# My latest wheelbuild



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Recently, I wanted to build up a set of wheels that used a couple of components that I've never had the chance to use before. I get questions all the time about these components; questions that I didn't have answers to as I don't get to build many wheelsets. The parts were - 23mm wide rims and Sapim Laser spokes. I've built lots of wheels with Sapim CX-Ray spokes (which are just flattened Lasers) but I wanted to know first hand if the skinny center section of the Laser caused any real problems with twist during building.

When I talked with BikeHubStore.com Brandon, he suggested that he send me the experimental 27h rear Pacenti SL23 center drilled rim, matched up to his rear hub drilled 18:9 using 3x on the DS, radial on the NDS. The front wheel would be a 24h Pacenti SL23 with radial spokes.

Bandon had a special run of 27h SL23's made but when they arrived he was surprised at how they were drilled. He was expecting equally spaced spoke holes but they had been drilled in groups of three, similar to the Campagnolo Zonda rear wheel.

For those of you who are scratching your heads right now, I'll just give a little background. Most rims come with 24, 28 or 32 spoke holes, all equally spaced. Half the spokes go to one side of the hub, the other half to the other side. But.......with the "dishing" of the rear wheel to accommodate the cassette, the NDS (non drive side) spokes are less tensioned than the DS (drive side) and do less work at maintaining wheel integrity. Eventually, some smart-alec wondered about using half the number of spokes on the NDS, which would make the remaining half do 2x the work and would probably need higher tension, closer to the DS tension. Sounds good eh? The idea has gone over well with some wheelbuilders. Up until now, 16/8 spokes were used (24 total) on these wheels.

Brandon found that some people wanted more spokes than the 16/8 total of 24 so he decided to ask for 27 hole rims via Pacenti - divided up into 18/9. No problem there right? But when they arrived he found the rim maker had drilled them in groups of three, similar to the Campagnolo Zonda rear wheel. So that meant there were 9 groups of 3 spokes with 2 spokes on the DS and one on the NDS. After his initial shock he probably thought "Oh what the heck; these are cool; let's see how they go over". 

My old buddy Thorsten, importer of Sapim spokes, got in on the act over a spoke length question, and he insisted on sending me a bag of Sapim's Secure Lock Nipples in black aluminum. I don't have a problem with nipples unscrewing, even though I use no thread-locker of any type but he was kind enough to send the nipples so I had to give them a try. These Secure Lock have a deformed thread instead of what most locking nipples use - internally applied goo of some kind.

So the final parts spec was -
Pacenti SL23 27 hole rims, 24mm width, 26mm depth. Weight - 439 and 458 grams (measured by me).
BHS SL210 hubs. Rear - 18/9 drilled. Front - 24h.
Sapim Laser spokes (2.0/1.5/2.0mm).
Front wheel - radial spoking. Rear wheel - radial NDS, 3x DS.
Sapim Secure Lock nipples. 12mm. Aluminum.
Sapim HM nipple washers (on all spokes)
Finished weight, f - 688g, r - 803g. Total - 1491 grams.

The parts arrived quickly from BHS - all the way up here to Canada. After initial inspection and pre-requisite parts weighing, I set to work. 

*The Pacenti rims*, which I had never laid eyes on before, were visually excellent. They have a great finish and an imperceptible joint where they are welded. The spoke holes are "center drilled" (meaning - not staggered on the inner circumference) but the inside nipple holes are staggered and you have to be careful how you orient the staggers. The "left" holes go to the right side of the hub, the "right" holes go to the left side of the hub - because the holes are angle drilled for correct nipple angle. I'll assume that's how they go anyway.
The rim decal states the all important ERD - 588 in this case - and I measured it and found it to be dead-on (I trust no-one, not even Kirk Pacenti!) The sidewall wear indicator is a nice touch. They are a premium priced rim and we should expect all the bells & whistles on a rim of this cost.

*The BHS SL210 hubs* were what we have come to expect from BHS - well-finished hubs of excellent value and quality. Their easy of service and maintenance is good (PM me for instructions and photos). I measured the hubs and put all the specs through Roger Musson's spoke calculator and found that Brandon had done a great job of sending the correct length spokes.
I will add this caution and tip here though - if you are using nipple washers, add the thickness of two washers (1.4mm total) to the rim ERD and use the new ERD in the calculator. This might make a difference whether you round your numbers up or down. I use nipple washers on all non-eyleted rims anymore. At a 9 gram penalty (for 24/28 wheels) I can't think of a good reason not to.

The radial NDS and the 3-spoke grouping made spoke installation a breeze. I've never assembled a rear wheel so fast and easily. 

I ran all the nipples down to "no threads visible" (the ground zero starting place for tensioning) and noticed the thread locking action of the Secure Lock nipples. Yes, it twisted the thin Lasers a little but that's no big deal if you are aware of spoke twist and the absolute need to remove it. At that point I could spin the wheel in the stand and it was almost dead true - an indication of the rim quality.

Tensioning and truing was easy and fast due to the rim quality and the visual orientation of the spoke groups of three. It made it MUCH easier to orientate yourself to where you were on the wheel. Radial runout was a non-issue and I had to do nothing for this. Lateral truing was a breeze - the easiest rims I have ever worked on. I added a few layers of tension and as I never build with a spoke tension meter, I just judge what I think is sufficient tension. The pluck/tone method of judging relative tension is my chosen method of equalizing tensions - it's so fast and with a rudimentary musical ear, it's very accurate.

After lots of stress-relief (for both me and the wheels) and a couple of more rounds of equalizing and truing, it was time to mount the thin Pacenti blue rim tape (you must use a thin tape for these rims!) and the tires.

It's been said that the Pacenti rims were difficult to mount tires on and I found that to be correct. I had two tires - an old worn out Vittoria Open Corsa Evo CX and a brand new one. Yes the old one went on and off easier than the new one (both went on without levers) but I decided to use a single lever to get both the tires off. These are the only rims I've used a lever on in many years.

*Tire measurements - (25mm Vittoria OC Evo CX)*
Tire width on old 19mm rims - 26mm. Tire width on Pacenti 24mm rim - 27mm.
Tire height on old rims - 24mm. On Pacenti - 23mm.
So I gained 1mm in width and lost 1mm in height.

Then came the first test ride. I used the same pressures as with my old narrow rims (80f, 90r). I did not notice any difference in ride quality or cornering ability, not that I corner on the ragged edge anymore. Yes, I know it's wise to drop pressures with wider rims but I wanted to introduce as few changes as possible for the first ride.
On the 2nd ride I dropped the pressures 10psi (to 70/80) and didn't notice any difference in ride or handling.

I did beat my personal best on my 24 mile route on the first ride with these wheels. Two days before I'd broken my existing record using my old wheels. So was it the new wheels that helped me break my record? I'll never know. Anecdotal record-breaking evidence at its finest eh?

Bottom line - excellent service from BHS, nice rims by Kirk Pacenti in this interesting 18/9 3-group spoking and I think I've found the "poor man's CX-Ray" - Sapim Laser. If this visually different rim appeals to you (and I like it) I'd be getting a set before Brandon runs out - he just might not get any more.

I see that just this evening he's put up a wheel kit with these fine 24/27h rims.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Neat hoops and bizarre drilling for that rear hoop Mike 


Radial NDS and 2x DS? How even was the resulting tension in spokes between wheel sides out of curiosity?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Marc said:


> Radial NDS and 2x DS?


3x DS!! 



> How even was the resulting tension in spokes between wheel sides out of curiosity?


As I don't use a tensiometer ever (as stated in the post and on my site) I have no way of quantifying it. With a puck/ping comparison between the 18/9 and my normal 28h wheel, I don't hear much of a tonal difference between the two


----------



## Roland44 (Mar 21, 2013)

Marc said:


> Neat hoops and bizarre drilling for that rear hoop Mike
> 
> 
> Radial NDS and 2x DS? How even was the resulting tension in spokes between wheel sides out of curiosity?


I would like to know that as well. Great work on the wheels and writing this Mike :thumbsup:


----------



## Enoch562 (May 13, 2010)

Nice wright up Mike.


----------



## Roland44 (Mar 21, 2013)

Oops, seems like you replied while I was posting. Oh well! 3x DS sounds good.


----------



## Kirk Pacenti (Mar 18, 2006)

Great write up Mike. Thanks for the kind words and keep me posted on the long term performance of the wheels and how they hold up for you.

Cheers, 
KP


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Oh wow, the famous KP replies! Thanks for that. Those are nice looking rims Kirk; very well finished and very clean inside.


----------



## nsfbr (May 23, 2014)

> Brandon found that some people wanted more spokes than the 16/8 total of 24 so he decided to ask for 27 hole rims via Pacenti - divided up into 18/9. No problem there right? But when they arrived he found the rim maker had drilled them in groups of three, similar to the Campagnolo Zonda rear wheel. So that meant there were 9 groups of 3 spokes with 2 spokes on the DS and one on the NDS. After his initial shock he probably thought "Oh what the heck; these are cool; let's see how they go over".


From an engineering perspective, I don't think this is an accident. Grouping them like that should reduce stresses in the wheel from the 18/9 pattern. Also, my bet is that it is cheaper to set up the machine, as it looks like it is a normal 36h with half the NDS holes left undrilled.

I'd venture to guess that it makes way more sense to drill like this if you know the wheel is going to be laces with the 2:1 DS:NDS pattern, regardless of the number of spokes. At lower spoke counts it would seem to be somewhat more important to equalize the lateral stress in the rim, not necessarily for fatigue life (Does that even matter? Probably not.) but for lateral trueing.

So, when you have a design choice that makes sense technically and from a cost perspective you have a real winner. And again, probably not a complete accident on KP's part.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

From the report I got, it was a surprise to everyone concerned - apart from the rim company of course. I don't know enough about engineering to comment on your comments. 

But it might turn out to be a good selling feature - if all those factory wheelsets with visually bizarre spoke patterns are anything to go off.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Campy has an interesting video on why they use this "G3" lacing pattern.

G3 Geometry - Wheels Campagnolo

Although it looks like you're lacing pattern is slightly different as the spokes don't cross in the G3 pattern.

@Mike - Is there a specific reason you don't use a tension meter? From the sounds of it you build a lot of wheels and like to make apples to apples comparisons of them. Knowing the spoke tension would help the comparison. There is also an iPhone app that does this based on sound.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

deviousalex said:


> Campy has an interesting video on why they use this "G3" lacing pattern.
> Although it looks like you're lacing pattern is slightly different as the spokes don't cross in the G3 pattern.


I'll watch the vid. Thanks.



> @Mike - Is there a specific reason you don't use a tension meter? From the sounds of it you build a lot of wheels and like to make apples to apples comparisons of them. Knowing the spoke tension would help the comparison. There is also an iPhone app that does this based on sound.


Yes there is and I think it's a good one IMO. The reasoning is on my site but this is it - my goal with my site is to help as many Newbs as possible realize that they can build their own wheels and they can do it like it been done for many years and it's the way I started out - using almost zero special tools. Really, all that is needed is a spoke wrench. To keep my credibility I've never used a tension meter. I have gone hi-tech on something though - a wheel stand. The only reason I use this is because Roger Musson gave it to me. It cost me the price of a Park stand to pay for its shipping from the UK but that's another story.

The wheel stand does not help me in any way to build better wheels than I did when using frame & fork. After all, that frame & fork cost way more than any stand (custom Ti frame, hi-end carbon fork)

So I like to retain my credibility, lead by example and not use a tension meter. In fact, recently I was offered one at dealer cost and I graciously turned it down. I just don't need one and my wheels' reliability proves that.



> From the sounds of it you build a lot of wheels


Not nearly enough. I just build for myself and the occasional wheel for a friend. I do a lot of thinking & reading about wheels though


----------



## Bridgestone (Sep 6, 2007)

Nice write up. I appreciate you taking the time and effort and always see solid info coming from your posts! I was thinking of doing a similar build only a 16-8 with Kinlin 270's and the same hub.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Bridgestone said:


> Nice write up. I appreciate you taking the time and effort and always see solid info coming from your posts! I was thinking of doing a similar build only a 16-8 with Kinlin 270's and the same hub.


Thanks *Bridgestone* and thanks for the rep too (and from poster *nsfbr*). The 270 would have been my 2nd choice had I not gone with the Pacenti even though I doubt the Kinlin quality isn't equal to the Pacenti (for the price gap there should be a difference). The Kinlin would probably have been easier to remove tires from as I think we pay price for using "tubeless ready" rims with tubes and their tires.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Since I've already built 3 sets of BHS wheels this year, I'm going to have to pass on this "special"!

Mike, I'm only counting 2X DS on that build. Why you say 3? Do my eyes deceive me?

Interested to see how they hold up.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

bikerjulio said:


> Since I've already built 3 sets of BHS wheels this year, I'm going to have to pass on this "special"!
> 
> Mike, I'm only counting 2X DS on that build. Why you say 3? Do my eyes deceive me?
> 
> Interested to see how they hold up.


First cross is right under/over the hub flange.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/wheels-tires/my-latest-wheelbuild-337429.html#post4724546


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

OK, my eyes did deceive me. Sorry.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

bikerjulio said:


> Since I've already built 3 sets of BHS wheels this year, I'm going to have to pass on this "special"!
> Mike, I'm only counting 2X DS on that build. Why you say 3? Do my eyes deceive me?
> Interested to see how they hold up.


Yep your glasses need cleaning *Julio*.  Here's the definitive spoke-crossing pic -


----------



## tinball (Sep 24, 2014)

Mike,

I just purchased this build kit from BHS after a exchanges with Brandon. This will be my first wheelset from the ground up. I have trued and rounded a few wheels over the years but nothing major. I've read through your site and also have a reference DVD from Bill Mould (Master Wheel Building) that I plan on re-watching again as well. I plan on going slow and only riding them once they are "done" - no rushing allowed. 

Any advice that I as a first time builder should pay particular attention to on this wheelset?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

tinball said:


> Mike,
> 
> I just purchased this build kit from BHS after a exchanges with Brandon. This will be my first wheelset from the ground up. I have trued and rounded a few wheels over the years but nothing major. I've read through your site and also have a reference DVD from Bill Mould (Master Wheel Building) that I plan on re-watching again as well. I plan on going slow and only riding them once they are "done" - no rushing allowed.
> Any advice that I as a first time builder should pay particular attention to on this wheelset?


Your question is a good one. For your first wheelset, this one will probably be the easiest one you could ever tackle. The radial front is a yawn - nothing to be concerned about there. I do my radial fronts "heads out". The rear wheel, with its 3-spoke grouping is the 2nd easiest wheel you could ever tackle. It's dead obvious where the spokes go - once you have decided where the first & 2nd spokes go in the hub.

One thing to be wary of and it's in my report above - the rims are centre drilled but the tape bed nipple holes are not and you should do this right and visualize them as being angled - a "left" hole goes to the right side of the hub. This is unless the rim man himself - Kirk Pacenti - chimes in to say it doesn't matter.

Then install all the rear radial spokes. I do mine "heads out". 
Sight across the hub from the DS to a radial spoke across from you. Call this radial spoke #1. Put tape on it. Choose the DS hole just to the left of that spoke.
Count back left 3 DS holes. Insert a head-in spoke in this hole.
Lace this spoke to the right of the radial spoke #1.
Sight across the hub again to radial spoke #1.
Choose the DS hole just to the right of that spoke.
Count right, 3 holes. Insert a head-out spoke in this hole.
Lace this spoke to the left of the radial spoke #1.
Lace it over the 2nd spoke.

Those instructions are just for this 3-grouping spoke rim and won't be found in any book.
Once you have this group of 3 spokes installed, repeat 8 more times. It doesn't get any easier.

Then finish the wheel just like any other rear wheel.


----------



## Twinge (Apr 28, 2014)

Mike T. said:


> So I like to retain my credibility, lead by example and not use a tension meter. In fact, recently I was offered one at dealer cost and I graciously turned it down. I just don't need one and my wheels' reliability proves that.


The Park is only $65. I bought one before I built my first wheel and I'm glad I did. You are using techniques to judge equal tension like plucking spokes. That is not something a significant portion of noobs are going to be very good at.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Twinge said:


> The Park is only $65. I bought one before I built my first wheel and I'm glad I did. You are using techniques to judge equal tension like plucking spokes. That is not something a significant portion of noobs are going to be very good at.


The Sapim one is about $500 and a few others are well up into three figures. If I was going to buy one (and I'm not) it would be one of these as I would imagine they have greater accuracy and repeatability. As my wheels have never suffered from not having their DS tension quantified, I just don't see a good reason to spend that kind of money.

Actually, I wouldn't think the tone/pluck method of checking relative tension would take more than a minute to get onto. After all, we're just trying to get "ping" to equal "ping" and not "pong".

But - there is an even easier way to check tone relativity - and that's with a simple  guitar tuner. It's deadly accurate.


----------



## Twinge (Apr 28, 2014)

If all you are doing is measuring evenness of tension, the Park is as good as it gets and is very fast. To calculate an accurate tension, you need a calibrator, which are not hard or expensive to build. A $500 price tag on a tension meter is not representative of an increase in precision or performance.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Mike T. said:


> After all, we're just trying to get "ping" to equal "ping" and not "pong".


The issue with that being you only get relative tension, not a value which may be important.



> But - there is an even easier way to check tone relativity - and that's with a simple  guitar tuner. It's deadly accurate.


There's also an iPhone app that gives you absolute tension by using the sound in combination with you putting in the type of spoke. It also allows you to keep a log of the spoke tension of a wheel.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

deviousalex said:


> relative tension, not a value which may be important.


Pardon? IMO, relative tension is absolutely as important as sufficient tension. YOMV.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Mike T. said:


> Pardon? IMO, relative tension is absolutely as important as sufficient tension. YOMV.


Whooops, what I meant to type is "you only get relative tension, not absolute tension, a value which may be important."


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

deviousalex said:


> Whooops, what I meant to type is "you get relative tension", a value which is very important."


There, I fixed it for ya.


----------



## JohnF2 (Sep 21, 2014)

I built this rear wheel several weeks ago -- same components. The rim is based on 36 hole drilling, but every 4th hole has been skipped. The spoke length calculation for the DS can be made based on a 36 hole rim and 3x, but the nice thing is that Brandon can provide the needed spoke length information. Of course, with the kit, it's all there already. One of pictures shows the spoke threads revealed at the top of the nipple, which was the case for all of the spokes, so perfect engagement.

I found it to be a relatively easy build, and I did use a Park tension gauge. I checked the calibration against a high-dollar local shop tension meter to better insure I was in the desired ball park for tension. I use the pluck method to find obvious deviations in tension, but use the tension gauge for the fine-tuning, and to get the overall tension close to target.

I tensioned the DS to 110 kgf, and NDS about 10 - 15 less. It was a real pleasure getting some decent tension on the NDS.

Used nipple washers and brass nipples for DS and NDS.

Built the front well with 20 spokes also using cx-ray and radial lacing. Running 90psi rear/85psi front with Conti 4000s. Tire jack required for initial mounting using Pacenti rim tape (two layers). Wheelset weight before tape and skewers is 1,464g. Riding experience so far has been excellent.


----------



## ergott (Feb 26, 2006)

In that last pic, the spoke hole looks offset to one side. It that rim definitely straight drilled?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

ergott said:


> In that last pic, the spoke hole looks offset to one side. It that rim definitely straight drilled?


Definitely. I even checked with a vernier calliper as some rims are quite subtle in their hole offsets.


----------



## Gregory Taylor (Mar 29, 2002)

Mike - 

I've built up a couple of wheels with the Sapin Lazers - I like them a lot. Very little issue with "twist" while building...I have a tiny little pair of channel locks (really small) that I use to grab and hold the spoke in place while tensioning.

I really like them in front wheels - Velocity Aerohead rim, 32 spoke, 2x cross.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Gregory Taylor said:


> Mike -
> I've built up a couple of wheels with the Sapin Lazers - I like them a lot. Very little issue with "twist" while building...I have a tiny little pair of channel locks (really small) that I use to grab and hold the spoke in place while tensioning.
> I really like them in front wheels - Velocity Aerohead rim, 32 spoke, 2x cross.


This was my first wheel-build with Lasers (I've done lots of Race and CX-Rays!) and I've wanted to try them for few years. Now I had my chance. I did nothing to prevent the twist but I was very aware of how much each spoke was twisting.....and the locking mechanism of the Secure Lock nipples really kicked in at a certain point. It was no problem to over-turn them and then back them off to remove the twist. Any remaining twist was eliminated by a healthy stress-relieving using "Method 6", on my wheelbuilding page, after each round of tensioning/equalizing/truing. There were no pings when I first jetted off up the road.

Now after a few rides and some short sharp hill sprints to try to flex those wheels, I think the Lasers are the bee's knees.


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Interesting discussion on tension.. Although not a wheel builder, we work on a lot of high pressure fitting/flanges and multiple studies have shown that flanges/fitting were less likely to leak if the fasteners were tensioned evenly. Most often, consistent tensioning values are more important that tensioning to the correct value.


----------



## Bridgestone (Sep 6, 2007)

Mike T. said:


> 3x DS!!
> 
> 
> As I don't use a tensiometer ever (as stated in the post and on my site) I have no way of quantifying it. With a puck/ping comparison between the 18/9 and my normal 28h wheel, I don't hear much of a tonal difference between the two


Mike, would a 1X NDS pattern work on that build?


----------



## nsfbr (May 23, 2014)

Bridgestone said:


> Mike, would a 1X NDS pattern work on that build?


There are an odd number of NDS spokes, so that would be difficult.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

nsfbr said:


> There are an odd number of NDS spokes, so that would be difficult.


Woooo that was a good question and I had to go look at the wheel to form an opinion. I guess 1x would work but I think the nipple angle at the rim would be extreme as the 9 spokes on the NDS are quite widely spaced at the hub.

I wouldn't try it but maybe contacting Brandon at BHS and Kirk Pacenti would be a better option than listening to me.


----------



## nsfbr (May 23, 2014)

Mike T. said:


> Woooo that was a good question and I had to go look at the wheel to form an opinion. I guess 1x would work but I think the nipple angle at the rim would be extreme as the 9 spokes on the NDS are quite widely spaced at the hub.
> 
> I wouldn't try it but maybe contacting Brandon at BHS and Kirk Pacenti would be a better option than listening to me.


My response was based on my not having any idea how you'd balance the leading and lagging spokes with an odd number. Is there something I'm missing that makes this doable?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

nsfbr said:


> My response was based on my not having any idea how you'd balance the leading and lagging spokes with an odd number. Is there something I'm missing that makes this doable?


There ya go. There's something I didn't think of - the odd number (9) of spokes. Maybe it's not doable and I'm not sure that the issue is worth further thought unless you have some massive objection to NDS radial spokes.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

ergott said:


> In that last pic, the spoke hole looks offset to one side. Is that rim definitely straight drilled?


Actually Eric, as I said in my first post, the inner holes (in the tape bed) are staggered but the nipple holes are centred on the rim (vernier confirmed). I think the holes are offset and drilled at an angle for straight nipple line. So IMO the holes you see in the nipple bed go to the opposite side of the rim to which they're drilled.


----------



## Bridgestone (Sep 6, 2007)

Hi Mike, I was wondering how you are liking this wheel set . I have a couple of points of interest . One is do you get any rear wheel side to side flex in out of saddle climbing efforts? The other is how they corner at speed? Two things about your build make think this could be a issue (or not?). One is the R hub geometry on the BHS hub. It seems to be narrower than a Shimano or Novatec or my Fulcrum with very wide flange spacing, and the other is the lacing/drilling where two DS spokes are in sequence with a large space in-between but no NDS spoke . I just bought a Fulcrum 5 (2012) that has 2:1 drilling DS 16 two cross, NDS 8 radial, the pattern has equal spacing with no gaps. I am not sure it makes a difference as Campy GS has large unsupported rim real estate also . You thoughts ? Thanks!


----------



## tinball (Sep 24, 2014)

Bridgestone said:


> Hi Mike, I was wondering how you are liking this wheel set . I have a couple of points of interest . One is do you get any rear wheel side to side flex in out of saddle climbing efforts? The other is how they corner at speed? Two things about your build make think this could be a issue (or not?). One is the R hub geometry on the BHS hub. It seems to be narrower than a Shimano or Novatec or my Fulcrum with very wide flange spacing, and the other is the lacing/drilling where two DS spokes are in sequence with a large space in-between but no NDS spoke . I just bought a Fulcrum 5 (2012) that has 2:1 drilling DS 16 two cross, NDS 8 radial, the pattern has equal spacing with no gaps. I am not sure it makes a difference as Campy GS has large unsupported rim real estate also . You thoughts ? Thanks!


Speaking for myself, I just built up this wheelset - only with Sapim CX-Ray spokes. They are paired with 25c Rubino Pros at 95psi. I had my first longer ride on them yesterday with some fast downhills at 50mph and cornering at 35+mph. I weigh 185ish and and like to push myself. Objectively speaking, they are stiff and accelerate very well. They do not keep speed as well in the flats as my older Mavic Cosmics which are much heaver and deeper. But I could tell no obvious flex in the wheel as I jumped out of the saddle attacking on hills or attempting to sprint. For what it's worth, I am running the break pads very close to the rim and have't noticed any rub when standing or leaning the bike at a sharp angle while coasting or pedaling. 

They climb much better than the stock MOST(re-branded Campagnolo) wheels that came on my bike. They should since I weighed them back to back with cassette, tires, and levers and they are just at 1.5 lbs lighter. Without leavers, tires, and cassette, they weighed about 1440g on my postage scale. 

But that is the initial impression and I am figuring out what pressure to run. I felt very confident on the over 90 deg downhill corner at about 37mph and pedaling through another sweeping at almost 40. We did 2 1mi+ downhills and the bike was very stable no shimmy whatsoever. I don't know how much of that is the wider tire and how much is the wheelset. 

The only criticism I have is the front wheel has a slight pulse to it when breaking. Not really noticeable when breaking at speed but as you slow down you will feel it. It's not grabby but like I said you definitely feel it as you slow down under 10mph.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Bridgestone said:


> Hi Mike, I was wondering how you are liking this wheel set.


Good question and after a few weeks of riding this wheelset it's a good time to re-evaluate it.



> I have a couple of points of interest . One is do you get any rear wheel side to side flex in out of saddle climbing efforts? The other is how they corner at speed? Two things about your build make think this could be a issue (or not?). One is the R hub geometry on the BHS hub. It seems to be narrower than a Shimano or Novatec or my Fulcrum with very wide flange spacing, and the other is the lacing/drilling where two DS spokes are in sequence with a large space in-between but no NDS spoke . I just bought a Fulcrum 5 (2012) that has 2:1 drilling DS 16 two cross, NDS 8 radial, the pattern has equal spacing with no gaps. I am not sure it makes a difference as Campy GS has large unsupported rim real estate also . You thoughts ? Thanks!


Flex - none is noticed at all. And I'm using Laser spokes all round. But then all my other summer wheels have had full CX-Rays for many years. Sure I'm not 180lbs, 27 years old and putting out 1500 watts up short hills but I do try hard to flex them. Yes the 18/9 rear spoking pattern concerned me at first, with the large gaps in the NDS spokes but so far, it's a non issue.

Cornering at speed - my days of criterium race cornering efforts are long over and the main goal now is to stay upright through corners so I don't have much of an opinion in ultimate cornering performance. They corner just fine for me and I'm no slow-poke.

Hub geometery/flange spacing - I've got lots of experience with BHS & BWW Asian sourced hubs and their flange spacing is fine for me. I'd rather go ride than spend time debating which flange spacing is better. It's all a compromise and I don't know who nails the compromise the "best". Get the NDS flange moved out (which improves the triangulation base) and this increases DS/NDS tension ratio, reducing NDS tension. Get the DS flange moved out and you risk hooking the derailer. Bring the NDS flange in (to increase NDS tension) and you get a smaller triangulation base and a "weaker" wheel.

But then I was ok with arguably the "worst" rear hub geometry - the DT-Swiss 240. I had a set for 4 years that took me through all my MTB racing, Enduro riding and training.

Equal spacing NDS spoke gaps versus the Pacenti 18/9 3-spoke pattern - yeah I think the equal spacing makes more physical sense but so far my wheels are ok and I'll bet they'll stay ok for a long time.

But you did ask how I was liking the wheelset. Overall it's an 8.5 outta 10 for me. The hubs, as always, are great, especially for their cost. It's my fist ever (yeah!) Laser spoke build and I love 'em. I've always used CX-Ray on my lighter wheels (Sapim Race on me heavier ones). The Laser are as light as the 'Rays, 1/3rd the cost and just as fast for me. Their extra twist during building, due to their thin center section, was not an issue. The rims are really nice in all aspects except one - their difficulty of tire installation and removal and it's the reason I started the other thread on non tubeless-ready rims. 

I wanted to try wide rims as I get asked lots of e-mail and PM questions about them (via my site). I won't be going tubeless and I'll bet a good percentage of wide rim users won't either. IMO the hassle with liquids, inflation and lack of tire choices are the reasons for this. They're certainly my reasons. Just this morning, this  tubeless inflation issue popped up. I just have no time and energy for liquids, replacement liquids and awkward inflation. So the tubeless-ready feature of most current wide rims is not only lost on me, it's a big negative. Tire installation and removal is MUCH harder. I even bought the Crank Brothers meaty fist-full tire lever but it performs worse than my skinny e-cheapo lever due to its large bulk at its blade end. The lever bulk makes the tire fit even tighter come removal time.

So my last post - about non tubeless-ready wide rims, is a quest to find a wide rim with the ease of tire fitting that is an absolute joy on my other wheels - with BWW Blackset Race rims. I haven't swallowed the wide-rim Koolaid though as I don't notice any benefit from gaining 1mm of tire width while losing 1mm of tire height.

So to Kirk Pacenti if you're reading - how about an SL23 rim for *tubed* tires that gives us no-struggle tire removal? I was in a group ride yesterday with three women and I couldn't help thinking - if they had to insert a tube into an SL23 rim out on a solo ride, they would be phoning for a ride home. And to Chris at BWW - how about a Blackset Race and Pure Race rim of 23mm width (with no other changes!)? Thanks fellas! But i think I can anticipate your answers.


----------



## JohnF2 (Sep 21, 2014)

tinball said:


> Speaking for myself, I just built up this wheelset - only with Sapim CX-Ray spokes. They are paired with 25c Rubino Pros at 95psi. I had my first longer ride on them yesterday with some fast downhills at 50mph and cornering at 35+mph. I weigh 185ish and and like to push myself. Objectively speaking, they are stiff and accelerate very well. They do not keep speed as well in the flats as my older Mavic Cosmics which are much heaver and deeper. But I could tell no obvious flex in the wheel as I jumped out of the saddle attacking on hills or attempting to sprint. For what it's worth, I am running the break pads very close to the rim and have't noticed any rub when standing or leaning the bike at a sharp angle while coasting or pedaling.
> 
> They climb much better than the stock MOST(re-branded Campagnolo) wheels that came on my bike. They should since I weighed them back to back with cassette, tires, and levers and they are just at 1.5 lbs lighter. Without leavers, tires, and cassette, they weighed about 1440g on my postage scale.
> 
> ...


I’ve been using the set I built several weeks ago, and experience has been excellent. I’m running 90psi rear/85psi front. My routes included railroad tracks, and the groups I ride with don’t like to slow down much for tracks. No deep pot holes on the routes, so no testing there, but I do wonder how low the tension can go before risking pinch flats.

How the wheels hold up over time is the only question in my mind, but certainly no issue with working out of true so far – however, after building wheels, the fear of having to do follow-up truing is really not a concern.

Tire mounting experience – based on other advice I’ve read on the web, I used Pacenti rim tape (similar to Stans No Tube) – two layers -- installed new Conti 4000s II tires. 
When installing the tires, I would end up with about a foot (or bead) left to install, and even a tire-jack wasn’t making very good progress, so was experiencing just what I had read others saying – a very tough install.

I then recalled a tip I’d read somewhere – and that was to work around the rim where the tire bead was already over the rim, squeezing it toward the opposite side of the rim. The effect is to move the opposite bead away from center, allowing the side getting installed to rest in the center of the rim (or more so) where there is a bit of trough. That worked like a charm – still used the tire jack, but the tires went on without struggle.

I’m not confident that I could have installed the tires without the tire-jack, even with the above technique, so I have been carrying the tire-jack on rides. I’ll eventually remove and try reinstalling by hand, and if successful, then abandon the tire-jack for hauling along on rides. (nice that tires eventually stretch a bit)

The other tip which I have not tried is to work the tire onto the rim starting with the side opposite the valve stem. The logic certainly seems good in combination with what I described above, so plan to give it a try in the future.


----------



## CraigTB (Nov 3, 2014)

Thanks for these brilliant instructions! They made it possible for a first timer to build these wheels. Ride nicely on day one but putting on the tyres I had to hand--tricomps--was a struggle.


----------

