Seeking advice on rear wheel lacing plan

[Anthony DeLorenzo]

To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
looking at building my first dished rear wheel.

I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.

I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
any problems with the non-drive side spokes.

1. Basic 3X build on both sides.

2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
left side.

3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
makes sense to me.

Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.

Thanks,
Anthony

[landotter]

On Sep 12, 2:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.

Nothing wrong with that, however a basic 3x build on an off-center
drilled rim might be the best bet. It's a simple solution and strong.
Not sure which brand would be best, though.

>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
I've known some folks to go thin DB non-drive and straight pull on the
drive. It might be voodoo--but not high risk, so why not?

> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>

It makes sense to me as well, and would likely be my first choice if I
wasn't using an O/C rim. I believe you want spoke heads out with this
style.

[RJ Peterson]

I've been building fronts and non-drive rears with one cross for years --
three cross on the drive side. For me, they work better than conventional
three cross all around. Just put the spoke heads on the outside and do the
math for the one cross. This gives the advantages of radial (looks cool, BS
aerodynamic advantage, etc.) but minimizes somewhat the downside of tearing
out the flange.


"Anthony DeLorenzo" <anthony.delorenzo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189624701.384829.173430@d55g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>
> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[unforgiven99@juno.com]

On Sep 12, 3:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>
> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony

Spoke gauge doesn't affect tension. Only bracing angle does. Going
with butted spokes on both sides improves strength by making the wheel
more compliant, and spreading load to more spokes under impact
loading. When different gauges are used on the same wheel, it's
typically a case of the right side being bigger rather than the left
side being smaller. In other words the left side spokes are the same
gauge as the front, and the right side are beefed up for the extra
tension.

[Nate Knutson]

On Sep 12, 12:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.

It won't be higher; total tension of the left side spokes will be
virtually the same. The theory here is that since thinner spokes are
more elastic, they will respond to loads "faster" and with more
distribution of loads among multiple spokes, which reduces the
tendency for them to become momentarily slack and allow nipples a
chance to unscrew. Greater distribution of loads among multiple spokes
also essentially makes the wheel stronger, as well as reducing fatigue
around the spoke holes. The reason thinner spokes are used on the left
side is basically because there's no reason not to, since dealing with
windup will be less of a factor. For a wheel such as yours it would
probably make the most sense to use 2.0/1.8 or 2.0/1.7 spokes all
around.

> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.

Nothing bad will happen if you do it, and the the dish will be just a
bit better, which is good.

> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.

Really, using an offset rim would be ideal, but the choices are very
limited. One of the few that is out there is the Velocity Synergy OC.
I have one in a 9spd wheel with a Phil Touring hub and Wheelsmith
2.0/1.7 spokes. The tension balance is about 80kgf left, 105kgf right,
which is great. Problem is, I weigh about as much as you, I've been
riding this wheel just over a year, and the rim is now cracking at
multiple drive-side spoke holes, so it's probably not a very good big
guy or touring rim, which sucks. There are a couple other touring-ish
offset rims in 700 out there, but I haven't tried any yet.

You can also get less dish by either using disc hubs or 130 road hubs
respaced to 135 by adding spacers on the left. Both make a nice
difference in increased leftside tension, which is really the crucial
thing of course.

[Jay Beattie]

On Sep 12, 12:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>
> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.

I am 6'3" and 215. This is my standard rear wheel: Velocity Aerohead
OC 32 or 36 spoke low flange hub with 14/15 or 15/16 spokes three
cross. I wind them up to about 110 kgf (right rear) rather than the
standard 100 kgf. This is within the manufacturer's tolerances. The
Dyad is a stronger rim and probably a better choice for you, but I do
not know if it comes in an OC version.

I do not bother with mixed spoke patterns for two reasons: (1) I do
not care about the tiny weight savings, and (2) I own a lot of
standard sized spokes and don't want to buy short ones for a radial
pattern. I also wonder whether radial will pull through my flanges and
other superstitious thoughts like that. -- Jay Beattie.

[Sheldon Brown]

On Sep 12, 3:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.

Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.

> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes.

Don't cheap out on the spokes. That's a false economy.

Butted spokes aren't that much more expensive. If money is tight, go
for a Deore hub and butted spokes. Butted spokes build more reliable
wheels.

>I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.

That's what I would do.

> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.

That's theoretically better, but not clear that it's worth the trouble

> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.

Maybe you didn't read my article closely enough. Half-radial is a
solution for problems with HIGHLY DISHED wheels. If you're using an
XT or Deore hub, the dish is moderate.

Sheldon "Cross 3" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
+
| Check out the Shostakovich 24 Preludes & Fugues for Piano, Op. 87.
|
| Sort of like "Das Wohltemperierte Klavier" on drugs. Way cool!
|
+---------------------------------------------------------------------
+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com
Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
http://sheldonbrown.com

[daveornee]

Anthony DeLorenzo Wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>
> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
1. 3X both sides is good idea.
2. 14/15 DB spokes both sides is a good idea.... 14/17 DB on the NDS is
OK as it will help those spokes from going slack. Going slack results
in two negative things: a) nipple unwind, b) lack of rim support at the
slack spoke
If you haven't already purchased the hub, cutting back from XT to LX or
just plain Deore will give you more money to work with on spokes. $40
will get you 72 Sapim Race 14/15 DB spokes and 72 Sapim Polyax Brass
nipples mailed to your home or office.
3. Radial lacing isn't a panacea. The heads out portion of the plan
helps the NDS spokes carry more of the load due to decrease spoke
support angle... and it also means they can't easily go slack with
pedaling torque transfer.... but it is harder on the spokes, hubs, and
to a slight degree on the rim holes of the radial spokes.
If you want to balance out the tension you can look at the spoke
support angle(s) Drive-side Vs NDS with all heads out on NDS 1X, 2X, or
3X for your particular hub and rim combination. Closer tension left
and right is available with an offset rim like the Velocity Synergy OC
which is available in 36H both 26" and 700C.


--
daveornee

[David L. Johnson]

Anthony DeLorenzo wrote:

> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.

There is your problem. Use double-butted spokes. The wheel will last
longer. At 36 spokes, getting enough tension on the left side without
getting the right so tight that the rim buckles is a challenge.
Straight gauge makes it even tougher.

> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.

3x versus 4x does not make that much difference.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side.

Use butted spokes.

> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.

Looks cool, doesn't cause harm.

--

David L. Johnson

A mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems.
-- Paul Erdos

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Sep 12, 1:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.

Probably your problem..straight gauge spokes and NO need for 4 cross
on 36h..to much spoke overlap on the hub flange.

>
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> left side.
>
> 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> makes sense to me.
>
> Any advice or other suggestions are much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony

Use 14/15 spokes, lace 3 cross all around, and make sure the tension
is in the 100-110 kgf range for the right side...brass nipples. Radial
or thin spokes on the left side does nuthin on a well built and
tensioned rear wheel.

[Ron Ruff]

On Sep 12, 1:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes. I've researched the matter in
> this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> any problems with the non-drive side spokes.

This hub should have relatively balanced tension compared to a road
hub. To optimize the situation to prevent NDS spoke slackening, I
would suggest using a thicker spoke on the DS relative to the NDS.
2.3/1.8/2.0 or 2.3/2.0 or 2.0/1.8/2.0 mm spokes on the drive side and
2.0/1.5/2.0 or 1.8/1.6/1.8 or maybe 2.0/1.7/2.0 mm spokes (if
2.3/2.0mm spokes are used on the DS) on the NDS. Lighter spokes on the
NDS will mean that they stretch more at a given tension and it will
take more deflection before they go slack. 3x DS, and on the NDS
either radial heads in, 1x heads in, or 2x. Choose 2x if you will be
doing anything like low gear uphill mashing sprints... otherwise
radial or 1x will be fine, and give you more lateral stiffness. Of
course, make sure that the tension is as high as Velocity "allows"...
at least... which I think is 110-120kg.

[Nate Knutson]

On Sep 12, 4:06 pm, Sheldon Brown <CaptB...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
> On Sep 12, 3:18 pm, Anthony DeLorenzo <anthony.delore...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > To date I have successfully built six wheels (2 rear, 4 front), so I'm
> > reasonably confident in my wheel-building skills. However, I'm now
> > looking at building my first dished rear wheel.
>
> > I'm a 6'6" 250+ rider. I've had no problems at all with my non-dished
> > rear wheels. They've been reliable, held tension and not needed any
> > truing to date. However, my last shop-built rear cassette wheel was a
> > nightmare. The non-drive side spokes were constantly coming loose. I
> > had a local shop re-tension it completely with a tensionometer and it
> > still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> > DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.
>
> > I am hoping to minimize the effects of dish on this build, which is
> > going to be a 36-hole Shimano XT non-disc hub laced to a Velocity Dyad
> > rim with DT 2.0 straight-gauge spokes.
>
> Don't cheap out on the spokes. That's a false economy.
>
> Butted spokes aren't that much more expensive. If money is tight, go
> for a Deore hub and butted spokes. Butted spokes build more reliable
> wheels.
>
> >I've researched the matter in
> > this newsgroup and elsewhere, and there seems to be some difference of
> > opinion. I'm considering several options to help hopefully alleviate
> > any problems with the non-drive side spokes.
>
> > 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> That's what I would do.
>
> > 2. 3X build on both sides, use a thinner spoke (1.8?) on the non-drive
> > side. I haven't read much about this, but some postings on this group
> > suggest that the thinner spoke will build to a higher tension on the
> > left side.
>
> That's theoretically better, but not clear that it's worth the trouble
>
> > 3. Radial lace on the non-drive side with 3X on the drive side. This
> > one seems to be the most controversial, but Sheldon Brown's take on it
> > makes sense to me.
>
> Maybe you didn't read my article closely enough. Half-radial is a
> solution for problems with HIGHLY DISHED wheels. If you're using an
> XT or Deore hub, the dish is moderate.

Clearly it's more moderate, but I've referred to that article
occasionally for years and would also never have guessed that you
intended to make this distinction.

The way SpocCalc models it, for a rim with 602 ERD, most 130 road hubs
have a left/right tension balance of around 46-50%, Shimano road hubs
get it to around 57%, and non-disc 135 hubs are around %60-63. All
heavily generalized numbers of course. I don't know exactly how
accurate SpocCalc is here, but it seems about right.

Can't the same problems that half-radial is used to mitigate on a road
wheel also occur on the XT-based wheel, given enough load? That's more
or less what I've assumed, based on the article.

[David L. Johnson]

Sheldon Brown wrote:

> Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.

It's certainly too many for 32s, but I had no trouble with 36 -- well,
last wheel I had with that was high-flange, which might make a difference.

--

David L. Johnson

It is a scientifically proven fact that a mid life crisis can only be
cured by something racy and Italian. Bianchis and Colnagos are a lot
cheaper than Maserattis and Ferraris.
-- Glenn Davies

[Anthony DeLorenzo]

On Sep 12, 4:06 pm, Sheldon Brown <CaptB...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

> Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.

Yeah, that was something I realized afterwards. At the time, I was
still learning a lot about bikes and was relying on what the non-local
shop recommended. (I don't deal with that shop anymore...) All the
wheels I've built myself since that time have been 3X and have done
very well.

> Butted spokes aren't that much more expensive. If money is tight, go
> for a Deore hub and butted spokes. Butted spokes build more reliable
> wheels.

I've considered butted but have always been advised to use plain
spokes by LBS, for some reason. I'm definitely hearing a lot of
support for butted spokes on this thread so I'll do it for this build.
The cost isn't a big deal as I got the XT hub dirt cheap and the Dyad
rim was unlaced from those aforementioned crappy wheels.

> Maybe you didn't read my article closely enough. Half-radial is a
> solution for problems with HIGHLY DISHED wheels. If you're using an
> XT or Deore hub, the dish is moderate.

Thanks for that clarification, I'll stick to 3X both sides. Maybe the
article could be improved by giving some indication of what highly-
dished means.

Thanks very much to all posters who replied, the advice was
invaluable. I'll hit LBS on my lunch break for some butted spokes and
go ahead with a straight 3X build.

Regards,
Anthony

[Nate Knutson]

On Sep 12, 6:16 pm, "David L. Johnson" <david.john...@lehigh.edu>
wrote:
> Anthony DeLorenzo wrote:
> > still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> > DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> There is your problem. Use double-butted spokes. The wheel will last
> longer. At 36 spokes, getting enough tension on the left side without
> getting the right so tight that the rim buckles is a challenge.
> Straight gauge makes it even tougher.
>
> > 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> 3x versus 4x does not make that much difference.

4x on 36h either gives or comes very close to giving spoke head
overlap, and it's hard to model reliably ahead of time even if youre
bright enough to realize it could be a problem. and even with flanges
large enough to prevent overlap, you get into needlessly extreme
angles at the rim if 4x is used. it's poor form either way. it does
have the theoretical benefit of being close to perfectly tangential
with the hub, but there is no functional difference at all in that
regard compared to 3x. so it's pretty much unequivocally bad.

[Chalo]

David L. Johnson wrote:
>
> Sheldon Brown wrote:
> >
> > Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.
>
> It's certainly too many for 32s, but I had no trouble with 36 -- well,
> last wheel I had with that was high-flange, which might make a difference.

It makes a difference. The problem with cross-four on a low flange is
that spokes overlap the heads of adjacent spokes. When one breaks,
several must be removed to effect the repair. That doesn't happen
with a high flange, so I'd go so far as to say that cross-four is
suitable for 36 spokes on a high flange.

Of all patterns I have ever tried, cross-four on a 36-spoke hub comes
closest to pulling purely tangentially at the spoke hole.

Chalo

[Henry]

On Sep 13, 2:35 am, Nate Knutson <biken...@riseup.net> wrote:
> On Sep 12, 6:16 pm, "David L. Johnson" <david.john...@lehigh.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > Anthony DeLorenzo wrote:
> > > still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> > > DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> > There is your problem. Use double-butted spokes. The wheel will last
> > longer. At 36 spokes, getting enough tension on the left side without
> > getting the right so tight that the rim buckles is a challenge.
> > Straight gauge makes it even tougher.
>
> > > 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> > 3x versus 4x does not make that much difference.
>
> 4x on 36h either gives or comes very close to giving spoke head
> overlap, and it's hard to model reliably ahead of time even if youre
> bright enough to realize it could be a problem. and even with flanges
> large enough to prevent overlap, you get into needlessly extreme
> angles at the rim if 4x is used. it's poor form either way. it does
> have the theoretical benefit of being close to perfectly tangential
> with the hub, but there is no functional difference at all in that
> regard compared to 3x. so it's pretty much unequivocally bad.


Interesting that the pros still favour standard 32 hole tubular rims,
3 crossed for Paris - Roubaix.
Guess it's a good combination for a really strong wheel that'll take
the punishment of crap roads.

[Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com]

On Sep 13, 7:00 am, Henry <henryswit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 13, 2:35 am, Nate Knutson <biken...@riseup.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 12, 6:16 pm, "David L. Johnson" <david.john...@lehigh.edu>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Anthony DeLorenzo wrote:
> > > > still didn't help. It was a 36-hole wheel laced 4X on both sides with
> > > > DT 2.0 straight gauge spokes.
>
> > > There is your problem. Use double-butted spokes. The wheel will last
> > > longer. At 36 spokes, getting enough tension on the left side without
> > > getting the right so tight that the rim buckles is a challenge.
> > > Straight gauge makes it even tougher.
>
> > > > 1. Basic 3X build on both sides.
>
> > > 3x versus 4x does not make that much difference.
>
> > 4x on 36h either gives or comes very close to giving spoke head
> > overlap, and it's hard to model reliably ahead of time even if youre
> > bright enough to realize it could be a problem. and even with flanges
> > large enough to prevent overlap, you get into needlessly extreme
> > angles at the rim if 4x is used. it's poor form either way. it does
> > have the theoretical benefit of being close to perfectly tangential
> > with the hub, but there is no functional difference at all in that
> > regard compared to 3x. so it's pretty much unequivocally bad.
>
> Interesting that the pros still favour standard 32 hole tubular rims,
> 3 crossed for Paris - Roubaix.
> Guess it's a good combination for a really strong wheel that'll take
> the punishment of crap roads.

Or for just everyday riding on any roads...geeezzz, you 'save' maybe
200 grams or so on whizbang wheels....on a 87,000 or so gram 'package'
of bike and rider. What you get is less 'treasure' in your bank
account, same or poorer performance and less reliability.

[D'ohBoy]

I'd go with 'Isopulse' lacing. Radial DS, cross NDS. If it's good
enough for Mavic and Shimano marketing, it's good enough for you!

Especially offroad!!!

D'ohBoy

[Sheldon Brown]

I opined:

> > > Cross 4 is not appropriate for 36 spoke wheels.

Chalo wrote:

> It makes a difference. The problem with cross-four on a low flange is
> that spokes overlap the heads of adjacent spokes. When one breaks,
> several must be removed to effect the repair. That doesn't happen
> with a high flange, so I'd go so far as to say that cross-four is
> suitable for 36 spokes on a high flange.
>
> Of all patterns I have ever tried, cross-four on a 36-spoke hub comes
> closest to pulling purely tangentially at the spoke hole.

That's true, but so what? Spokes don't need to be purely tangential.

Excessive crossings, especially with larger hubs or smaller rims, can
create an excessive angle at the _rim_.

Since rims with 4-way aimed spoke holes seem to have gone extinct,
this can lead to an excessive bend where the spoke enters the
nipple.

That is an area where the threads are also frequently creating a
stress riser. It is not unusual to see spokes break there when wheels
are laced with excessive crossing.

Sheldon "Semi-tangential" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school |
| It's a wonder I can think at all |
| And though my lack of education hasn't hurt me none |
| I can read the writing on the wall --Paul Simon |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com
Useful articles about bicycles and cycling
http://sheldonbrown.com

[Chalo]

Sheldon Brown wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > Of all patterns I have ever tried, cross-four on a 36-spoke hub comes
> > closest to pulling purely tangentially at the spoke hole.
>
> That's true, but so what? Spokes don't need to be purely tangential.

You are right about that, and like most folks I mostly use lacings
that are less than perfectly tangential, like 48 spokes laced cross-
four or 36 spokes laced cross-three.

> Excessive crossings, especially with larger hubs or smaller rims, can
> create an excessive angle at the _rim_.

I've seen that, particularly with large hub motors (even when laced
cross-one).

> That is an area where the threads are also frequently creating a
> stress riser. It is not unusual to see spokes break there when wheels
> are laced with excessive crossing.

I'm sure that's true, but it has never happened to me. I have used a
few wheels with 36 spokes laced cross-four, and more than that with 48
spokes laced cross-five (slightly less tangential). None have ever
broken spokes at the threads.

Chalo

[Ron Ruff]

On Sep 13, 4:29 pm, Sheldon Brown <CaptB...@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:
> Since rims with 4-way aimed spoke holes seem to have gone extinct,
> this can lead to an excessive bend where the spoke enters the
> nipple.
>
> That is an area where the threads are also frequently creating a
> stress riser. It is not unusual to see spokes break there when wheels
> are laced with excessive crossing.

Yes... many rims now have no "aiming" at all!... which is why I bend
the spokes right above the threads, so the spoke goes more directly
into the rim, and the threads and rim don't have to endure an
excessive load at that point.