Wheel weight

meagain
meagain Posts: 2,331
edited April 2008 in Workshop
For those interested in such things and who have not found it, the wheel weight calculator herein is quite novel!

http://www2.bsn.de/Cycling/tubulars.html
d.j.
"Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."

Comments

  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    as long as he is happy on his tubs with the 17 step guide to repairing them!

    had to laugh at the text below:

    "The absolute min. number of spokes for an acceptably strong rear wheel dished for 8/9-speeds is (using 700c normal section rims and standard components) is (lower bounds):

    Rider Weight
    36 spokes >80 kg
    32 spokes 60-80 kg.
    28 spokes <60 kg."
  • Pirahna
    Pirahna Posts: 1,315
    wildmoustache wrote:
    as long as he is happy on his tubs with the 17 step guide to repairing them!

    To quote the text "if this is a roadside repair".

    That would go down well on a club run. "Just hang about for an hour or so chaps while I repair my tub" :D
  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    I really must stop using my Shimano WH-R540s. They've done about 10,000 miles all over the place, including a LEJOG, never gone out of true or had any other problem, but they only have 32 spokes between the pair of them, and I weigh 73kg.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    wildmoustache wrote:
    I really must stop using my Shimano WH-R540s. They've done about 10,000 miles all over the place, including a LEJOG, never gone out of true or had any other problem, but they only have 32 spokes between the pair of them, and I weigh 73kg.

    It's a shame to have to throw them away but the "article" says you can't ride them anymore. Somebody should tell Shimano. And Campy also.

    Dennis Noward
  • jefferee
    jefferee Posts: 80
    Perhaps a few things have changed since the days of the Deutsche Mark...
  • meagain
    meagain Posts: 2,331
    I only linked it for the calculator thing, honest! My knowledge is not sufficient to comment on the the principles/theories espoused!
    d.j.
    "Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Well, in the authors defense, I go back a ways to when this article was written, and
    even before and I do remember the "good old days" of 36 holes and lightweight
    (320 gram) tubular rims. I still have a front wheel made that way and even ride it fairly
    regularly. I really can't find much fault with what he says given the "era" it was written.
    Does it have any relevance in the year 2008? Sure it does. What he said about tubular v.
    clincher weight is still true. And yes, I have seen people fix tubulars on the road and most
    of them were damn good at it, quick too(I do not include myself among them). He said rims are heavier these days - they sure are. Have there been improvements since this was written? Oh, for sure but how could he foresee these things?
    Still a good article, even today.

    Dennios Noward
  • meagain
    meagain Posts: 2,331
    My only relevant direct "knowledge" is that tubs DO "feel" good!
    d.j.
    "Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."
  • Bugly
    Bugly Posts: 520
    meagain wrote:
    My only relevant direct "knowledge" is that tubs DO "feel" good!

    GOOD tubs on good wheels feel good - crXp tubs on crXp wheels are well exactly that. Nice clinchers wheels with good tyres and latex tubes are good also. Lost my love for tubs doing repairs on them after each race season. Also tubs are not to good on mountain desents on hot days. (Ever roll a tub of the rim at 40mph plus?)

    :oops:

Categories