# Velocity A23 rim crack



## karlg (Nov 29, 2006)

I had my LBS build me a set of wheels. He used my hubs (DT Swiss 240 Hugi) laced to Velocity A23 rims, DT Swiss Competition spokes and DT Swiss brass nipples. The rear wheel is laced 32 3X on both sides. The wheels are about 5.5 years old with 14500 miles. I am about 170 pounds. I just discovered the crack in the picture. It is on the drive side. I am collecting information to try to help decide what I should do. I will stop by my LBS as soon as I have the time. Is the crack a common failure of A23 rims? Is it the build/tension? Another possibility? Thoughts? I need to decide if I should just tell them to order another A23 rim and spokes and rebuild? Or, should I try another brand of rim? Thanks.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

It happens. But who know what the cause is. I can tell you that I had it happen on Kinlin rims so went to H Plus Son Archetype, everything else the same, and have not had any cracks in many more miles that the kinlin. So I'd try another brand. 

"Another possibility?"
Not enough spokes? Kind a guessing on that being a potential cause but I think it would make sense low spokes would increase the stress per spoke hole.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

We used to use A23's and Velocity's as our go-to rims for years. The started having major problems w/ the rims cracking on the inside between spoke holes. It became common enough that we switched to HED Belgium+. No problems at all w/ them.


----------



## karlg (Nov 29, 2006)

cxwrench said:


> We used to use A23's and Velocity's as our go-to rims for years. The started having major problems w/ the rims cracking on the inside between spoke holes. It became common enough that we switched to HED Belgium+. No problems at all w/ them.


A little online searching definitely agrees with your experience. I had hoped that a hand-built 32 spoke wheel would hold up better.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

cxwrench said:


> We used to use A23's and Velocity's as our go-to rims for years. The started having major problems w/ the rims cracking on the inside between spoke holes. It became common enough that we switched to HED Belgium+. No problems at all w/ them.


When did this problem start? I have 40K miles on a set of A23s (OC rear rim) with no issues (example of one). Spoke hole cracks are indicative of too high tension for the rim. It may be a weak rim or a too-high tension build. Impossible to tell based on a photo rather than spoke tension information.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

karlg said:


> A little online searching definitely agrees with your experience. I had hoped that a hand-built 32 spoke wheel would hold up better.


It kinds depends on the quality of the rim, doesn't it? 



Kerry Irons said:


> When did this problem start? I have 40K miles on a set of A23s (OC rear rim) with no issues (example of one). Spoke hole cracks are indicative of too high tension for the rim. It may be a weak rim or a too-high tension build. Impossible to tell based on a photo rather than spoke tension information.


I believe we started noticing it around 2010/11. Velocity replaced a LOT of rims under warranty. I rebuilt a LOT of wheels. And then rebuilt many of them again...w/ HED rims after they cracked again. I will never build another wheel w/ a Velocity rim again.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

cxwrench said:


> *I believe we started noticing it around 2010/11.* Velocity replaced a LOT of rims under warranty. I rebuilt a LOT of wheels. And then rebuilt many of them again...w/ HED rims after they cracked again. I will never build another wheel w/ a Velocity rim again.


yup, close enough. When they started making them in Florida. I remember considering them around then, based on what I read about people's experience with pre-US production rims, and a wheel builder told me since they moved he received a few that were unusable right out of the box. 

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/nor...rims-moves-manufacturing-florida#.XF1e1lxKiM8


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

One data point in your (the OP's) experience is not enough to come to a conclusion about the rim.

I vote with Kerry Irons that too high tension is the likely cause, although I'll concede the alloy used could be a contributor.

Rebuild with another A23, or switch to Velocity's O/C version, which will distribute the torque loads more evenly among the left/right spokes. I think that will improve your odds greatly.

Rear rims are more susceptible to cracks due to torque loads.

I use Velocity rims, specifically O/C rims in the back, and have never had a problem.


----------



## changingleaf (Aug 20, 2009)

The wheel may have too much tension for the rim, but other rims may be able to handle it. Aluminum rims don't last forever, but they can and often do last longer than 14500 miles. It looks like any combination of things that caused the failure resulted in rim that you are not satisfied and I recommend trying a different rim.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Peter P. said:


> One data point in your (the OP's) experience is not enough to come to a conclusion about the rim.


Which is why he asked and he received a lot more data points. I don't know exactly how many CXwrench was talking about but I believe he works at a high volume shop that cranks out a lot of wheels so it would be enough for me to come to a conclusion.


----------



## November Dave (Dec 7, 2011)

Some rims can't reliably handle 125kgf. That's the fault of the rim, and the selection of that rim in a particular build. We've learned that the tough way a bit, but fool me once...

It could easily be that the spoke tension on this particular build was completely overbaked, and there are certainly things a builder can do to increase the likelihood of problems like this, but the pervasive "spokes break because too much tension was used" is inaccurate. 

Below 125kgf on the drive side spokes of a build for a bike with a modern drive train and you start risking blown non-drive spokes, which are also "the builder's fault." 

Any rim that can't provide a reasonable working buffer above 125kgf shouldn't be used in a modern rear wheel, or even a disc brake front wheel.


----------



## RoadCube (Nov 22, 2006)

I have had good luck with a Velocity Fusion rim based wheel set built by Velocity. With that being said, Velocity does have great customer service. Give Velocity a call and see if they will warranty the rim. 
My Bontrager Race wheels had multiple spoke cracks and I had them replaced multiple times. I finally purchased Velocity wheels
Road Cube


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

After reading about so many problems with Velocity rims and since there are so many other good rims out there, I see no reason to use Velocity.

HED Belgiums are good quality rims, but pricey. Other good rims worth considering are the DT R460s and H+Son Archetypes. The DT R460s are a steal.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

RoadCube said:


> I have had good luck with a Velocity Fusion rim based wheel set built by Velocity. With that being said, Velocity does have great customer service. Give Velocity a call and see if they will warranty the rim.
> My Bontrager Race wheels had multiple spoke cracks and I had them replaced multiple times. I finally purchased Velocity wheels
> Road Cube


I think the only rims worse than Velocity or Mavic are Bontrager.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

karlg said:


> View attachment 324705
> 
> 
> I had my LBS build me a set of wheels. He used my hubs (DT Swiss 240 Hugi) laced to Velocity A23 rims, DT Swiss Competition spokes and DT Swiss brass nipples. The rear wheel is laced 32 3X on both sides. The wheels are about 5.5 years old with 14500 miles. I am about 170 pounds. I just discovered the crack in the picture. It is on the drive side. I am collecting information to try to help decide what I should do. I will stop by my LBS as soon as I have the time. Is the crack a common failure of A23 rims? Is it the build/tension? Another possibility? Thoughts? I need to decide if I should just tell them to order another A23 rim and spokes and rebuild? Or, should I try another brand of rim? Thanks.


Maybe I have low expectations but as a somewhat heavier (180-190lbs) I almost expect the see cracks in the rear drive side at that mileage. I have cracked rims from Mavic, Ambrosio, and Bontragor (within a month), but not a Velocity (although I have only had one Velocity rim (OC in rear). None of the ones I cracked seemed to have particularly high spoke tension. I have built 3 sets of wheels myself and (knock on wood) none of those have developed cracks


----------



## greatscott (Jan 31, 2019)

Could this crack be due to the LBS putting too much tension on the spokes? I think so! You only weigh 170 pounds and was using a 32 spoke rim laced 3X that's more then strong enough to handle your weight and the bike's weight.

I took my bike into my LBS to have the whole thing gone through and they wanted to tension the spokes higher, I told them no, leave it as the factory built it, and they haven't cracked with over 10,000 miles. For some reason it's apparently the thing to do nowadays is to tension the spokes higher then needed, not sure why that's happening, but it's not working!

Problem is getting the LBS to accept responsibility for over tensioning the wheels. You could email (or call if they have a phone number) Velocity and ask them what the proper spoke tension should be on those A23's and see what they're response is; once you have that information you can talk to the LBS that made them and ask them what they tensioned the spokes at...WITHOUT telling them that you contacted Velocity, if they say they tensioned it at Z but Velocity said it should be lower at X then they'll have to replace the rim for exceeding factory recommendation for tensioning.


----------



## karlg (Nov 29, 2006)

greatscott said:


> Could this crack be due to the LBS putting too much tension on the spokes? I think so! You only weigh 170 pounds and was using a 32 spoke rim laced 3X that's more then strong enough to handle your weight and the bike's weight.
> 
> 
> I took my bike into my LBS to have the whole thing gone through and they wanted to tension the spokes higher, I told them no, leave it as the factory built it, and they haven't cracked with over 10,000 miles. For some reason it's apparently the thing to do nowadays is to tension the spokes higher then needed, not sure why that's happening, but it's not working!
> ...


Too much tension has been suggested by several posters above.
Velocity has between 110kgf and 130kgf on the website. I definitely plan to talk to the builder about tension.


----------



## deadleg (Jan 26, 2005)

I am/was on my fourth velocity A23 rear rim. Cracks at the spoke hole. Got the wheels around 2010, first crack was on warranty the others were on me. I reused the spokes, paid for the labor and new rims. I weigh 155-160, 28 spoke rear wheel. New ride now tho


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

deadleg said:


> *I am/was on my fourth velocity A23 rear rim. *Cracks at the spoke hole. Got the wheels around 2010, first crack was on warranty the others were on me. I reused the spokes, paid for the labor and new rims. I weigh 155-160, 28 spoke rear wheel. New ride now tho


Yeeesh! I would have abandoned Velocity after the second one cracked. Not to say, but do you know the definition of insanity?


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

karlg said:


> View attachment 324705
> 
> 
> I had my LBS build me a set of wheels. He used my hubs (DT Swiss 240 Hugi) laced to Velocity A23 rims, DT Swiss Competition spokes and DT Swiss brass nipples. The rear wheel is laced 32 3X on both sides. The wheels are about 5.5 years old with 14500 miles. I am about 170 pounds. I just discovered the crack in the picture. It is on the drive side. I am collecting information to try to help decide what I should do. I will stop by my LBS as soon as I have the time. Is the crack a common failure of A23 rims? Is it the build/tension? Another possibility? Thoughts? I need to decide if I should just tell them to order another A23 rim and spokes and rebuild? Or, should I try another brand of rim? Thanks.


Junk. The spoke holes in the rim aren't structurally sound enough to hold the spoke in place under tension. Sure, too tight spokes would accelerate the process, but the rim is under-built around the spoke holes. I've seen cheap eyeless rims crack from loading and unloading repeatedly on under-tensioned spokes. 32 spokes evenly tensioned should make a bulletproof wheel not requiring an especially "stiff" rim. 

Whatever happened to rims with brass spoke eyelets? They hardly ever split around the spoke holes. Learned the lesson with a cracked rear rim like in the pix. Since then, never used anything other than eyelets, and never had a problem on Weinman, Ambrosio or Campy aluminum rims. 

The brake surfaces get scored by around 20,000 miles. Almost had a rim split apart on the brake surface around 30,000 miles. A dog ran into the rear wheel once and pulled a spoke out of the hub. Never had one come out of a brass eyeleted rim. I've seen lots of rims without eyelets crack at the spoke holes, probably as soon as 16,000 miles, like the pix above. Aluminum just isn't adequate around a spoke hole on the rear wheel where torsional forces are high. Brass works much better.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> Junk. The spoke holes in the rim aren't structurally sound enough to hold the spoke in place under tension. Sure, too tight spokes would accelerate the process, but the rim is under-built around the spoke holes. I've seen cheap eyeless rims crack from loading and unloading repeatedly on under-tensioned spokes. 32 spokes evenly tensioned should make a bulletproof wheel not requiring an especially "stiff" rim.
> 
> Whatever happened to rims with brass spoke eyelets? They hardly ever split around the spoke holes. Learned the lesson with a cracked rear rim like in the pix. Since then, never used anything other than eyelets, and never had a problem on Weinman, Ambrosio or Campy aluminum rims.
> 
> The brake surfaces get scored by around 20,000 miles. Almost had a rim split apart on the brake surface around 30,000 miles. A dog ran into the rear wheel once and pulled a spoke out of the hub. Never had one come out of a brass eyeleted rim. I've seen lots of rims without eyelets crack at the spoke holes, probably as soon as 16,000 miles, like the pix above. Aluminum just isn't adequate around a spoke hole on the rear wheel where torsional forces are high. Brass works much better.


Eyeletted (is that a word?) rims can crack too. Mavic Open Pros have eyelets and they have a reputation for cracking. Eyelets are a way of trying to compensate for a weak spoke bed. If the rim is made right, it does not need eyelets. How many HED Belgiums or H+ Son Archetypes have you heard of cracking? Use brass nipples for your build and you shouldn't have a problem.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Eyeletted (is that a word?) rims can crack too. Mavic Open Pros have eyelets and they have a reputation for cracking. Eyelets are a way of trying to compensate for a weak spoke bed. If the rim is made right, it does not need eyelets. How many HED Belgiums or H+ Son Archetypes have you heard of cracking? Use brass nipples for your build and you shouldn't have a problem.


I had an Open Pro crack in 6000 miles. It makes the A23 look good.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

mfdemicco said:


> I had an Open Pro crack in 6000 miles. It makes the A23 look good.


Oh yeah. Forgot about Mavic Open Pros. They were the only "pro" [sic] rim that cracked around the eyelets a few years ago, typical French quality control. 

Also yes, brass nipples tighten down more securely on brass eyelets, too, and won't loosen up over the miles. I've seen aluminum nipples split after being tensioned, not to mention the flats round off easily when truing, too soft a material.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

mfdemicco said:


> I had an Open Pro crack in 6000 miles. It makes the A23 look good.


And the mid-2000's Bontrager Race wheels with the paired spokes make the Open Pros look good.




Fredrico said:


> Oh yeah. Forgot about Mavic Open Pros. They were the only "pro" [sic] rim that cracked around the eyelets a few years ago, typical French quality control.





Fredrico said:


>


Now, now. :nono: The Open Pros were already being made in China when they started having this problem.



Fredrico said:


> Also yes, brass nipples tighten down more securely on brass eyelets, too, and won't loosen up over the miles. I've seen aluminum nipples split after being tensioned, not to mention the flats round off easily when truing, too soft a material.


The main problem with alloy nipples is corrosion which can cause the threads to snap. Aluminum is more brittle than brass. I see no valid reason to use alloy nipples as you will only save 40g at most over brass.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> And the mid-2000's Bontrager Race wheels with the paired spokes make the Open Pros look good.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Well, Mavic has gotten some disrespect in the cycling community as having problems with quality control. Open Pros were a great example. 

Yep, those paired spoked rims concentrated too much force on the rims at the spoke holes. Spoking alternating from left and right, spreads the stress out more along the entire rim, so would take much longer to develop cracks. Have to wonder why they went with paired spokes in the first place. They thought it made a stiffer wheel, I guess, which would be BS. Nothing stiffer than a well tensioned 32 spoke wheel.

Yes, I think my buddy said the same thing about alloy nipple threads stripping out, as well as the flats rounding off.

I'll stick with brass eyelets, regardless that some rims wouldn't need them. How ya gonna tell which ones are strong enough and which aren't?  Eyelets are like washers. They keep the thing from coming apart. Brass on brass holds up just fine. The flats don't round off and it doesn't corrode.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> Well, Mavic has gotten some disrespect in the cycling community as having problems with quality control. Open Pros were a great example.


At this point, I would avoid anything with the name Mavic on it with the exception of the A719 touring rims. Those are quite good at what they are designed for.



Fredrico said:


> Yep, those paired spoked rims concentrated too much force on the rims at the spoke holes. Spoking alternating from left and right, spreads the stress out more along the entire rim, so would take much longer to develop cracks. Have to wonder why they went with paired spokes in the first place. They thought it made a stiffer wheel.........


No. I think Trek's only motive for this design is that they thought it looked "sexy" and would lure more buyers. As we all know, sex sells. It definitely does not make for a stiffer wheel. The best way to get a stiffer wheel is MORE SPOKES.



Fredrico said:


> I'll stick with brass eyelets, regardless that some rims wouldn't need them. How ya gonna tell which ones are strong enough and which aren't?


I think when riders are trashing the brake tracks before spoke holes crack or spokes break, that is a good sign that eyelets or washers added to those wheels would not have helped in the longevity of the wheel. :idea: I have yet to hear of a HED Belgium or H+ Son Archetype cracking. Of course that doesn't mean it isn't impossible if the rider weighs 300lbs. and tries hard enough. But if the rider is 300lbs. and riding a road bike with road wheels, I think he will have more problems with his bike besides cracked spoke holes.

And some riders say eyelets make an annoying rattle. Personally, I have not noticed the noise. I had a set of Weinmann Zac19 rims on a hybrid awhile back. The alloy must be really soft because at 6,000 miles, the brake tracks were scored to the point I got some annoying pulsating while braking. Though I never noticed the eyelet rattle people complain about.

You know the old saying about the chain only being as good as the weakest link. It doesn't do any good to overbuild one aspect of a product at the expense of others. :idea:


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Fredrico said:


> Yep, those paired spoked rims concentrated too much force on the rims at the spoke holes. Spoking alternating from left and right, spreads the stress out more along the entire rim, so would take much longer to develop cracks. Have to wonder why they went with paired spokes in the first place. They thought it made a stiffer wheel, I guess, which would be BS. Nothing stiffer than a well tensioned 32 spoke wheel.


I have a friend that uses Rolf wheels, which have paired spokes. He rode RAM so he rides many many miles. He says that the Rolf wheels he had were the most durable wheels he's ever used. I don't think paired spokes are responsible for cracking rims any more than regular spoking patterns. Bontrager wheels are just not durable. I've seen and had them crack, paired spokes or not.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

mfdemicco said:


> I have a friend that uses Rolf wheels, which have paired spokes. He rode RAM so he rides many many miles. He says that the Rolf wheels he had were the most durable wheels he's ever used. I don't think paired spokes are responsible for cracking rims any more than regular spoking patterns. Bontrager wheels are just not durable. I've seen and had them crack, paired spokes or not.


I belive Campy makes some paired spoke wheels as well and they don't have problems either.

That being said, just because a design doesn't have a problem doesn't mean there is a reason for this design other than aesthetics. Logic and common sense would point to spreading spokes evenly around the wheel as the best design. If you design a wheel otherwise, you will need to compensate for it somewhere else such as making the rim bed thicker and stronger. The same applies to low spoke count wheels.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Lombard said:


> I belive Campy makes some paired spoke wheels as well and they don't have problems either.
> 
> That being said, just because a design doesn't have a problem doesn't mean there is a reason for this design other than aesthetics. Logic and common sense would point to spreading spokes evenly around the wheel as the best design. If you design a wheel otherwise, you will need to compensate for it somewhere else such as making the rim bed thicker and stronger. The same applies to low spoke count wheels.


Yes, there seems to be no advantage and rims have to be stiffer (heavier) to keep the rim from becoming lobed shaped because of the large distance between spokes.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Fredrico said:


> Nothing stiffer than a well tensioned 32 spoke wheel.



how about a well tensioned 36 spoke wheel? Back in the day it was the standard, and the rims were lighter. Just saying.


----------



## November Dave (Dec 7, 2011)

If we're talking about 32 or 36h wheel with box section rims, it's easy to surpass their stiffness with almost any modern build. A modern deeper section rim with 32h lacing is going to build into an exceptionally stiff wheel, with almost no lateral rim movement under torque.

In my experience, cracking spoke holes are the rim's fault, not the spoke tension's fault. I'd not suggest trying this at home, but lay a wheel, hub end cap down, on the ground and jump on the spokes. Some rims take this all day long and laugh (or the spokes snap). Some rims will crack at the spoke hole every time you do this. Some rims exhibit both behaviors randomly in different experiments. I've done this to a bunch of wheels.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Kerry Irons said:


> how about a well tensioned 36 spoke wheel? Back in the day it was the standard, and the rims were lighter. Just saying.


Well yes, of course. I believe Fred was referring to today's world of insanely low spoke count road wheels.

But you do bring up a point. We know that more spokes make for a stiffer wheel. At what point is it a case of diminishing returns?


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Well yes, of course. I believe Fred was referring to today's world of insanely low spoke count road wheels.
> 
> But you do bring up a point. We know that more spokes make for a stiffer wheel. At what point is it a case of diminishing returns?


Around 40 spokes? . Back in the box section rim days, touring bikes had 40 spoked rear wheels. 

According to long time convention, Bernard Hinault mentioned it in his book, 32 spokes are all a racer needs for a bulletproof set of very stiff wheels. They're still ubiquitous in the TDF. I went with *36* spokes on both bikes and never regretted it. 

The brass eyelet box rims I've used, Wolber Super Champion, Ambrosio Elite Durex, and Campy Lambda, have lasted 20K, 30K miles. I've been holding a replacement rim for the Wolber rear wheel, the oldest of the lot, for about 5 years, as the brake surfaces are becoming concave and will split sooner or later. So far, so good. I bought that wheel back in '83. It has 80K miles on it, easily, serving on two bikes. 

32 and 36 spoked rims will always be available, so it's a simple matter to replace the rims on the same hubs. We could do it at the shop in 40 minutes. Hubs will last forever if cleaned and greased every 10K miles. I've even used the same DT stainless steel 14 ga. spokes if they don't look scored at the bends, and never had a spoke break. Even tension around the wheel is the key.

Kerry is right on, 36 spoked wheels are the stiffest wheels around.  I'll test these wheels against any lower spoke count wheels, although appreciate that thick aero rims are no doubt "stiffer" than aluminum box section rims. So what? 32 or 36 spokes take care of holding the wheel true just fine, instead of a massive rim supported by considerably fewer spokes. Box section on 36 spokes also have more material spread out to dissipate shocks and are nice and comfortable, IME.

Never had a problem with brake pads rubbing on rims when climbing after I figured out how to properly tension the spokes.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

November Dave said:


> I'd not suggest trying this at home, but lay a wheel, hub end cap down, on the ground and jump on the spokes. Some rims take this all day long and laugh (or the spokes snap). Some rims will crack at the spoke hole every time you do this.


Yep.

Well, maybe not jumping on the wheel, but pressing vigorously around the rim with it sitting firmly on the floor, the twisted spokes from the wrenching may crack once as they seat, but that should be it. If it keeps cracking, a spoke is probably too loose or the rim is really weak, possibly split at a spoke hole, as you suggest. I've seen it a few times. Even cheap box section rims stop cracking after touch up truing and tensioning following the first "pressing." The second go around should not pull the wheel out of true. Amazing how that works.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> Around 40 spokes? . Back in the box section rim days, touring bikes had 40 spoked rear wheels.
> 
> According to long time convention, Bernard Hinault mentioned it in his book, 32 spokes are all a racer needs for a bulletproof set of very stiff wheels. They're still ubiquitous in the TDF. I went with *36* spokes on both bikes and never regretted it.
> 
> ...


Everything you said here is pretty much true except the part about thick aero rims being stiffer and less comfortable. Here is a good article every wheel builder should read:

https://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Debunking_Wheel_Stiffness_3449.html


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Lombard said:


> We know that more spokes make for a stiffer wheel. At what point is it a case of diminishing returns?


No we don't. Stiffer wheels make stiffer wheels and number of spoke is just one of very many things that contribute, or detract, from that.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Jay Strongbow said:


> No we don't. Stiffer wheels make stiffer wheels and number of spoke is just one of very many things that contribute, or detract, from that.


You may want to read the Slowtwitch article I linked in post 35 before you dismiss my statement.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Lombard said:


> You may want to read the Slowtwitch article I linked in post 35 before you dismiss my statement.


ha, that's a good one.

Actually you might want to read it. The whole point is that there are a lot of things that contribute to a wheel's stiffness.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Jay Strongbow said:


> ha, that's a good one.
> 
> Actually you might want to read it. The whole point is that there are a lot of things that contribute to a wheel's stiffness.


And how does this dismiss what I originally said? More than one thing, yes. "A lot" is a stretch, dontcha think?

My point in my reply to Fred is that deep section rims are not less comfortable than box rims. Contrary to what many riders may think, wheels have a negligible effect on comfort. "Stiffness" as in the ability to resist lateral movement is a different story. Here again, rim design has little to no effect on this.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Jay Strongbow said:


> ha, that's a good one.
> 
> Actually you might want to read it. The whole point is that there are a lot of things that contribute to a wheel's stiffness.


And Jobst Brandt said in the book "The Bicycle Wheel" that wheels are stiff enough, so why do we care if 36 spokes make stiffer wheels than 32?


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Lombard said:


> And how does this dismiss what I originally said? More than one thing, yes. "A lot" is a stretch, dontcha think?
> 
> My point in my reply to Fred is that deep section rims are not less comfortable than box rims. Contrary to what many riders may think, wheels have a negligible effect on comfort. "Stiffness" as in the ability to resist lateral movement is a different story. Here again, rim design has little to no effect on this.


Did you even read the article you linked to? 

You can decide for yourself why it's very easy to meet or exceed the lateral stiffness of old school 32-36 spoke wheels with modern components and many less spokes. Or choose not be believe it if you'd like.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

mfdemicco said:


> And Jobst Brandt said in the book "The Bicycle Wheel" that wheels are stiff enough, so why do we care if 36 spokes make stiffer wheels than 32?


Right.
Not like I scientifically measured it but I've had a lot of wheels and the stiffest by far seemed to be 24/20 spokes. The guy who build them said they would be really stiff and that was due to the dimensions of Alchemy hubs. The most laterally flexy where 32/32 with Mavic Open pro rims. No mystery why those were the least stiff (except for Lombard) but they were plenty stiff enough for my 145 pounds.

I'm a big fan of spoke overkill but that's only because I'm less screwed if I break one on the road. With regard to lateral stiffness there's not need for a ton of spokes in this day and age as long as you choose the right components.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Everything you said here is pretty much true except the part about thick aero rims being stiffer and less comfortable. Here is a good article every wheel builder should read:
> 
> https://www.slowtwitch.com/Tech/Debunking_Wheel_Stiffness_3449.html


This rang true, IME:

_How often do riders complain of their shallow-section aluminum wheels not being stiff enough? I don’t know about you, but I almost never hear that – short of a wheel with spokes that are far too loose. The reason you never hear that is because most aluminum wheels have *relatively high spoke stiffness and relatively low rim stiffness.* Think of wheel with 32 spokes of 2mm diameter, laced to a 20mm deep alloy rim – that’s a lot of spoke material and not much rim._

_An astoundingly stiff, deep-section carbon rim – strapped on to a handful of thin aero spokes. The *stiff rim can literally overpower the spokes.* If your rim rubs your rear brake pads, this is probably why._

Case closed!


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> This rang true, IME:
> 
> _How often do riders complain of their shallow-section aluminum wheels not being stiff enough? I don’t know about you, but I almost never hear that – short of a wheel with spokes that are far too loose. The reason you never hear that is because most aluminum wheels have *relatively high spoke stiffness and relatively low rim stiffness.* Think of wheel with 32 spokes of 2mm diameter, laced to a 20mm deep alloy rim – that’s a lot of spoke material and not much rim._
> 
> ...


You and I read this part, Fred. Apparently Jay didn't read these paragraphs and decided to shoot from the hip.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Lombard said:


> You and I read this part, Fred. Apparently Jay didn't read these paragraphs and decided to shoot from the hip.


As for the equivalent of being told by Trump I have a bad haircut. That's funny.
As for what you quoted from the article. Yes, we all know apples are different from oranges. There is more to the example than more spokes.

"Nothing stiffer than a well tensioned 32 spoke wheel."
"We know that more spokes make for a stiffer wheel."

Those are the statements that are incomplete at best.

Some other things that make for a stiff, or not:
-Rim Material
-Rim geometry
-hub geometry
-Spoke material
-Spoke guage
-Spoke pattern
-Spoke tension (very minor)
-Bracing angles (though that's just just the product of rim and hub geometry)
-Dish (rear only of course).

A 'wheel', all of it, is what makes a wheel stiff or not. Not even close to just spoke count.

And there is absolutely no question a 24 spoke wheel (just to use a random example) with all those things being favorable can be made stiffer and stronger then a 32 spoke wheel with them not being favorable.

Poser and weight-weenie-ism are not the only reasons we see lower spoke counts than decades past. It's because modern wheel components can achieve the same or more stiffness and strength with less spokes.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Jay Strongbow said:


> As for the equivalent of being told by Trump I have a bad haircut. That's funny.
> As for what you quoted from the article. Yes, we all know apples are different from oranges. There is more to the example than more spokes.
> 
> "Nothing stiffer than a well tensioned 32 spoke wheel."
> ...


Is this what you got out of that article, Jay? Yes, it is true that these items mentioned play a part as stated in the article "total stiffness of the system":

_-Axle diameter and thickness
-Spoke count
-Number of spoke crossings
-Spoke thickness
-Spoke material
-Spoke type (j-bend or straight pull)
-Rim depth
-Rim width
-Rim material 
-Fork leg stiffness and steerer tube diameter
-Chainstay and seatstay design
__-Dropout alignment _

On trying to make a wheel "stiffer" by raising hub flanges:

_Please let me insert a screeching halt. __Screeeeeeeech!

This is ONLY true if we’re talking about consistent flange spacing between the two different hubs. If your hub flanges are very tall – but not placed very wide, the resulting spoke angle is often worse than short, wide flanges. High flanges also carry a weight penalty – so they must be balanced with the total performance intent of the wheel. 

The obvious limiting factor on rear wheel flange spacing is the cassette; this takes up a substantial amount of space on the drive side, and is a key limiter in rear wheel lateral stiffness. This is also the reason we often see flanges of unequal height on rear wheels (higher on the drive side) – some manufacturers are scraping for every last bit of spoke angle they can get.
_
Now, can we agree that there is only so much you can do with hub geometry due to space necessary for an 11-speed freehub? So while you may eek out a bit better bracing angle, we're talking about a drop in a bucket. Not to mention that you open up other issues when you raise flanges.

Now, on to the part about wider and deeper rims being stiffer. Yes, the RIMS are stiffer. But........

_When you start climbing or sprinting on a carbon wheel, the stiff rim tends to want to stay perfectly straight – relative to itself. 

This gets compounded by the fact that most “race” wheels have thin aerodynamic spokes – AND not very many of them. On top of that, in very recent years, we have also seen carbon rims grow in both width and depth – subsequently gaining both lateral and radial stiffness. 

*What this adds up to is the perfect wheel storm: An astoundingly stiff, deep-section carbon rim – strapped on to a handful of thin aero spokes. The stiff rim can literally overpower the spokes. If your rim rubs your rear brake pads, this is probably why.
*_
So paradoxically (in case you didn't get this from the article), a stiffer rim can make for a wheel which is *LESS* stiff. So in theory, if you want the stiffest wheel possible, you want the shallowest, narrowest rim. Of course this isn't practical for other reasons.

So at the end of the day, the most practical way to make a wheel stiffer (as in being least likely to flex enough to rub brakes or frame) is by adding spokes and using thicker spokes.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Is this what you got out of that article, Jay? Yes, it is true that these items mentioned play a part as stated in the article "total stiffness of the system":
> 
> _-Axle diameter and thickness
> -Spoke count
> ...


You said it well! :thumbsup: 

It may be true short spokes possible on a fat aero rim can be very efficient linkage between rim and hub, but they're the weak link in the system and are more likely to fail than 32 or 36 spokes crossed three or sometimes four. 

That's exactly why I've had great luck with cheap, replaceable box section 19mm or 20mm wide shallow rims. They stand up to out of saddle sprints and hard climbing without protest and absorb shocks nicely. The rim comes from the factory true "relative to itself," but the 36 properly tensioned spokes hold the wheel true on a ride, not the rim itself! There are so many spokes, none break, and if one does in an accident, the rim has a great chance to not pretzel into oblivion. Rider widens the brake blocks and makes it home.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> You said it well! :thumbsup:
> 
> It may be true short spokes possible on a fat aero rim can be very efficient linkage between rim and hub, but they're the weak link in the system and are more likely to fail than 32 or 36 spokes crossed three or sometimes four.
> 
> That's exactly why I've had great luck with cheap, replaceable box section 19mm or 20mm wide shallow rims. They stand up to out of saddle sprints and hard climbing without protest* and absorb shocks nicely*.


Stop right there. Rims do not perceivably absorb shocks, *tires do*.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

karlg said:


> A little online searching definitely agrees with your experience. I had hoped that a hand-built 32 spoke wheel would hold up better.





Kerry Irons said:


> When did this problem start? I have 40K miles on a set of A23s (OC rear rim) with no issues (example of one). Spoke hole cracks are indicative of too high tension for the rim. It may be a weak rim or a too-high tension build. Impossible to tell based on a photo rather than spoke tension information.





Lombard said:


> Stop right there. Rims do not perceivably absorb shocks, *tires do*.


Exactly. People that talk about 'ride quality' and wheels in the same sentence are confused.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Stop right there. Rims do not perceivably absorb shocks, *tires do*.


Take a 50 mile ride on time trial disc wheels and tell me they're just as comfortable as 32 spoke cross 3's.  We all agreed in the listings above materials make a huge difference. 32 spoked box rims dissipate shocks more efficiently than a massive stiff rim on wimpy aero spokes. Try it.

If all rider needs for comfort are tires, then why are builders tweaking the frame tubing and offering elastomer shocks, et. al? All materials on the bike either absorb shocks or pass them on. I thought we established that in the listings above.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> Take a 50 mile ride on time trial disc wheels and tell me they're just as comfortable as 32 spoke cross 3's.  We all agreed in the listings above materials make a huge difference. 32 spoked box rims dissipate shocks more efficiently than a massive stiff rim on wimpy aero spokes. Try it.
> 
> If all rider needs for comfort are tires, then why are builders tweaking the frame tubing and offering elastomer shocks, et. al? All materials on the bike either absorb shocks or pass them on. I thought we established that in the listings above.


Why? Umm, to sell more bikes? :idea:

Sure, frame geometry does have some effect on compliance, frame materials and wheels, not enough to be perceivable.

So do the time trial disc wheels and 32 spoke box rims in your example have the exact same tires measuring the same width inflated to the same pressure? Do tell, Fred.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

karlg said:


> A little online searching definitely agrees with your experience. I had hoped that a hand-built 32 spoke wheel would hold up better.





Kerry Irons said:


> When did this problem start? I have 40K miles on a set of A23s (OC rear rim) with no issues (example of one). Spoke hole cracks are indicative of too high tension for the rim. It may be a weak rim or a too-high tension build. Impossible to tell based on a photo rather than spoke tension information.





Fredrico said:


> Take a 50 mile ride on time trial disc wheels and tell me they're just as comfortable as 32 spoke cross 3's.  We all agreed in the listings above materials make a huge difference. 32 spoked box rims dissipate shocks more efficiently than a massive stiff rim on wimpy aero spokes. Try it.
> 
> If all rider needs for comfort are tires, then why are builders tweaking the frame tubing and offering elastomer shocks, et. al? All materials on the bike either absorb shocks or pass them on. I thought we established that in the listings above.


Disc wheels are laterally stiffer than spoked wheels. Vertical compliance...they might be somewhat stiff but how would you feel it? The tire would have to compress damn near to the point of pinch flatting before the rim is going to flex. If the rim flexed enough so that you could feel it the spokes would have zero tension...that doesn't happen. Trust me, no matter what 'people' or 'marketing departments' want you to believe, you can't really feel a difference in 'ride quality' between 2 wheels even if their construction is massively different. It definitely makes me wonder about how much the average joe thinks his wheel is flexing radially when he's riding. 
You can't really be serious with the questions about frames right? How are they going to sell anything if the new version isn't touted as better/lighter/faster/more comfy than the previous one?


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

cxwrench said:


> Disc wheels are laterally stiffer than spoked wheels. Vertical compliance...they might be somewhat stiff but how would you feel it? The tire would have to compress damn near to the point of pinch flatting before the rim is going to flex. If the rim flexed enough so that you could feel it the spokes would have zero tension...that doesn't happen. Trust me, no matter what 'people' or 'marketing departments' want you to believe, you can't really feel a difference in 'ride quality' between 2 wheels even if their construction is massively different. It definitely makes me wonder about how much the average joe thinks his wheel is flexing radially when he's riding.
> You can't really be serious with the questions about frames right? How are they going to sell anything if the new version isn't touted as better/lighter/faster/more comfy than the previous one?


Nope, rider won't feel the 32 spoked wheel flexing; it's going to stay centered and round mainly by spoke tension, not rim size. The wheel will still absorb shock waves, along the spoke lengths, along the rim surfaces, that solid TT wheels will transmit full on through the dropouts into the frame. 

Brandt points out wheels want to go egg shaped as they roll along. This absorbs shock waves. Not so with disc wheels. They ride like concrete. Yep, they'll pinch flat in a heartbeat.

Guys who ride elastomer shocks say they do attenuate shocks before the latter reach the saddle. Let the bike win Paris-Roubaix, just for bragging rights.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

karlg said:


> A little online searching definitely agrees with your experience. I had hoped that a hand-built 32 spoke wheel would hold up better.





Kerry Irons said:


> When did this problem start? I have 40K miles on a set of A23s (OC rear rim) with no issues (example of one). Spoke hole cracks are indicative of too high tension for the rim. It may be a weak rim or a too-high tension build. Impossible to tell based on a photo rather than spoke tension information.





Fredrico said:


> Nope, rider won't feel the 32 spoked wheel flexing; it's going to stay centered and round mainly by spoke tension, not rim size. The wheel will still absorb shock waves, along the spoke lengths, along the rim surfaces, that solid TT wheels will transmit full on through the dropouts into the frame.
> 
> Brandt points out wheels want to go egg shaped as they roll along. This absorbs shock waves. Not so with disc wheels. They ride like concrete. Yep, they'll pinch flat in a heartbeat.
> 
> Guys who ride elastomer shocks say they do attenuate shocks before the latter reach the saddle. Let the bike win Paris-Roubaix, just for bragging rights.


Uhhhmmm ok. What bike has elastomer 'shocks'? You haven't confused a Specialized Roubaix w/ Zertz as a feature that absorbs shocks have you?


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Uhhhmmm ok. What bike has elastomer 'shocks'? You haven't confused a Specialized Roubaix w/ Zertz as a feature that absorbs shocks have you?


Zertz only work in marketingland, nowhere else. Yep, put a void in the carbon and stick some silicone in there. Nice gimmick, Specialized!


----------

