'm not new to this forum. Check my profile and see for yourself. I didn't post much because I lost interest in the sport. My company did the math for Shimano during the 80's when they were first experimenting with aero profiles. You may recall their aero platform pedal. That was a direct result of MY research. I know lots of idiots in positions above their knowledge. I also know people tend to get complacent and defensive about what they think they know. It's human nature, not the best aspects of it but human nature none the less. If there wasn't an ego issue, there wouldn't have been a reason to hit my rep so please stop bullshitting yourself. You can bullshit me all you like but lying to yourself for rationalization is really sad. For the record, I didn't start getting salty until it came at me first. I know of Ergott's business and know many of his clients. I'm in the NY area. It's quite possible he knows of me too and maybe that's why his replies didn't have the low pH of the others. If you dolts don't see how a 12:9 originating on a 36H hub can thread without gaps into a 21H rim then I don't know what the hell your experience is worth. I gave the benefit of the doubt to one of the posters here and sent him a PM describing all the motivations for my posts. I am a student of psychology/sociology and there are ways to suss out things by introducing the appropriate stimuli. Sometimes, things aren't what they seem no matter how much you try to make them so. One more thing, if you believe rims don't flex under load and that areas of rims without spokes don't bend more easily than those where the spokes are attached (reference to my 'cush in the wheel' statement) then I've already made my determination about your _expertise_. If you guys want respect, learn how to give it first.

Andreas_Illesch
You came up with the wrong wheel configuration pretty quickly when you were trying to discredit my 12:9 implementation by putting it on a 36H rim so I'm surprised it's taken this long to present what the wheel would really look like built as I suggested. I'm not going to speculate on your rationale for this defect. If you don't want to do it, tell me the software used and I'll do it myself.


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> You came up with the wrong wheel configuration pretty quickly when you were trying to discredit my 12:9 implementation by putting it on a 36H rim so I'm surprised it's taken this long to present what the wheel would really look like built as I suggested. I'm not going to speculate on your rationale for this defect. If you don't want to do it, tell me the software used and I'll do it myself.


I came up with the one configuration that might actually work but you still did not seem to be able to get that.

I didn't came up with your suggestion because:
1. It is wrong/not doable with a rim with 21 evenly spaced holes, I am not wasting my time on this.
2. I don't live in the US, we have a different time here meaning I simply went to bed because it was late here!
3. Considering your boasting all day I am under the impression you have already a (wrong) plan in your head how to build this and that you already have drawn it up!
So why do I have to tell you how to build your own configuration???
So why do you ask for the software, don't you have your lacing pattern already worked out???

I am expecting your report on Monday.


nania said:


> X2/DS on every 3rd hub hole, radial/NDS on every 4th hole. By Monday I'll be able to report on the result.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

nania said:


> Kontact
> I'm not new to this forum. Check my profile and see for yourself. I didn't post much because I lost interest in the sport. My company did the math for Shimano during the 80's when they were first experimenting with aero profiles. You may recall their aero platform pedal. That was a direct result of MY research. I know lots of idiots in positions above their knowledge. I also know people tend to get complacent and defensive about what they think they know. It's human nature, not the best aspects of it but human nature none the less. If there wasn't an ego issue, there wouldn't have been a reason to hit my rep so please stop bullshitting yourself. You can bullshit me all you like but lying to yourself for rationalization is really sad. For the record, I didn't start getting salty until it came at me first. I know of Ergott's business and know many of his clients. I'm in the NY area. It's quite possible he knows of me too and maybe that's why his replies didn't have the low pH of the others. If you dolts don't see how a 12:9 originating on a 36H hub can thread without gaps into a 21H rim then I don't know what the hell your experience is worth. I gave the benefit of the doubt to one of the posters here and sent him a PM describing all the motivations for my posts. I am a student of psychology/sociology and there are ways to suss out things by introducing the appropriate stimuli. Sometimes, things aren't what they seem no matter how much you try to make them so. One more thing, if you believe rims don't flex under load and that areas of rims without spokes don't bend more easily than those where the spokes are attached (reference to my 'cush in the wheel' statement) then I've already made my determination about your _expertise_. If you guys want respect, learn how to give it first.
> 
> Andreas_Illesch
> You came up with the wrong wheel configuration pretty quickly when you were trying to discredit my 12:9 implementation by putting it on a 36H rim so I'm surprised it's taken this long to present what the wheel would really look like built as I suggested. I'm not going to speculate on your rationale for this defect. If you don't want to do it, tell me the software used and I'll do it myself.


The thing is, you have just misunderstood what has been happening in this thread.

You lost your Rep not because you suggested something odd, but because you refused to back up a single outlandish and uneducated claim you made about vectors, tension, slack, anything. You even went so far to claim that you _couldn't_ say, as if the assassins would be after you. That sort of nonsense is never going to be tolerated by anyone with a brain. And you were rude on top of it.

You also don't understand some of the basic stuff being discussed. I said that a rim with large spokeless sections wouldn't be "cush" because rims with long open section can't be allowed to flex much. But even if they did, the ride would not be "cush" because the cushy section would alternate with the well braced sections and make the wheel ride like an octagon, not a circle. Stiff, soft, stiff, soft, stiff, soft at 33 Hertz.

I'm certain the other participants in the thread understood that point when I wrote it, but you still don't seem to get that you can't have sections of a rim being soft, either the wheel is soft as a whole or it isn't going to work.


When did I, as one of the "dolts", say that you couldn't put 21 spokes on 36h rim? Again, quote where I said that. 


And I don't care when you signed up, you have interacted 25 times. How's that going for you? What makes you so special that everyone "bullied" you so much in so few posts? Because it can't be you, right? It must be everyone else that is so stupid, close minded, and foolish. Even though you were the one who didn't know about 14:7 when you started the thread. Weird.

You are either a highly unskilled liar or someone who is losing their rationality with age. Follow the "natural vector" to any group of people with IQs above 90 and you're going to discover that you make the same number of converts to your pseudoscience approach to topics you are unfamiliar with.

Nice job with the DA pedal, though. That was clearly based on some winning ideas. Probably the only high end group of that vintage no one wants on a classic bike.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Here is a rudimentary drawing that shows the concept. Blue is DS. Note the 3 interlocking trapezoids, larger and lesser, on the drive side. The NDS is radial. Also note that the Word drawing tools used doesn't have the precision to place the spokes properly in the hub but they fit right because both 12 and 9 factor into 36.
View attachment 21H rim on 36H hub.pdf


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> If there wasn't an ego issue, there wouldn't have been a reason to hit my rep .......


CX did not hit your rep because of ego issues. Your outlandish theories on wheels and wheel building aside, you went as far as to say _"You may have caused your fanboy cxwrench to come in his pants with your attack against me......._" Nobody here attacked you in a way to provoke this.

Experienced people here tried to help you understand logical reasons why your theories don't work, but you persist in saying you believe them anyway because "you heard it from someone". You chose not to reveal any sources, so you have nothing to back up your claims. * That discredits you right there*.

I tried to help you to understand wheel building because regardless of your "experience", you come across as someone who does not have a concept of even the basics of wheel building. I gave you the benefit of the doubt - as I do to most people who troll these boards. 



nania said:


> I know lots of idiots in positions above their knowledge.


Oh man! I must not go there!  

I'll have to admit though, I have found all this to be entertaining and amusing.


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> Here is a rudimentary drawing that shows the concept.


 LOL yourself!
Why did you waste your time on that word drawing?
It is useless. No dimensions, no spoke lengths, random hole spacings at rim and hub...
Get a cheap CAD tool and draw it properly with correct hole spacings then you will see that it wont work. 



nania said:


> because both 12 and 9 factor into 36.


You genius, guess why you need a 36hole pattern in the rim, too!!!

Nearly forgot:
I am expecting your report on Monday.


nania said:


> X2/DS on every 3rd hub hole, radial/NDS on every 4th hole. By Monday I'll be able to report on the result.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> Kontact
> Please note your hypocrisy. You want me to admit I'm wrong while you openly state the only way to build a wheel 12:9 is with a 12:9 hub. Where is your admission there? Get off your platform, it's embarrassing. The explanation and rationale has already been presented to those that can read and understand English. It probably explains why current big name manufacturers are all starting to build asymmetrically and the reasons for a radial DS with its counterintuitive result. You can choose to accept its truth and value or not. I have no motivation to twist anyone's arm here. It's clear to me that I know things that you don't, I'd say it's a good probability that the forum knows things that I don't. That's why I'm here, to learn and to teach. *I offered a gift to this forum and it was not accepted graciously. Without harping on the pinch flat comment which I addressed on page 1,* what specific "odd ball stuff" caused the most pain to your cognitive map?


A gift?!? 

On pg 1 you said this: "Having just 7 spokes holding the NDS will definitely tense them up. That addresses the NDS slack and stretch which is often responsible for pinch flats "

Explain it.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

nania said:


> Kontact
> Please note your hypocrisy. You want me to admit I'm wrong while you openly state the only way to build a wheel 12:9 is with a 12:9 hub. Where is your admission there? Get off your platform, it's embarrassing. The explanation and rationale has already been presented to those that can read and understand English. It probably explains why current big name manufacturers are all starting to build asymmetrically and the reasons for a radial DS with its counterintuitive result. You can choose to accept its truth and value or not. I have no motivation to twist anyone's arm here. It's clear to me that I know things that you don't, I'd say it's a good probability that the forum knows things that I don't. That's why I'm here, to learn and to teach. I offered a gift to this forum and it was not accepted graciously. Without harping on the pinch flat comment which I addressed on page 1, what specific "odd ball stuff" caused the most pain to your cognitive map?


A gift?!? 

Here's your post from pg1:

"Having just 7 spokes holding the NDS will definitely tense them up. That addresses the NDS slack and stretch which is often responsible for pinch flats "

Explain.


----------



## cfoster (Dec 20, 2007)

nania said:


> I'm assuming these are 12H on the DS and 9H on the other but if I'm wrong, please correct me. What are the viable lacing patterns?


Trick question! It's already laced...


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Lombard
My pedal design was ahead of its time and many of the current designs borrow from it. You should also know my spec had polymer resin as the material (the same stuff used for helicopter blades) and would have weighed 215g per set. The DuraAX marketing team decided to go alloy and the pedals became the failure you rightly point out. 

Project update: I built the 12:9 wheels with 21H carbon rims on 36H AVS hubs last night and they look like the drawing I submitted above. Andreas_Illesch correctly pointed out a slight angle differential with the spokes as they left the hub due to the rim hole spacing radius (360/21) and the one on the hub and (360/9). This was more evident on the radial side but they seated properly with some spoke end filing. The wheel seems stable and looks okay but we'll know more later. I've asked some strong club riders to torture it in Prospect Park, we'll see what they say.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> Lombard
> My pedal design was ahead of its time and many of the current designs borrow from it. You should also know my spec had polymer resin as the material (the same stuff used for helicopter blades) and would have weighed 215g per set. The DuraAX marketing team decided to go alloy and the pedals became the failure you rightly point out.


You're talking to the wrong guy here. I am not impressed with tiny weight reductions, sorry. I'm interested in things that will be solid and go the long haul. In fairness, Shimano has a reputation to defend. They have always been the "sensible shoes" brand as in rock solid reliable, not a lot of bling.



nania said:


> Project update: I built the 12:9 wheels with 21H carbon rims on 36H AVS hubs last night and they look like the drawing I submitted above. Andreas_Illesch correctly pointed out a slight angle differential with the spokes as they left the hub due to the rim hole spacing radius (360/21) and the one on the hub and (360/9). This was more evident on the radial side but they seated properly with some spoke end filing. The wheel seems stable and looks okay but we'll know more later. I've asked some strong club riders to torture it in Prospect Park, we'll see what they say.


Oh brother! Come back to me in 5,000 miles and tell me how these worked out. Turture in Prospect Park? Isn't that mostly flat?


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Lombard
No, it's one of the hilliest parts of Brooklyn with a few 7% grades. I don't think a 215g aero pedal set is anything to scoff at, especially considering the time it was designed. Like I said, it was ahead of its time and that should have impressed anyone that wanted to go fast. Even by todays standards it's still a respectable accomplishment. Thanks for your continuing interest in this project


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

I know a few wheel destroyers that could run the wheel through it's paces.

Who makes a 21 hole rim?


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

nania said:


> I don't think a 215g aero pedal set is anything to scoff at......


So how many miles do you expect to get out of a 215g aero pedal?



nania said:


> Like I said, it was ahead of its time ........


So was the AMC Pacer.


----------



## nania (Aug 9, 2007)

Lombard
They would have lasted as long or longer than some of the other parts made at the time 
Kidding aside, that polymer is tough stuff and it would have held up lots better than aluminum and unlike carbon fiber, it can take a hit and not crack. The design had so much rigidity that the increased flex modulus of the material would have never been noticed.

ergott
The Chinese will drill them any way you like but I got these from an acquaintance. These have a 38mm toroidal profile and weigh 460g each. There's a hard coating on the brake track.


----------



## Andreas_Illesch (Jul 9, 2002)

nania said:


> Project update: I built the 12:9 wheels with 21H carbon rims on 36H AVS hubs last night and they look like the drawing I submitted above.


Can we get photos, please, with close-ups on the hub? 
Then I will draw it up to see how many different spoke lengths are required.


----------

